Order Code RL33017
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Military Quality of Life/VA (House) and Military
Construction/VA (Senate): FY2006 Appropriations
Updated August 15, 2005
Daniel H. Else
Specialist in National Defense
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division
Paul J. Graney
Analyst in Social Legislation
Domestic Social Policy Division
Sidath Viranga Panangala
Analyst in Social Legislation
Domestic Social Policy Division
Congressional Research Service { The Library of Congress

---

The annual consideration of appropriations bills (regular, continuing, and supplemental) by
Congress is part of a complex set of budget processes that also encompasses the
consideration of budget resolutions, revenue and debt-limit legislation, other spending
measures, and reconciliation bills. In addition, the operation of programs and the spending
of appropriated funds are subject to constraints established in authorizing statutes.
Congressional action on the budget for a fiscal year usually begins following the submission
of the President’s budget at the beginning of each annual session of Congress.
Congressional practices governing the consideration of appropriations and other budgetary
measures are rooted in the Constitution, the standing rules of the House and Senate, and
statutes, such as the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974.
This report is a guide to one of the 13 regular appropriations bills that Congress considers
each year. It is designed to supplement the information provided by the House Military
Quality of Life and Veterans Affairs and Senate Military Construction and Veterans Affairs
Appropriations Subcommittees. It summarizes the status of the bill, its scope, major issues,
funding levels, and related congressional activity, and is updated as events warrant. The
report lists the key CRS staff relevant to the issues covered and related CRS products.
NOTE: A Web version of this document with active links is
available to congressional staff at
[http://www.crs.gov/products/appropriations/apppage.shtml].

---

Military Quality of Life/VA (House) and Military
Construction/VA (Senate) Appropriations
Summary
The structure of the Committees on Appropriations underwent significant
change with the beginning of the 109th Congress. As a result, jurisdictions over the
appropriations covered in this report, including military construction, military
housing allowances, military installation maintenance and operation, the Department
of Veterans Affairs, and other veteran-related agencies, rest in the House Committee
on Appropriations with the new Subcommittee on Military Quality of Life and
Veterans Affairs. In the Senate Committee on Appropriations, jurisdiction for
military construction, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and other veteran-related
agencies lies with the Subcommittee on Military Construction and Veterans Affairs,
while military housing allowances and military installation maintenance and
operation are the responsibility of the Subcommittee on Defense. Authorization
jurisdictions lie with the two Committees on the Armed Services and Committees on
Veterans Affairs.
Key issues in congressional action to date include:
! Military Construction: The changing structure of the Army, the
redeployment of troops from overseas garrisons to domestic bases,
and the current BRAC round have drawn committee attention during
the appropriation process. The draft report of the Commission on
Review of Overseas Military Facility Structure of the United States
(the Overseas Basing Commission), created by Congress, concluded
that the Department of Defense (DOD) plan for withdrawing forces
from long-standing garrisons in Europe and Asia is moving too fast
and that DOD has not engaged in substantive consultation with other
agencies whose operations would be affected by the changes. The
funding of the construction of military infrastructure in support of
Operation Enduring Freedom (Afghanistan) and Operation Iraqi
Freedom (Iraq), whether continuing through emergency
supplemental appropriations or transitioning to the normal annual
appropriation cycle, has also been discussed in hearings.
! Veteran Benefits: Entitlement spending is rising as the number of
beneficiaries is increasing, education benefits are being augmented,
and annual cost of living adjustments are being granted. Benefits
such as disability compensation, pensions, and education are
mandatory payments and constitute more than half ($36.6 billion) of
the VA appropriation of approximately $70 billion.
! Veteran Medical Care: The Administration has again requested
legislative changes to increase certain co-payments and other cost-
sharing fees for veterans in lower priority categories. After VA
announced a shortfall of more than $1 billion from its FY2005
enacted appropriations for veterans health programs, $1.5 billion in
supplemental appropriations was added by P.L. 109-54.

---

Key Policy Staff for Military Quality of Life, Military Construction, and
Veterans Affairs Appropriations
Area of
Name
Telephone
E-Mail
Expertise
Acquisition
David Lockwood
7-7621
dlockwood@crs.loc.gov
Base Closure
Daniel Else
7-4996
delse@crs.loc.gov
David Lockwood
7-7621
dlockwood@crs.loc.gov
Defense
Stephen Daggett
7-7642
sdaggett@crs.loc.gov
Budget
Amy Belasco
7-7627
abelasco@crs.loc.gov
Health Care;
Richard Best
7-7607
rbest@crs.loc.gov
Military
Military
Daniel Else
7-7996
delse@crs.loc.gov
Construction
Military
Robert Goldich
7-7633
rgoldich@crs.loc.gov
Personnel
David Burrelli
7-8033
dburrelli@crs.loc.gov
Military
Lawrence Kapp
7-7609
lkapp@crs.loc.gov
Personnel;
Reserves
Veterans
Paul Graney
7-2290
pgraney@crs.loc.gov
Affairs
Veterans
Sidath Panangala
7-0623
spanangala@crs.loc.gov
Affairs;
Healthcare

---

Contents
Most Recent Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Military Quality of Life and Veterans Affairs Appropriations
(H.R. 2528) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Senate Defense Authorization (S. 1042) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
House Defense Authorization (H.R. 1815) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Status of Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Summary and Key Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Realignment of Appropriations Subcommittee Jurisdictions . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
House . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Senate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Title I: Department of Defense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Military Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Army Modularity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Military Base Realignments and Closures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Overseas Military Bases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Operation Enduring Freedom/Operation Iraqi Freedom . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Other Defense Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH)
and Military Housing Privatization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Title II: Department of Veterans Affairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Agency Mission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Key Budget Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
VA Cash Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Medical Care . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Title III: Related Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Independent Commissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
American Battle Monuments Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Cemeterial Expenses, Army . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Armed Forces Retirement Home . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Appendix A. Consolidated Funding Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Appendix B. Additional Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Budget . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Military Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Veterans Affairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Selected Websites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

---

List of Tables
Table 1a. Status of FY2006 Military Quality of Life/Veterans
Affairs (House) and Military Construction/Veterans
Affairs (Senate) Appropriations (H.R. 2528) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Table 1b. Status of FY2006 Defense Authorization(H.R. 1815, S. 1042) . . . . . . . 2
Table 2. Department of Veterans Affairs Appropriations, FY2001-FY2005 . . . 10
Table 3. Appropriations: Department of Veterans Affairs,
FY2005-FY2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Table 4a. DOD Military Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Table 4b. DOD Basic Allowance for Housing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Table 4c. DOD Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, & Modernization . . . . . . . . 20
Table 4d. DOD Environmental Remediation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Table 4e. DOD Health Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Table 4f. DOD Totals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Table 5a. VA Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Table 5b. VA Health Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Table 5c. VA Departmental Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Table 5d. VA Totals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Table 6. Related Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Table 7. Grand Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

---

Military Quality of Life/VA (House) and
Military Construction/VA (Senate)
Appropriations
Most Recent Developments
Military Quality of Life and Veterans Affairs Appropriations (H.R.
2528). The House Committee on Appropriations reported its Military Quality of
Life and Veterans Affairs appropriations bill (H.R. 2528) on May 23, 2005 (H.Rept.
109-95). The House undertook consideration of the bill on May 26 and passed it the
same day. H.R. 2528 was received in the Senate on May 26, read twice and referred
to the Committee on Appropriations. On July 21, the Senate Committee on
Appropriations reported its amended version of the bill.1 It was placed on the Senate
Legislative Calendar under General Orders (Calendar No. 169).
Senate Defense Authorization (S. 1042). The Senate Committee on
Armed Services reported its version of the Defense Authorization bill (S. 1042) on
May 17 (S.Rept. 109-69). The measure was placed on the Senate Legislative
Calendar under General Orders (Calendar No. 102). The measure was laid before the
Senate by Unanimous Consent on July 20 (Congressional Record S8536-8545).
House Defense Authorization (H.R. 1815). The House Committee on
Armed Services reported its version of the Defense Authorization bill (H.R. 1815)
on May 20 (H.Rept. 109-89). The House passed the bill on May 25. It was received
in the Senate, read twice, and referred to the Senate Committee on Armed Services
on June 6.
1 The House version of the appropriation bill included military construction, military
housing allowances, military installation maintenance and operation, the Department of
Veterans Affairs, and other veteran-related agencies, while the Senate amendment did not
address military housing allowances or military installation maintenance and operation. The
Senate Committee on Appropriations made an amendment in the form of a substitute.

---

CRS-2
Status of Legislation
Table 1a. Status of FY2006 Military Quality of Life/Veterans
Affairs (House) and Military Construction/Veterans Affairs
(Senate) Appropriations (H.R. 2528)
Committee
Conference
Markup
House
House
Senate
Senate
Conf.
Report Approval
Public
Report
Passage
Report
Passage
Report
Law
House
Senate
House
Senate
H. Rept.
S.Rept.
5/25/05
7/21/05
5/26/05
—
—
—
—
—
109-95
109-105
Table 1b. Status of FY2006 Defense Authorization
(H.R. 1815, S. 1042)
Committee
Conference
Markup
House
House
Senate
Senate
Conf.
Report Approval
Public
Report
Passage
Report
Passage
Report
Law
House
Senate
House
Senate
H. Rept.
S. Rept.
5/18/05
5/12/05
5/25/05
—
—
—
—
—
109-89
109-69
Summary and Key Issues
Realignment of Appropriations Subcommittee Jurisdictions
House. During the last week of January 2005, Representative Jerry Lewis, the
chairman of the House Committee on Appropriations, proposed a significant
reorganization of the Committee’s subcommittee structure and realignment of
subcommittee jurisdictions. In the resulting redistribution of subcommittee
responsibilities, the Subcommittees on Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban
Development (VA-HUD) and Military Construction were eliminated and some of
their responsibilities were assigned to a new Subcommittee on Military Quality of
Life and Veterans Affairs under the chairmanship of Representative James T. Walsh.
The new subcommittee was given jurisdiction for appropriations to the
following accounts:
! Department of Defense: Military Construction, Army, Navy
(including Marine Corps), Air Force, Defense-wide, and Guard and
Reserve Forces, Facilities Sustainment, Restoration and
Modernization, Army, Navy (including Marine Corps), Air Force,
and Guard and Reserve Forces, Chemical Demilitarization
Construction, Defense-wide Military Family Housing Construction

---

CRS-3
and Operation and Maintenance, Army, Navy (including Marine
Corps), Air Force, and Defense-wide Family Housing Improvement
Fund, Military Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund,
Homeowners Assistance Fund, Basic Allowance for Housing, Army,
Navy (including Marine Corps), Air Force, and Guard and Reserve
Forces, Environmental Restoration Accounts, Base Realignment and
Closure Account, NATO Security Investment Program, Defense
Health Program Account.
! Department of Veterans Affairs
! Related Agencies: American Battle Monuments Commission, Armed
Forces Retirement Home, Cemeterial Expenses, Army (DOD), Court
of Appeals for Veterans Claims.
Senate. The Senate Committee on Appropriations undertook its own
reorganization under the chairmanship of Senator Thad Cochran. In the ensuing
reassignment of responsibilities, the Committee’s Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs,
Housing and Urban Development was dissolved. The Subcommittee on Military
Construction retained its responsibility for military construction appropriations and
absorbed additional appropriation obligations for Veterans Affairs, the American
Battle Monuments Commission, Cemeterial Expenses, Army (Arlington National
Cemetery), the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and the Selective Service
Commission. Other appropriation accounts did not transfer.
The reconstituted subcommittee continued under the chairmanship of Senator
Kay Bailey Hutchison and was renamed the Subcommittee on Military Construction
and Veterans Affairs.
Title I: Department of Defense
Military Construction
Army Modularity. All of the military operating forces are undergoing
significant structural reorganization as part of the Department of Defense
transformation effort. The Army may be undertaking the most profound of these
initiatives as Chief of Staff Gen. Peter J. Schoomaker guides its transition from an
organization based on the division to one based on the smaller, lighter brigade.2 The
Army has traditionally placed divisions in garrison as a unit.
One of the implications of breaking up the division into a number of smaller
brigades could be to increase the number of installations that could be candidates as
2 The division usually consists of three or four brigades.

---

CRS-4
new garrisons. On July 27, the Department of Defense announced locations that will
host 44 of the Army’s new “Modular Brigade Combat Teams” (MBCT).3
The Senate Appropriations Committee noted in its report (S.Rept. 109-105) that
the Army’s change in organization is intertwined with two other initiatives, Military
Base Realignment and Closure, and the redeployment of 60,000 - 70,000 troops from
overseas garrisons to posts in the United States and its territories over the next
decade. The Committee drew the attention of the Army to its expectations that the
service would be requesting funding adequate to enable all three to be carried out
simultaneously.
Military Base Realignments and Closures. The 2005 round of Base
Realignment and Closures (BRAC), authorized by Congress in December 2001 as
Title XXX of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002, came to
full maturity during 2005 with the appointment of the nine-member BRAC
Commission (officially known as the Defense Base Closure and Realignment
Commission of 2005) in early April, the creation of its supporting staff in early May,
the release of the Department of Defense List of Recommended BRAC Actions to
the Commission on May 13, and the initiation of a series of Commission hearings in
Washington and around the country.
The Commission is required to present its own list of recommended BRAC
actions to the President by September 8, 2005. The President will review the list and
either approve or disapprove it, forwarding to the Commission his reasons for
disapproval. The Commission may then draft and submit an amended list of
recommendations to the President. The President must forward an approved list to
Congress not later than November 7, 2005, or the BRAC process ends.
Under the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (10 USC 2687
note), as amended, Congress has 45 days from receipt of the President’s list to pass
a joint resolution disapproving the list. If Congress fails to do so, the list is
considered enacted, and the Department of Defense is required to initiate actions to
carry out the recommendations. The Department must begin all actions within two
years of enactment and complete all closures and realignments within six years.
Therefore, all enacted recommendations will be completed by the end of 2011.
This year, 2005, marks the fifth time that a commission has taken part in
determining which military installations are to be closed or significantly reduced in
scope. The first, the Base Realignment and Closure Commission, was chartered by,
and reported its recommendations to, the Secretary of Defense. All subsequent
commissions were created by Congress in the Defense Base Closure and
Realignment Act of 1990, as amended. Three subsequent rounds (in 1991, 1993, and
3 Unattributed, “Army Unveils Active Component Brigade Combat Team Stationing,” U.S.
Department of Defense Press Release, July 27, 2005. These consist of 37 regular MBCTs,
6 so-called “Stryker” MBCTs (organized around the Stryker Light Armored Vehicle III), and
one MBCT (-) (a light formation stationed at the National Training Center at Ft. Irwin,
California).

---

CRS-5
1995) were authorized by Congress in the original legislation. The 2005 round was
authorized in an amendment to the original law.
Several BRAC-related issues have arisen as the process has unfolded, as
indicated below.
Recommendations Regarding the National Guard. The list of
recommended BRAC actions released by the Department of Defense on May 13
included a significant number that affected Reserve Component (Reserves and
National Guard) sites. Among its other recommendations, the DOD suggested the
deactivation of the 111th Fighter Wing (Pennsylvania Air National Guard) and the
distribution of the aircraft assigned to the 183rd Fighter Wing (Illinois Air National
Guard) from the Abraham Lincoln Capital Airport Air Guard Station in Springfield,
Illinois, to the Ft. Wayne International Airport Air Guard Station and the 122nd
Fighter Wing (Indiana Air National Guard) in Ft. Wayne, Indiana.
On July 11, Governor Edward D. Rendell, Senator Arlen Specter, and Senator
Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, filed suit in U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania, naming the Secretary of Defense as defendant. The
governor complained that the recommendation to deactivate the 111th Fighter Wing
without his consent constituted a change in organization of a National Guard unit
barred by federal statute. The governor requested that the court issue “a Declaratory
Judgment declaring that Secretary Rumsfeld may not, without first obtaining
Governor Rendell’s approval, deactivate the 111th Fighter Wing.”
On July 21, Governor Rod Blagojevich of Illinois filed suit in the U.S. District
Court for the Central District of Illinois, naming the Secretary of Defense and each
of the BRAC Commissioners as defendants. His complaint, in part, claimed that the
distribution of aircraft from Springfield to Ft. Wayne constituted a realignment,
withdrawal, or relocation of Illinois Air National Guard units, and that this violated
various provisions in both Title 10 (Armed Forces) and Title 32 (National Guard) of
the United States Code. He asked that the court declare that the “realignment of the
183rd Fighter Wing as proposed by defendant Rumsfeld without the consent of the
Governor of the State of Illinois is prohibited by federal law ... .”
Both legal actions contended that the Secretary of Defense was required by law
to obtain the consent of the respective state governors before recommending these
actions.
Requested Funding for BRAC Accounts. The appropriation request for
Fiscal Year 2006 is split between two Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)
Accounts, one for 1990 and one for 2005.
The BRAC 1990 account is the consolidation of what had been four separate
accounts, one for each of the previous BRAC rounds. Because all of the
recommended BRAC actions from those rounds were completed in 2001, the BRAC
1990 account is devoted to funding the continuing environmental remediation
required on the federal property deemed excess during those rounds but not yet
conveyed to non-DOD ownership. $246 million was appropriated to this account for

---

CRS-6
FY2005. The President requested almost $378 million in new budget authority for
this account for FY2006.
The BRAC 2005 account will fund the many realignment and closure actions,
to include the movement of units and equipment, the construction of new
infrastructure at receiving installations, and the realignment and closure of property
deemed excess in the current BRAC round. The implementation of all enacted
BRAC actions in the 2005 round must begin not later than two years and be
completed not later than six years from the date of enactment. During previous
BRAC rounds, appropriations tended to rise sharply during the first few years,
peaking during the third or fourth year. They then gradually fell off as movement and
construction activity was replaced by environmental remediation and land transfer
to other agencies and local redevelopment authorities.
The BRAC 2005 appropriations account was established this year to fund the
first year of realignment and closure activity. The President made his first
appropriation request of $1.88 billion. The House approved an appropriation of only
$1.57 million, and the Senate Committee on Appropriations recommended only
$1.50 million. In its report to the Senate (S.Rept. 109-105), the Committee noted that
the President’s funding request had indicated his intention to retain $376 million of
the requested funding as unobligated at the end of the fiscal year. The Committee
cited this as its rationale for reducing the appropriation by the same amount.
Environmental Remediation on Closed Military Bases. A significant
portion of land rendered surplus during previous BRAC rounds remains the property
of the Department of Defense. The principal reason for this is the Department’s
enduring responsibility for property cleanup prior to transferring title.
In its report (H.Rept. 109-95), the House discussed the current situation at the
former Ft. Ord, where large tracts remain in DOD hands, but where the Department
has begun to take an innovative approach to speeding the transfer of remaining
property.
The Committee is aware that the Army and the re-use authority at the former Fort
Ord have begun discussions to develop creative means to transfer the remaining
surplus land at the base to the re-use authority prior to the completion of clean
up activities at the site. The Committee encourages the Army and the re-use
authority to explore the use of an environmental services cooperative agreement.
Such an arrangement would allow the Army to transfer the land immediately but
guarantee the re-use authority access to funds to pursue clean up through third
parties.
Attempt to Reopen the Airfield at Malmstrom Air Force Base,
Montana. Malmstrom Air Force Base in Montana had once hosted both an
intercontinental ballistic missile wing and an air refueling wing of KC-135 tanker
aircraft. The 1995 BRAC Commission recommended that “all fixed-wing aircraft
flying operations at Malmstrom AFB will cease and the airfield will be closed,” an
action that was subsequently carried out. A provision, Sec. 1942, inserted into the
text of H.R. 3, the “Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient Transportation Equity
Act of 2005” prior to the filing of the bill’s conference report (H.Rept. 109-203) on

---

CRS-7
July 28, 2005, provided for the reopening of the airfield, stating that, “Not later than
60 days after the date of the enactment of this act, the Secretary of the Air Force shall
— (1) open the airfield at Malmstrom Air Force Base, Montana; and (2) enable
flying operations for all fixed-wing aircraft at that base.”
The House subsequently drafted and passed H.Con.Res. 226, which amended
the conference report to remove Sec. 1942. The Senate agreed to the resolution on
July 29.
Overseas Military Bases. The six-member Commission on Review of
Overseas Military Facility Structure of the United States, created by Congress in Sec.
128 of the Military Construction Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (H.R.
2559, P.L. 108-132), released its draft report on May 9, 2005. The Commission,
commonly referred to as the “Overseas Basing Commission” (OBC), was given the
task to “conduct a thorough study of matters relating to the military facility structure
of the United States overseas.” In this, the Commission’s effort paralleled in part a
Department of Defense examination of its installations worldwide.4
The Commission was also enjoined to “submit to the President and Congress
a report which shall contain a detailed statement of the findings and conclusions of
the Commission, together with its recommendations for such legislation and
administrative actions as it considers appropriate ... [and] the report shall also include
a proposal by the Commission for an overseas basing strategy for the Department of
Defense in order to meet the current and future mission of the Department.”
During the period of the OBC study, the President announced that between
60,000 and 70,000 military personnel based in overseas garrisons would, over the
ensuing decade, be redeployed to garrisons located within the United States and its
territories. The military services were continuing the process of organizational
transformation, while the DOD was drawing up its list of recommended actions for
submission to the BRAC Commission. After weighing these and other factors, the
OBC stated:
The Commission found that the overseas basing structure cannot be viewed in
isolation from a myriad of other security-related considerations. Its feasibility
and effectiveness can only be evaluated in context with all other aspects of
national security mentioned elsewhere in this Report. We believe that at some
time too much activity in too short a time threatens to change transformation into
turbulence. We have concluded that we are doing too much too fast and a
reordering of the steps is necessary. We call, therefore, for a process of
deliberation and review to accompany the zeal and aggressiveness to act.5
4 This is known as the DOD Integrated Global Presence and Basing Strategy (IGPBS).
5 Report of the Commission on Review of Overseas Military Facility Structure of the United
States (Draft), May 9, 2005, p. viii. Following publication of the May 9 report, the
Department of Defense advised the Commission of its concerns that certain information in
the report might have a deleterious impact on the Department’s activities. In response, the
Commission edited those passages to remove any such information. In so doing, the
Commission determined that the changes in the report had no affect on the conclusions and
(continued...)

---

CRS-8
The report highlighted several issues of potential interest to Congress, including
the ability of U.S. military bases to absorb the influx of personnel and their families
from overseas, the interaction between BRAC, service transformation, and the DOD
plan for continuing bases on foreign soil, and the amount of military construction that
will be required to support that continuing presence.
Since the publication of the Commission’s draft report, the Department of
Defense announced that 11 military installations in Germany will be returned to full
German national control during FY2007. Two additional facilities in Würzburg,
Würzburg Hospital and Leighton Barracks, will be returned to German control at
some later, as yet unspecified, date.6
Operation Enduring Freedom/Operation Iraqi Freedom. The Fiscal
Year 2005 Emergency Supplemental Appropriation request7 included $1.0 billion to
support operations in Afghanistan and Iraq through military construction in these and
surrounding countries. This was added to the $912 million that had been
appropriated for the same purpose in all other emergency supplemental
appropriations enacted since September 11, 2001. These requests highlight several
matters, some of which may be of interest to Congress, such as:
! whether the $2.2 billion in funding in support of military operations
in Iraq and Afghanistan signals a longer-term U.S. presence in the
region or is primarily for short-term improvements to facilities for
U.S. troops;
! whether Congress has received sufficient information to evaluate
these projects;
! whether current authorities that give DOD additional flexibility to
fund unanticipated needs in military construction give Congress
adequate tools for oversight; or
! whether DOD’s decisions to rely primarily on supplemental rather
then regular military construction funding and military construction
rather than Operation and Maintenance funding for projects in Iraq
and Afghanistan are appropriate and ensure congressional oversight.8
Military forces of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) operate from
installations in Iraq and Afghanistan, and provide support from locations in many of
5 (...continued)
recommendations of the report. The revised report to the President and Congress was
published on June 5, 2005, and can be downloaded from the Commission’s website,
[http://www.obc.gov]. The Commission’s final report will be published by August 15, 2005.
6 “U.S. to Return 11 Bases to Germany Within Two Years,” State Department Press
Releases and Documents, July 29, 2005.
7 H.R. 1268, Making Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for the Fiscal Year Ending
September 30, 2005, and for Other Purposes, enacted May 11, 2005 (P.L. 109-13).
8 For more detailed information, see CRS General Distribution Memorandum, Military
Construction in Support of Afghanistan and Iraq, by Amy Belasco and Daniel Else, dated
April 21, 2005.

---

CRS-9
the states bordering the Persian Gulf, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, and Kyrgyzstan. Political
unrest in the Kyrgyz Republic during April 2005 precipitated press reports describing
assurances given by the interim Prime Minister of the country, Kurmanbek Bakiyev,
to the United States that continued use of the Manas Air Base, near the capital of
Bishkek, was assured.9 Soon after his victory in July, now-acting President Bakiyev
called for a reexamination of U.S. use of the airbase.10 The government of
Uzbekistan has echoed this sentiment for reconsidering continued U.S. use of
Khanabad Air Base (also known as “K-2”) in that country. The Secretary of Defense
visited the region in late July for discussions with the various governments.11
Nevertheless, on Friday, July 29, 2005, the government of Uzbekistan delivered
a message to the U.S. Embassy in Tashkent giving the U.S. 180 days to cease
operations at Khananabad.12
Other Defense Issues
Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) and Military Housing
Privatization. During the late 1990s, the Department of Defense undertook an
initiative to eliminate substandard housing for military personnel. This initiative took
two distinct paths, increasing the housing allowance paid to service personnel who
reside in commercial housing (owning or renting apartments and houses) and
upgrading government-furnished housing at military installations.
The original target date of 2010 for ensuring adequate housing for all was later
revised forward to 2007 for personnel stationed within the United States and 2009
for personnel stationed overseas.13 This was possible because the Department has
been able to gradually increase the housing allowance paid to troops (the Basic
Allowance for Housing), making off-base commercial housing affordable for a
greater percentage of active duty personnel. The Department has also been able to
effectively utilize a number of special authorizations granted by Congress to enter
9 Greg Jaffe, “Kyrgyz Leader Assures U.S. on Use of Air Base,” Wall Street Journal, April
15, 2005, p. 8.
10 See CRS Reports RL32864, Coup in Kyrgyzstan: Developments and Implications, and
97-690, Kyrgyzstan: Recent Developments and U.S. Interests, by Jim Nichol, for more
information on developments in the Kyrgyz Republic.
11 Unattributed, “U.S. Struggles to Defend Bases in Central Asia,” Agence France Presse,
July 18, 2005, 03:34, and Unattributed, “Rumsfeld Due in Kyrgyzstan for Talks on U.S.
Airbase,” Agence France Presse, July 25, 2005, 07:56.
12 The U.S. government is reported to have paid approximately $15 million since late 2001
to lease facilities at the airbase. While the U.S. has sought to renew the lease, the
government of President Islam Karimov has been the target of international criticism since
reports of the killing of large numbers of civilians by government troops in the city of
Andijan during May. Nick Paton, “Uzbekistan Kicks U.S. Out of Military Base,” The
Guardian, August 1, 2005.
13 The Department of Defense has been careful to point out that these target dates refer to
the signing of contracts for the construction of adequate housing and not the appearance of
the housing itself.

---

CRS-10
into public-private partnerships with commercial real estate developers to improve,
increase capacity, and privatize family housing at some military installations.
Department of Defense Health Care. The House Committee on
Appropriations report on the appropriations bill highlighted issues of importance to
veterans undergoing continuing health care as they transition from active duty to
veteran status through reversion to inactive reserve status or retirement. In particular,
the Committee encouraged the Department of Defense and the Department of
Veterans Affairs to pursue initiatives to render their currently incompatible electronic
information systems interoperable so that health-related data can follow the veteran
from one department to the other.
Title II: Department of Veterans Affairs
Table 2. Department of Veterans Affairs Appropriations,
FY2001-FY2005
(budget authority in billions)
FY2001
FY2002
FY2003
FY2004
FY2005
VA
$47.95 $52.38 $58.10
$61.84
$65.84
Source: Amounts shown are from reports of the Appropriations Committees accompanying the
appropriations bills for the following years.
Agency Mission
Federal policy toward veterans recognizes the importance of their service to the
nation and the effect that service may have on their subsequent civilian lives. The
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) administers, directly or in conjunction with
other federal agencies, programs that provide benefits and other services to veterans
and their dependents and beneficiaries. The three primary organizations in VA that
work together to accomplish this mission are the Veterans Benefits Administration
(VBA), the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), and the National Cemetery
Administration (NCA). The benefits provided include compensation for disabilities
sustained or worsened as a result of active duty military service; pensions for totally
disabled, poor war veterans; cash payments for certain categories of dependents
and/or survivors; education, training, rehabilitation, and job placement services to
assist veterans upon their return to civilian life; loan guarantees to help them obtain
homes; free medical care for conditions sustained during military service as well as
medical care for other conditions, much of which is provided free to low income
veterans; life insurance to enhance financial security for their dependents; and burial
assistance, flags, grave-sites, and headstones when they die.

---

CRS-11
Table 3. Appropriations: Department of Veterans Affairs,
FY2005-FY2006
(budget authority in billions)
FY2006
FY2005
FY2006
FY2006
Senate
FY2006
Program
enacted
request
House
Approp.
Conf
Comm.
Compens., pension, burial
$32.608
$33.413
$33.413
$33.413
—
Readjustment benefits
2.556
3.214
3.214
3.214
—
Insurance/indemnities
0.044
0.046
0.046
0.046
—
Housing prog.(net, indef.)
-0.100
-0.047
-0.047
-0.047
—
Subtotal: Mandatory
35.108
36.626
36.626
36.626
—
Med. services
19.317
19.995
20.995
21.331
—

Emerg. funding
1.538a
1.977
—
1.977
—
Med. administration
4.667
4.518
4.135
2.858
—

Emerg. funding
0.002
—
—
—
—
(P.L. 108-324)
Information technology
—
—
—
1.457
—
Medical facilities
3.715
3.298
3.298
3.298
—

Emerg. funding
0.047
—
—
—
—
(P.L. 108-324)
Med., prosthetic research
0.402
0.393
0.393
0.412
—
Med. care cost collect.b

(offsetting receipts)
-1.986
-2.170
-2.170
-2.170
—

(approps. indefinite)
1.986
2.170
2.170
2.170
—
Subtotal: Med. programs &
29.689
30.181
28.821
31.333
—
admin. (appropriations)
Total available to
31.675
32.351
30.991
33.503
—
VHA
Gen. admin. exp. (total)
1.314
1.419
1.412
1.419
—
Emerg.
funding
0.001
—
—
—
—
(P.L. 108-324)
Nat’l Cemetery Admin.
0.148
0.156
0.156
0.156
—

Emerg. funding (P.L.
c
—
—
—
—
108-324)

---

CRS-12
FY2006
FY2005
FY2006
FY2006
Senate
FY2006
Program
enacted
request
House
Approp.
Conf
Comm.
Inspector General
0.069
0.070
0.070
0.070
—
Construction
0.684
0.816
0.816
0.816
—

Emerg. funding
0.036
—
—
—
—
(P.L. 108-324)
Grants; state facilities
0.104
—
0.025
0.104
—
State veteran cemeteries
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.032
—
Housing & other loan
0.154
0.155
0.155
0.155
—
admin.
Subtotal: Discretionary
32.231
32.829
31.487
34.085
—
Total: (VA)
$67.339
$69.454
$68.112
$70.711
—
Source: Table prepared by the Congressional Research Service based on H.Rept. 109-95, S.Rept. 109-
105, and H.Rept. 109-188.
a. Includes supplemental funding from the Military Construction Appropriations and Emergency
Hurricane Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2005 (P.L. 108-324) and from the Department of
the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2006 (P.L. 109-54).
b. Medical Care Collections Fund (MCCF) receipts are restored to the VHA as an indefinite budget
authority equal to the revenue collected.
c. $50,000.
Key Budget Issues
The budget submitted by the Administration in February 2005 called for funding
VA at a level of $66.5 billion dollars for FY2006. More recent estimates of amounts
required for both mandatory and discretionary medical care spending have raised this
to $69.5 billion. This would be an increase of $2.1 billion, or 3.1%, over FY2005
with supplementals included.
Both the House and the Senate passed their versions of the budget resolution for
FY2006 on March 17, 2005. The overall budget function 700 for veterans benefits
and services addressed in the budget resolution is broader than just the Department
of Veterans Affairs and includes money that will be appropriated in other bills for
other departments as well. The House-passed resolution (H.Con.Res. 95)
recommended $68.9 billion in new budget authority for veterans benefits and
services, including an increase of $297 million in discretionary spending over the
Administration’s request. The Senate version (S.Con.Res. 18) was amended to
provide $69.0 billion for the veterans budget function. The House version included
a directive to the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs to reduce the level of direct
spending on veterans’ programs by $155 million in outlays for FY2006, but the

---

CRS-13
Senate version did not. This directive was not included in the final conference report
which was approved by both houses on April 28, 2005. The final budget resolution
includes $69.0 billion for the veterans budget function in FY2006.
H.R. 2528, as approved by the House Appropriations Committee on May 18,
2005 and by the House on May 26, 2005, would provide a total of $68.1 billion for
the VA budget with $31.5 billion of the bill’s $85.2 billion 302(b) allocation going
for VA discretionary spending. The Senate Appropriations Committee approved its
version of H.R. 2528 on July 21, 2005. This bill would provide a total of $70.7
billion for VA including $34.1 billion in new budget authority for discretionary
spending.
VA Cash Benefits. Since spending for the VA cash benefit programs is
mandatory as noted above, the amounts requested in the budget are based on
projected caseloads. Eligibility requirements and benefit levels are specified in law.
While the total number of veterans is declining, the number receiving benefits is
increasing. VA entitlement spending, mostly service-connected compensation,
pensions, and readjustment (primarily education) payments, reached $32.7 billion in
FY2004 and is projected to reach $35.1 billion in FY2005 and $36.6 billion in
FY2006. In addition to the increased number of beneficiaries, much of the projected
increases in recent years result from cost-of-living adjustments for compensation
benefits and from liberalizations to the Montgomery GI Bill, the primary education
program.
Medical Care. On June 23, 2005, VA announced a shortfall of more than $1
billion in the $30.2 billion that had been made available to VHA for FY2005. On
July 26, 2005, the conferees of the Department of the Interior, Environment, and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2006 (H.R. 2361, H.Rept. 109-188) provided
$1.5 billion in supplemental appropriations for veterans medical services for FY2005,
with carryover authority for FY2006 as well. The President signed the bill on August
2, 2005, making it P.L. 109-54.
For FY2006, the Administration has requested $30.2 billion for VHA. This
amount includes $22.0 billion for medical services, $4.5 billion for medical
administration, $3.3 billion for medical facilities and $393 million for medical and
prosthetic research. The Administration projects that another $2.2 billion in medical
care collections would also be available for VA medical programs. Together with
these collections, the Administration’s budget request for VHA is $32.4 billion.
The House budget resolution (H.Con.Res. 95) called for $31.7 billion in
discretionary budget authority for FY2006, most of which would be for VA medical
care programs.14 The Senate budget resolution (S.Con.Res 18) did not provide a
separate amount for discretionary budget authority for VA programs.
14 U.S. Congress, House Committee on the Budget, Concurrent Resolution on the Budget,
Fiscal Year 2006, report to accompany H.Con.Res 95, 109th Cong., 1st sess., March 11, 2005,
p.38.

---

CRS-14
In its budget submission to Congress, the Administration is proposing several
legislative changes. The major proposals are: to assess an annual enrollment fee of
$250 for all veterans in Priority Groups 7 and 8;15 to increase pharmacy co-payments
from $7 to $15 for a 30-day supply of prescriptions paid by Priority 7 and 8 veterans;
to suspend grants to fund construction and renovation of state extended care facilities
for a period of one year; to provide per diem payments to state veterans nursing
homes only for the care of service-connected and catastrophically disabled veterans
with special needs;16 to authorize payment for insured veteran patients’ out-of-pocket
expenses for emergency services if their emergency care is obtained outside of the
VA health care system; to exempt former Prisoners of War (POWs) from
co-payments for extended care services; and to exempt co-payment requirements for
hospice care provided in any VA setting. Many of these same proposals were offered
in the Administration’s budgets for FY2004 and FY2005 and rejected by Congress.
H.R. 2528, as passed by the House, would provide $21.0 billion for medical
services, $4.1 billion for medical administration, $3.3 billion for medical facilities,
and $393 million for medical and prosthetic research. The total amount available to
VHA, including an estimated $2.2 billion in collections, would be $31.0 billion. The
version approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee would provide $23.3
billion for medical services, $2.9 billion for medical administration with an
additional $1.5 billion dedicated to information technology, $3.3 billion for medical
facilities, and $412 million for medical and prosthetic research. The Senate total
would be $31.3 billion before the collections were added; $33.5 including the
estimated $2.2 billion in collections. Neither version includes the requested
enrollment fees or increased co-payments.
Title III: Related Agencies
Independent Commissions
American Battle Monuments Commission. The American Battle
Monuments Commission (ABMC) is responsible for the maintenance and
construction of U.S. monuments and memorials commemorating the achievements
in battle of U.S. armed forces since the nation’s entry into World War I; the erection
of monuments and markers by U.S. citizens and organizations in foreign countries;
and the design, construction, and maintenance of permanent military cemetery
memorials in foreign countries. The Commission maintains 24 military memorial
15 Priority Group 7 veterans have incomes above $25,843 for a single veteran and below the
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) geographic means test level.
Priority 8 veterans are those with incomes above $25,843 for a single veteran and above the
HUD geographic means test. The HUD geographic means test is established at a local level
such as county.
16 State veterans nursing homes will receive per diem payments for Priority Groups 1-4
veterans who have catastrophic disabilities and who need short-term care (less than 90
days), as well as those who need long-term maintenance care. For Priority Group 4 veterans
who are not catastrophically disabled, and for Priority Groups 5-8 veterans, state veterans
nursing homes will be reimbursed only for short-term care.

---

CRS-15
cemeteries and 25 monuments, memorials, and markers in 15 countries, including
three memorials on U.S. soil.
The ABMC was responsible for the planning and construction of the World War
II Memorial on the Mall in Washington, DC. Though the National Park Service
assumed responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the Memorial at its
dedication, the ABMC retains a fiduciary responsibility for the remaining public
contributions given for its construction. The ABMC is presently charged with
erecting an Interpretive Center at the Normandy American Cemetery, Normandy,
France.
U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The U.S. Court of Appeals
for Veterans Claims was established by the Veterans’ Judicial Review Act of 1988.
The Court is an independent judicial tribunal with exclusive jurisdiction to review
decisions of the Board of Veterans’ Appeals. It has the authority to decide all
relevant questions of law; interpret constitutional, statutory, and regulatory
provisions; and determine the meaning or applicability of the terms of an action by
the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). It is authorized to compel action by the
VA. It is authorized to hold unconstitutional or otherwise unlawful and set aside
decisions, findings, conclusions, rules and regulations issued or adopted by the
Department of Veterans Affairs or the Board of Veterans’ Appeals.
The Senate Committee on Appropriations drew special attention to the Court’s
efforts to implement an electronic case management system.
Cemeterial Expenses, Army. The Secretary of the Army is responsible for
the administration, operation and maintenance of Arlington National Cemetery and
the Soldiers’ and Airmen’s Home National Cemetery. In addition to its principal
function as a national cemetery, Arlington is the site of approximately 3,100 non-
funeral ceremonies each year and has approximately 4,000,000 visitors annually.
In increasing the amount requested by the President for this account, the House
suggested that the funding be used to speed the entry into electronic form of cemetery
record data now existing only in paper-based records.
Armed Forces Retirement Home. The Armed Forces Retirement Home
account provides funds to operate and maintain the Armed Forces Retirement Home
in Washington, DC (also known as the United States Soldiers’ and Airmen’s Home),
and the Armed Forces Retirement Home in Gulfport, MS (originally located in
Philadelphia, PA, and known as the United States Naval Home). These two facilities
provide long-term housing and medical care for approximately 1,600 needy veterans.

---

CRS-16
Appendix A. Consolidated Funding Tables
Table 4a. DOD Military Construction
(budget authority in $000)
FY 2005
FY 2006
Account
House
Senate
Conf.
Enacted
Request
Military Construction, Army
1,981,084
1,479,841
1,652,552
1,640,641
—
Rescissions
-18,976
—
—
—
—
Total
1,962,108
1,479,841
1,652,552
1,640,641
—
Military Construction,
1,069,947
1,029,249
1,109,177
1,045,882
—
Navy and Marine Corps
Rescissions
-24,000
—
—
-92,354
—
Emergency Approps.
138,800
—
—
—
—
(P.L. 108-324)
Additional Approps.
-4,350
—
—
—
—
(P.L. 108-447, Div. J)
Total
1,180,397
1,029,249
1,109,177
953,528
—
Military Construction,
866,331
1,069,640
1,171,338
1,209,128
—
Air Force
Rescission
-21,800
—
—
—
—
Total
844,531
1,069,640
1,171,338
1,209,128
—
Military Construction,
686,055
1,042,730
976,664
1,072,165
—
Defense-wide
Rescission
-22,737
—
—
—
—
Total
663,318
1,042,730
976,664
1,072,165
—
Total, Active components
4,650,354
4,621,460
4,909,731
4,875,462
—
Military Construction,
446,748
327,012
410,624
467,146
—
Army National Guard
Military Construction,
243,043
165,256
225,727
279,156
—
Air National Guard
Rescission
-5,000
—
—
—
—
Total
238,043
165,256
225,727
279,156
—

---

CRS-17
FY 2005
FY 2006
Account
House
Senate
Conf.
Enacted
Request
Military Construction,
92,377
106,077
138,425
136,077
—
Army Reserve
Emergency Approps.
8,700
—
—
—
—
(P.L. 108-324)
Total
101,077
106,077
138,425
136,077
—
Military Construction,
44,246
45,226
45,226
46,676
—
Naval Reserve
Additional Approps.
4,350
—
—
—
—
(P.L. 108-447, Div. J)
Total
48,596
45,226
45,226
46,676
—
Military Construction, Air
123,977
79,260
110,847
89,260
—
Force Reserve
Total, Reserve components
958,441
722,831
930,849
1,018,315
—
Total, Military Construction
5,608,795
5,344,291
5,840,580
5,893,777
—
Appropriations
(5,553,808)
(5,344,291)
(5,840,580)
(5,986,131)
—
Emergency appropriations
(147,500)
—
—
—
—
Rescissions
(-92,513)
—
—
(-92,354)
—
NATO Security Investment
165,800
206,858
206,858
206,858
—
Program
Rescission
-5,000
—
—
—
—
Total
160,800
206,858
206,858
206,858
Family Housing Construction,
636,099
549,636
549,636
549,636
—
Army
Rescission
-21,000
—
—
—
—
Total
615,099
549,636
549,636
549,636
—
Family Housing O and M,
926,507
812,993
803,993
812,993
—
Army
Emergency Approps.
1,200
—
—
—
—
(P.L. 108-324)
Total
927,707
812,993
803,993
812,993
—
Family Housing Construction,
139,107
218,942
218,942
218,942
—
Navy and Marine Corps

---

CRS-18
FY 2005
FY 2006
Account
House
Senate
Conf.
Enacted
Request
Rescission
-12,301
—
—
—
—
Total
126,806
218,942
218,942
218,942
—
Family Housing O and M,
696,304
593,660
588,660
593,660
—
Navy and Marine Corps
Emergency Approps.
9,100
—
—
—
—
(P.L. 108-324)
Total
705,404
593,660
588,660
593,660
—
Family Housing Construction,
846,959
1,251,108
1,236,220
1,142,622
—
Air Force
Rescission
-45,171
—
—
—
—
Total
801,788
1,251,108
1,236,220
1,142,622
—
Family Housing OP and M,
853,384
766,939
755,319
766,939
—
Air Force
Emergency Approps.
11,400
—
—
—
—
(P.L. 108-324)
Total
864,784
766,939
755,319
766,939
—
Family Housing Construction,
49
—
—
—
—
Defense-wide
Family Housing O and M,
49,575
46,391
46,391
46,391
—
Defense-wide
DOD Family Housing
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
—
Improvement Fund
Rescission
-19,109
—
—
—
—
Total
-16,609
2,500
2,500
2,500
—
Total, Family Housing
4,074,603
4,242,169
4,201,661
4,133,683
—
Appropriations
(4,150,484)
(4,242,169)
(4,201,661)
(4,133,683)
—
Emergency
(21,700)
—
—
—
—
Appropriations
Recissions
(-97,581)
—
—
—
—
Chemical Demilitarization
81,886
—
—
—
—
Construction, Defense-wide

---

CRS-19
FY 2005
FY 2006
Account
House
Senate
Conf.
Enacted
Request
Base Realignment and Closure
BRAC, 1990
246,116
377,827
377,827
377,827
—
BRAC, 2005
—
1,880,466
1,570,466
1,504,466
—
Emergency Appropriation
50
—
—
—
—
(P.L. 108-324)
Total
246,166
2,258,293
1,948,293
1,882,293
—
Table 4b. DOD Basic Allowance for Housing
(budget authority in $000)
FY 2005
FY 2006
Account
House
Senate
Conf.
Enacted
Request
Basic Allowance for Housing
Army
3,341,882
3,945,392
3,945,392
—
—
Navy
3,471,251
3,592,905
3,592,905
—
—
Marine Corps
1,053,573
1,179,071
1,179,071
—
—
Air Force
3,010,770
3,240,113
3,240,113
—
—
Army National
434,073
453,690
453,690
—
—
Guard
Air National
214,151
248,317
248,317
—
—
Guard
Army Reserve
290,117
310,566
310,566
—
—
Naval Reserve
202,282
191,338
191,338
—
—
Marine Corps
38,945
40,609
40,609
—
—
Reserve
Air Force
59,781
71,286
71,286
—
—
Reserve
Total
12,116,825
13,273,287
13,273,287
—
—

---

CRS-20
Table 4c. DOD Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, &
Modernization
(budget authority in $000)
FY 2005
FY 2006
Account
House
Senate
Conf.
Enacted
Request
Facilities Sustainment, Restoration & Modernization
Army
1,967,028
1,825,518
1,850,518
—
—
Navy
1,333,288
1,344,971
1,344,971
—
—
Marine Corps
523,756
553,960
553,960
—
—
Air Force
1,991,710
1,815,701
1,845,701
—
—
Defense-Wide
95,000
115,400
115,400
—
—
Army National
384,044
391,544
391,544
—
—
Guard
Air National
230,642
169,791
184,791
—
—
Guard
Army Reserve
201,141
204,370
204,370
—
—
Naval Reserve
73,410
62,788
67,788
—
—
Marine Corps
12,126
10,105
10,105
—
—
Reserve
Air Force Reserve
53,056
55,764
55,764
—
—
Total
6,865,201
6,549,912
6,624,912
—
—
Table 4d. DOD Environmental Remediation
(budget authority in $000)
FY 2005
FY 2006
Account
House
Senate
Conf.
Enacted
Request
Environmental Restoration
Army
400,948
407,865
407,865
—
—
Navy
266,820
305,275
305,275
—
—
Air Force
397,368
406,461
406,461
—
—
Defense-Wide
23,684
28,167
28,167
—
—
Formerly Used
Defense Sites
266,516
221,921
221,921
—
—
(FUDS)
Total
1,355,336
1,369,689
1,369,689
—
—

---

CRS-21
Table 4e. DOD Health Program
(budget authority in $000)
FY 2005
FY 2006
House
Senate
Conf.
Enacted
Request
Defense Health Program
Operation and
17,297,419
19,247,137
19,184,537
—
—
Maintenance
Procurement
367,035
375,319
355,119
—
—
Research and
506,982
169,156
444,256
—
—
Development
Total
18,171,436
19,791,612
19,983,912
—
—
Gen. Provision
—
65,000
65,000
—
—
(Sec. 128)
Table 4f. DOD Totals
(budget authority in $000)
FY 2005
FY 2006
Account
House
Senate
Conf.
Enacted
Request
Total, Department of Defense
New Budget Authority
48,681,048
53,101,111
53,514,192
12,116,611
—
Appropriations
(48,706,892)
(53,101,111)
(53,514,192)
(12,208,965)
—
Emergency
(169,250)
—
—
—
—
Appropriations
Rescissions
(-195,094)
—
—
(-92,354)
—

---

CRS-22
Table 5a. VA Benefits
(budget authority in $000)
FY 2005
FY 2006
Account
House
Senate
Conf.
Enacted
Request
Veterans Benefits Administration
Compensation and Pensions
32,607,688
33,412,879
33,412,879
33,412,879
—
Readjustment Benefits
2,556,232
3,214,246
3,214,246
3,214,246
—
Veterans Insurance and
44,380
45,907
45,907
45,907
—
Indemnities
Veterans Housing Benefit
Program Fund Program
43,784
64,586
64,586
64,586
—
Account (Indefinite)
Credit Subsidy
-144,000
-112,000
-112,000
-112,000
—
Administrative Expenses
152,842
153,575
153,575
153,575
—
Vocational Rehabilitation
47
53
53
53
—
Loans Program Account
Administrative Expenses
309
305
305
305
—
Native American Veteran
Housing Loan Program
566
580
580
580
—
Account
Total
35,261,848
36,780,131
36,780,131
36,780,131
—

---

CRS-23
Table 5b. VA Health Administration
(budget authority in $000)
FY 2005
FY 2006
Account
House
Senate
Conf.
Enacted
Request
Veterans Health Administration
Medical Services
19,316,995
19,995,141
20,995,141
21,331,011
—
Emergency
—
1,977,000
—
1,977,000
Appropriations
Emergency
Appropriations
38,283
—
—
—
—
(P.L. 108-324)
Emergency
Appropriations
1,500,000
—
—
—
—
(P.L. 109-54)
Medical Administration
4,667,360
4,517,874
4,134,874
2,858,442
—
Emergency
Appropriations
1,940
—
—
—
—
(P.L. 108-324)
Information Technology
—
—
—
1,456,821
Medical Facilities
3,715,040
3,297,669
3,297,669
3,297,669
—
Emergency
Appropriations
46,909
—
—
—
—
(P.L. 108-324)
Medical and Prosthetic
402,348
393,000
393,000
412,000
—
Research
Medical Care Cost
Recovery Collections:
Offsetting
-1,985,984
-2,170,000
-2,170,000
-2,170,000
—
Collections
Appropriations
1,985,984
2,170,000
2,170,000
2,170,000
—
(Indefinite)
Total
29,688,875
30,180,684
28,820,684
31,332,943
—

---

CRS-24
Table 5c. VA Departmental Administration
(budget authority in $000)
FY 2005
FY 2006
Account
House
Senate
Conf.
Enacted
Request
Departmental Administration
General Operating Expenses
1,314,155
1,418,827
1,411,827
1,418,827
—
Emergency Appropriations
545
—
—
—
—
(P.L. 108-324)
National Cemetery Administration
147,734
156,447
156,447
156,447
—
Emergency Appropriations
50
—
—
—
—
(P.L. 108-324)
Office of Inspector General
69,153
70,174
70,174
70,174
—
Construction, Major Projects
455,130
607,100
607,100
607,100
—
Construction, Minor Projects
228,933
208,937
208,937
208,937
—
Emergency Appropriations
36,343
—
—
—
—
(P.L. 108-324)
Grants for Construction of State
104,322
—
25,000
104,322
—
Extended Care Facilities
Grants for the Construction of State
31,744
32,000
32,000
32,000
—
Veterans Cemeteries
Total
2,388,109
2,493,485
2,511,485
2,597,807
—
Table 5d. VA Totals
(budget authority in $000)
FY 2005
FY 2006
Account
House
Senate
Conf.
Enacted
Request
Total, Veterans Administration
New Budget Authority
67,338,832
69,454,300
68,112,300
70,710,881
—
Appropriations
(65,714,762)
(67,477,300)
(68,112,300)
(68,733,881)
—
Emergency
(1,624,070)
(1,977,000)
—
(1,977,000)
—
Appropriations
VA Discretionary
32,230,748
32,828,682
31,486,682
34,085,263
—
VA Mandatory
35,108,084
36,625,618
36,625,618
36,625,618
—

---

CRS-25
Table 6. Related Agencies
(budget authority in $000)
Account
FY 2005
FY 2006
House
Senate
Conf.
Enacted
Request
American Battle Monuments Commission
Salaries and Expenses
40,771
35,250
35,750
36,250
—
Foreign Currency
11,904
15,250
15,250
15,250
—
Fluctuations
Total
52,675
50,500
51,000
51,500
—
U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
Salaries and Expenses
17,112
18,295
18,295
18,795
—
Department of Defense-Civil
Cemeterial Expenses,
29,363
28,050
29,550
28,550
—
Army
Armed Forces Retirement
Home
Operation and
57,163
57,033
57,033
57,033
—
Maintenance
Capital Program
3,968
1,248
1,248
1,248
—
Total
61,131
58,281
58,281
58,281
—
Total, Agencies
160,281
155,126
157,126
157,126
—
Table 7. Grand Total
(budget authority in $000)
FY 2005
FY 2006
Account
House
Senate
Conf.
Enacted
Request
Grand Total, All
Titles
New Budget Authority
116,180,161
122,710,537
121,783,618
82,984,618
—
Appropriations
(114,581,935)
(120,733,537)
(121,783,618)
(81,099,972)
—
Emergency
(1,793,320)
(1,977,000)
—
(1,977,000)
—
Appropriations
Rescissions
(-195,094)
—
—
(-92,354)
—
Note:
Senate appropriations are combined from the Military Construction/Veterans Affairs and
Defense Appropriations bills.

---

CRS-26
Appendix B. Additional Resources
Budget
CRS Report RL30002. A Defense Budget Primer, by Mary T. Tyszkiewicz and
Stephen Daggett.
CRS Report 98-720. Manual on the Federal Budget Process, by Robert Keith and
Allen Schick.
Military Construction
CRS Report RL32924. Defense: FY2006 Authorization and Appropriations, by
Stephen Daggett.
CRS Report RS21822. Military Base Closures: DOD’s 2005 Internal Selection
Process, by Daniel H. Else and David E. Lockwood.
CRS Report RL32216. Military Base Closures: Implementing the 2005 Round, by
David E. Lockwood.
CRS Report RL30440. Military Base Closures: Estimates of Costs and Savings, by
David E. Lockwood.
CRS Report RL30051. Military Base Closures: Agreement on a 2005 Round, by
David E. Lockwood.
CRS Multimedia MM70068. Military Base Closures: DOD’s Internal 2005 BRAC
Selection Process, by Daniel H. Else and David E. Lockwood, available online
at [http://www.crs.gov/products/multimedia/sem_bc-040422.shtml].
CRS Report RL32305. Authorization and Appropriations for FY2006: Defense, by
Stephen Daggett.
Veterans Affairs
CRS Report RL32975. Veterans’ Medical Care: FY2006 Appropriations, by Sidath
Viranga Panangala.
CRS Report RL32961. Veterans’ Health Care Issues in the 109th Congress, by
Sidath Viranga Panangala.

---

CRS-27
Selected Websites
House Committee on Appropriations
[http://appropriations.house.gov/]
Senate Committee on Appropriations
[http://appropriations.senate.gov/]
House Committee on Armed Services
[http://www.house.gov/hasc/]
Senate Committee on Armed Services
[http://armed-services.senate.gov/]
House Committee on Veterans Affairs
[http://veterans.house.gov/]
Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs
[http://veterans.senate.gov/]
Commission on Review of Overseas Military Facility Structure of the United States
(Overseas Basing Commission)
[http://www.obc.gov/]
CRS Appropriations Products Guide
[http://www.crs.gov/products/appropriations/apppage.shtml]
CRS Multimedia Library
[http://www.crs.gov/products/multimedia/multimedialibrary.shtml]
Congressional Budget Office
[http://www.cbo.gov/]
Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission (BRAC Commission)
[http://www.brac.gov]
General Accounting Office
[http://www.gao.gov/]

---