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

Congressional research reportMay 12, 2015

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and

Related Agencies: FY2015 Appropriations

(name redacted), Coordinator

Acting Section Research Manager

(name redacted)

Specialist in Veterans Policy

(name redacted)

Analyst in Disability Policy

May 12, 2015

Congressional Research Service

7-....

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of additional new budget authority, and added to that unexpired appropriations rescinded from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

Markup

H.R. 4486

House

Senate

04/03/2014

05/20/2014

House

Report

H.Rept.

113-416

House

Passage

H.R. 4486

04/30/2014

Conference

Report

Approval

Senate

Report

Senate

Passage

Conf.

Report

House

Senate

S.Rept.

113-196

—

Public

Law

H.R.

83,

Div. I

P.L.

113235

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.

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 (name redacted) and (name redacted)

Congressional Research Service

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

Markup

House

Senate

House

Report

H.R. 4435

4/30/14 5/20/14 and H.Rept. 113and 5/1/14

5/21/14

446

House

Passage

H.R.

4435

5/25/14

Final Bill

H.R. 3979

Senate

Report

S. 2410

S.Rept. 113176

Report

see

Note

House

Senate

12/4/14

12/12/14

Public

Law

P.L. 113291

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 bill,

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

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.”

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

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 dollars

Account

Request

Authorization

Military Construction, Army

539,427

543,427

Military Construction, Navy

1,018,772

993,199

811,774

846,174

2,061,890

1,962,890

Chemical Demilitarization Construction, Defense

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

Family Housing, Operation and Maintenance

350,976

Family Housing, Operation and Maintenance, Air Force

327,747

Family Housing Construction, Navy and Marine Corps

16,412

Family Housing, Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide

61,100

DOD Family Housing Improvement Program

1,662

Base Realignment and Closure, Army

84,417

Base Realignment and Closure, Navy

94,692

Military Construction, Air Force

Military Construction, Defense-Wide

(...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

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

Account

Request

Base Realignment and Closure, Air Force

Total Military Construction

Authorization

90,976

6,557,447

6,551,843

46,000

220,410

Military Construction for Overseas Contingency Operations

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 longestablished 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.

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

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

The new medical facility will replace the nearby Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, originally established in 1953.

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.

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

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.

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.

The Chemical Weapons Convention is discussed in detail in CRS Report RL31559, Proliferation Control Regimes:

Background and Status, coordinated by (name redacted); CRS Report RL33865,

Arms Control and

Nonproliferation: A Catalog of Treaties and Agreements, by (name redacted), (name redacted), and (name redacted);

CRS Report RL31502, Nuclear, Biological, Chemical, and Missile Proliferation Sanctions: Selected Current Law, by

(name redacted); and CRS Report RL32158,

Chemical Weapons Convention: Issues for Congress, by (name

redacted), among other CRS Products.

Congressional Research Service

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.

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

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.

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.

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).

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

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.

The accompanying JES noted that DOD had already provided such certification to the committees of defense. JES,

p. 317.

Congressional Research Service

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

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:

This reflects the execution of an existing reversionary provision.

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

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)