Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

Congressional research reportOct 1, 2010

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and

Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

(name redacted)

Specialist in National Defense

(name redacted)

Specialist in Social Policy

(name redacted)

Specialist in Veterans Policy

October 1, 2010

Congressional Research Service

7-....

www.crs.gov

R41345

CRS Report for Congress

Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 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, 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 construction supporting military operations overseas

(known as Overseas Contingency Operations, or OCO), a function previously carried out through

emergency supplemental appropriations, and advance appropriations for veterans medical

services.

President Barack Obama submitted his request to Congress for Fiscal Year (FY) 2011

appropriations on February 1, 2010. For the appropriations accounts included in this bill, his

request totaled $191.7 billion in new budget authority, divided into four major categories: Title I

(military construction and family housing) at $18.7 billion; Title II (veterans affairs) at $171.4

billion; Title III (related agencies) at $283.8 million; and Title IV (a new category of funding for

construction in support of active military operations overseas) at $1.3 billion. All told, the request

comprised $20.0 billion in Department of Defense (DOD), $171.4 billion in veterans affairs, and

$283.8 million in other agency funding. Of the total, $76.0 billion (39.6%) would be discretionary

appropriations, with the remainder considered mandatory.

Simultaneously, the President requested an emergency supplemental appropriation for FY2010

that contained $521.4 million for Army and Air Force construction in Afghanistan.

The military construction funding amounts requested by the President and recommended by the

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations have fallen off as building for the 2005 Defense

Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC) round has nearly reached completion. Funding support

for military family housing construction has also declined as the military departments (Army,

Navy, and Air Force) continue their efforts to privatize formerly government-owned

accommodations.

In the area of non-medical benefits, the largest dollar increases in funding for the VA between

FY2010 and FY2011 in the Administration request, the House Appropriations Committee

recommendation (H.R. 5822) and the Senate Appropriations Committee recommendation (S.

3615) are for disability compensation and pension benefits, and readjustment benefits, where the

largest component is for education benefits.

The appropriations subcommittees in both chambers reported their versions of the bill (S. 3615)

on July 14, 2010. The Senate introduced S. 3615 and placed it on the Legislative Calendar

(Calendar No. 469) on July 19. The House introduced H.R. 5822 on July 22, took it up on July

28, and passed it with amendments. The Senate received H.R. 5822 on July 29 and placed it on

the Legislative Calendar under General Orders (Calendar No. 494). On September 29, the Senate

revived H.R. 3081, a bill that had lain dormant since July 13, 2009, amended it to form a

Continuing Appropriations Act that expires not later than December 3, 2010, and passed the

measure. The House followed suit early on September 30.

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

Contents

Status of Legislation....................................................................................................................1

Continuing Appropriations ....................................................................................................1

Appropriation .......................................................................................................................2

National Defense Authorization.............................................................................................3

Title I: Department of Defense ....................................................................................................4

Military Construction ............................................................................................................4

Key Budget Issues ................................................................................................................5

Planning Future Construction: the Quadrennial Defense Review .....................................5

Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC): the Cost of Implementation ..............................6

Overseas Installations: the Guam Redeployment .............................................................7

Incremental vs. Phased Construction Funding .................................................................8

Other Issues ....................................................................................................................8

Title II: Department of Veterans Affairs..................................................................................... 10

Agency Overview ............................................................................................................... 10

Key Budget Issues .............................................................................................................. 10

Title III: Related Agencies......................................................................................................... 15

American Battle Monuments Commission........................................................................... 15

U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims .......................................................................... 15

Department of Defense: Civil (Army Cemeterial Expenses) ................................................ 15

Armed Forces Retirement Home (AFRH) ........................................................................... 15

Title IV: Overseas Contingency Operations ............................................................................... 16

Temporary Contingency Construction Authority.................................................................. 16

Permanent Construction Authorities .................................................................................... 17

The Use of CCA for Construction ....................................................................................... 17

Creation of Title IV............................................................................................................. 18

Figures

Figure 1. New Budget Authority Estimates, BRAC 2005 Implementation....................................7

Tables

Table 1. Status of FY2011 Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies

Appropriations Act...................................................................................................................1

Table 2. Status of FY2011 National Defense Authorization Act ...................................................1

Table 3. Department of Veterans Affairs Appropriations, FY2004-FY2010 ................................ 10

Table 4. Appropriations: Department of Veterans Affairs, FY2010-FY2012 ............................... 12

Table 5. Mandatory and Discretionary Appropriations: Department of Veterans Affairs,

FY2009-FY2011 .................................................................................................................... 13

Table 6. Appropriations: Related Agencies, FY2010-FY2011 .................................................... 16

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

Table A-1. Appropriations: Title I Military Construction Appropriations Accounts,

FY2010-FY2011 .................................................................................................................... 19

Table A-2. Appropriations: Title IV OCO Military Construction Appropriations Accounts,

FY2010-FY2011 .................................................................................................................... 21

Appendixes

Appendix A. DOD Military Construction Accounts ................................................................... 19

Contacts

Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 24

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

Status of Legislation

Table 1. Status of FY2011 Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related

Agencies Appropriations Act

(H.R. 5822, S. 3615)

Conference

Report

Approval

Committee

Markup

House

Senate

07/14/10

House

Report

House

Passage

Senate

Report

Senate

Passage

Conf.

Report

House

Senate

Public

Law

H.Rept.

111-559

07/28/10

S.Rept.

111226

—

Source: CRS Legislative Information Service (LIS).

Table 2. Status of FY2011 National Defense Authorization Act

(H.R. 5136, S. 3454)

Conference

Report

Approval

Committee

Markup

House

Senate

04/25/10

06/03/10

House

Report

House

Passage

Senate

Report

Senate

Passage

Conf.

Report

House

Senate

Public

Law

H.Rept.

111-491

05/28/10

S.Rept.

111201

—

Source: CRS Legislative Information Service (LIS).

Continuing Appropriations

Because no regular military construction/veterans affairs appropriations were enacted before the

end of FY2010, Congress sought to pass legislation to continue funding for operations into

FY2011. The vehicle chosen was an appropriations bill that had made its way partially through

the legislative process during the first session of the 111th Congress.

H.R. 3081, the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations

Act, 2010, had been passed by the House on July 9, 2009. The Senate received the bill on July 13,

but it had lain dormant on the chamber’s Legislative Calendar (General Orders, Calendar No.

107) ever since.1 On September 24, 2010, the Majority Leader, Sen. Harry Reid (NV) moved to

consider the bill and sent to the desk a cloture motion (Congressional Record S7454). The Senate

invoked cloture on the motion to proceed by Yea-Nay vote (84-14, Record Vote No. 243, CR

S7585) on September 28. On September 29, the Senate amended the bill, renamed it as the

Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011, and passed it by Yea-Nay vote (69-30, Record Vote No.

247). The House took up the appropriate rule (H.Res. 1682) late that same evening, passed the

These appropriations were enacted as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010 (H.R. 3288, P.L. 111-117),

enacted on December 16, 2009.

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

rule, and moved to accept the Senate amendments. The House agreed to the amendments early on

September 30 by recorded vote (228-194, Roll No. 564), making funds available through

December 3, 2010.

The measure appropriated funds, according to Sec. 101, in

such amounts as may be necessary, at a rate for operations as provided in the applicable

appropriations Acts for fiscal year 2010 and under the authority and conditions provided in

such Acts, for continuing projects or activities ... that are not otherwise specifically provided

for in this Act, that were conducted in fiscal year 2010, and for which appropriations, funds,

or other authority were made available ....

Nevertheless, Sec. 104 of the bill added

Except as otherwise provided ..., no appropriation of funds made available or authority

granted ... shall be used to initiate or resume any project or activity for which appropriations,

funds, or other authority were not available during fiscal year 2010.

The impact this will have on military construction projects requested by the President for FY2011

appears to depend on whether an individual project is a standard military construction project or a

construction required to implement a recommendation of the 2005 Defense Base Closure and

Realignment (BRAC) Commission. Standard military construction projects are both individually

appropriated for in the various military construction accounts and individually authorized in the

annual National Defense Authorization Act, and the necessary authorization legislation has not

yet been enacted for FY2011.2 Therefore, standard construction projects for which no

appropriation of funds or authority was available in 2010 may not be initiated under the

Continuing Appropriations Act. Nevertheless, funding for BRAC 2005 implementation is

appropriated at the account, not the project, level, and both authority and appropriations funds for

that activity were available during FY2010.3

Sec. 135 of the bill reduced the amounts available to the BRAC 2005 from the rate available for

FY2010 (where $7.95 billion had been appropriated) to an annual rate of operations of $2.35

billion, the amount requested for FY2011 by the President and recommended by both

appropriations committees.

Appropriation

President Barack Obama submitted a detailed appropriations request for Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 on

February 1, 2010. In it, he requested $18.7 billion in new budget authority for regular military

construction and military family housing construction and operation, plus an additional $1.3

billion for construction in support of ongoing military contingency operations overseas, primarily

in Afghanistan. The committees on appropriations subsequently recommended to their respective

In addition to the constitutional requirement for appropriations to be enacted before the federal agencies may obligate

funding, 10 USC § 114 requires the Department of Defense to be specifically authorized to expend appropriated funds.

For a broader discussion of continuing appropriations, see CRS Report RL30343, Continuing Resolutions: Latest

Action and Brief Overview of Recent Practices, by (name redacted), and U.S. General Accounting Office, Principles of

Federal Appropriations Law, Third Edition, Vol. II, GAO-06-382SP, January 2004, pp. 8-1 to 8-38. (name redacted),

Legislative Attorney, Congressional Research Service, contributed to this section.

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

chambers that Congress appropriate funds equal to the president’s request, though each

committee’s allocation of funds among the various subaccounts differed in detail.

Senator Tim Johnson (South Dakota), chair of the Senate Committee on Appropriations

Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies, introduced an

original measure, S. 3615 (S.Rept. 111-226), to the Senate on July 19, 2010, where it was placed

on the Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders (Calendar No. 469).

Representative Chet Edwards (TX/17), chair of the House Committee on Appropriations

Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies, reported an

original measure, H.R. 5822 (H.Rept. 111-559), to the House on July 22, 2010. The bill was

placed on the Union Calendar (Calendar No. 320). The House Committee on Rules met on July

27 to draft a rule for the consideration of H.R. 5822. The Rules Committee adopted a structured

rule (H.Res. 1559) the same day, submitting H.Rept. 111-570.4 The House passed the rule on July

28 and took up the bill, considering a total of 14 amendments. Of these, eleven were adopted

before passing the amended bill on the Yeas and Nays (411-62, CR H6228-H6235, Roll No. 482).

Detailed, appropriations account-level data on the appropriations bills, including enacted amounts

for prior years, are displayed in Table 4 (Department of Veterans Affairs), Table 6 (Related

Agencies), and Table A-1 (Military Construction and Family Housing) and Table A-2 (Overseas

Contingency Operations Military Construction).5

National Defense Authorization

Representative Ike Skelton (MO/04) introduced H.R. 5136, the National Defense Authorization

Act for 2011, on April 26, 2010, when it was referred to the House Committee on Armed Services

(HASC).6 The committee referred parts of the bill, including the authorization request for the

FY2011 military construction appropriation, to its various subcommittees on May 11 and reported

the bill (H.Rept. 111-491) on May 21.7 The House took up the bill on May 27, adopted several

amendments, and passed an amended version on recorded vote (Roll No. 336) on May 28, 2010.

The bill was received in the Senate on June 9 and placed on the Legislative Calendar under

General Orders (No. 423). On June 24, the Senate, at the other chamber’s request (H.Res. 1467),

returned the papers to the House by Unanimous Consent. H.R. 5136 was again received in the

Senate on June 28 and placed on the Legislative Calendar under General Orders (No. 447).

The Senate’s version of the defense authorization bill, S. 3454, was introduced to that chamber by

the chair of the Senate Committee on Armed Services (SASC), Senator Carl Levin (MI), as an

original measure on June 4, 2010 (S.Rept. 111-201). The measure was placed on the Legislative

Calendar under General Orders (No. 414).

The rule permitted one hour of general debate and waived points of order against consideration of and provisions in

the bill under certain clauses of Rule XXI (Restrictions on Certain Bills). It made in order only those amendments

printed in the Rules Committee report, which would be introduced in order by a Member designated therein. It limited

debate on the amendments and provided for them to then be considered for adoption en gros.

An overview of the status of all FY2011 appropriations bills is available through the CRS website at

http://www.crs.gov/Pages/appover.aspx.

A much more comprehensive and detailed report on the National Defense Authorization Act can be found in CRS

Report R41254, Defense: FY2011 Authorization and Appropriations, coordinated by (name redacted).

A supplemental report, H.Rept. 111-491, Part II, was filed on May 26, 2010.

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

Table 1 and Table 2 track the progress of the appropriations and authorization acts, respectively.

The remainder of this report is organized in parallel with the appropriations bills.

Title I: Department of Defense

Military Construction

The military construction appropriations account includes a number of appropriations

subaccounts:

•

Military Construction accounts provide funds for new construction, construction

improvements, planning and design, and host nation support of active and reserve

military forces and DOD agencies.

•

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program (NSIP) is

the U.S. contribution to a common fund in which all NATO members participate

to defray the costs of construction (airfields, fuel pipelines, military headquarters,

etc.) needed to support major NATO commands.

•

Family housing accounts fund new construction, construction improvements,

federal government costs for family housing privatization, maintenance and

repair, furnishings, management, services, utilities, and other expenses incurred

in providing suitable accommodation for military personnel and their families

where needed.

•

The DOD Housing Improvement Fund is the vehicle by which DOD provides the

seed money, both directly appropriated and transferred from other accounts,

needed to initiate public-private arrangements for the privatization of military

housing.

•

The Homeowners Assistance Fund aids federal personnel stationed at or near an

installation scheduled for closure or realignment who are unable to sell their

homes by allowing the Secretary of Defense to subsidize the sale or to purchase

homes outright. 8

•

The Chemical Demilitarization Construction, Defense-Wide, account provides

for the design and construction of disposal facilities required for the destruction

of chemical weapons stockpiles, as required under international treaty.

•

The Base Realignment and Closure Account 1990 funds the remaining

environmental remediation requirements (including the disposal of unexploded

ordnance) arising from the first four base realignment and closure (BRAC)

rounds (1988, 1991, 1993, and 1995).

The ARRA for 2009 (the Stimulus Bill) permanently expanded eligibility for the Homeowner Assistance Program to

some classes of wounded and injured DOD and Coast Guard personnel or their surviving spouses and temporarily

authorized eligibility to some other federal personnel. A discussion of this expansion can be found in CRS Report

RL34558, Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations, by (name redacted),

(name redacted), and (name redacted).

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

•

The Base Realignment and Closure Account 2005 provides funding for the

military construction, relocation, and environmental requirements of the

implementation of both the 2005 BRAC round and the DOD Integrated Global

Presence and Basing Strategy/Global Defense Posture Realignment (military

construction only).

Funding of the various accounts included under Title I (Department of Defense) and Title IV

(Overseas Contingency Construction) is listed in Appendix A to this report.

Key Budget Issues

Planning Future Construction: the Quadrennial Defense Review

Congressional committees with jurisdiction over military construction appropriations and

appropriation authorizations require the Secretary of Defense to justify in detail the construction

projects requested for the upcoming fiscal year. In addition, in order to anticipate upcoming

construction requirements, Congress requires the Secretary to regularly project its future budget

plans and to review its national defense strategy. One important document in that planning

process is the statutorily mandated Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR).

Since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Congress has required DOD to periodically reassess its

strategic objectives and potential military threats to national defense. 9 The Department published

its fourth such exercise, the 2010 QDR, in February 2010.10

In recent QDRs, DOD expressed its intention to reevaluate its “global footprint,” the network of

permanent garrisons stationed on foreign soil, with an eye toward concentrating a greater

percentage of troops on U.S. territory, ready to deploy to temporary sites overseas where and as

needed. In the 2010 QDR, DOD appeared to reevaluate its position, stating its intention to extend

“a global defense posture composed of joint, ready forces forward-stationed and rotationally

deployed to prevail across all domains, prepositioned equipment and overseas facilities, and

international agreements.”11

The Senate appropriations committee noted that DOD had initiated several QDR-inspired reviews

of its basing policies and encouraged the Department to focus its installations planning on U.S.

European Command (USEUCOM) and Pacific Command (USPACOM), the geographic

commands with the most extensive basing establishments. While awaiting results of the DOD

reviews, the committee recommended deferring $464.6 million of the FY2011 presidential

request for military construction in Djibouti, Germany, Guam, Honduras, Japan, and the Republic

of Korea.12 The House committee also noted basing uncertainties in the 2010 QDR, including

10 U.S.C. § 118, Quadrennial Defense Review.

Office of the Secretary of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, Washington, DC, February 2010 (hereafter,

Quadrennial Defense Review), http://www.defense.gov/qdr/. For a thorough discussion of the 2010 QDR, see CRS

Report R41250, Quadrennial Defense Review 2010: Overview and Implications for National Security Planning, by

(name redacted).

Quadrennial Defense Review, p. 15.

U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Military Construction and Veterans Affairs,

and Related Agencies, Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2011, report

to accompany S. 3615, 111th Cong., 2nd sess., July 19, 2010, S.Rept. 111-226 (Washington: GPO, 2010), p. 9.

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

references to the need for U.S. military forces to have “access to networks of bases and

supporting infrastructures that are more resilient than today’s in the face of attacks by a variety of

means,”13 and the “normalization” of duty tours in locations such as the Republic of Korea.14 The

House committee directed DOD to include a report with its FY2012 budget submission detailing

how it intends to fund the construction needed to implement a revised overseas basing plan.15

Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC): the Cost of Implementation

In the detailed documentation submitted by DOD to accompany the President’s FY2011

appropriations request, DOD estimated that its one-time implementation costs for BRAC 2005

will total $34.5 billion.16

These cost estimates have increased over time as the military departments and DOD have

developed plans to carry out the various required BRAC actions. In requesting military

construction funds for FY2007, the first submission after the list of BRAC recommendations was

created, DOD estimated the total one-time implementation cost to implement the 2005 BRAC

round (the realignment and closure of a number of military installations on United States

territory) and to redeploy approximately 70,000 troops and their families from overseas garrisons

to bases within the United States at $17.9 billion. Between the submission of the FY2007 request

in February 2006 and the FY2008 request the next year, DOD estimates had matured

considerably, causing the estimate of one-time implementation cost to rise to more than $30.7

billion. The same estimate made by DOD in February 2008 for the FY2009 appropriations

request rose again, to $32.0 billion. DOD’s FY2010 estimate for one-time implementation costs

over the FY2006-2011 period reached $34.2 billion.

FY2011 is the final year of BRAC 2005 implementation, which by statute must be complete by

September 15, 2011, and the estimate for total new budget authority required to complete the

process has now been set by DOD at $34.5 billion. The President has requested $2.4 billion as the

final implementation installment. Both House and Senate committees have recommended full

funding of the President’s request.

Figure 1 displays the progression of DOD cost estimates.

Quadrennial Defense Review, p. 33.

Duty in many locations, such as the Republic of Korea, has long been classified as a short-term “hardship”

assignment where service members are not authorized to have family members accompany them. In “normalizing”

such duty, DOD would incur a requirement to provide more extensive family housing and supporting infrastructure in

order to sustain families and lengthened tours.

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, 2011, report to

accompany H.R. 5822, 111th Cong., 2nd sess., July 22, 2010, H.Rept. 111-559 (Washington: GPO, 2010), p. 17.

One-time implementation costs for BRAC include the construction of necessary facilities, environmental remediation

of surplus military property, the operation and maintenance of property associated with BRAC, and the transfer of

military and DOD civilian employees to new duty stations.

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

Figure 1. New Budget Authority Estimates, BRAC 2005 Implementation

New Budget Authority ($ Millions)

10,000

9,143

8,509

9,000

9,025

8,174

8,000

8,174

7,000

5,639

6,000

5,623

5,000

7,581

7,912

5,623

5,626

5,473

5,696

5,558

4,000

2,439

3,000

2,000

1,530

1,502

1,000

2,071

2,996

1,502

1,563

1,489

484

2006

2,104

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Fiscal Year

FY2007 Est.

FY2008 Est.

FY2010 Est.

FY2011 Est.

FY2009 Est.

Source: DOD Budget Justification Documents for FY2007-FY2011.

Overseas Installations: the Guam Redeployment

The President has requested $426.9 million for construction to support the relocation of

approximately 8,000 Marines and an estimated 10,000 members of their families from

installations in the Prefecture of Okinawa to the U.S. Territory of Guam and an additional $139.3

million for construction associated with the forward deployment of other military units.

Relocation funding is to be shared between the governments of Japan and the United States.

Associated with the Guam relocation is the construction of a replacement facility on Okinawa for

the Marine Corps air station at Futenma and a redeployment of units to Camp Schwab,

Okinawa.17

In its report to the House, the Committee on Appropriations wrote of its concerns over the ability

of DOD to fully utilize this amount, citing an inadequate Navy Draft Environmental Impact

Statement on the proposed construction, lack of apparent progress in upgrading civil

infrastructure “outside the fence line” (such as roads, sewage treatment, water supplies, etc.), and

the uncertain impact of the 2010 QDR’s concept of installation “resiliency” on future construction

planning. 18 The Senate committee also pointed out the absence of a definite DOD global basing

strategy, citing the Guam and the Okinawa relocations as cases in point. The Senate committee

drew attention to the “cost and magnitude of the construction program, the potential

MCAS Futenma is located approximately five miles from Naha, the capital of Okinawa Prefecture, in south-central

Okinawa. Camp Schwab is located in northeastern Okinawa. The construction of the Futenma Replacement Facility is

expected before the end of 2010.

As discussed in the section above on the 2010 QDR, DOD has expressed a desire to make use of worldwide

“networks of bases and supporting infrastructures that are more resilient than today’s,” but has not elaborated on what

it seeks in creating “resiliency.”

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

environmental impact on Guam, and the timeline to complete the realignment.” 19 In the end, of

the $566.2 million requested by the President for construction on Guam, the House committee

recommended appropriating $393.2 million, and the Senate committee recommended $246.0

million. 20

Incremental vs. Phased Construction Funding

Major construction projects often require several years to complete. In their planning and

execution, military departments and defense agencies have developed the practice of requesting

authorization and appropriations in discrete phases, each of which is considered to be independent

of another.

A “military construction project” is defined in statute to include “all … work … necessary to

produce a complete and usable facility or a complete and usable improvement to an existing

facility.”21 Thus, as each phase of construction is presented as its own project, each must result in

a facility that can be placed in service.

Each approach presents certain advantages and distinct disadvantages. Phased construction

considers each portion of a major construction project to be a discrete undertaking, fully funded

and presenting a usable edifice at its conclusion. Under phased funding, DOD and Congress are

committed to even large-scale construction for only a limited period and either body could, at the

end of a phase, halt continued construction. Incremental funding would break large projects into

two legislative tracks – a single authorization for the entire construction and repeated

appropriations to carry the construction through to completion. By authorizing a project through

the incremental funding mechanism, Congress could commit itself, and potentially future

congresses, to its support for a number of years.

Phased funding could lead to inefficient construction in certain large projects because each phase

must be planned and executed as if it was discrete. Incremental funding may commit subsequent

congresses to the support of an already authorized construction project.

Other Issues

Piñon Canyon, CO, Maneuver Training Area (PCMTA)

During the 1980s, the Department of the Army acquired approximately 250,000 acres near Ft.

Carson, CO, for use as a troop maneuvering area. Half of the land was purchased via open sale,

with the remainder bought through the use of condemnation proceedings.22

U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Military Construction and Veterans Affairs,

and Related Agencies, Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2011,

report to accompany S. 2615, 111th Cong., 2nd sess., July 19, 2010, S.Rept. 111-226 (Washington: GPO, 2010), p. 10.

A detailed discussion of recent issues in the planned deployment of additional U.S. military forces to Guam can be

found in CRS Report RS22570, Guam: U.S. Defense Deployments, by (name redacted).

10 U.S.C. 2801(b).

A more lengthy discussion of the issues surrounding the Piñon Canyon Maneuver Training Site can be found on pp.

22-3 of CRS Report RL34558, Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations,

by (name redacted), (name redacted), and (name redacted).

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

When the Department announced that the number of soldiers stationed at Ft. Carson would

increase substantially, it initiated an effort to add an additional 450,000 acres to the PCMTA.

Local land owners expressed concern that public condemnation might again be invoked to

acquire the new land.

An amendment to the bill appropriating military construction funds for FY2008 (P.L. 110-161)

forbade the use of those funds for the Piñon Canyon expansion. Identical language appeared in

the military construction appropriations acts for FY2009 and FY2010. This restriction is

continued in Section 126 of the Administrative Provisions in Title I of H.R. 5822, the House

version of the appropriations bill, but is not reflected in its companion bill, S. 3615.

School Construction

A number of military installations will gain a significant number of military and civilian

personnel during the next several years due to force shifts associated with base realignments,

military end strength increases, and the redeployment of military units from overseas to domestic

garrisons. Most school-age children of military personnel attend public schools operated by local

school agencies.

Federal property is exempt from the local taxation that normally supports school systems, and an

important federal support for school attendance takes the form of Impact Aid Program payments

to local school districts.23 Nevertheless, impact aid is retroactive, depending on an annual census

of military family school children. This has presented a challenge for jurisdictions to prepare for a

large influx of students as military units move to nearby installations.

Sec. 2815 of H.R. 5136, the House version of the National Defense Authorization Act for

FY2011, may offer an alternative path for DOD assistance in helping local jurisdictions cope with

expanded installation populations. The proposed language would amend 10 U.S.C. 2391, the

statute under which DOD offers economic adjustment and diversification assistance to

communities impacted by installation closure or realignment under BRAC. The amendment states

If the proposed or actual establishment or expansion of a military installation would

otherwise qualify a State or local government for assistance under this paragraph and is the

result of base realignment and closure activities authorized by the Defense Base Closure and

Realignment Act of 1990 (10 U.S.C. 2687 note), the Secretary may make grants, conclude

cooperative agreements, and supplement funds available under Federal programs

administered by agencies other than the Department of Defense in order to assist the State or

local government with development of the public infrastructure (including construction)

required by the proposed or actual establishment or expansion.24

The Impact Aid Program is established in Title VIII of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965

(ESEA).

H.R. 5822, Sec. 2815.

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

Title II: Department of Veterans Affairs

Table 3. Department of Veterans Affairs Appropriations, FY2004-FY2010

(budget authority in billions of $)

FY2004

FY2005

FY2006

FY2007

FY2008

FY2009

FY2010

61.84

65.84

71.46

79.55

88.11

95.95

109.61

Source: Amounts shown are from reports of the Appropriations Committees accompanying the appropriations

bills for the years noted above.

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 provide these benefits:

the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA), the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), and the

National Cemetery Administration (NCA). Benefits available to veterans include serviceconnected 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 3, VA appropriations

for benefits and services has increased from $61.84 billion in FY2004 to $109.61 billion in

FY2010.

Key Budget Issues

The FY2011 budget submitted by the Administration called for funding the VA at a level of

$120.79 billion for FY2011 (see Table 4). This is an increase of $11.18 billion, or 10.2%, over

the FY2010 appropriation.

The largest dollar increases in funding for the VA between FY2010 and FY2011 in the

Administration request, the House Appropriations Committee recommendation (H.R. 5822) and

the Senate Appropriations Committee recommendation (S. 3615) are for disability compensation

and pension benefits, and readjustment benefits, where the largest component is for education

benefits.

As shown in Table 4, the Administration request, H.R. 5822 and S. 3615 would provide $53.49

billion in disability compensation and pension benefits, an increase of $6.10 billion or 12.9%

more than the FY2010 appropriation. The Administration request, H.R. 5822, and S. 3615 would

also provide $10.44 billion in readjustment benefits, an increase of $1.21 billion or 13.1% more

than the FY2010 appropriation.

The Administration request is for $120.79 billion in FY2011 funding for the VA, and $50.61

billion in advance FY2012 funding for VA medical care. H.R. 5822 provides total funding for the

VA of $120.81 billion for FY2011 (of which $48.18 was advance funding), and advance funding

for FY2012 of $50.61 billion. H.R. 5822 provides higher funding overall for general departmental

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

administration including increases in operating expenses, the Office of the Inspector General, and

construction, and a decrease for information technology compared to the Administration request.

S. 3615 would provide, as shown in Table 4, $120.84 billion in FY2011 funding for the VA (of

which $48.18 was advance funding), and $50.61 billion in advance FY2012 funding for VA

medical care. Unlike the Administration request and H.R. 5822, S. 3615 would provide additional

funding, beyond the prior advance funding for FY2011, for medical services and medical

facilities. S. 3615 would also provide higher funding overall for general departmental

administration, with increases in operating expenses, the Office of the Inspector General, and

construction, and a decrease for information technology compared to the Administration request.

As shown in Table 5, there is an almost equal split between mandatory and discretionary funding

for the VA. In the FY2010 appropriation, mandatory funding was only slightly higher than

discretionary funding. The Administration request, H.R. 5822, and S. 3615 for FY2011 would

provide discretionary funding that is less than mandatory funding. For FY2012, all of the advance

funding provided by H.R. 5822 and S. 3615 is discretionary funding.

Congressional Research Service

Table 4. Appropriations: Department of Veterans Affairs, FY2010-FY2012

(budget authority in billions of $)

FY2010 Enacted

Program

FY2010

Administration Request

FY2011

Advance

FY2011

FY2012

Advance

H.R. 5822

FY2011

S. 3615

FY2012

Advance

FY2011

Compensation and pensions

47.396

53.492

Readjustment benefits

9.232

10.440

Insurance and indemnities

0.049

0.063

Housing programs (net, indefinite)a

-0.109

-0.145

Housing programs administration

0.165

0.164

Total, Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA)

56.734

64.014

National Cemetery Administration

0.250

0.251

0.259

0.251

Medical Services

34.708

0.000

0.100

Advance appropriations

Medical support and compliance

37.136

4.930

Advance appropriations

Medical facilities

39.650

0.000

5.307

4.859

Advance appropriations

Medical and prosthetic research

37.136

0.000

5.535

0.000

5.740

39.650

37.136

39.650

0.000

5.535

0.000

5.426

FY2012

Advance

5.535

0.020

5.426

0.581

0.590

(Offsetting receipts)

-2.954

-3.393

(Appropriations - indefinite)

2.954

3.393

Total, Veterans Health Administration (VHA)

45.078

48.773

48.893

Medical Care Collection Fundb

Total, VHA advance appropriations

48.183

50.611

48.183

50.611

48.183

Total, VHA non-advance appropriations

45.078

0.590

0.710

Available to VHA (includes collections)

48.032

52.166

52.286

CRS-12

50.611

FY2010 Enacted

Program

Administration Request

FY2011

Advance

FY2010

H.R. 5822

FY2012

Advance

FY2011

S. 3615

FY2012

Advance

FY2011

FY2012

Advance

FY2011

General operating expensesError! Reference source not found.

2.087

2.588

2.615

2.612

Information technology

3.307

3.222

3.147

Inspector General

0.109

0.115

0.112

Construction, major projects

1.194

1.151

1.176

1.198

Construction, minor projects

0.703

0.468

0.508

0.486

Grants for state extended care facilities

0.100

0.085

Grants for state veterans cemeteries

0.046

Total, Departmental Administration

7.546

7.754

7.767

7.685

Total, Department of Veterans Affairs

109.608

120.792

120.813

120.843

Total, VA advance appropriations

48.183

Total, VA non-advance appropriations

48.183

109.608

50.611

48.183

72.609

50.611

48.183

72.630

72.660

Source: Table prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on reports of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees.

This negative budget authority is the result of combining the loan subsidy payments estimated to be needed with the offsetting receipts expected to be collected.

Medical Care Collection Fund (MCCF) receipts are restored to the VHA as an indefinite budget authority equal to the revenue collected.

Table 5. Mandatory and Discretionary Appropriations:

Department of Veterans Affairs, FY2009-FY2011

(budget authority in billions of $)

FY2010 Enacted

FY2010

Mandatory

CRS-13

FY2011

Advance

Request

FY2011

FY2012

Advance

H.R. 5822

FY2011

FY2012

Advance

S. 3615

FY2011

FY012

Advance

50.611

FY2010 Enacted

FY2010

Benefits (VBA)

FY2011

Advance

Request

FY2011

H.R. 5822

FY2012

Advance

FY2011

S. 3615

FY2012

Advance

FY2011

56.568

63.849

45.078

48.773

48.893

FY012

Advance

Discretionary

Medical (VHA)

Advance appropriations

48.183

50.611

National Cemetery Administration

(NCA)

0.250

0.251

0.259

0.251

Departmental administration

7.546

7.754

7.767

7.685

Housing administration (VBA)

0.166

0.165

Total, discretionary

53.039

56.943

56.964

56.994

Discretionary, advance appropriations

Total, Department of Veterans

Affairs

48.183

109.608

Total, VA advance appropriations

50.611

120.792

48.183

50.611

120.813

50.611

120.843

50.611

Percentages of Total

Mandatory

51.6%

Discretionary

48.4%

52.9%

100.0%

47.1%

52.8%

100.0%

47.2%

52.8%

100.0%

Source: Table prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on reports of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees.

CRS-14

47.2%

100.0%

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

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 either foreign countries or on U.S. soil.

U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims

The U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims 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.

The Court currently occupies leased facilities near Judiciary Square in the District of Columbia

and is searching for a permanent location as the current lease expires in September 2010. The

Administration request and H.R. 5822 provide $62 million in funds for a transfer to the General

Services Administration related to construction of a new courthouse. S. 3615 provides $25

million, as the first funding increment, for the construction of a new courthouse.

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 4,000,000 visitors annually.

H.R. 5822 and S. 3615 provide additional funding and reporting requirements, in light of the

recent reports of mismanagement at Arlington National Cemetery.

Armed Forces Retirement Home (AFRH)

The Armed Forces Retirement Home 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, Mississippi (originally

located in Philadelphia, PA, and known as the United States Naval Home). These two facilities

provide long-term housing and medical care for approximately 1,600 needy veterans. The

Gulfport campus, encompassing a 19-story living accommodation and medical facility tower, was

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

severely damaged by Hurricane Katrina at the end of August, 2005, and is not currently in use.

Residents of the facility were transferred to the Washington, DC, location immediately after the

storm. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was signed between the AFRH and the General

Services Administration (GSA) for the rebuilding of the Gulfport facility, with a targeted

completion date in 2010. The facility is scheduled to be completed this summer, with residents

being able to return in October 2010.

The appropriation for the AFRH facilities is 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 6 shows the FY2010 enacted appropriations, and the Administration request, the House

Appropriations Committee recommendations (H.R. 5822) and the Senate Appropriations

Committee (S. 3615) funding for FY2011 for each of the related agencies.

Table 6. Appropriations: Related Agencies, FY2010-FY2011

(budget authority in thousands of $)

Enacted

Administration Request

H.R. 5822

S. 3615

FY2010

FY2011

American Battle Monuments Commission (ABMC)

Salaries and expenses

62.675

64.200

65.667

67.200

Foreign currency fluctuations account

17.100

20.200

Total, ABMC

79.775

84.400

85.867

87.400

27.115

90.147

53.297

39.850

38.100

39.600

43.100

Operation and maintenance

62.000

69.200

Capital program

72.000

2.000

Total, AFRH

134.000

71.200

Total, All Related Agencies

280.740

283.847

286.814

254.997

U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims

Salaries and expenses

Army Cemeterial Expenses

Salaries and expenses

Armed Forces Retirement Home (AFRH)

Source: Table prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on reports of the House and

Senate Appropriations Committees.

Title IV: Overseas Contingency Operations

Temporary Contingency Construction Authority

Construction of facilities in a fast-changing theater of war has presented DOD with an

extraordinarily complicated problem. In the normal appropriations and authorization process,

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

plans for construction projects are drafted a year or more in advance of the date construction is to

begin. Experience on the ground in both Iraq and Afghanistan has shown that even the best of

plans is likely to become outdated by the time the necessary legislation is passed and enacted.

Since FY2004, in order to provide timely assistance to commanders in the field, Congress has

used the annual National Defense Authorization Act to grant DOD a temporary authorization,

“Contingency Construction Authority” (CCA), to permit the use of a limited amount of already

appropriated operations and maintenance (O&M) funds from the defense appropriation for

construction. Reviewed and reauthorized every year since, the geographic areas where the CCA

may be employed, the purposes to which the funds may be put, and the ceiling imposed on the

amount available have varied.

Under its current authority, DOD may use up to $200 million of O&M appropriations in U.S.

Central Command (USCENTCOM), including those portions of U.S. Africa Command

(USAFRICOM) once part of USCENTCOM, for construction. If the Secretary of Defense

certifies the need, he may use up to an additional $300 million for construction within

Afghanistan.25

Permanent Construction Authorities

The Secretary of Defense has long held authority to initiate military construction projects without

waiting for specific authorization and appropriation. 10 U.S.C. §2804 permits the Secretary to

begin construction using already appropriated funds if he “determines that deferral of the project

for inclusion in the next Military Construction Authorization Act would be inconsistent with

national security or national interest” and notifies Congress of his action within a specified

period. This section of Title 10 is titled “Contingency Construction,” but is permanent and distinct

from the temporary authority mentioned above and should not be confused with it. 10 U.S.C.

§2805 (“Unspecified Minor Construction”) permits the Secretary to make very limited use of

O&M funds for small construction projects. 10 U.S.C. §2808 allows the Secretary to initiate

construction projects not otherwise authorized, using funds appropriated for military construction,

after a declaration of war or of national emergency requiring the employment of armed forces.26

The Use of CCA for Construction

In H.Rept. 111-559, the House committee noted that the use of the temporary CCA has given

commanders in the field added flexibility to address urgent construction requirements and that

almost $1.4 billion in O&M funding has been obligated under it to date. The committee also

noted the O&M appropriations account is part of the defense appropriation, not the military

construction appropriation, and its oversight lies with a subcommittee not responsible for defense

construction. The committee also pointed out that O&M funds are appropriated for other uses,

A more detailed discussion of expenditures on the CCA and military construction in Afghanistan is included in CRS

Report R41232, FY2010 Supplemental for Wars, Disaster Assistance, Haiti Relief, and Other Programs, coordinated

by (name redacted).

The temporary CCA is sometimes referred to as “Sec. 2808 authority” because it was originally created as Sec. 2808

of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2004. It is not the same as the permanent 10 U.S.C. §2808

construction authority.

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

such as meeting operational requirements of armed forces in the field and, to the extent they are

expended on construction, they are unavailable for those ends to which they were intended. 27

Creation of Title IV

Before FY2010, construction projects in an active military area of operations would have been

requested in one or more requests for emergency supplemental appropriations. FY2010 marked

the first year that all such construction was included in the regular annual appropriation request as

the Obama Administration migrated planned war-related construction costs away from emergency

supplemental appropriations into the regular appropriations process. FY2011 marks the first year

that a “Title IV: Overseas Contingency Operations” has been included in this appropriations bill

and appears to be a vehicle through which Congress may address concerns for both flexibility and

oversight.

The House committee recommended that all military construction funding for Overseas

Contingency Operations (OCO) be considered emergency appropriations.28 The Senate committee

amended the list of projects for which it recommended funding to reflect changes requested by

DOD since its original FY2011 request and increased the amount dedicated to unspecified minor

construction in order to enhance commanders’ ability to meet emerging needs. The committee

also moved all construction requested for Afghanistan, whether included in regular military

construction or in OCO submissions, into Title IV.

Funding levels for the various appropriations accounts in Title IV are presented in Table A-2 in

Appendix A.

H.Rept. 111-559, pp. 62-63.

Ibid., pp. 63-64.

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

Appendix A. DOD Military Construction Accounts

Table A-1. Appropriations:Title I Military Construction Appropriations Accounts,

FY2010-FY2011

(budget authority in thousands of $)

Account

FY2010

Enacted

FY2011

Request

FY2011

House

Committee

FY2011

Senate

Committee

FY2011

Conference

Military Construction, Army

3,719,419

4,078,798

4,051,512

3,797,521

—

Military Construction,

Navy and Marine Corps

3,769,003

3,879,104

3,587,376

3,667,922

—

Military Construction,

Air Force

1,450,426

1,311,385

1,276,385

1,378,688

—

Rescissions

-37,500

—

1,412,926

1,311,385

1,276,385

1,378,688

—

Military Construction,

Defense-wide

3,093,679

3,118,062

2,999,612

3,241,601

—

Rescissions

-151,160

—

Total

2,942,519

3,118,062

2,999,612

3,241,601

—

Total, Active

components

11,843,867

12,387,349

11,914,885

12,085,732

—

Military Construction,

Army National Guard

582,056

873,664

1,020,228

980,072

—

Military Construction,

Air National Guard

371,226

176,986

292,386

337,454

—

Military Construction,

Army Reserve

431,566

318,175

358,325

347,916

—

Military Construction,

Navy Reserve

125,874

61,557

91,557

61,557

—

Military Construction,

Air Force Reserve

112,269

7,832

48,182

12,832

—

Total, Reserve

components

1,622,991

1,438,214

1,810,678

1,739,831

—

Total, Military

Construction

13,466,858

13,825,563

13,725,563

13,825,563

—

(13,655,518)

(13,825,563)

(13,725,563)

(13,825,563)

—

(Rescissions)

(-188,660)

—

NATO Security

Investment Program

197,414

258,884

—

Family Housing

Construction, Army

273,236

92,369

—

Family Housing Ops and

Debt, Army

523,418

518,140

—

Family Housing

146,569

186,444

—

Total

(Appropriations)

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

FY2010

Enacted

FY2011

Request

FY2011

House

Committee

FY2011

Senate

Committee

FY2011

Conference

Family Housing Ops and

Debt, Navy and Marine

Corps

368,540

366,346

—

Family Housing

Construction, Air Force

66,101

78,025

—

Family Housing Ops and

Debt, Air Force

502,936

513,792

—

Family Housing

Construction, Defensewide

2,859

—

Family Housing Ops and

Debt, Defense-wide

49,214

50,464

—

DOD Family Housing

Improvement Fund

2,600

1,096

—

Homeowners Assistance

Fund

323,225

16,515

—

Total, Family Housing

2,258,698

1,823,191

—

(Appropriations)

(2,258,698)

(1,823,191)

—

(Rescissions)

—

Chemical

Demilitarization

Construction,

Defense-wide

151,541

124,971

—

BRAC, 1990

496,768

360,474

460,474

360,474

—

BRAC, 2005

7,455,498

2,354,285

—

7,952,266

2,714,759

2,814,759

2,714,759

—

Military Construction,

Army

-230,000

—

Military Construction,

Navy and Marine Corps

-235,000

—

Military Construction,

Air Force

-64,091

—

-529,091

—

Military Construction,

Army

-33,000

—

Military Construction,

Navy and Marine Corps

-51,468

—

Account

Construction, Navy and

Marine Corps

Total, BRAC

General Reductions

(Sec. 129)

Total

General Rescissions

(Sec. 130)

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

FY2010

Enacted

FY2011

Request

FY2011

House

Committee

FY2011

Senate

Committee

FY2011

Conference

Military Construction,

Air Force

-93,268

—

Military Construction,

Army National Guard

-33,000

—

Military Construction,

Air National Guard

-7,000

—

-217,736

—

Grand Total, Title I

MilCon & FH

23,279,950

18,747,368

—

(Appropriations)

(23,686,346)

(18,747,368)

—

(-406,396)

—

Account

Total

(Rescissions)

Sources: H.Rept. 111-559, S.Rept. 111-226.

Table A-2. Appropriations:Title IV OCO Military Construction Appropriations

Accounts, FY2010-FY2011

(budget authority in thousands of $)

Account

FY2010

Enacted

FY2011

Request

FY2011

House

Committee

FY2011

Senate

Committee

FY2011

Conference

Military Construction, Army

924,484

929,996

—

1,045,676

—

Military Construction, Army

(Emergency)

—

929,996

—

Military Construction,

Air Force

474,500

280,506

—

164,826

—

Military Construction,

Air Force (Emergency)

—

280,504

—

Military Construction,

Defense-wide

—

46,500

—

46,500

—

Military Construction,

Defense-wide (Emergency)

—

46,500

—

Grand Total, Title IV

MilCon

1,398,984

1,257,002

1,257,000

—

Sources: H.Rept. 111-559, S.Rept. 111-226.

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

Additional Resources

Budget

CRS Report RL30002, A Defense Budget Primer, by (name redacted) and (name redacted).

CRS Report 98-720, Manual on the Federal Budget Process, by (name redacted) and Allen Schick.

Defense

CRS Report R41254, Defense: FY2011 Authorization and Appropriations, coordinated by (nam

e redacted).

CRS Report R41250, Quadrennial Defense Review 2010: Overview and Implications for

National Security Planning, by (name redacted).

CRS Report R40156, War in Afghanistan: Strategy, Military Operations, and Issues for Congress,

by (name redacted) and (name redacted).

Veterans Affairs

CRS Report R41343, Veterans Medical Care: FY2011 Appropriations, by (name redacted)

CRS Report RL33991, Disability Evaluation of Military Servicemembers, by (name redacted) and

(name redacted).

CRS Report RS22483, Health Care for Dependents and Survivors of Veterans, by (name redacted)

CRS Report RS20533, VA-Home Loan Guaranty Program: An Overview, by (name redacted).

CRS Report RL33704, Veterans Affairs: The Appeal Process for Veterans’ Claims, by (name re

dacted).

CRS Report RL33113, Veterans Affairs: Basic Eligibility for Disability Benefit Programs, by

(name redacted).

CRS Report RL33323, Veterans Affairs: Benefits for Service-Connected Disabilities, by (name re

dacted).

CRS Report RL34370, Veterans Affairs: Health Care and Benefits for Veterans Exposed to Agent

Orange, by (name redacted) and (name redacted).

CRS Report RS22897, Veterans Affairs: Historical Budget Authority, Fiscal Years 1940 Through

2008, by (name redacted).

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

CRS Report RS22561, Veterans Affairs: The U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims—Judicial

Review of VA Decision Making, by (name redacted).

CRS Report RS22666, Veterans Benefits: Federal Employment Assistance, by (name redacted).

CRS Report RL33985, Veterans’ Benefits: Issues in the 110th Congress, coordinated by (name red

acted).

CRS Report RL33992, Veterans Benefits: Merchant Seamen, by (name redacted) and (name redacte

d) .

CRS Report RS22902, Veterans Benefits: An Overview, by (name redacted), (name redacted)

, and (name redacted).

CRS Report RL34626, Veterans’ Benefits: Benefits Available for Disabled Veterans, by (name reda

cted) and (name redacted).

CRS Report RS22804, Veterans’ Benefits: Pension Benefit Programs, by (name redacted) and

(name redacted).

CRS Report RL34627, Veterans’ Benefits: The Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment

Program, by (name redacted) and (name redacted).

CRS Report RL33993, Veterans’ Health Care Issues, by (name redacted) .

Selected Websites

House Committee on Appropriations

http://appropriations.house.gov/

Senate Committee on Appropriations

http://appropriations.senate.gov/

House Committee on Armed Services

http://www.house.gov/hasc/

Senate Committee on Armed Services

http://armed-services.senate.gov/

House Committee on Veterans Affairs

http://veterans.house.gov/

Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs

http://veterans.senate.gov/

CRS Appropriations Appropriation s Status Table

http://www.crs.gov/Pages/appover.aspx

Congressional Budget Office

http://www.cbo.gov/

Congressional Research Service

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations

Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission (BRAC Commission)

http://www.brac.gov

Government Accountability Office

http://www.gao.gov/

Author Contact Information

(name redacted)

Specialist in National Defense

/redacted/@crs.loc.gov, 7-....

(name redacted)

Specialist in Veterans Policy

/redacted/@crs.loc.gov, 7-....

(name redacted)

Specialist in Social Policy

/redacted/@crs.loc.gov, 7-....

Congressional Research Service

EveryCRSReport.com

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) is a federal legislative branch agency, housed inside the

Library of Congress, charged with providing the United States Congress non-partisan advice on

issues that may come before Congress.

EveryCRSReport.com republishes CRS reports that are available to all Congressional staff. The

reports are not classified, and Members of Congress routinely make individual reports available to

the public.

Prior to our republication, we redacted names, phone numbers and email addresses of analysts

who produced the reports. We also added this page to the report. We have not intentionally made

any other changes to any report published on EveryCRSReport.com.

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 permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or

otherwise use copyrighted material.

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' institutional role.

EveryCRSReport.com is not a government website and is not affiliated with CRS. We do not claim

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.