# FY2026 NDAA: Military Construction and Housing Authorizations

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/crs%3AR48899

## Record

- **Collection:** Congressional research report
- **Document type:** Reports
- **Published:** April 8, 2026
- **Citation:** R48899

## Text

FY2026 NDAA: Military Construction and
Housing Authorizations
April 8, 2026

Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
R48899

SUMMARY

FY2026 NDAA: Military Construction and
Housing Authorizations

R48899
April 8, 2026
Andrew Tilghman

Analyst in U.S. Defense
The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for FY2026 authorized funding for
Infrastructure Policy
the Department of Defense (DOD) military construction and family housing programs,
and included policy provisions that may impact the management and oversight of these
programs. (DOD is “using a secondary Department of War designation,” under
Executive Order 14347 dated September 5, 2025.) The FY2026 NDAA authorized 4.4%
more for military construction (MILCON) and family housing than the amount the President requested in his
FY2026 budget submission to Congress. The FY2026 NDAA included several provisions that gave DOD
expanded authorities for executing military construction contracts. Other provisions may affect the Defense
Community Infrastructure Program (DCIP), which is a DOD-run grant program that provides funding for local
government entities in communities surrounding military installations to support civilian infrastructure projects
that may in some way enhance military readiness. The law also included provisions that may affect the funding
and oversight of military housing programs. Among those provisions are

•
•
•
•

repeal of statutory requirements for construction standards intended to reduce risk of terrorist
attacks;
new authorities giving DOD more flexibility for MILCON contracting;
expanded eligibility for grant programs supporting communities surrounding military
installations, and
additional requirements for DOD’s management of the privatized housing programs.

During the legislative process, the Senate-passed version of an NDAA proposed to change the way Congress
provides funding for military infrastructure by shifting Facilities Sustainment Restoration and Modernization
(FSRM) funding from DOD’s Operation and Maintenance (O&M) accounts into the accounts for MILCON. That
proposed change was not included in the version of the legislation that was ultimately enacted.

Congressional Research Service

FY2026 NDAA: Military Construction and Housing Authorizations

Contents
Overview ......................................................................................................................................... 1
Debates on Facilities Sustainment Restoration and Modernization (FSRM) Funding ............. 3
Overview ............................................................................................................................. 3
Legislative Action ............................................................................................................... 4
Selected Policy Provisions .............................................................................................................. 5
General Provisions .................................................................................................................... 5
Defense Community Infrastructure Program ............................................................................ 6
MILCON Contracting ............................................................................................................... 6
Housing ..................................................................................................................................... 7

Tables
Table 1. FY2026 NDAA Authorizations for Military Construction and Family Housing .............. 2
Table 2. FY2026 NDAA Authorizations for Facilities Sustainment, Restoration and
Modernization (FSRM) ................................................................................................................ 4

Contacts
Author Information.......................................................................................................................... 8

Congressional Research Service

FY2026 NDAA: Military Construction and Housing Authorizations

Overview
Department of Defense (DOD) military construction and family housing programs fund
infrastructure to support military operations and servicemembers around the world. (DOD is
“using a secondary Department of War designation,” under Executive Order 14347 dated
September 5, 2025.) The Trump Administration’s FY2026 budget submission to Congress
requested a total of $18.893 billion in discretionary funding for military construction (MILCON)
and family housing.1 Congress typically authorizes MILCON funding for construction of new
military facilities, separate and distinct from Facilities Sustainment Restoration and
Modernization (FSRM) funding, which DOD uses to maintain existing facilities.2
The House Armed Services Committee (HASC) reported on August 19 an FY2026 version of a
defense authorization bill (H.R. 3838) titled the Streamlining Procurement for Effective
Execution and Delivery and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 and issued
a committee report for the bill (H.Rept. 119-231). The Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC)
on July 15 reported a defense authorization bill (S. 2296) titled the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026, as well as an accompanying committee report (S.Rept.
119-39).3 Congress enacted a final version (S. 1071), with a conference committee joint
explanatory statement on December 18, 2025, and President Trump signed the enacted version of
the FY2026 NDAA (P.L. 119-60).4 The law provided $19.737 billion for DOD’s military
construction and family housing programs, which is about 4.4% more than the President’s
requested amount (see Table 1).
The FY2026 NDAA included policy provisions that may impact the management and oversight
of military construction and family housing programs. The law included several provisions that
gave DOD expanded authorities for executing military construction contracts. Other provisions
may impact the Defense Community Infrastructure Program (DCIP), which is a DOD-run grant
program that provides funding for local government entities in communities surrounding military
installations to support civilian infrastructure projects that may in some way enhance military
readiness. The law also included provisions that could affect the funding and oversight of military
housing programs.
Appropriations for MILCON and family housing programs in the amount of $19.737 billion were
provided in the Continuing Appropriations, Agriculture, Legislative Branch, Military

1 Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), Military Construction, Family

Housing, and Base Realignment and Closure Program (C-1), June 2025, p. iv, https://comptroller.defense.gov/
Portals/45/Documents/defbudget/FY2026/FY2026_c1.pdf. (Note that the Under Secretary of Defense is using “Under
Secretary of War” as a “secondary title” under Executive Order 14347 dated September 5, 2025.)
2 FSRM is typically contained in DOD’s Operation and Maintenance (O&M). For additional information about military
infrastructure funding, see CRS In Focus IF12773, Defense Primer: Military Infrastructure Funding, by Andrew
Tilghman.
3 The House passed H.R. 3838 and the Senate passed S. 2296. For additional information about legislative activity
related to the FY2026 NDAA, see CRS Insight IN12653, FY2026 NDAA: Status of Legislative Activity, by Valerie
Heitshusen and Daniel M. Gettinger.
4 “Joint Explanatory Material Statement Submitted by Mr. Rogers of Alabama, Chair of the House Committee on
Armed Services, on S. 1071,” Congressional Record, vol. 171, no. 208 (December 10, 2025),
https://www.congress.gov/119/crec/2025/12/10/171/208/CREC-2025-12-10-pt2-PgH5571-2.pdf. For additional
information about the FY2026, see CRS Insight IN12653, FY2026 NDAA: Status of Legislative Activity, by Valerie
Heitshusen and Daniel M. Gettinger. Also see CRS Insight IN12641, FY2026 NDAA: Summary of Funding
Authorizations, by Daniel M. Gettinger and Cameron M. Keys.

Congressional Research Service

1

FY2026 NDAA: Military Construction and Housing Authorizations

Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Extensions Act, 2026 (P.L. 119-37).5 For more information
about the FY2026 appropriations for MILCON and family housing, see CRS Insight IN12622,
FY2026 Military Construction Appropriations: A Summary.
Table 1. FY2026 NDAA Authorizations for
Military Construction and Family Housing
(Discretionary funding, in thousands of dollars)
Account

FY2026
Request

HASCpassed
H.R. 3838

Senate-passed
S. 2296 a

P.L. 119-60

Military Construction, Army

2,173,959

2,248,759

8,477,672

2,072,659

Military Construction, Navy

6,012,677

6,574,987

14,517,515

6,772,465

Military Construction, Air Force

3,721,473

3,963,193

7,906,432

3,394,773

Military Construction, Defense-wide

3,792,301

2,521,871

2,702,728

2,976,120

Military Construction, Army
National Guard

151,880

303,680

1,760,585

430,230

Military Construction, Air National
Guard

188,646

249,646

1,304,172

810,746

Military Construction, Army Reserve

42,239

117,839

669,161

207,239

Military Construction, Navy and
Marine Corps Reserve

2,255

52,255

216,877

52,255

Military Construction, Air Force
Reserve

60,458

63,658

309,260

123,658

NATO Security Investment Program

481,832

481,832

531,832

531,832

1,854,862

1,854,862

1,754,862

1,754,862

460,161

410,161

460,161

0

0

150,000

150,000

18,892,743

18,892,743

40,711,257

19,737,000

Family Housing b
Base Realignment and Closure
(BRAC)
INDOPACIFIC Command
Total

410,161

Source: For FY2026 request, see Construction Programs, Department of Defense Fiscal Year 2026, Office of
the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), p. iv, https://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/
Documents/defbudget/FY2026/FY2026_c1.pdf#page=5. For House-passed budget, see Section 4601 from H.R.
3838, https://www.congress.gov/119/bills/hr3838/BILLS-119hr3838eh.pdf#page=1749. For Senate bill, see Section
4601 from S.2296, https://www.congress.gov/119/bills/s2296/BILLS-119s2296es.pdf#page=1823. For enacted
budget, see P.L. 119-60, Section 4601, pp. 816-837, https://www.congress.gov/119/plaws/publ60/PLAW119publ60.pdf. (Note that the Under Secretary of Defense is using “Under Secretary of War” as a “secondary
title” under Executive Order 14347 dated September 5, 2025.)
Note:
a. Budget data for S. 2296 include funding for FSRM programs within the military construction accounts.
b. Family Housing budget numbers reflect amounts provided for Family Housing Construction accounts, Family
Housing Operation and Maintenance accounts, the Family Housing Improvement Fund (FHIF), and the
Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund (UHIF).

5 See Joint Explanatory Statement, Congressional Record, Senate, vol. 171, part 189 (November 9, 2025), pp. S8098-

S8111, https://www.congress.gov/119/crec/2025/11/09/171/189/CREC-2025-11-09.pdf#page=77.

Congressional Research Service

2

FY2026 NDAA: Military Construction and Housing Authorizations

Debates on Facilities Sustainment Restoration and Modernization
(FSRM) Funding
Overview
The condition of military infrastructure, and oversight of funding for such infrastructure, has been
an issue of concern for some Members in the 118th and 119th Congresses. For FY2025, DOD data
showed an estimate of “deferred maintenance and repairs” of military infrastructure totaling $278
billion.6 Some defense officials and Members of Congress have said the deferred maintenance
backlog poses a risk to military readiness.7 Both DOD budget requests and appropriations enacted
by Congress have periodically funded FSRM at levels below what DOD considers to be
necessary.8 The NDAA for FY2025 set new minimum requirements for the military departments
to invest certain levels of FSRM funding.9 Those minimum requirements are scheduled to begin
in FY2027.
Congress previously has provided funding to support military infrastructure primarily through
two separate and distinct accounts: MILCON funding to support construction of new or expanded
facilities, and FSRM for maintenance of existing facilities. In the past, Congress has authorized
MILCON funding within MILCON accounts and appropriated that funding within MILCON
accounts as part of a Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies (MILCONVA) Act. For FSRM, Congress has in the past authorized FSRM activities within Operation and
Maintenance (O&M) accounts and appropriated that funding within O&M accounts in a Defense
Appropriations Act.
Congress in the past has authorized MILCON and FSRM with different expiration dates that
impact how long each type of funding is available to DOD. While MILCON and FSRM accounts
are budgetarily and legally separate and distinct, some infrastructure managers and budget
planners may consider them interrelated because both provide support for infrastructure and, in
some instances, investment from one account may diminish the need for spending from the other.
For example, when DOD identifies a need for additional infrastructure, DOD officials may
evaluate whether the need is best met by planning a new MILCON project, or investing FSRM
funding in the improvement of an existing facility.10

6 Department of Defense, Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 Agency Financial Report (AFR), December 2025, p. 207,

https://comptroller.war.gov/Portals/45/Documents/afr/fy2025/DoD_FY25_Agency_Financial_Report.pdf#page=207;
For prior year data, see GAO, Defense Infrastructure: DOD Should Better Manage Risks Posed by Deferred Facility
Maintenance, GAO-22-104481, January 2022, p. 21, https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-22-104481.pdf.
7
See for example, Sen. Roger Wicker, 21st Century Peace Through Strength: A Generational Investment in the United
States Military, Senate Armed Services Committee, May 29, 2024, p. 34, https://www.wicker.senate.gov/
services/files/BC957888-0A93-432F-A49E-6202768A9CE0. Also see House Armed Services Committee, “Ranking
Member John Garamendi Opening Statement for Readiness Subcommittee Hearing: “State of DoD Housing and Aging
Infrastructure,” press release, February 7, 2024, https://democrats-armedservices.house.gov/2024/2/ranking-memberjohn-garamendi-opening-statement-for-readiness-hearing.
8 U.S. Government Accountability Office, DEFENSE INFRASTRUCTURE DOD Should Better Manage Risks Posed by
Deferred Facility Maintenance, GAO-22-104481, January 2022, p. 20, https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-22-104481.pdf.
9 See P.L. 118-159, Section 2841, codified as Title 10, Section 2680.
10 For more information, see CRS In Focus IF12773, Defense Primer: Military Infrastructure Funding, by Andrew
Tilghman.

Congressional Research Service

3

FY2026 NDAA: Military Construction and Housing Authorizations

Legislative Action
During the FY2026 legislative process, the Senate-passed version of an FY2026 NDAA that, had
it been enacted, would have changed the structure of the defense budget components that support
military infrastructure. The Senate-passed version of an FY2026 NDAA would have authorized
FSRM funding within DOD’s MILCON accounts instead of O&M accounts (Table 2). That bill
would have authorized a total of $40.711 billion for MILCON, and family housing (a set of
accounts sometimes referred to collectively as MILCON) plus FSRM. Specifically, the bill would
have authorized $21.054 billion for the military construction and family housing accounts and an
additional $19.658 billion for FSRM.11 The change could have altered the duration of funding
authorizations because past FSRM authorizations in the O&M accounts have expired at the end of
the current fiscal year, meaning DOD has to “use it or lose it.” Authorizations provided under
MILCON accounts have been typically available for obligation for three years12, which allows
more flexibility for DOD to plan and execute multiyear construction projects.13 The Senate bill’s
proposed shift of FSRM funding into MILCON accounts was not included in the enacted public
law. (Nor was a change of this nature included in defense appropriation legislation proposed and
enacted for FY2026.14)
Table 2. FY2026 NDAA Authorizations for
Facilities Sustainment, Restoration and Modernization (FSRM)
(Discretionary funding, in thousands of dollars)
Account

FY2026 Request
(within O&M)

HASC-passed
H.R. 3838
(within O&M)

Senate-passed
S. 2296
(within MILCON)

P.L. 119-60
(within O&M)

Army FSRM

6,159,744

6,179,744

6,459,744

6,179,744

Navy SRM

3,991,438

3,991,438

4,191,438

3,991,438

Marine Corps SRM

2,079,890

2,079,890

2,179,890

2,079,890

11 Within that topline authorization, the Senate bill would have authorized $21.054 billion for the MILCON and family

housing programs typically included in the defense budget’s Division B. That would have been 11.4 percent more than
the amount requested in the President’s budget proposal. The Senate bill would have authorized $19.658 billion for
FSRM. The president’s budget request included $18.507 billion for FSRM funding within the O&M accounts. In effect,
the Senate bill’s $19.658 billion for FSRM would have been 6.2% more than the amount in the President’s budget
request.
12See, for example, P.L. 119-60, Section 2002, https://www.congress.gov/119/bills/s1071/BILLS119s1071enr.pdf#page=547.
13 Some defense officials and others have raised concerns that time limitations for obligation of FSRM funding pose
challenges for DOD because they limit the time DOD has to carry out the contracting process with private construction
firms. That process may include issuing a request for proposal, evaluating proposals, and negotiating a contract. A
legislative commission cited this concern in a report in 2024 as part of its comprehensive examination of DOD’s
Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) process. “Construction managers and contracting officers
are moving quickly in order to preserve the funding and not lose it, which impacts their ability to negotiate the best
possible contracts.” See The Commission on Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) Reform,
Defense Resourcing for the Future, March 2024, p. 326. https://ppbereform.senate.gov/finalreport/.
14 Hypothetically, if considered and adopted by defense appropriators and enacted by the Congress, moving FSRM
funding into MILCON accounts could have additional impacts. Appropriations for MILCON accounts typically have
been available for obligation for five years, compared to the one-year obligation window for O&M appropriations. In
terms of legislative process, the proposal to move FSRM funding into MILCON accounts would also place both
infrastructure accounts within the purview of the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs and Related Agencies
(MILCON-VA) Act and the appropriations committees’ MILCON-VA subcommittees. That would differ from the
current practice of providing FSRM funding through the defense appropriations bills, which come from the
appropriations committees’ defense subcommittees.

Congressional Research Service

4

FY2026 NDAA: Military Construction and Housing Authorizations

Account

FY2026 Request
(within O&M)

HASC-passed
H.R. 3838
(within O&M)

Senate-passed
S. 2296
(within MILCON)

P.L. 119-60
(within O&M)

Air Force FSRM

3,093,331

3,118,331

3,643,331

3,118,331

Space Force FSRM

557,175

557,175

557,175

557,175

Army National
Guard, FSRM

1,275,984

1,275,984

1,275,984

1,275,984

Air National Guard,
FSRM

549,496

554,496

549,496

554,496

Army Reserve,
FSRM

504,922

504,922

504,922

504,922

Navy Reserve, SRM

58,213

58,213

58,213

58,213

Marine Corps
Reserve, SRM

48,519

48,519

48,519

48,519

Air Force Reserve.
FSRM

188,802

188,802

188,802

188,802

Total

18,507,514

18,557,514

19,657,514

18,557,514

Source: For FY2026 request, see Operation and Maintenance (O-1), Department of Defense Fiscal Year 2026,
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) https://comptroller.defense.gov/Budget-Materials/
Budget2026/ House data drawn from H.R. 3838, Section 4301, pp. 1737-1744, https://www.congress.gov/119/
bills/hr3838/BILLS-119hr3838eh.pdf. Senate data drawn from S. 2296, Section 4301, pp. 1811-1811,
https://www.congress.gov/119/bills/s2296/BILLS-119s2296es.pdf. Enacted data drawn from P.L. 119-60, Section
4301, pp. 1518-1528, https://www.congress.gov/119/plaws/publ60/PLAW-119publ60.pdf. (Note that the Under
Secretary of Defense is using “Under Secretary of War” as a “secondary title” under Executive Order 14347
dated September 5, 2025.)
Notes: In budget documents and legislation, the Navy and Marine Corps do not use the word “Facilities” and
identify the line item for FSRM funding as “Sustainment, Modernization and Restoration” or “SRM.”

Selected Policy Provisions
The FY2026 NDAA contained policy provisions that may impact DOD’s management and
congressional oversight of military installations, military construction programs, and military
housing. Selected provisions are summarized below.

General Provisions
Section 2801 revises the definition of “military installation resilience” contained in Title 10,
Section 101(f)(8), of the U.S. Code, to include the capability to respond effectively to “energy or
water disruptions, or human-induced hazards with respect to the environment.”
Section 2803 directs the military departments (Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force) to
develop 20-year infrastructure improvement plans and submit them to the congressional defense
committees.
Section 2804 directs the Secretary of Defense to develop a “risk-based approach to water
management and water security” for each military installation. (The Secretary of Defense is using
“Secretary of War” as a “secondary title” under Executive Order 14347 dated September 5,
2025.)

Congressional Research Service

5

FY2026 NDAA: Military Construction and Housing Authorizations

Section 2813 increases the maximum amount that a Secretary of Defense may obligate to restore
or replace damaged or destroyed facilities under Title 10, Section 2854(c)(3), of the U.S. Code
from $100 million to $300 million.
Section 2817 directs the Secretary of Defense to implement measures intended to improve
planning and reduce errors that can cause delays and increased costs for military construction
projects. Specifically, the provision directed the Secretary to implement the recommendations
outlined in a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report published in September 2024.15
Section 2848 repeals the provision in Title 10 that directed DOD to assess the vulnerability of
military installations to terrorist attacks and to develop construction standards that are designed to
reduce the vulnerability of structures to terrorist attacks. The provision repealed, Title 10, Section
2859, of the U.S. Code, was originally enacted in 2004.
Section 2841 amends the minimum capital investment requirements for FSRM funding contained
in Title 10, Section 2860, of the U.S. Code.16

Defense Community Infrastructure Program
Section 2805 amends Title 10, Section 2391, of the U.S. Code, to authorize the Secretary of
Defense to make grants, conclude cooperative agreements, and supplement other Federal funds in
order to assist a State or local government in enhancing its capacities for “health care, housing
and defense critical infrastructure projects and services.”
Section 2806 amends Title 10, Section 2391, of the U.S. Code, to revise the statutory
prioritization for grants and assistance under the DCIP Program to include projects that may
enhance “the readiness of a military department or mission assurance at a military installation.”
Section 2807 amends Title 10, Section 2391, of the U.S. Code, to authorize the provision of DCIP
grants in support of demolition projects.

MILCON Contracting
Section 2802 authorizes DOD to enter into transactions other than contracts, cooperative
agreements, or grants – known as other transactions, or OT – to carry out repair and construction
of military infrastructure. OTs, in contrast to traditional procurement contracts, are exempt from
many federal procurement laws and regulations.17
Section 2808 amends 10 U.S.C. Section 2851(a) to eliminate a reference to the Army Corps of
Engineers and Naval Facilities and Engineering Command from requirements regarding
supervision of MILCON projects.
Section 2809 authorizes the use of alternative project contracting methods that may combine
design and construction under one contract, including accelerated design-build and progressive
design-build procedures, for military construction projects.
Section 2814 authorizes DOD to enter into multiyear contracts for procurement relating to certain
military construction projects. The provision stipulates that any obligation for DOD to make a
15 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Military Construction: Better Information Sharing Would Improve DOD’s

Oversight, GAO-24-106499, September 2024, https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-106499.
16 The provision in 10 U.S.C. §2680, established by the NDAA for FY2025, set new minimum requirements for the
military departments to invest certain levels of FSRM funding. See P.L. 118-159, Section 2841.
17 For additional information about other transactions, see CRS In Focus IF12856, Defense Primer: Other Transactions
(OTs), by David H. Carpenter and Alexandra G. Neenan.

Congressional Research Service

6

FY2026 NDAA: Military Construction and Housing Authorizations

payment under a contract for a fiscal year after the fiscal year in which the contract is awarded is
subject to the availability of appropriations or funds for that purpose for such later fiscal year.
Section 2816 authorizes the use of cost-plus-incentive-fee contracts for certain military
construction projects associated with the Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program.18

Housing
Section 2822 amends the requirements for annual reports that DOD provides to Congress
regarding unaccompanied housing to include information about waivers granted for “health and
safety standards,” which include “standards relating to mold, ventilation, fire safety, or other
related habitability conditions necessary to ensure safe occupancy.”
Section 2823 amends the periodic reports that DOD provides to Congress regarding DOD’s
privatized housing program, known as the Military Housing Privatization Initiative, or MHPI, to
include additional analysis of housing data and a requirement that the military departments
disaggregate certain MHPI data by military installation.
Section 2824 modifies requirements for how and when a privatized housing company can close
maintenance work orders related to privatized military housing.
Section 2825 directs privatized housing companies to provide to the Secretary of Defense
additional annual financial information, including the total amount of payments the landlords
made “pursuant to a dispute resolution process.”
Section 2826 amends the law pertaining to how the military departments may comply with the
National Historic Preservation Act (54 U.S.C. §§300101 et seq.) related to certain historic
military housing facilities.
Section 2827 directs the Secretary of Defense to submit annually to Congress data regarding the
number of servicemembers “whose rank would require that they live in military unaccompanied
housing, but that also receive a basic allowance for housing” and the total amount of housing
allowance provided to those servicemembers.
Section 2829 directs the Secretary of Defense to carry out a pilot program to assess and
implement “emerging technologies for moisture control and mitigation” in certain military
housing facilities that may be at higher risk for mold growth.
Section 2830 directs the Secretary of Defense to “develop and implement uniform guidelines for
the remediation of mold in military housing facilities.”
Section 2831 directs the Secretary of Defense to “establish a standard inspection and audit
program for privatized military housing and Government-owned military housing” that involves
“independent qualified home inspectors.”
Section 2852 directs the Secretary of Defense to implement a series of GAO recommendations
intended to address issues related to housing affordability in certain high-cost areas.19

18 For additional information about cost-plus-incentive-fee contracts, see CRS Report R48784, Types of Federal

Procurement Contracts, by Alexandra G. Neenan and Dominick A. Fiorentino, p. 10.
19 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Military Housing: DOD Should Address Critical Supply and Affordability
Challenges for Service Members, GAO-25-106208, October 2024, https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-25-106208.

Congressional Research Service

7

FY2026 NDAA: Military Construction and Housing Authorizations

Author Information
Andrew Tilghman
Analyst in U.S. Defense Infrastructure Policy

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service

R48899 · VERSION 1 · NEW

8

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/crs%3AR48899. Public record. Not legal advice.