Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and
Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations
Daniel H. Else, Coordinator
Acting Section Research Manager
Sidath Viranga Panangala
Specialist in Veterans Policy
Umar Moulta-Ali
Analyst in Disability Policy
April 20, 2015
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R43995

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

Summary
The Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies appropriations bill provides
funding for the planning, design, construction, alteration, and improvement of facilities used by
active and reserve military components worldwide. It capitalizes military family housing and the
U.S. share of the NATO Security Investment Program and finances the implementation of
installation closures and realignments. It underwrites veterans benefit and health care programs
administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), provides for the creation and
maintenance of U.S. cemeteries and battlefield monuments within the United States and abroad,
and supports the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, Armed Forces Retirement Homes,
and Arlington National Cemetery. The bill also funds advance appropriations for veterans’
medical services.
Military construction appropriations must be both authorized (usually in the annual National
Defense Authorization Act) and appropriated. For FY2015, the President requested $6.6 billion in
new budget authority for regular (base budget) military construction and an additional $46
million for Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) construction associated with ongoing active
military operations. Congress appropriated what the President requested, included a small amount
of additional new budget authority, and added to that unexpired appropriations rescinded from
prior fiscal years, bringing the base plus OCO military construction appropriation to $6.8 billion.
In the spring of 2014, the President initiated a European Reassurance Initiative intended to
strengthen confidence in U.S. support of its allies’ security and territorial integrity. Congress
thereupon added $221 million in military construction funding to the appropriation, bringing the
total budget authority available for military construction in FY2015 to $7.0 billion.
For Veterans Affairs, the President requested $154.6 billion, an increase of $10.7 billion above the
amount enacted for FY2014. The final appropriation of $159.1 billion augmented the President’s
request by approximately $505 million. The Administration requested $212.6 million to support
the other agencies (the American Battle Monuments Commission, the U.S. Court of Appeals for
Veterans Claims, Arlington National Cemetery, and the Armed Forces Retirement Home) funded
by the act. The final combined appropriation for these agencies for FY2015 was $236.6 million.
The Carl Levin and Howard P. “Buck” McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2015 (H.R. 3979/P.L. 113-291), which authorizes military construction appropriations and
other related activities, was enacted on December 19, 2014. The final version of the FY2015
Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act (the
Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015; H.R. 83, Division I/P.L. 113-265)
was enacted on December 16, 2014.

Congressional Research Service

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

Contents
Status of Legislation ........................................................................................................................ 1
Military Construction Authorization (P.L. 113-291, Division B) ................................................... 2
Army Authorizations ................................................................................................................. 4
Navy Authorizations .................................................................................................................. 5
Air Force Authorizations ........................................................................................................... 5
Defense Agencies Authorizations .............................................................................................. 5
Chemical Demilitarization Authorizations ................................................................................ 6
North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program (NSIP)
Authorization .......................................................................................................................... 6
Guard and Reserve Forces Facilities ......................................................................................... 6
Family Housing Improvement Authorization ............................................................................ 7
Base Realignment and Closure Activities ................................................................................. 7
Military Construction General Provisions ................................................................................. 8
Provisions Related to Asia-Pacific Military Realignment ................................................... 9
Land Conveyances .............................................................................................................. 9
Military Memorials, Monuments, and Museums .............................................................. 10
Designations ...................................................................................................................... 10
Other Matters .................................................................................................................... 11
Overseas Contingency Construction Authorizations ............................................................... 11
European Reassurance Initiative ....................................................................................... 11
Defense Agency Construction ........................................................................................... 11
Authorization of Appropriations ....................................................................................... 11
Appropriations (P.L. 113-235) ....................................................................................................... 11
Title I: Department of Defense ................................................................................................ 12
Military Construction ........................................................................................................ 12
Military Construction Issues for FY2015 .......................................................................... 15
Title II: Veterans Affairs .......................................................................................................... 18
Agency Overview .............................................................................................................. 18
Appropriation Highlights .................................................................................................. 18
Title III: Related Agencies ....................................................................................................... 24
American Battle Monuments Commission ....................................................................... 24
U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims ....................................................................... 25
Department of Defense: Civil (Army Cemeterial Expenses) ............................................ 25
Armed Forces Retirement Home ....................................................................................... 25
Title IV: Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) ................................................................ 26

Figures
Figure 1. Military Construction and Family Housing Budget Authority, FY1948-FY2019 .......... 13
Figure 2. Military Construction and Family Housing New Budget Authority,
FY2012-FY2019 ......................................................................................................................... 15

Congressional Research Service

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

Tables
Table 1. Status of FY2015 Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act ....................................................................................................................... 1
Table 2. Status of FY2015 National Defense Authorization Act ..................................................... 2
Table 3. Military Construction Appropriation Authorizations for FY2015 ..................................... 3
Table 4. Reserve Component Military Construction ....................................................................... 7
Table 5. Land Conveyances Authorized by the Military Construction Authorization Act
for FY2015 ................................................................................................................................. 10
Table 6. Incrementally Funded Military Construction, FY2015 .................................................... 16
Table 7. Department of Veterans Affairs Appropriations, FY2008-FY2015 ................................. 18
Table 8. Appropriations: Department of Veterans Affairs, FY2015 and FY2016 Advance .......... 19
Table 9. Mandatory and Discretionary Appropriations: Department of Veterans Affairs,
FY2015-FY2016 Advance .......................................................................................................... 23
Table 10. Appropriations: Related Agencies, FY2015 ................................................................... 25
Table A-1. Title I, Department of Defense Military Construction, FY2014-FY2015 .................... 27
Table A-2. Title IV, Overseas Contingency Construction, FY2014-FY2015................................. 30

Appendixes
Appendix. Military Construction Appropriations, FY2014-FY2015............................................. 27

Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 31

Congressional Research Service

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

Status of Legislation
Fiscal year 2015 (FY2015) was the fourth year in which discretionary appropriations for the
Department of Defense (DOD) were subject to a legally binding cap on national defense-related
spending, initially codified by P.L. 112-25, the Budget Control Act of 2011 (or BCA) and
subsequently amended, most recently by P.L. 113-67, the Bipartisan Budget Act (BBA) of 2013.1
President Obama’s FY2015 Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies
(MilCon/VA) budget request complied with the applicable cap, as did the versions of the FY2015
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that were passed by the House (H.R. 4435),
reported by the Senate Armed Services Committee (S. 2410), and enacted into law (H.R. 3979,
P.L. 113-291).
Similarly, the versions of the FY2015 MilCon/VA Appropriations Act passed by the House and
reported by the Senate Appropriations Committee (H.R. 4486) and the version enacted as part of
the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act of 2015 (H.R. 83, Division I; P.L.
113-235) were consistent with spending caps then in force.
Table 1 and Table 2 track the status of both acts.
Table 1. Status of FY2015 Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act
(H.R. 4486; H.R. 83, Division I)
Committee
Conference
Public
Markup
Report
Law
H.R. 4486
House
Approval
H.R.
House
Passage
Senate
Senate
Conf.
83,
House Senate
Re
port
H.R. 4486
Report
Passage Report House
Senate
Div. I


04/03/2014 05/20/2014 H.Rept. 04/30/2014 S.Rept. — — — —
P.L.
113-416
113-196
113-
235
Source: CRS Appropriations Status Table (http://www.crs.gov/Pages/AppropriationsStatusTable.aspx).
Notes: H.R. 4486 was incorporated into H.R. 83, To Require the Secretary of the Interior to Assemble a Team of
Technical, Policy, and Financial Experts to Address the Energy Needs of the Insular Areas of the United States and the
Freely Associated States through the Development of Action Plans Aimed at Reducing Reliance on Imported Fossil Fuels
and Increasing Use of Indigenous Clean Energy Resources, and for Other Purposes, renamed the Consolidated and
Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015. Division I of H.R. 83 constitutes the Military Construction, Veterans
Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015.

1 Enacted in 2011 to resolve the crisis that summer about raising the debt limit, P.L. 112-25, the Budget Control Act of
2011 (BCA) required annual reductions in discretionary spending (compared with a projected spending baseline)
totaling about $2.1 trillion thru FY2021, in return for raising the debt limit by the same amount. For each year in the
decade FY2012-FY2021, the BCA caps require roughly equal reductions (from the projected baseline) in
appropriations for defense agencies and non-defense agencies. For any year for which appropriations for either
category exceed the BCA cap, appropriations are reduced to the level of the cap by a process of sequestration. For an
expanded discussion of the BCA, see CRS Report R42506, The Budget Control Act of 2011: The Effects on Spending
and the Budget Deficit , by Mindy R. Levit and Marc Labonte
Congressional Research Service
1

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

Table 2. Status of FY2015 National Defense Authorization Act
(H.R. 4435; S. 2410; H.R. 3979)
Subcommittee
House
Final Bill
Markup
House
Passage
Senate
H.R. 3979
Report
Report
H.R.
Public
House Senate
H.R

Report
. 4435
4435
S. 2410
House Senate Law
4/30/14
5/20/14 and H.Rept. 113-
S.Rept. 113-
see
12/4/14 12/12/14 P.L.
113-
and 5/1/14
5/21/14
446
5/25/14
176
Note
291
Source: CRS Legislative Information System.
Note: House and Senate negotiators drafted a compromise NDAA based on H.R. 4435 as passed by the House
and S. 2410 as reported by committee. This final version was incorporated into H.R. 3979, an unrelated bil ,
which then was passed by both chambers. A “Joint Explanatory Statement” on the compromise bill (equivalent to
a conference report) is available on the House Armed Services Committee website.
Military Construction Authorization
(P.L. 113-291, Division B)
Congress annually authorizes the appropriation of funds for military construction projects through
the drafting and passage of a Military Construction Authorization Act.2 This is typically
incorporated as a division within the broader National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 constituted Division B of the Carl
Levin and Howard P. “Buck” McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015
(P.L. 113-291).
The NDAA is the principal legislative vehicle by which Congress organizes and sets policy for
DOD. The Military Construction Authorization Act within the NDAA not only authorizes military
construction projects and their necessary appropriations, but is also used to modify and extend the
authorizations of existing projects, approve the acquisition and transfer of defense land title, set
policy for real property disposition, require specific notifications to Congress of relevant defense
actions, authorize appropriations for the NATO Security Investment Program (NSIP),3 and direct

2 Section 114 of Title 10 of the United States Code (10 U.S.C. §114) states, in part, that “No funds may be appropriated
for any fiscal year to or for the use of any armed force or obligated or expended for ... military construction ... unless
funds therefor have been specifically authorized by law.” The statute defines “military construction” as “any
construction, development, conversion, or extension of any kind which is carried out with respect to any military
facility or installation (including any Government-owned or Government-leased industrial facility used for the
production of defense articles and any facility to which section 2353 of this title [10 U.S.C. §2353, Contracts:
acquisition, construction, or furnishing of test facilities and equipment] applies), any activity to which section 2807 of
this title [10 U.S.C. §2807, Architectural and engineering services and construction design] applies, any activity to
which chapter 1803 of this title [10 U.S.C. §§18231 et seq., Reserve component construction] applies, and advances to
the Secretary of Transportation for the construction of defense access roads under section 210 of title 23 [23 U.S.C.
210, Defense access roads]. Such term does not include any activity to which section 2821 [10 U.S.C. §2821, Military
family housing construction] or 2854 [10 U.S.C. §2854, Restoration or replacement of damaged or destroyed facilities]
of this title applies.”
3 The North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program (NSIP) is the fund that provides the alliance’s
collective funding for the building of facilities (airfields, communications infrastructure, etc., needed to support major
NATO commands. All NATO member countries contribute to NSIP according to cost shares established and adjusted
by consensus agreements within the alliance. Construction projects funded by the NSIP account are authorized by votes
within the NATO Infrastructure Committee. NATO-related issues are discussed in a number of CRS reports available
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
2

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

the management of DOD real property and facilities, among other actions. Provisions within, or
amendments to, the NDAA authorized each of the five military base realignment and closure
(BRAC) rounds carried out over the course of the past quarter-century. Title XXX of the FY 2015
NDAA, titled Natural Resources Related General Provisions, was unusual in the sense that it
directed a number of real property actions for the Department of Interior, not DOD. This report
will address only DOD-related provisions of the act.
The amount of military construction new budget authority requested for FY2015 ($6.6 billion)
was 40% less than the request for FY2014 ($11.0 billion). According to Administration
statements, this reflected a deferral of construction forced by appropriations caps imposed by the
BCA. The final act authorized the appropriation of $6.6 billion for military construction and
family housing, $220 million for additional overseas contingency operations construction, and
authorized several “unfunded” construction projects for which DOD had planned but had not
requested funding. Table 3 tabulates the military construction appropriations requested and
authorized for FY2015.
Table 3. Military Construction Appropriation Authorizations for FY2015
(budget authority in thousands of dol ars
Account Request
Authorization
Military Construction, Army
539,427 543,427
Military Construction, Navy
1,018,772
993,199
Military Construction, Air Force
811,774 846,174
Military Construction, Defense-Wide
2,061,890
1,962,890
Chemical Demilitarization Construction, Defense
38,715
38,715
NATO Security Investment Program
199,700
174,700
Military Construction, Army National Guard
126,920 133,920
Military Construction, Army Reserve
103,946 128,946
Military Construction, Navy Reserve
51,528
99,397
Military Construction, Air National Guard
94,663
105,863
Military Construction, Air Force Reserve
49,492
63,992
Family Housing Construction, Army
78,609
78,609
Family Housing, Operation and Maintenance
350,976
350,976
Family Housing, Operation and Maintenance, Air Force
327,747
327,747
Family Housing Construction, Navy and Marine Corps
16,412
16,412
Family Housing, Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide
61,100
61,100
DOD Family Housing Improvement Program
1,662
1,662
Base Realignment and Closure, Army
84,417
84,417
Base Realignment and Closure, Navy
94,692
94,692

(...continued)
through CRS.gov. For a broader discussion of cost sharing with NATO, see U.S. General Accounting Office, NATO:
History of Common Budget Cost Shares, NSIAD-98-172, May 22, 1998, http://www.gao.gov/products/NSIAD-98-172.
Congressional Research Service
3

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

Account Request
Authorization
Base Realignment and Closure, Air Force
90,976
90,976
Total Military Construction
6,557,447
6,551,843
Military Construction for Overseas Contingency Operations
46,000
220,410
Source: U.S. Congress, House Committee on Rules, House Amendment to the Text of S. 1847, committee print,
113th Cong., 2nd sess., December 2, 2014, H.Prt. 113-58 (Washington: GPO, 2014), pp. 1636-1643.
Army Authorizations
In all, the President had requested $539.4 million for Army construction, while the act authorized
$543.4 million. The President also requested $78.6 million for Army family housing construction
and $351.0 million for operation and maintenance. The act authorized those amounts.
Authorizations for military construction appropriations typically remain current for three years, as
specified within the act. Nevertheless, specific authorizations can be modified in subsequent acts
with respect to time for completion and to scope. The FY2015 act extended the authorization for
a number of Army projects that originated in FY2011 and FY2012. It also expanded the scope or
increased the amount of appropriations authorized for several others. The act also collapsed the
last four of six planned phases of construction of a Command and Control Facility at Fort Shafter,
HI, into a single authorization, with the conference committee stating that the move would be
expected to save construction cost and speed completion by up to four years.4 The act also
adjusted the Army’s construction priorities by authorizing three projects for which funding had
not been requested in FY2015:
• $15.0 million for a Consolidated Shipping Center at Blue Grass Army Depot
in KY,
• $46.0 million for a Simulations Center at Fort Hood, TX, and
• $86.0 million for the third phase of construction of the Individual Training
Barracks Complex at Fort Lee, VA.
With respect to overseas military construction, the act prohibited the obligation or expenditure of
funds for the construction of family housing at Camp Walker in the Republic of Korea (ROK)
until DOD validated on-post family housing requirements in the country and proposed a plan to
meet those requirements. The consolidation of U.S. Army personnel in the ROK from long-
established garrisons along the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) bordering North Korea to Camp
Walker, near Daegu, and Camp Humphreys, near Seoul, has been a point of congressional
concern noted in several NDAAs.

4 Large construction projects require the dedication of substantial amounts of budget authority, which could limit the
amount of budget authority available for other construction. This has led to a practice of breaking major construction
projects into a number of phases, thereby spreading the funding requirement over a number of years. Each phase,
though, is considered to be an independent project in the sense that its completion must yield a usable facility. This has
led some in the construction industry to suggest that the approach is inefficient in both cost and time to completion.
Congress has occasionally modified such projects by converting a series of construction phases into a single project and
funding them in a series of increments, thereby preserving new budget authority and offering the potential for more
efficient construction.
Congressional Research Service
4

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

Navy Authorizations
The President requested $16.4 million for Navy and Marine Corps family housing construction
and $354.0 million for operation and maintenance. The act authorized those amounts.
The President had requested $1.0 billion ($1,018.7 million) for Navy and Marine Corps
construction, while the act authorized $993.2 million. In its Joint Explanatory Statement (JES)
accompanying the act, the conference committee explained that it had reduced the requested
authorization for a Cyber Studies Building at Annapolis, MD, by $90.1 million from $120.1
million to $30.0 million, noting that the Navy would not be able to spend the full amount of the
request. The act added unrequested authorizations of $13.8 million for a Regional Ship
Maintenance Support Facility at Bangor, WA, and $50.7 million for a Radio Battalion Complex at
Camp Lejeune, NC, the top unfunded construction priorities for the Navy and Marine Corps,
respectively. As with the Army, the act modified some previously enacted authorizations for
various construction projects.
Air Force Authorizations
The President had requested $811.7 million for Air Force construction, while the act authorized
$846.2 million. The difference can be attributed to an unrequested authorization of $34.4 million
for a Corrosion Control and Composite Repair Shop at Andersen Air Force Base (AFB), Guam, a
forward rotational deployment site for Global Strike Command B-52 Stratofortress and B-2 Spirit
bombers. As it did for the other departments, the act modified several previously enacted
construction authorizations.
The President did not request family housing construction funding for the Air Force, and the act
did not authorize any. He did request $327.7 million for Air Force family housing operation and
maintenance, and the act authorized that amount.
Defense Agencies Authorizations
The President had requested $2.1 billion ($2,061.9 million) for Defense-Wide construction, while
the act authorized $2.0 billion ($1,962.9 million). The difference is explained by a $70.0 million
reduction to the $259.7 million requested for hospital construction at the Rhine Ordnance
Barracks in Germany,5 a $9.0 million reduction in the request for Contingency Construction,6 and
a $20.0 million reduction in requested Planning and Design funding.7 The act also modified
several previously enacted authorizations for ongoing construction projects and barred the
obligation or expenditure of any funds for the construction of either a human performance center
at Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek-Story, VA, or a squadron operations facility at Cannon
AFB, NM, until the Committees on Armed Services of both House and Senate receive a report on

5 The new medical facility will replace the nearby Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, originally established in 1953.
6 Contingency construction, authorized under 10 U.S.C. §2804, is a project commenced without authorization by law
that is determined by the Secretary concerned to be inconsistent with national security or national interest if deferred
until enactment of the next regular Military Construction Authorization Act.
7 10 U.S.C. §2807 allows the Secretaries to use military construction funding to initiate architectural and engineering
work on not-yet-authorized projects.
Congressional Research Service
5

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

DOD efforts on the prevention of suicide among members of U.S. Special Operations Command
(USSOCOM).8
The President did not request family housing construction funding for the Defense account, and
the act did not authorize any. He did request $61.0 million for the operation and maintenance of
defense family housing, which the act authorized.
Chemical Demilitarization Authorizations
The international Chemical Weapons Convention, formally known as the Convention on the
Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on
their Destruction, ratified in 1997, banned the production, stockpiling, or use of chemical
weapons. Since ratification, the U.S. has systematically reduced its supply of chemical
munitions.9
The U.S. Army Chemical Munitions Activity is the agency entrusted with the destruction
(demilitarization) of the nation’s chemical munitions stockpile. At one time, installations in eight
states stored these munitions. Currently, only Pueblo Chemical Depot, CO, and Blue Grass Army
Depot, KY, have remaining munitions.
The President had requested $38.7 million for chemical demilitarization construction and the act
authorized the full amount.
North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program
(NSIP) Authorization
The President had requested $199.7 million as the U.S. contribution to NSIP (see footnote 3, p.2
of this report), while the act authorized $174.7 million. The difference is attributed in the act’s
Joint Explanatory Statement (JES) to slower than expected expenditure of funds already in the
program.
Guard and Reserve Forces Facilities
The presidential requests and subsequent authorizations for the various reserve components are
set out in Table 4.

8 USSOCOM is a joint command not considered to be a part of any existing military department (Army, Navy, Air
Force). Construction on behalf of USSOCOM is therefore included in the Defense Agency category.
9 The Chemical Weapons Convention is discussed in detail in CRS Report RL31559, Proliferation Control Regimes:
Background and Status, coordinated by Mary Beth D. Nikitin; CRS Report RL33865, Arms Control and
Nonproliferation: A Catalog of Treaties and Agreements, by Amy F. Woolf, Paul K. Kerr, and Mary Beth D. Nikitin;
CRS Report RL31502, Nuclear, Biological, Chemical, and Missile Proliferation Sanctions: Selected Current Law, by
Dianne E. Rennack; and CRS Report RL32158, Chemical Weapons Convention: Issues for Congress, by Steve
Bowman, among other CRS Products.
Congressional Research Service
6

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

Table 4. Reserve Component Military Construction
(in millions of dollars)
Component Request Authorization
Army National Guard
$126.9
$133.9
Army Reserve
$103.9
$128.9
Navy and Marine Corps Reserve
$51.5
$99.4
Air National Guard
$94.7
$105.9
Air Force Reserve
$49.5
$64.0
Source: House Amendment to the Text of S. 1847, pp. 1640-1641.
The projects authorized included several for which the President had not requested funding.
Family Housing Improvement Authorization
The Family Housing Improvement Fund is the principal source of appropriations used to support
the privatization of military family housing. The President requested $1.7 million for the fund,
and the act authorized that amount.
Base Realignment and Closure Activities
During the course of military Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) rounds, Congress has
created appropriations accounts to fund all of the activities (construction, relocation, etc.)
necessary to carry them out and appropriated funds to them through the military construction
appropriation. With no BRAC round currently authorized or underway, the primary purpose of
continuing BRAC appropriations is to fund the environmental remediation necessary to permit
the transfer of title to BRAC-surplused real property from the federal government to other parties.
The President had requested $270.1 million for the BRAC account, and the act authorized that
amount.
The act also contained a provision (Section 2711) that affirmed congressional intent to reject the
President’s request to authorize a 2017 base closure round.
Under previous BRAC procedures, DOD and so-called Local Redevelopment Authorities (LRAs)
worked closely together to redevelop and transfer title of BRAC-surplused defense real property.
In some instances, the creation of an LRA has proved problematic.10 Section 2721 of the act
allowed a local government within whose jurisdiction the affected installation is wholly located to
be recognized as an LRA.

10 Though rarely seen, the complexity involved in sorting out property title claims that could stretch back centuries or
conflicts within and between local jurisdictions affected by military base closures has sometimes made the creation of a
universally accepted Local Redevelopment Authority difficult. Section 2721 was intended to help ease some of those
difficulties.
Congressional Research Service
7

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

Military Construction General Provisions
Advance congressional notification requirement. Section 2801 of the act amended statute 10
U.S.C. §2801 to require the Secretary concerned to notify the congressional defense committees11
in advance of any construction on a military installation that is not authorized under a Military
Construction Authorization Act.
Modification of construction authority. Section 2802 amended 10 U.S.C. §2805, which allows
the Secretary concerned to initiate minor construction without previous authorization. The
amendment raised the cost ceiling from $2.0 million to $3.0 million for such routine construction
and from $3.0 million to $4.0 million if initiated to correct a deficiency that is life-threatening,
health-threatening, or safety-threatening. The statute also permitted the use of operation and
maintenance (O&M) funds, part of the defense appropriation, for construction projects costing
less than $750 thousand. The amendment raised that limit to $1.0 million.
Authorized payments-in-kind and in-kind contributions. Section 2803 amended 10 U.S.C.
§2687a, which deals with U.S. military installations on foreign soil. The amendment clarifies that
a military construction project may be accepted as a payment-in-kind form of host nation support
only if it has been authorized by law. The amendment will become operative on September 30,
2016, or the date of enactment of a military construction authorization act for FY2017.
One-step turn-key contractor selection. Section 2804 expanded the authority of the Secretaries
under 10 U.S.C. §2862 to use a single fixed-price contract to both design and build a military
construction project.12 Under standard military construction practice, design and construction are
separate competitive-bid processes. Using “one-step turn-key selection procedures,” the two are
combined into a single contract. The amendment expanded its applicability to include certain
repair projects and facility construction associated with authorized security assistance programs.
Limits on construction in European Command. Section 2805 extended an existing restriction
on military construction within the European Command Area of Responsibility (EUCOM AOR)
until its requirement has been certified as part of the European Infrastructure Consolidation
Assessment, has been determined to be of an enduring nature, and is the most effective means of
meeting the need at the authorized location. For those projects created under the European
Reassurance Initiative,13 the section requires the Secretary concerned to provide a military
construction project data sheet (known as a Form DD-1391) to the congressional defense
committees, to certify that a project pre-financing statement has been submitted through the NSIP,
and to wait a specified number of days before initiating action.

11 The act adopted the definition of “congressional defense committees” that is codified in statute as 10 U.S.C.
§101(a)(16). This includes the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate and
the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.
12 The statute defines term “one-step turn-key selection” as “procedures used for the selection of a contractor on the
basis of price and other evaluation criteria to perform, in accordance with the provisions of a firm fixed-price contract,
both the design and construction of a facility using performance specifications supplied by the Secretary concerned.”
See 10 U.S.C. §2862(b).
13 The U.S. initiated a series of actions during the spring of 2014 intended to enhance the confidence of the European
allies in the continued strength of support in their security and territorial integrity. A part of this European Reassurance
Initiative, or ERI, has included a number of military construction projects that can enhance the deployment and rotation
of U.S. military forces to Central and Eastern Europe.
Congressional Research Service
8

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

Temporary use of O&M funds for domestic construction. Section 2806 extended for one year
a temporary authority to use a limited amount of O&M funding for contingency construction in
the Central Command (CENTCOM) AOR. This provision has been reauthorized and amended
annually since its original enactment as Section 2808 of the Military Construction Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Division B of P.L. 108-136). The current extension limits the authority
to $100 million.
Residential building construction standards. Section 2807 expanded the number of voluntary
consensus green building standards or rating systems that may be applied to any newly authorized
residential building project.
Limits on construction at NS Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Section 2808 forbade the expenditure
of any FY2015 funds for the construction of new facilities on Naval Station Guantanamo Bay,
Cuba, unless the Secretary of Defense certifies that they would have enduring value independent
of a high value detention mission.14
Provisions Related to Asia-Pacific Military Realignment
Section 2821 modified certain restrictions on the expenditure of funds that had limited the
movement of Marine Corps forces from Okinawa, Japan, to the U.S. Territory of Guam. These
restrictions had been in existence for several years pending the satisfaction of a number of
conditions established in previous NDAAs. One of those conditions was the creation by DOD of
a Master Plan for Guam, which the department supplied in July 2014. The section removed the
previous prohibition and replaced it with a cap on the overall cost of construction on Guam to
carry out the movement of Marines from Okinawa. The provision continued certain restrictions
on the use of military construction funds for the development of other public infrastructure on
Guam.
Section 2822 permits the Secretary of the Navy and the Secretary of the Interior to provide for the
establishment and operation of a surface danger zone in the Ritidian Unit of Guam that would
provide safe boundaries for a proposed live-fire range on Andersen AFB – Northwest Field and
management of adjacent Guam National Wildlife Refuge property.
Land Conveyances
Subtitle D of the act provided for the conveyance to various entities of title to all or part of a
number of land parcels administered by DOD. Many of these conveyance authorities stipulated
reversionary clauses that would permit the United States to reassume title to the property under
certain conditions. The conveyances authorized by the act are listed in Table 5.

14 The accompanying JES noted that DOD had already provided such certification to the committees of defense. JES,
p. 317.
Congressional Research Service
9

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

Table 5. Land Conveyances Authorized by the Military Construction Authorization
Act for FY2015
Conveyor Installation Recipient
Secretary of the Army
Gordo Army Reserve Center
City of Gordo, AL
Secretary of the Air Force
West Nome Tank Farm
City of Nome, AK
Secretary of the Air Force
Former Air Force Norwalk Defense Fuel Supply Point
City of Norwalk, CA
Secretary of the Army
Former Walter Reed Army Hospital
Secretary of State or
District of Columbia
Secretary of the Air Force
Former Lynn Haven Fuel Depot
City of Lynn Haven, FL
Secretary of Agriculture
Chattahoochee National Forest, GA
Secretary of the Army
Secretary of the Army
Lake Lanier, GA
Secretary of Agriculture
Secretary of the Navy
Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam
Honolulu Authority for
Rapid Transit
State of Oklahoma
Camp Gruber
Secretary of the Armya
Secretary of the Air Force
Joint Base Charleston
City of Hanahan, SC
Secretary of Defense
Columbia Pikeb
Arlington County, VA,
and Commonwealth of
Virginia
Notes:
a. This reflects the execution of an existing reversionary provision.
b. These parcels are part of a land exchange agreement permitting the expansion of the Arlington National
Cemetery.
Military Memorials, Monuments, and Museums
Section 2851 amended 10 U.S.C. §4772 to permit the Secretary of the Army to accept funds and
in-kind gifts, including services, construction materials, and equipment used in construction, for
the Heritage Center for the National Museum of the United States Army from the Army Historical
Foundation and from industry donors.
Section 2852 directed the Secretary of Defense to convey title to the Mt. Soledad Veterans
Memorial in San Diego, California, to the Mount Soledad Memorial Association, Inc., subject to
certain conditions.
Section 2853 authorized the Secretary of the Navy to permit a third party to establish and
maintain a memorial on the Washington Navy Yard in the District of Columbia to the victims of
the shooting attack of September 16, 2013, that occurred there.
Designations
Section 2861 redesignated the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies at Honolulu, Hawaii, as
the “Daniel K. Inouye Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies.” Senator Daniel K. Inouye, a
World War II Army veteran and Medal of Honor recipient, represented Hawaii in the House of
Representatives and the Senate continuously since the state entered the Union. Senator Inouye
died on December 17, 2012.
Congressional Research Service
10

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

Other Matters
Section 2871 required the Secretary of Defense to submit not later than April 30, 2015, to the
congressional defense committees a report on actions taken by DOD on recommendations
resulting from reviews of physical security standards following the shooting incidents of
November 2009 at Fort Hood, TX, and September 2013 at the Washington Navy Yard, DC.
Overseas Contingency Construction Authorizations
European Reassurance Initiative
Section 2901 and Section 2902 authorized a number of Army and Air Force construction projects
that would support the ERI. These projects were to be located in Romania, Bulgaria, Estonia,
Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland.15
Defense Agency Construction
Section 2903 authorized $46.0 million for an overseas contingency construction project on behalf
of the National Security Agency at a classified location.
Authorization of Appropriations
Section 2904 authorized $4.4 million for unspecified minor construction associated with the ERI.
In total, the act authorized $220.4 million under its Title XXIX, Overseas Contingency
Operations Military Construction.
Appropriations (P.L. 113-235)
The Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies appropriations bill provides
funding for the planning, design, construction, alteration, and improvement of facilities used by
active and reserve military components worldwide. It capitalizes military family housing and the
U.S. share of the NATO Security Investment Program and finances the implementation of
installation closures and realignments. It underwrites veterans benefit and health care programs
administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), provides for the creation and
maintenance of U.S. cemeteries and battlefield monuments within the United States and abroad,
and supports the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, Armed Forces Retirement Homes,
and Arlington National Cemetery. The bill also funds advance appropriations for veterans’
medical services.
The Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Subcommittee of the House
Committee on Appropriations reported out its version of the appropriations bill (H.R. 4486,

15 The European Reassurance Initiative is discussed in CRS Report R43698, NATO’s Wales Summit: Outcomes and
Key Challenges, by Paul Belkin and CRS Report R43478, NATO: Response to the Crisis in Ukraine and Security
Concerns in Central and Eastern Europe, coordinated by Paul Belkin.
Congressional Research Service
11

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

H.Rept. 113-416) by voice vote on April 3, 2014. It was formally introduced to the House on
April 17 by Representative John Abney Culberson (TX/07) and passed on the Yeas and Nays
(416-1, Roll no. 187).
The bill was received in the Senate on May 1, 2014, and referred to the Committee on
Appropriations. On May 20, the Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and
Related Agencies approved the bill with an amendment in the nature of a substitute for
consideration by the full committee. Senator Tim Johnson (SD) reported the bill to the Senate
with an amendment in the nature of a substitute on May 22 (S.Rept. 113-174). The bill was placed
on the Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders (Calendar No. 400).
No further action was taken on the bill until December 11, 2014, when it was incorporated as
Division I of the House’s amendment to the Senate’s amendment to a separate bill, H.R. 83. The
House agreed to the newly amended bill by the Yeas and Nays (219-206, Roll No. 563).
The Senate took up the amended bill on December 12 and agreed to the House amendment by
Yea-Nay vote (56-40, Record Vote No. 354) on December 13.
The bill was presented to the President on December 16, 2014, and signed into law as P.L. 113-
235.
Title I: Department of Defense
The appropriations included within this act closely follow the authorizations discussed in the
previous section of this report. The major appropriations categories include military construction
and family housing construction and operation for the various active and reserve components of
the armed forces and defense agencies, U.S. contributions the NATO Security Investment
Program, construction associated with the demilitarization of the U.S. chemical munitions
stockpile, the DOD homeowners assistance program, the DOD family housing improvement
program, and activities associated with the five formal military base closure and realignment
(BRAC) rounds that Congress has authorized.
Military Construction
Military construction is the creation of real property (that which cannot be moved), by the
Department of Defense (on behalf of the defense agencies and Special Operations Command) or
the Departments of the Army, Navy, or Air Force,. 10 U.S.C. §2802 defines military construction
projects as “surveys and site preparation; acquisition, conversion, rehabilitation, and installation
of facilities; acquisition and installation of equipment and appurtenances integral to the project;
acquisition and installation of supporting facilities (including utilities) and appurtenances incident
to the project; and planning, supervision, administration, and overhead incident to the project.”
Since 1948, the median (half above and half below) annual combined military construction and
family housing appropriation is calculated at $11.9 billion, as measured in constant FY2015
dollars. For FY2015, Congress passed, and the President enacted, a military construction and
family housing appropriation of $6.6 billion. The flow of appropriations is illustrated in Figure 1.
Congressional Research Service
12

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

Figure 1. Military Construction and Family Housing Budget Authority,
FY1948-FY2019
40,000
35,000
s
ion 30,000
ill
M
25,000
rs in
lla
20,000
Do
15
0
2 15,000
t FY
n
sta 10,000
n
o
C
5,000
0
Korean War
Cold War
Post-Cold War
Fiscal Year
Military Construction
Family Housing

Source: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptrol er), National Defense Budget Estimate for FY 2015,
Department of Defense, Washington, DC, April 2014, pp. 129-135,
http://comptrol er.defense.gov/Portals/45/Documents/defbudget/fy2015/FY15_Green_Book.pdf.
Funding for military construction over the decades has tended to organize itself into several
distinct time periods.
Post-World War II
The end of World War II in 1945 left the Department of War and the Department of the Navy
(predecessors of DOD) with massive, relatively new, infrastructure inventories supporting a
rapidly demobilizing military force. A total of more than 16 million U.S. men and women served
in uniform during the war, and more than 12 million were on active duty in September of 1945.
By mid-1947, when DOD was created out of the two military departments, that number had
shrunk to less than 2 million. Construction requirements, therefore, were minimal between the
end of World War II and the outbreak of hostilities on the Korean Peninsula in 1950.
The Cold War
The Cold War’s onset required a significant reorientation of U.S. national strategy. Long-range
Soviet bomber fleets and a large ground army concentrated in central Europe posed significant
threats. During the 1950s and early 1960s, the U.S. constructed early warning radar facilities,
missile defense sites, and strategic bomber bases along its northern tier and established large
garrisons near the border between West and East Germany.
Congressional Research Service
13

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

Construction continued apace as U.S. combat troops became engaged in Vietnam during the late
1960s. The need for new construction slowed somewhat as the United States disengaged from
Vietnam in the late 1960s, but picked up again during the military buildup during the Reagan
Administration in the 1980s.
Post-Cold War and BRAC
Tensions of the Cold War eased during the last years of the 1980s, presaging the collapse of the
Soviet Union in 1991. By then, budgetary pressures, the lack of a clearly defined adversary, and
underutilized infrastructure offered an opportunity to significantly reduce DOD’s “footprint.”
This led the Secretary of Defense in 1988 to negotiate an agreement with Congress that created a
special Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process. Under BRAC, DOD and an independent
commission have drawn up lists of recommendations in 1988, 1991, 1993, 1995, and 2005 that
closed or adjusted the missions and garrisons of installations around the nation. The
recommendations for each round have been implemented over the course of the six subsequent
years, and the sole source of funding for that implementation has been the military construction
appropriation. Authority to conduct BRAC expired in 2006.
The Cost of BRAC. BRAC implementation is one reason that military construction
appropriations between FY1989 and FY2011, the last year of BRAC implementation, may not
have dropped to levels expected at the end of the Cold War. That the 2005 BRAC round,
implemented between FY2006 and FY2011, required an extraordinary commitment of funding
was largely due to three reasons unique to that round:
• its primary goal was not cost savings, but rather support for the “transformation”
of U.S. military forces into a lighter “expeditionary” post-Cold War organization;
• operations in Iraq and Afghanistan prompted an increase in ground forces
(“Grow the Force”) requiring the construction of new troop facilities; and
• the redeployment of overseas units to U.S. garrisons required construction of
additional domestic facilities funded through the BRAC account.16
Trends in Appropriations. Since 2011, appropriations for military construction and family
housing appear to have shrunk to levels not seen since the mid-1970s. Military construction for
FY2012, the first post-BRAC year, amounted to $13.8 million, a 28% reduction from the year
before. The $10.0 million appropriated for FY2014 represented a further 27% reduction below
those for FY2012. The President requested $6.6 million in military construction and family
housing appropriations for FY2015, which represented a level 53% below the appropriation of
three years earlier. The military construction appropriations levels for FY 2016 through FY 2019
presented by DOD in its Future Years Defense Plan (FYDP) are projected to rise to $9.3 million,
then decline to $8.5 million, $8.0 million, and $7.7 million, respectively.
Post-BRAC actual, requested, and projected military construction and family housing new budget
authority is illustrated in Figure 2.

16 For a broader discussion of the cost of the 2005 BRAC round see U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Armed
Services, Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support, Statement of Mr. John Conger, Acting Deputy
Secretary of Defense (Installations and Environment)), for a hearing on the National Defense Authorization Act for
FY2015, 113th Cong., 2nd sess., April 2, 2014.
Congressional Research Service
14

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

Figure 2. Military Construction and Family Housing New Budget Authority,
FY2012-FY2019
16,000
s
n 14,000
illio
M 12,000
s in 10,000
llar 8,000
Do 6,000
4,000
t FY2015 2,000
stan
0
n
Co
Fiscal Year
Military Construction
Family Housing

Source: National Defense Budget Estimate for FY 2015, pp. 129-135.
Military Construction Issues for FY2015
The conference committee on H.R. 83, Division I, raised several key issues in drafting the
FY2015 appropriation.
Incremental Funding of Major Construction Projects
Capital asset projects, such as the construction of military facilities, can be either fully funded or
incrementally funded.17
As a general rule, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has directed federal agencies,
including DOD, to fully fund construction in order to accurately reflect the real cost of each
project. Nevertheless, major projects that would require the dedication of substantial amounts of
budget authority could limit the amount of annual budget authority available for other
construction. For such large, budget-intensive projects, DOD has broken the funding stream into
phases spread over a number of years. Each phase, though, is considered to be an independent,
stand-alone project in the sense that its completion must yield a usable facility. This has led some
in the construction industry to suggest that the approach is inefficient in both cost and time to
completion. While generally supporting full funding, Congress has occasionally modified such
projects by converting a series of construction phases into a single project and funding them in a

17 Fully funded capital projects are those for which budget authority is or appears to be provided for the full estimated
cost of a capital project or a stand-alone stage if the project is divisible into stages. Fully funded projects also include
the survey and design of a capital project and a major upgrade or renovation that results in a usable asset. Incrementally
funded capital projects are projects for which budget authority is or appears to be provided for only part of the
estimated cost of a capital. U.S. General Accounting Office, Incremental Funding of Capital Asset Acquisitions, GAO-
01-432R, February 26, 2001, p. 2, http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d01432r.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
15

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

series of increments, thereby preserving new budget authority and offering the potential for more
efficient construction. Such was the case with several major construction projects for which funds
were appropriated in the FY2015 act, as shown in Table 6.
Table 6. Incrementally Funded Military Construction, FY2015
(budget authority in thousands of dol ars)
Project and Increment
Request
Conference
Fort Meade, MD


Cybercom Joint Operations Center, Increment 2
166,000
166,000
NSA (Washington) Recapitalize Building #1/Site M, Increment 3
45,521
45,521
Offutt AFB, NE


USSTRATCOM Replacement Facility, Increment 4
180,000 180,000
U.S. Military Academy, NY


Cadet Barracks, Increment 3
58,000
58,000
Fort Bliss, TX


Hospital Replacement, Increment 6
131,500
131,500
NS Kitsap, WA


Explosives Handling Wharf #2, Increment
83,776
83,776
Rhine Ordnance Barracks, Germany


Hospital Replacement, Increment 4
259,695
189,695
Andersen AFB, Guam


Guam Strike Fuel Systems Maintenance Hangar, Increment 2
64,000
64,000
Source: Explanatory Statement Submitted by Mr. Rogers of Kentucky Regarding the House Amendment to the
Senate Amendment on H.R. 83, Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 160, no. 151 (December 11, 2014),
“Zero Percent Utilization” Real Property Management
Sometimes, military installations will continue to provide minimal upkeep and maintenance to
buildings that are not occupied or otherwise being productively used. On one hand, this can
reduce the assets available to support other facilities. On the other hand, keeping the heat and air
conditioning on, patching leaks, and generally keeping these “zero-utilization” buildings
habitable could prove a long-term cost-saving measure in case the facilities must again be pressed
into service or title to the property is transferred to another agency or to a non-federal entity, such
as in the case that the military installation is closed. In their Explanatory Statement accompanying
the appropriations act, the conference committee stated, “It is important for DOD to eliminate
wasteful spending on unused facilities and properties that have been rated at zero percent
utilization. The DOD is urged to manage its facilities and properties in a responsible manner that
does not waste taxpayer resources.”18

18 Explanatory Statement Submitted by Mr. Rogers of Kentucky Regarding the House Amendment to the Senate
Amendment on H.R. 83, Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 160, no. 151 (December 11, 2014), p. H9919.
Congressional Research Service
16

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

Defense Access Roads and Road Improvements on Military Installations
The conference committee also noted that budget constraints on military construction appear to
have negatively affected the quality of surface transportation infrastructure in and around a
number of military installations. While road construction and maintenance can be funded through
the military construction and defense appropriations, the only vehicle by which DOD can assist
with the construction of roads “outside the fence” is the Defense Access Road (DAR) Program.19
The committee noted that DOD had submitted a list of certified unfunded DAR requirements
totaling $92,900,000.20 The committee then directed DOD to submit with its FY2016 military
construction appropriations request
• an updated list of unfunded DAR requirements;
• a list of unfunded internal road improvements at installations which have
experienced a growth rate of 10 percent or more in tenant populations within the
past five years or where tenant organizations comprise more than 50 % of the
workforce;
• recommendations of ways in which DOD could facilitate the contribution and
coordination of multiple service and Defense agency components of an
installation’s population to address unfunded base access and internal
transportation requirements; and
• additional related data.21
Unfunded Quality of Life Construction Projects
In its Explanatory Statement, the conference committee noted that funding for the construction of
what are referred to as “Quality of Life” (QOL) facilities (e.g., child development centers,
physical fitness facilities and troop housing) had declined under strengthened budget constraints,
stating that
Both the Department and the services have acknowledged that they are taking risk in their
military construction programs, especially QOL requirements, to provide additional funds for
operational readiness. ...
The fiscal year 2015 Senate Military Construction, Veterans Affairs and Related Agencies
Appropriations Bill provided additional funding for unfunded QOL military construction
requirements identified by the services, subject to authorization. However, no additional
funding for QOL projects was authorized in either the fiscal year 2015 Senate or House of
Representatives Defense authorization bills.22

19 Information on the Defense Access Road Program is available online through the U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Lands Highways website.
20 Charts accompanying the Explanatory Statement indicate that there were no DAR Program funds requested or
appropriated for FY2015, and a single “Road and Infrastructure Improvements” project for Marine Corps Base Hawaii,
Kaneohe Bay, HI, was funded for $2.2 million.
21 Explanatory Statement, p. H9919.
22 Ibid.
Congressional Research Service
17

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

The committee then directed DOD to provide along with its FY2016 military construction
appropriations request a prioritized list of unfunded QOL requirements to include, but not limited
to, troop housing, child development and youth centers, and physical fitness centers, for each of
the services, and a plan across the FYDP to address these requirements.
Title II: Veterans Affairs
Table 7. Department of Veterans Affairs Appropriations, FY2008-FY2015
(budget authority in billions of dollars)
FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015
VA 88.11 95.95 122.99 120.64 122.23 134.11
147.93
159.14
Source: Table prepared by the Congressional Research Service based on reports of the appropriations
committees accompanying the appropriations bills for the years noted above. FY2010 includes $13.4 billion in
supplemental funding provided by the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2010 (P.L. 111-212). FY2011 reflects
0.2% reductions required by the Department of Defense and Ful -Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011(P.L.
112-10). FY2013 includes the 0.1% across-the-board rescission required of al discretionary accounts of the VA
by Section 3001 in Division G of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 (P.L. 113-
6); and the 0.032% across-the-board rescission required from all discretionary accounts of the VA as a result of
Section 3004 in Division G of P.L. 113-6. FY2014 and FY2015 include administrative rescissions mandated by
Congress.
Agency Overview
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 spouses,
dependents, and beneficiaries. The VA has three primary organizations to administer these
benefits: the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA), the Veterans Health Administration
(VHA), and the National Cemetery Administration (NCA). Benefits available to veterans include
service-connected disability compensation; a pension for low-income veterans who are elderly or
have a nonservice-connected disability; vocational rehabilitation for disabled veterans; medical
care; life insurance; home loan guarantees; burial benefits; and educational and training benefits
to help in the transition of active servicemembers to civilian life. As shown in Table 7, VA
appropriations for benefits and services have increased by almost 81% from FY2008 ($88.11
billion) to FY2015 ($159.14 billion).
Appropriation Highlights
The FY2015 budget submitted by the Administration called for funding the VA at a level of
$158.64 billion (see Table 8). This is an increase of $10.71 billion, or 7.2%, compared to the
2014 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 113-76). However, the final $159.14 billion enacted
FY2015 appropriation for the VA was $11.21 billion (7.6%) over the FY2014 enacted amount,
and approximately $505 million (.34%) above the Administration’s FY2015 request.

Congressional Research Service
18

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

Table 8. Appropriations: Department of Veterans Affairs,
FY2015 and FY2016 Advance
(billions of dollars)
House-Passed
Senate Comm.
(H.R. 4486;
(H.R. 4486; S.Rept.
Conference
FY2015 Request
H.Rept. 113-416)
113-174)
(P.L. 113-235)
Program
FY2015 FY2016 FY2015 FY2016 FY2015 FY2016 FY2015 FY2016
Veterans Benefits
Administration

Compensation and
pensions 78.688
-
78.688
-
78.688
-
79.071
-
Readjustment benefits
14.762
-
14.762
-
14.762
-
14.997
-
Insurance and
indemnities 0.063
-
0.063
-
0.063
-
0.063
-
Housing programs
administration 0.161
-
0.161
-
0.161
-
0.161
-
Total, Veterans Benefits
Administration
93.675 - 93.675 -
93.675 -
94.294 -
National Cemetery
Administration 0.257
-
0.257
-
0.257
-
0.257
-
Total, National
Cemetery Administration
0.257 -
0.257 -
0.257 -
0.257 -
Veterans Health
Administration







Medical services
45.383
-
45.016
-
45.116
-
45.225
-
Medical support and
compliance 5.880
-
5.880
-
5.880
-
5.880
-
Medical facilities
4.739
-
4.739
-
4.739
-
4.739
-
Medical and prosthetic
research 0.589
-
0.589
-
0.589
-
0.589
-
Total, VHA
(without
collections)
56.591
-
56.223
-
56.448
-
56.432
-
Medical Care
Collection Fund
(MCCF)a 2.456
-
2.456
-
2.456
-
2.456
-
Total, VHA (with
collections)
59.047 - 58.679 - 58.904 - 58.888 -
Departmental
Administrationb






General
administration 0.322
-
0.307
-
0.322
-
0.322
-
Board of Veterans
Appeals 0.094
-
0.094
-
0.099
-
0.099
-
General operating
expenses, VBA
2.494
-
2.524
-
2.524
-
2.534
-
Congressional Research Service
19

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

House-Passed
Senate Comm.
(H.R. 4486;
(H.R. 4486; S.Rept.
Conference
FY2015 Request
H.Rept. 113-416)
113-174)
(P.L. 113-235)
Program
FY2015 FY2016 FY2015 FY2016 FY2015 FY2016 FY2015 FY2016
Information
technology 3.903
-
3.874
-
3.913
-
3.903
-
Inspector General
0.121
-
0.122
-
0.126
-
0.126
-
Construction, major
projects 0.562
-
0.562
-
0.562
-
0.562
-
Construction, minor
projects 0.495
-
0.495
-
0.540
-
0.495
-
Grants for state
extended care facilities
0.080
-
0.080
-
0.100
-
0.090
-
Grants for state
veterans cemeteries
0.045
-
0.045
-
0.046
-
0.046
-
Total, Departmental
Administration
8.117 -
8.104 -
8.233 -
8.178 -
Total, Department
of Veterans Affairs
158.640
-
158.221
-
158.613
-
159.145
-
Addendum:c
FY2016 advance
appropriations







Medical services
-
47.603
-
47.603
-
47.603
-
47.812
Medical support and
compliance -
6.144
-
6.144
-
6.144
-
6.144
Medical facilities
-
4.915
-
4.915
-
4.915
-
4.915
Total, VA advance
appropriations
-
58.662
-
58.662
-
58.662
-
58.662
Total, VA non-
advance
appropriations 99.978
-
99.559
-
99.951
-
100.482
-
Source: Table prepared by the Congressional Research Service based on U.S. Congress, House Committee on
Appropriations, Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies, Military
Construction, Veterans Affairs, And Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2015, report to accompany H.R. 4486, 113th
Congress, 2nd session, April 17, 2014, H.Rept. 113-416, pp. 6-10; U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on
Appropriations, Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies, Military
Construction, Veterans Affairs, And Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2015, report to accompany H.R. 4486,113th
Congress, 2nd session, May 22, 2014, S.Rept. 113-174, pp. 111-113, and “Explanatory Statement Regarding The
House Amendment To The Senate Amendment On H.R. 83,” An explanation of the Consolidated and Further
Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015, Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 160, Book II (December 11, 2014),
pp. H9941-H9945.
Notes: Table shows appropriation amount (new budget authority), and not total budget authority for the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Total budget authority for the VA is the amount of money the VA can
spend, or obligate to spend, by law; it has several forms including appropriations, authority to borrow, contract
authority, and authority to spend from offsetting collections. For more information see CRS Report 98-721,
Introduction to the Federal Budget Process, coordinated by Bill Heniff Jr.
a. Medical Care Col ection Fund (MCCF) receipts are restored to the Veterans Health Administration (VHA)
as an indefinite budget authority equal to the revenue collected.
Congressional Research Service
20

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

b. Beginning with FY2012, the General Operating Expenses category was split into General Administration and
General Operating Expenses, VBA (Veterans Benefit Administration).
c. The Veterans Health Care Budget Reform and Transparency Act 2009 (P.L. 111-81; codified at 38 U.S.C.
§117) provided for advance appropriations (appropriations that become available one fiscal year after the
fiscal year for which the appropriations act was enacted) for VA’s medical services, medical support and
compliance, and medical facilities appropriations accounts, and requires the VA to submit a request for
advance appropriation with its annual congressional budget submission. Under current budget scoring
guidelines new budget authority for an advance appropriation is scored in the fiscal year in which the funds
become available for obligation. Therefore, in this table the advance appropriations budget authority for
FY2015, provided in the 2014 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 113-76), is recorded in the FY2015
column. Likewise, the Administration’s advance appropriations request for FY2016 and advance
appropriations budget authority for FY2016 provided in the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015 are recorded in the FY2016 column.
Advance Appropriations
Under current budget scoring guidelines, advance appropriations of budget authority are scored as
new budget authority in the fiscal year in which the funds become newly available for obligation,
and not in the fiscal year the appropriations are enacted.23 Therefore, in Table 8 and Table 9 of
this report, FY2016 advance appropriation figures are shown in the corresponding fiscal year
column at the end of each table. For example, the 2015 Consolidated and Further Continuing
Appropriations Act (H.R. 83; P.L. 113-235) provides advance appropriations for the medical
services, medical support and compliance, and medical facilities accounts for FY2016. Funding
shown for FY2015 does not include advance appropriations provided in FY2015 by P.L. 113-235
for use in FY2016. Instead, the advance appropriation provided in FY2015 for use in FY2016 is
shown in the FY2016 column. At the same time, advance appropriations included in the 2014
Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 113-76) for use in FY2015 are shown in the FY2015
column.
Since FY2010, the annual appropriations process for VHA includes advance appropriations for
use during the following fiscal year. Beginning with the FY2016 MILCON/VA budget, the
Administration will also be required to request FY2017 advance appropriations for several VBA
accounts as described below.
Advance Appropriations for VA Medical Care.24 In 2009, Congress enacted the Veterans
Health Care Budget Reform and Transparency Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-81) authorizing advance
appropriations for three of the four accounts that comprise VHA: medical services, medical
support and compliance, and medical facilities.25 The fourth account, the medical and prosthetic
research account, is not funded with an advance appropriation. P.L. 111-81 also required the
Department of Veterans Affairs to submit a request for advance appropriations for VHA with its
budget request each year. Congress first provided advance appropriations for the three VHA

23 Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Appendix A-Scorekeeping Guidelines,
OMB Circular No. A–11, PART 7, July 2013, p. 2.
24 In general, an appropriations act makes budget authority available beginning on October 1 of the fiscal year for
which the appropriations act is passed (“budget year”). However, there are some types of appropriations that do not
follow this pattern; among them are advance appropriations. An advance appropriation means appropriation of new
budget authority that becomes available one or more fiscal years beyond the fiscal year for which the appropriations act
was passed (i.e., beyond the budget year). For more information on advance appropriations, see CRS Report R43482,
Advance Appropriations, Forward Funding, and Advance Funding: Concepts, Practice, and Budget Process
Considerations, by Jessica Tollestrup.
25 Codified at 38 U.S.C. §117.
Congressional Research Service
21

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

accounts in the FY2010 appropriations cycle; the 2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L.
111-117) provided advance appropriations for FY2011. Subsequently, each successive
appropriation measure has provided advance appropriations for the three VHA accounts.26 In
addition to the request for FY2015, as required by law, the Administration requested $58.66
billion in advance FY2016 funding for VA health care.
Congress Extends Advance Appropriations to Mandatory VA Benefits. Additionally, the 2015
Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act (H.R. 83; P.L. 113-235) amended 38
U.S.C §117 and authorized advance appropriations for three mandatory programs within the
VBA: compensation and pensions, readjustment benefits, and veterans insurance and
indemnities. Beginning with the FY2016 MILCON-VA Appropriations bill, these three VBA
accounts will be provided advance appropriations for FY2017 in addition to the three VHA
accounts that are already authorized to receive advance appropriations as explained above.
Comparison of FY2015 Budget Request and Final Enacted Appropriations
The major differences between the FY2015 Administration request and P.L. 113-235 are that P.L.
113-235 includes slightly less overall funding for medical services than requested. P.L. 113-235
also rescinds and reallocates funding that affects several accounts. A general administrative
rescission of $41 million applied across discretionary accounts, and a $15 million rescission was
applied to the DOD-VA Health Care Sharing Incentive Fund for a total of $56 million in
rescissions. Of that amount, $40 million was reprogrammed to temporarily extend a pilot program
allowing the VA to contract outside physicians to conduct disability examinations in accordance
with the Veterans’ Benefits Improvement Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-275).27 Taking into account the
$40 million reallocation, new budget authority for the VA under P.L. 113-235 contained a final
total of $16 million in rescissions.
Slightly more funding than requested was provided for several VA departmental administration
functions, including the Board of Veterans Appeals, general operating expenses for the VBA, the
Office of the Inspector General, and grants for the construction of state extended care facilities
and veterans’ cemeteries.
Veterans’ Health Care
The 2015 MILCON-VA Appropriations Act (H.R. 83; P.L. 113-235) provides a total of $56.4
billion for VHA (excluding rescissions), which comprises four accounts: medical services,
medical support and compliance, medical facilities, and medical and prosthetic research accounts
(see Table 8). For FY2015, P.L. 113-235 provides a $209 million supplement for the VHA
medical services account in addition to the advance appropriation of approximately $45 billion
provided in the 2014 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 113-76), for the combined $45.225
billion in new budget authority included in Table 8. This additional amount funds the higher than
expected costs associated with the acquisition of two new Hepatitis-C drug therapies; to support

26 The Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 (P.L. 112-10), provided advance
appropriations for FY2012; the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 (P.L. 112-74), provided advance appropriations
for FY2013; the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 (P.L. 113-6), provided advance
appropriations for FY2014; and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014 (P.L. 113-76) provided advance
appropriations for FY2015.
27 Sec. 241 of P.L. 113-235.
Congressional Research Service
22

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

the higher than expected demand for the Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family
Caregivers — established by Title I of the Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act
of 2010 (P.L. 111-163); and to fund several unfunded provisions in the Veterans Access, Choice,
and Accountability Act of 2014 (P.L. 113-146 as amended by P.L. 113-175 and P.L. 113-235).28
The 2015 MILCON-VA Appropriations Act provides advance appropriations of approximately
$58.7 billion for FY2016 for three VHA accounts (medical services, medical support and
compliance, and medical facilities). For a more detailed discussion of VA health care
appropriations, see CRS Report R43547, Veterans’ Medical Care: FY2015 Appropriations, by
Sidath Viranga Panangala.
Mandatory and Discretionary VA Funding
As shown in Table 9, mandatory funding is higher than discretionary funding for the VA. In the
FY2015 appropriation (P.L. 113-235), discretionary funding is 40.9%, while mandatory funding
is 59.1% of total funding. Advance funding for VA medical care is considered discretionary;
however, mandatory funding is composed of appropriated entitlements including disability
compensation, pension, and readjustment benefits. The growth of mandatory funding has been
driven primarily by disability claims of (1) former servicemembers, (2) current beneficiaries who
are experiencing worsening or multiple service-connected disabilities, and (3) individuals who
may be eligible for benefits under a presumptive service-connection.29
Table 9. Mandatory and Discretionary Appropriations: Department of Veterans
Affairs, FY2015-FY2016 Advance
(billions of dollars)
Senate
FY2015 Request
House-Passed
Committee
Conference
Program
FY2015 FY2016 FY2015 FY2016 FY2015 FY2016 FY2015 FY2016
Mandatory








Benefits (VBA)
93.513
-
93.513
-
93.513
-
94.131
-
Discretionary








Medical (VHA)
59.619
-
59.251
-
59.476
-
59.460
-
Advance
appropriations
- 58.662 -
58.662 -
58.662 - 58.662

28 Explanatory Statement Regarding The House Amendment To The Senate Amendment On H.R. 83, An explanation
of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015, Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 160,
Book II (December 11, 2014), pp. H9935.
29 A presumption relieves veterans of the burden to prove that a disability or illness was caused by a specific exposure
that occurred during service in the Armed Forces. When a disease is designated as presumptively service-connected,
the individual veteran does not need to prove that the disease was incurred during service. In other words, a
presumption shifts the burden of proof concerning whether a disease or disability was caused or aggravated due to
service from the veteran to the VA. For more information see CRS Report R41405, Veterans Affairs: Presumptive
Service Connection and Disability Compensation, by Sidath Viranga Panangala, Daniel T. Shedd, and Umar Moulta-
Ali.
Congressional Research Service
23

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

Senate
FY2015 Request
House-Passed
Committee
Conference
Program
FY2015 FY2016 FY2015 FY2016 FY2015 FY2016 FY2015 FY2016
National Cemetery
Administration
(NCA) 0.257 -
0.257 -
0.257 -
0.257 -
Departmental
administration 8.117
-
8.104
-
8.233
-
8.178
-
Housing
administration (VBA)
0.161
-
0.161
-
0.161
-
0.161
-
Total, discretionary
65.127 - 64.708 -
65.100 -
65.013 -
Total, Department
of Veterans Affairs
158.640
-
158.221
-
158.613
-
159.144
-
Total, VA advance
appropriations
(discretionary)
- 58.662 - 58.662 - 58.662 - 58.662








Percentages of Total








Mandatory 58.9%
-
59.1%
-
59.0%
-
59.1%
-
Discretionary

41.1%
100.0% 40.9% 100.0% 41.0% 100% 40.9% 100.0%
Source: Table prepared by the Congressional Research Service based on U.S. Congress, House Committee on
Appropriations, Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies, Military
Construction, Veterans Affairs, And Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2015, report to accompany H.R. 4486, 113th
Congress, 2nd session, April 17, 2014, H.Rept. 113-416, pp. 6-10; U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on
Appropriations, Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies, Military
Construction, Veterans Affairs, And Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2015, report to accompany H.R. 4486,113th
Congress, 2nd session, May 22, 2014, S.Rept. 113-174, pp. 111-113, and “Explanatory Statement Regarding The
House Amendment To The Senate Amendment On H.R. 83,” An explanation of the Consolidated and Further
Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015, Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 160, Book II (December 11, 2014),
pp. H9941-H9945.
Notes: Table shows appropriation amount (new budget authority), and not total budget authority for the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Total budget authority for the VA is the amount of money the VA can
spend, or obligate to spend, by law; it has several forms including appropriations, authority to borrow, contract
authority, and authority to spend from offsetting collections. For more information see CRS Report 98-721,
Introduction to the Federal Budget Process, coordinated by Bill Heniff Jr.
Title III: Related Agencies
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 cemeteries and memorials in foreign countries. The commission
maintains 24 cemeteries and 25 memorials in foreign countries and on U.S. soil.
Congressional Research Service
24

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
The U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) was established by the Veterans’
Administration Adjudication Procedure and Judicial Review Act of 1988 (P.L. 100-687). 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 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 VA or the Board of Veterans’ Appeals.
Department of Defense: Civil (Army Cemeterial Expenses)
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 million visitors annually. P.L.
113-235 provides funding that is $20 million above the Administration request.
Armed Forces Retirement Home
The Armed Forces Retirement Home (AFRH) Trust Fund 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). The
appropriation for the AFRH facilities is normally all from the Armed Forces Retirement Home
Trust Fund. The trust fund is maintained through gifts, bequests, and a $0.50 per month
assessment on the pay of active duty enlisted military personnel and warrant officers.
Table 10 shows the Administration’s FY2015 budget request, the House-passed and Senate
proposed FY2015 appropriations, and the final enacted appropriation for each of the related
agencies.
Table 10. Appropriations: Related Agencies, FY2015
(thousands of dol ars)
FY2015
Senate
Conference
Request House-Passed
Committee
Enacted
American Battle Monuments Commission (ABMC)


Salaries and expenses
70,100
75,000
73,285
74,100
Foreign currency fluctuations account
1,900
1,900
1,900
1,900
Total,
ABMC
72,000 76,900 76,900 76,000
U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC)


Salaries and expenses
31,386 31,386 34,390 31,386
Army Cemeterial Expenses


Salaries and expenses
45,800
61,881
65,800
65,800
Congressional Research Service
25

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

FY2015
Senate
Conference
Request House-Passed
Committee
Enacted
Construction
programs
- - - -
Total, Army Cemeterial Expenses
45,800
61,881
65,800
65,800
Armed Forces Retirement Home (AFRH)


Operation
and
maintenance
62,400 62,400 62,400 62,400
Capital
program
1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000
Total,
AFRH
63,400 63,400 63,400 63,400
Total, All Related Agencies
212,586
233,567
238,775
236,586
Source: Table prepared by the Congressional Research Service based on U.S. Congress, House Committee on
Appropriations, Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies, Military
Construction, Veterans Affairs, And Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2015, report to accompany H.R. 4486, 113th
Congress, 2nd session, April 17, 2014, H.Rept. 113-416, pp. 6-10; U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on
Appropriations, Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies, Military
Construction, Veterans Affairs, And Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2015, report to accompany H.R. 4486,113th
Congress, 2nd session, May 22, 2014, S.Rept. 113-174, pp. 111-113, and “Explanatory Statement Regarding The
House Amendment To The Senate Amendment On H.R. 83,” An explanation of the Consolidated and Further
Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015, Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 160, Book II (December 11, 2014),
pp. H9941-H9945.Text and charts to be provided by DSP.
Title IV: Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO)
The conference agreement on Division I of H.R. 83 created a new title devoted to military
construction pursuant to the Global War on Terrorism and the European Reassurance Initiative
(ERI). The request for funds for these projects was submitted to Congress after congressional
consideration of the FY2015 Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies bills
was completed.
The act appropriated the requested $46 million for a Defense-Wide OCO construction project at a
classified location. An additional $175 million was appropriated for construction associated with
the ERI. The Administration had requested that this sum be drawn from defense Operation and
Maintenance (O&M) funds for unspecified ERI construction. Nevertheless, DOD subsequently
identified to Congress individual construction requirements for which the appropriations
committees provided funding as a new title within the appropriations act.
Congressional Research Service
26

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

Appendix. Military Construction Appropriations,
FY2014-FY2015
Table A-1. Title I, Department of Defense Military Construction, FY2014-FY2015
(budget authority in thousands of dol ars)
FY2015
FY2015
FY2015
Conference
FY2014
FY2015
House
Senate
H.R. 83,
Account
Enacted
Request
H.R. 4486
H.R. 4486
Div. I
Military
Construction,
1,104,875 539,427 526,427 539,427 528,427
Army
Military
Construction,
Navy and Marine
1,629,690 1,018,772 998,772 1,018,772
1,018,772
Corps
Military
Construction, Air
1,052,796 811,774 719,551 811,774 811,774
Force
Military
Construction,
3,445,423 2,061,890 2,021,690 1,961,890 1,991,690
Defense-wide
Total, Active
7,232,789 4,431,863 4,266,440 4,331,863 4,350,663
Components
Military
Construction,
314,740 126,920 126,920 126,920 128,920
Army National
Guard
Military
Construction, Air
119,800 94,663 94,663 94,663 92,663
National Guard
Military
Construction,
156,560 103,946 103,946 103,946 103,946
Army Reserve
Military
Construction,
29,000 51,528 51,528 51,528 51,528
Navy Reserve
Military
Construction, Air
45,659 49,492 49,492 49,492 49,492
Force Reserve
Total, Reserve
Components
665,759 426,549 426,549 426,549 426,549
Total, Military
Construction
7,898,043 4,858,412 4,692,989 4,758,412 4,777,212
NATO Security
Investment
199,700 199,700 199,700 199,700 199,700
Program
Congressional Research Service
27

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

FY2015
FY2015
FY2015
Conference
FY2014
FY2015
House
Senate
H.R. 83,
Account
Enacted
Request
H.R. 4486
H.R. 4486
Div. I
Family Housing
Construction,
27,408 78,609 78,609 78,609 78,609
Army
Family Housing
Ops and Maint,
512,871 350,976 350,976 350,976 350,976
Army
Family Housing
Construction,
Navy and Marine
73,407 16,412 16,412 16,412 16,412
Corps
Family Housing
Ops and Maint,
Navy and Marine
379,444 354,029 354,029 354,029 354,029
Corps
Family Housing
Construction, Air
76,360 — — — —
Force
Family Housing
Ops and Maint,
388,598 327,747 327,747 327,747 327,747
Air Force
Family Housing
Construction,
— — — — —
Defense-Wide
Family Housing
Ops and Maint,
55,845 61,000 61,000 61,000 61,000
Defense-Wide
DOD Family
Housing
1,780 1,662 1,662 1,662 1,662
Improvement
Fund
Homeowners
— — — — —
Assistance Fund
Total, Family
1,515,713 1,190,535 1,190,535 1,190,535 1,190,535
Housing
Chemical
Demilitarization
122,536 38,715 38,715 38,715 38,715
Construction,
Defense-wide
Base
Realignment
451,357 270,085 270,085 380,085 315,085
and Closure
Administrative
Provisions
— — — — —
Military
Construction,
—
— 125,000 — 125,000
FY2014 (§127)
Congressional Research Service
28

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

FY2015
FY2015
FY2015
Conference
FY2014
FY2015
House
Senate
H.R. 83,
Account
Enacted
Request
H.R. 4486
H.R. 4486
Div. I
Military
Construction,
—
— 245,000 — 117,000
FY2015 (§128)
Military
Construction,
-200,000 — -79,577 — -49,533
Army (§129)
Military
Construction,
Navy and Marine
-12,000 — — —
-25,522
Corps (§130)
Military
Construction, Air
-39,700 — — —
-41,392
Force (§131)
Military
Construction,
-14,000 — — — —
Defense-Wide
Military
Construction, Air
-14,200 — — — —
National Guard
NATO Security
Investment
— —
-25,000
—
-25,000
Program (§132)
Homeowners
Assistance
-99,949 —
-100,000
-50,000
-63,800
Program (42
U.S.C. 3374)
Military
Construction,
— —
—
60,000
—
Army (§127)
Military
Construction,
— —
—
40,000
—
Army National
Guard (§128)
Military
Construction,
— —
—
50,000
—
Army Reserve
(§129)
Military
Construction,
— —
—
200,000
—
Navy (§130)
Military
Construction, Air
— —
—
100,000
—
Force (§131)
Military
Construction, Air
Force Reserve
— —
—
15,000
—
(§132)
Congressional Research Service
29

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

FY2015
FY2015
FY2015
Conference
FY2014
FY2015
House
Senate
H.R. 83,
Account
Enacted
Request
H.R. 4486
H.R. 4486
Div. I
Rescissions (§133)
—
—
—
-423,447
—
Total,
Administrative
-379,849 — 165,423
-8,447
36,753
Provisions
(Appropriations) —
—
(370,000)
(465,000)
(242,000)
(Rescissions) (-379,849) —
(-204,577)
(-473,447)
(-205,247)
Total, Title I,
Department of
9,808,000 6,557,447 6,557,447 6,559,000 6,558,000
Defensea
(Appropriations) (10,187,849) (6,557,447) (6,762,024) (7,032,447) (6,763,247)
(Rescissions) (-379,849) —
(-204,577)
(-473,447)
(-205,247)
Source: Explanatory Statement Submitted by Mr. Rogers of Kentucky Regarding the House Amendment to the
Senate Amendment on H.R. 83, Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 160, no. 151 (December 11, 2014), pp.
H9307-H10003.
Note:
a. The totals shown for Title I, Department of Defense reflect the new budget authority appropriated by the
act. The budget authority amount actually available for Title I projects ($7.0 billion) equals new budget
authority ($6.6 billion) plus unexpired, unobligated budget authority rescinded from prior fiscal years ($473
million).
Table A-2. Title IV, Overseas Contingency Construction, FY2014-FY2015
(budget authority in thousands of dol ars)
FY2015
FY2015
FY2015
Conference
FY2014
FY2015
House
Senate
H.R. 83,
Account
Enacted
Request
H.R. 4486
H.R. 4486
Div. I
Military
Construction,
— 46,000 — — 46,000
Defense-Wide
European
Reassurance
Initiative
— — — —
175,000
Military
Construction
Total, Title
IV, Overseas
Contingency
— 46,000 —
— 221,000
Construction
Source: Explanatory Statement Submitted by Mr. Rogers of Kentucky Regarding the House Amendment to the
Senate Amendment on H.R. 83, Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 160, no. 151 (December 11, 2014), pp.
H9307-H10003.


Congressional Research Service
30

---

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations


Author Contact Information

Daniel H. Else, Coordinator
Umar Moulta-Ali
Acting Section Research Manager
Analyst in Disability Policy
delse@crs.loc.gov, 7-4996
umoultaali@crs.loc.gov, 7-9557
Sidath Viranga Panangala

Specialist in Veterans Policy
spanangala@crs.loc.gov, 7-0623


Congressional Research Service
31

---