FY2022 NDAA: Military Construction Authorizations
INSIGHTi
FY2022 NDAA: Military Construction
Authorizations
February 2, 2022
The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) typically authorizes funding for Department of Defense
(DOD) military construction projects in Division B of the legislation.
In general, DOD military construction accounts fund military construction projects; major infrastructure
improvements; land acquisition; construction and operation of military family housing; privatized housing
through the Family Housing Improvement Fund and the Military Unaccompanied Housing Improvement
Fund; construction and environmental cleanup projects required by the base closure and realignment
commission (BRAC) process; and contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
Security Investment Program, which funds infrastructure projects and cost-sharing expenses for collective
defense.
President’s Budget Request
The FY2022 President’s budget requested $9.8 billion in military construction and related discretionary
funding—$1.3 billion (15%) more than the enacted FY2021 level. The request included $8.4 billion in
military construction accounts and $1.4 billion in family housing accounts. Among the largest requested
stand-alone projects, in terms of dollar value, were:
$250 million to build a dry dock addition at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Kittery,
Maine, for maintenance and overhaul of the Navy’s Virginia-class fast-attack submarines;
$207.9 million to construct a maintenance hangar at Marine Corps Air Station Cherry
Point, North Carolina, to support two squadrons of F-35B Lightning II stealth fighter
aircraft scheduled to arrive at the installation in FY2024 and FY2025; and
$168 million to construct a helicopter rescue operations maintenance hangar at Kadena
Air Base in Japan to support missions of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command and Pacific Air
Forces.
House-passed NDAA
The House-passed NDAA (H.R. 4350) would have authorized $13.4 billion for military construction
projects and related funding—$3.6 billion (36%) more than the request. The House legislation would
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN11845
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress
link to page 3 Congressional Research Service
2
have authorized $4.8 billion in increases to the request (i.e., funding beyond the amounts for certain
projects requested in the budget or for projects not requested in the budget), according to CRS analysis of
funding tables in the accompanying report (H.Rept. 117-118) and enacted legislation. Among these
increases, the House bill would have authorized 21 congressionally directed spending projects, known as
Community Project Funding items, totaling $370 million. The net effect of these increases would have
been offset by $1.2 billion in decreases to the request.
Senate Armed Services Committee-reported NDAA
The Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC)-reported version of the bill (S. 2792) would have
authorized $12.7 billion in military construction projects and related funding—$2.9 billion (29%) more
than the request. The SASC legislation would have authorized $4.1 billion in increases to the request,
according to CRS analysis of funding tables in the accompanying report (S.Rept. 117-39) and enacted
legislation. The report did not reference Community Project Funding items. The net effect of these
increases would have been offset by $1.3 billion in decreases to the request.
The Biden Administration opposed provisions in the House-passed and SASC-reported bills to
realign military construction funding “from priority projects to other projects.” It also argued that
incrementally funding certain projects would require nearly $1 billion in additional funding to
complete them.
Enacted NDAA
The enacted NDAA (S. 1605; P.L. 117-81) included Division B, the “Military Construction
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022,” which authorized $13.3 billion in military construction
projects and related funding—$3.5 billion (36%) more than the request (see Figure 1), according
to CRS analysis of the funding tables in the accompanying explanatory statement. The statement
noted, in part, that “incremental funding of large and complex military construction projects
enables the Department to execute additional infrastructure projects in a fiscal year, enables
continuous congressional oversight, serves to reduce the significant unobligated MILCON
balance, and provides opportunities to adjust the authorization of appropriations level for projects
should issues arise or requirements change over the course of construction.”
Congressional Research Service
3
Figure 1. Military Construction Authorizations in the FY2022 NDAA
(in billions of dollars)
Source: CRS analysis of H.Rept. 117-118, pp. 482-498; S.Rept. 117-39, pp. 516-538; and explanatory statement
accompanying the FY2022 NDAA (P.L. 117-81) in the December 7, 2021, Congressional Record, pp. H7436-H7448.
Congressional Research Service
4
Notes: Totals may not sum due to rounding. “Difference (%)” column is the percentage difference between the requested
and enacted amounts.
The act authorized funding for the bulk, though not all, of the Administration’s projects, including the dry
dock addition at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard. The act authorized $4.9 billion in increases to the
request. Among these increases were the Community Project Funding items in the House bill. The net
effect of these increases were offset by $1.4 billion in decreases to the request. Among these decreases
was a $150 million reduction to the requested level funding for the maintenance hangar at Marine Corps
Air Station Cherry Point and a $133 million reduction to the requested level of funding for the helicopter
hangar at the Kadena Air Base. In recommending similar reductions in its version of the legislation, the
House Armed Services Committee noted its support for the projects yet questioned the armed services’
ability to fully expend the requested funding in FY2022.
The enacted legislation supported the Administration’s request for the NATO Security Investment
Program. It also authorized the Secretary of Defense to accept six military construction projects in South
Korea with a combined value of $505.2 million and two military construction projects in Poland with a
combined value of $37 million. The host governments paid for the projects pursuant to security
agreements with the United States requiring in-kind contributions.
In addition, the enacted legislation prohibited DOD from conducting another BRAC round; mandated the
publishing of information on Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization (FSRM) projects
costing more than $15 million; continued various military housing reforms; required the Government
Accountability Office to report on the contracting processes DOD used to maintain and upgrade stateside
military installations; and extended authorizations for certain military construction projects previously
identified for a redirection of funding for the construction of barriers along the U.S.-Mexico border.
Author Information
Brendan W. McGarry
Analyst in U.S. Defense Budget
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff
to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of
Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of
information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role.
CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United
States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However,
as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the
permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
IN11845 · VERSION 1 · NEW
Congressional Research Service
5
IN11845 · VERSION 1 · NEW