81–414 

113TH CONGRESS REPT. 113–102 " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session Part 2 

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL 

YEAR 2014 

JUNE 11, 2013.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. MCKEON, from the Committee on Armed Services, 

submitted the following 

SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT 

[To accompany H.R. 1960] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

This supplemental report shows the cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office with respect to the bill (H.R. 1960), as reported, which was not included in part 1 of the report submitted 

by the Committee on Armed Services on June 7, 2013 (H. Rept. 

113–102, pt. 1). 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE

In compliance with clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the cost estimate prepared by the Congressional Budget Office and submitted pursuant to section 402 of 

the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 is as follows: 

JUNE 11, 2013. 

Hon. HOWARD P. ‘‘BUCK’’ MCKEON, 

Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, 

U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1960, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is David Newman. 

Sincerely, 

DOUGLAS W. ELMENDORF, 

Director. 

Enclosure. 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
2 

H.R. 1960—National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 

2014 

Summary: H.R. 1960 would authorize appropriations totaling 

$632 billion for fiscal year 2014 for the military functions of the 

Department of Defense (DoD), for certain activities of the Department of Energy (DOE), and for other purposes. That total includes 

$86 billion for the cost of overseas contingency operations, primarily in Afghanistan. In addition, H.R. 1960 would prescribe personnel strengths for each active-duty and selected-reserve component of the U.S. armed forces. CBO estimates that appropriation of 

the authorized amounts would result in outlays of $618 billion over 

the 2014–2018 period. 

The bill also contains provisions that would increase or decrease 

the costs of defense programs funded through discretionary appropriations in 2015 and future years. Those implicit authorizations 

would affect force structure, DoD compensation and benefits, DoD’s 

use of multiyear procurement authority, and other programs and 

activities. CBO has analyzed the costs of a select number of those 

authorizations and estimates they would, on a net basis, lower the 

amount of appropriations needed to implement defense programs 

relative to current law by about $9 billion over the 2015–2018 period. Those savings are not included in the total amounts of outlays 

in the previous paragraph because funding for those activities 

would be covered by specific authorizations in future years. 

In addition, H.R. 1960 contains provisions that would affect direct spending. CBO estimates that, on net, those provisions would 

decrease direct spending by $18 million over the 2014–2018 period 

and by $2 million over the 2014–2023 period. Enacting the bill 

would have an insignificant effect on revenues. Because enacting 

the legislation would affect direct spending, pay-as-you-go procedures apply. 

The bill would impose intergovernmental and private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) 

on mortgage lending institutions and state governments. CBO estimates that the costs to public entities of complying with the mandates would be small and well below the annual threshold established in UMRA for intergovernmental mandates ($75 million in 

2013, adjusted annually for inflation). CBO estimates that the costs 

to private entities of complying with the mandate would probably 

fall below the annual threshold established in UMRA for privatesector mandates ($150 million in 2013, adjusted annually for inflation). 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 1960 is summarized in Table 1. Almost all of 

the $632 billion that would be authorized by the bill is for activities 

within budget function 050 (national defense). Some authorizations, 

however, fall within other budget functions, including: $219 million 

for cemetery expenses and for activities within the Department of 

Veterans Affairs (function 700—veterans benefits and services); 

$173 million for the Maritime Administration (function 400—transportation); $68 million for the Armed Forces Retirement Home 

(function 600—income security); $20 million for the Naval Petroleum Reserves (function 270—energy); and an estimated $20 million—over the 2015–2018 period—primarily for programs within 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
3 

the Department of the Interior (function 300—natural resources 

and environment). 

The provisions that would affect direct spending are primarily for 

activities within budget functions 050, 400, 600, 700, 550 (health), 

and 650 (Social Security). 

TABLE 1—BUDGETARY IMPACT OF H.R. 1960, THE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR 

FISCAL YEAR 2014 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2014– 

2018 

SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION 

Specified Authorization of Regular Appropriations for 2014, Primarily for the Departments 

of Defense and Energy 

Authorization Level ...................................... 545,349 0 0 0 0 545,349 

Estimated Outlays ....................................... 346,613 116,014 43,302 19,336 8,122 533,387 

Estimated Authorization of Regular Appropriations for 2014 for Accrual Payments a

Estimated Authorization Level ..................... 580 0 0 0 0 580 

Estimated Outlays ....................................... 580 0 0 0 0 580 

Specified Authorization of Appropriations for 

Overseas Contingency Operations 

Authorization Level ...................................... 85,766 0 0 0 0 85,766 

Estimated Outlays ....................................... 43,345 27,417 9,531 3,179 813 84,284 

Other Authorizations of Appropriationsb

Estimated Authorization Level ..................... 0 11 3 3 3 20 

Estimated Outlays ....................................... 0 9 4 3 3 19 

Total 

Estimated Authorization Level ............ 631,695 11 3 3 3 631,715 

Estimated Outlays .............................. 390,538 143,440 52,837 22,518 8,938 618,270 

CHANGES IN DIRECT SPENDING c

Estimated Budget Authority ................................. ¥28 ¥37 4 1 5 ¥55 

Estimated Outlays ................................................ ¥26 ¥27 14 11 10 ¥18 

Notes: Except as noted below, the authorization levels in this table reflect amounts that would be specifically authorized by the bill. The 

bill also would implicitly authorize some defense activities in 2015 and future years; those authorizations are not included above (but estimates for a select number of them are shown in Table 3) because funding for those activities would be covered by specific authorizations in 

future years. 

Numbers may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

a. This authorization reflects CBO’s estimate of the added cost of certain accrual payments required under current law but not fully reflected in the amounts specifically authorized by the bill. 

b. For 2015, this authorization level has two components: an estimated $8 million for extending certain benefits to federal civilian workers 

who perform official duty in a combat zone and are employed by departments and agencies other than DoD; and an estimated $3 million for 

Department of Interior activities related to the Sikes Act. For 2016 to 2018, the authorization levels reflect estimates for implementing the 

Sikes Act. (Current law contains authorizations for those activities in 2014; thus, no authorizations for that year are reflected here.) 

c. In addition to the changes in direct spending shown above, H.R. 1960 would have effects beyond 2018. CBO estimates that over the 

2014–2023 period, H.R. 1960 would decrease direct spending by $2 million (see Table 4). 

Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that H.R. 

1960 will be enacted near the start of fiscal year 2014 and that the 

authorized and estimated amounts will be appropriated. 

Spending Subject to Appropriation 

The bill would authorize appropriations for 2014 totaling $632 

billion, of which $546 billion would be authorizations of regular appropriations for ‘‘base budget’’ costs (not directly related to overseas 

contingency operations). Of the funding that would be authorized 

for base budget costs, nearly all ($545 billion) would be specifically 

authorized as follows: $527 billion for DoD and $18 billion for 

atomic energy defense activities within DOE and for various other 

programs (see Table 2). 

The funding that would be authorized for DoD’s base budget represents an increase of $32 billion (7 percent) relative to appropriaVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:06 Jun 12, 2013 Jkt 081414 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR102P2.XXX HR102P2

PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
4 

tions enacted for 2013 and adjusted to reflect the effects of the 

March 2013 sequestration. Authorized funding would increase for 

all major categories of spending: operation and maintenance would 

increase by $15 billion (8 percent), procurement by $10 billion (11 

percent), research and development by $5 billion (7 percent), military personnel by $2 billion (2 percent), and military construction 

and family housing by $1 billion (11 percent). For those comparisons, the amount authorized for DoD’s base budget also reflects 

CBO’s estimate of the additional amount needed—$580 million—to 

fully fund certain accrual payments required under current law but 

not fully reflected in the amounts specifically authorized by the 

bill. 

For DOE and other programs, the $18 billion that would be au- thorized for 2014 represents a $2 billion (10 percent) increase over 

the level appropriated for 2013, adjusted to reflect the March sequestration. The $86 billion that would be authorized for 2014 overseas contingency operations represents a $3 billion (4 percent) increase relative to the post-sequestration amounts for 2013. Authorized levels 

would increase by $10 billion (17 percent) for operation and maintenance, but would decrease by $4 billion (31 percent) and $2 billion (22 percent) for military personnel and procurement, respectively. Changes in other accounts would be less than $0.1 billion. 

TABLE 2—SPECIFIED AUTHORIZATIONS IN H.R. 1960 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2014–2018 

Authorization of Regular Appropriations 

Department of Defense 

Military Personnel a

Authorization Level .................... 136,896 0 0 0 0 136,896 

Estimated Outlays ..................... 127,490 8,126 587 38 0 136,241 

Operation and Maintenance 

Authorization Level .................... 208,558 0 0 0 0 208,558 

Estimated Outlays ..................... 149,151 43,309 9,453 2,402 823 205,138 

Procurement 

Authorization Level .................... 100,723 0 0 0 0 100,723 

Estimated Outlays ..................... 21,261 31,245 23,853 13,405 5,350 95,114 

Research and Development 

Authorization Level .................... 68,079 0 0 0 0 68,079 

Estimated Outlays ..................... 33,444 24,604 5,075 2,234 1,318 66,675 

Military Construction and Family 

Housing 

Authorization Level .................... 10,640 0 0 0 0 10,640 

Estimated Outlays ..................... 1,249 3,387 3,241 1,258 636 9,771 

Revolving Funds 

Authorization Level .................... 2,277 0 0 0 0 2,277 

Estimated Outlays ..................... 1,853 334 48 27 10 2,272 

General Transfer Authority 

Authorization Level .................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Estimated Outlays ..................... 175 ¥70 ¥53 ¥35 ¥17 0 

Subtotal, Department of Defense 

Authorization Level ........... 527,173 0 0 0 0 527,173 

Estimated Outlays ............ 334,623 110,935 42,204 19,329 8,120 515,211 

Atomic Energy Defense Activities 

Authorization Level b .................. 17,696 0 0 0 0 17,696 

Estimated Outlays ..................... 11,600 5,008 1,082 4 2 17,696 

Other Programs 

Authorization Level c .................. 480 0 0 0 0 480 

Estimated Outlays ..................... 390 71 16 3 0 480 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
5 

TABLE 2—SPECIFIED AUTHORIZATIONS IN H.R. 1960—Continued 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2014–2018 

Subtotal, Authorization of Regular Appropriations 

Authorization Level ........... 545,349 0 0 0 0 545,349 

Estimated Outlays ............ 346,613 116,014 43,302 19,336 8,122 533,387 

Authorization of Appropriations for Overseas 

Contingency Operations 

Military Personnel 

Authorization Level a ........................... 9,853 0 0 0 0 9,853 

Estimated Outlays .............................. 9,222 602 5 1 0 9,830 

Operation and Maintenance 

Authorization Level ............................. 68,362 0 0 0 0 68,362 

Estimated Outlays .............................. 32,151 24,116 7,919 2,641 635 67,462 

Procurement 

Authorization Level ............................. 7,169 0 0 0 0 7,169 

Estimated Outlays .............................. 1,743 2,598 1,561 530 183 6,615 

Research and Development 

Authorization Level ............................. 117 0 0 0 0 117 

Estimated Outlays .............................. 55 45 10 3 1 114 

Working Capital Funds 

Authorization Level ............................. 265 0 0 0 0 265 

Estimated Outlays .............................. 99 86 58 19 1 263 

Special Transfer Authority 

Authorization Level .................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Estimated Outlays ..................... 75 ¥30 ¥23 ¥15 ¥8 0 

Subtotal, Overseas Contingency 

Operations 

Authorization Level ........... 85,766 0 0 0 0 85,766 

Estimated Outlays ............ 43,345 27,417 9,531 3,179 813 84,284 

Total Specified Authorizations 

Authorization Level ...................................... 631,115 0 0 0 0 631,115 

Estimated Outlays ....................................... 389,958 143,431 52,833 22,515 8,935 617,671 

Notes: 

This table summarizes the authorizations of appropriations explicitly stated in the bill in specified amounts. Various provisions of the bill also would authorize activities and provide authorities that would result in additional costs in 2015 and in future years. Because the bill would not specifically authorize appropriations to cover those costs, they are not reflected in this table. Rather, Table 3 contains the esti- mated costs of a select number of those provisions. 

Numbers may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

a. The authorizations of appropriations for military personnel (in sections 421 and 1505) include $6,677 million and $164 million, respec- tively, for accrual payments to the Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Care Fund. CBO estimates, however, that section 421 understates—by 

$580 million—the amount required for those payments, thus that amount has been added to the estimated cost of the bill as reflected in Table 1. b. This authorization is primarily for atomic energy activities within the Department of Energy. 

c. This authorization is for veterans benefits and services ($219 million), the Maritime Administration ($173 million), the Armed Forces Re- tirement Home ($68 million), and the Naval Petroleum Reserves ($20 million). The authorized level reflected in this estimate for the Maritime Administration does not include the amount specified in the bill for payments to shipping companies under the maritime security program because that program is authorized under current law for 2014. 

H.R. 1960 also contains provisions that would affect the cost of 

various discretionary programs in future years. Most of those provisions would change end strength, military compensation and benefits, and acquisition programs using multiyear procurement authorities. The estimated effects of a select number of those provisions are shown in Table 3 and discussed below. The following discussion does not address the timing of outlays from those estimated 

authorizations. All such spending would be subject to appropriations action consistent with the bill. 

Force Structure. The bill would affect the force structure of the 

various military services by setting end-strength levels for 2014 

and modifying the minimum end-strength levels authorized in permanent law. 

Under title IV, the authorized end strengths in 2014 for activeduty personnel and personnel in the selected reserves would total 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
6 

1,361,400 and 842,700, respectively. Of those selected reservists, 

78,386 would serve on active duty in support of the reserves. In 

total, active-duty end strength would decrease by 40,160 and selected-reserve end strength would decrease by 8,180 when compared with levels authorized under current law for 2014. The specified end-strength levels for each component of the armed forces are 

detailed below. 

Active-Duty End Strengths. Compared with end-strength levels 

authorized under current law for 2014, section 401 would authorize 

reductions in active-duty personnel across three of the four services: 32,100 fewer for the Army; 7,100 fewer for the Marine Corps; 

and 1,860 fewer for the Air Force. In contrast, the Navy would increase strength by 900. CBO estimates that the total net reduction 

in active-duty personnel of 40,160 servicemembers would decrease 

costs to DoD by $24.9 billion over the 2014–2018 period, assuming 

appropriations are reduced by the same amount. Those decreases 

reflect reductions in pay and benefits from fewer personnel, as well 

as reductions in costs for operation and maintenance. 

Selected-Reserve End Strengths. Sections 411 and 412 would authorize the end strengths for reserve components, including those 

who serve on active duty in support of the reserves. Under this bill, 

four of the six reserve components would experience decreases in 

end strength: 4,000 fewer for the Army National Guard, 3,400 

fewer for the Navy Reserve, 300 fewer for the Air National Guard, 

and 480 fewer for the Air Force Reserve. The other reserve components would see no change to the levels already authorized for 

2014. Those numbers include a small net increase (21 reservists) 

in the number of full-time reservists who serve on active duty in 

support of the reserves compared with the authorized end-strength 

levels for 2014. CBO estimates that the net result of implementing 

those provisions would be a decrease in costs for salaries and expenses for selected reservists of $1.1 billion over the 2014–2018 period, assuming appropriations are reduced by the same amount. 

Reserve Technicians End Strengths. Section 413 would authorize 

the minimum end-strength levels for dual-status military technicians, who are federal civilian personnel required to maintain 

membership in a selected-reserve component as a condition of their 

employment. The bill would lower the minimum number of technicians required by 276 relative to the levels currently authorized. 

CBO estimates that such a reduction would decrease costs for civilian salaries and expenses by $131 million over the 2014–2018 period. 

TABLE 3—ESTIMATED AUTHORIZATIONS OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR SELECTED PROVISIONS IN 

H.R. 1960 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2014 a 2015 2016 2017 2018 2014–2018 

FORCE STRUCTURE 

Active-Duty End Strengths ................................... ¥3,037 ¥4,808 ¥5,468 ¥5,712 ¥5,900 ¥24,925 

Selected-Reserve End Strengths .......................... ¥91 ¥203 ¥252 ¥281 ¥289 ¥1,116 

Reserve Technicians End Strengths ..................... ¥13 ¥28 ¥29 ¥30 ¥31 ¥131 

Active Status for Inactive National Guard Members .................................................................. 8 26 44 64 63 205 

COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS 

Expiring Bonuses and Allowances ....................... 935 582 336 293 150 2,296 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
7 

TABLE 3—ESTIMATED AUTHORIZATIONS OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR SELECTED PROVISIONS IN 

H.R. 1960—Continued 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2014 a 2015 2016 2017 2018 2014–2018 

TRICARE Prime Service Areas .............................. 164 154 146 139 132 735 

Civilian Benefits in a Combat Zone, Department 

of Defense b ..................................................... 0 72 0 0 0 72 

OTHER PROVISIONS 

Multiyear Procurement Contracts 

C–130J Aircraft Variants ............................. 1,594 1,044 1,815 800 537 5,789 

E–2D Aircraft ............................................... 965 935 981 1,003 699 4,582 

Ground-based Interceptors .......................... 367 364 375 384 393 1,883 

East Coast Missile Defense Site .......................... 700 700 700 100 100 2,300 

Increased Cost Cap for CVN–78 Aircraft Carrier 132 777 0 0 0 909 

Repair of Vessels in Foreign Shipyards ............... 36 36 37 38 39 186 

Incrementally Funded Construction Projects ........ 373 195 0 0 0 568 

Mental Health Assessments ................................. 25 45 45 45 50 210 

Sikes Act, Department of Defense b ..................... 0 2 2 2 2 6 

Notes: Amounts shown in this table for 2015 through 2018 are not included in amounts that would be specifically authorized by the bill and would be covered by specific authorizations for defense programs in future years (and therefore are not reflected in Tables 1 and 2). 

Figures shown here may not add up to numbers in the text because of rounding. 

a. Amounts shown in this table for 2014 are included in amounts specifically authorized to be appropriated by the bill (as reflected in 

Table 2 and summarized in Table 1). 

b. This provision also would increase costs for agencies other than DoD. Those costs are included in Table 1 under ‘‘Other Authorizations of Appropriations.’’ 

Coast Guard Reserve End Strength. The bill also would authorize 

an end-strength level of 9,000 servicemembers in 2014 for the 

Coast Guard Reserve. Because this authorization is the same as 

that under current law, CBO does not estimate any change in costs 

for this provision. 

Active Status for Inactive National Guard Members. Section 513 

would provide temporary authority to create a new active status for 

certain members of the inactive National Guard (ING). Members 

transferred to that status would continue to receive their current 

level of pay and benefits; however, they would no longer count towards the end strength level for Selected Reserve Personnel. The 

bill would limit the number of guardsmen in the new active status 

to 4,000 at any time. 

Based on information from DoD, CBO expects that the Army National Guard (ARNG) would use this authority to transfer to the 

new status soldiers who are not eligible to be deployed because 

they are being evaluated under the Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES). As of April of this year, there were a little over 

4,000 ARNG members in IDES being evaluated for their injuries 

or illnesses to determine whether they will return to duty or be discharged. 

Based on information from DoD, CBO estimates that the ARNG 

would implement this authority starting in April of 2014, and that 

the number of members on the active status list of the ING would 

grow from about 1,000 members in 2014 to 4,000 by the end of 

2017. That number would then decline to zero by December 31, 

2018, when the authority would expire. By omitting those members 

of the ARNG from counting toward Selected Reserve end strength 

set in section 411 of this bill, and thus making room under the 

limit to hire additional part-time ARNG members, CBO estimates 

that this provision would effectively raise the authorized end 

strength by that same amount. CBO estimates that the resulting 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
8 

1The military’s health care program, TRICARE, comprises nine health plans that cover uniformed servicemembers, retirees, and their dependents in the United States and abroad. Two 

of the most commonly used plans are TRICARE Prime—a managed care option, and TRICARE 

Standard—a fee-for-service option. Medicare-eligible TRICARE beneficiaries use the TRICAREfor-Life benefit, which acts as Medicare wrap-around coverage. 

increase in ARNG personnel would cost $205 million over the 

2014–2018 period. 

Compensation and Benefits. H.R. 1960 contains several provisions that would affect compensation and benefits for uniformed 

personnel and civilian employees of DoD. The bill would specifically 

authorize regular appropriations of $137 billion for the costs of 

military pay and allowances in 2014. For related costs resulting 

from overseas contingency operations (primarily in Afghanistan), 

the bill would authorize the appropriation of an additional $10 billion for 2014. 

Expiring Bonuses and Allowances. Sections 611 through 616 

would extend for another year DoD’s authority to enter agreements 

to pay certain bonuses and allowances to military personnel. The 

authority to enter into such agreements is currently scheduled to 

expire on December 31, 2013. Some bonuses are paid in a lump 

sum, while others are paid in annual or monthly installments over 

the period of obligated service. Based on DoD’s budget submission 

for fiscal year 2014, CBO estimates that extending that authority 

for one year would cost $2.3 billion over the 2014–2018 period. 

TRICARE Prime Service Areas. At the beginning of fiscal year 

2014, several TRICARE Prime Service areas are scheduled to be 

eliminated. About 170,000 Prime beneficiaries will need to convert 

to TRICARE Standard, obtain a waiver to use TRICARE Prime 

providers in a nearby service area, or use some other form of 

health coverage (such as employer sponsored insurance).1 Section 

711 would require DoD to continue to make the TRICARE Prime 

benefit available to beneficiaries currently residing in those affected areas. DoD would be allowed to phase-out Prime in those 

areas as those beneficiaries either move, opt out of Prime, or reach 

the age of eligibility for TRICARE-for-Life. 

Because it has low out-of-pocket costs, TRICARE Prime is typically more expensive to DoD than other health options, including 

TRICARE Standard; thus, any attempt to maintain or expand enrollment in TRICARE Prime would result in added costs to the government. Based on an analysis of the proximity of the affected 

Prime service areas to areas unaffected by the new policy, CBO estimates that about a third of the affected beneficiaries will seek the 

waivers available under current law and travel the added distance 

to remain in Prime. Therefore, the net cost to the government of 

health benefits for those people will remain approximately the 

same. For the other two-thirds of that population, CBO estimates 

that the requirement to maintain the Prime benefit would result in 

added costs for the government. 

The average annual cost for a Prime beneficiary is about $5,400. 

CBO estimates that eliminating Prime would decrease that cost by 

over 25 percent. That estimate takes into account the lower costs 

for Standard, as well as the possibility that those beneficiaries 

would begin using another source of funding—such as employersponsored insurance—for part or all of their health care costs. Initially, CBO estimates that enacting section 711 would cost DoD 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
9 

more than $150 million annually, although costs would decrease 

over time as the affected beneficiaries drop out of Prime for various 

reasons. In total, CBO estimates that implementing section 711 

would increase the need for appropriations by $735 million over the 

2014–2018 period. 

In addition, CBO estimates section 711 would increase mandatory spending for retiree health benefits of the Other Uniformed 

Services. A discussion of those costs can be found in the ‘‘Direct 

Spending’’ section of this estimate. 

Civilian Benefits in a Combat Zone. Section 1102 would extend 

for one year the authority to grant certain benefits to federal civilian employees who perform official duty in a combat zone. Those 

benefits, which expire under current law on September 30, 2014, 

include death gratuities, paid leave and travel for one trip home, 

and up to three leave periods per year for rest and recuperation. 

Based on information from DoD and the Office of Personnel Management, CBO estimates that about 5,000 civilian employees of 

DoD and 600 employees of other federal agencies will work in a 

designated combat zone in 2015 and, under this provision, would 

receive an average benefit that would cost about $14,500 a year. 

Thus, CBO estimates that in 2015, section 1102 would increase the 

costs of civilian employees of DoD by about $72 million and of other 

federal employees by $8 million. 

Other Provisions. Various other provisions of H.R. 1960 would 

increase the cost of discretionary programs over the 2014–2018 period, CBO estimates. 

Multiyear Procurement Contracts. The bill would authorize the 

military departments to enter multiyear procurement contracts for 

four major acquisition programs. Multiyear procurement is a special contracting method authorized in current law (title 10, United 

States Code, section 2306b) that permits the government to enter 

into contracts covering acquisitions for more than one year but not 

more than five years, even though the total funds required for all 

years are not appropriated at the time the contracts are awarded. 

Additional legislative authorization is required for multiyear contracts costing more than $500 million. 

Multiyear procurement contracts are used to acquire multiple assets—such as ships, planes, and other weapons—under one agreement. As part of such a contract, the government commits to purchase all items specified at the time the contract is signed, including those to be produced and paid for in subsequent years. Budget 

authority is provided in advance only for the cost of the items that 

will be ordered in the upcoming budget year. Because multiyear 

procurement allows a contractor to plan for more efficient production, such a contract can reduce the cost of an acquisition compared 

with the cost of buying the items through a series of annual contracts. If such contracts are cancelled before completion, an agency 

usually has useable assets, albeit fewer than were envisioned 

under the contract. 

Multiyear contracts frequently include provisions that require 

DoD to pay for unrecovered fixed costs in the event that the contract is canceled before completion. In practice, DoD does not budget for, obtain, or obligate funds sufficient to pay for those contractual commitments at the time they are incurred. Thus, should the 

contracts be cancelled at the end of the first year, DoD could owe 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
10 

the contractors for unrecovered fixed costs, but the department 

does not request budget authority for that amount. The amount of 

cancellation liability declines in subsequent years, as increasing 

portions of the fixed costs are covered by annual contract payments, falling to zero in the final year of the contract. 

CBO believes that the full cost of such liabilities should be recorded in the budget at the time they are incurred. The failure to 

request funding for cancellation liabilities may distort the resource 

allocation process by understating the cost of decisions made today 

and possibly requiring a future Congress to pay for those decisions. • Section 131 would authorize the Air Force to enter a multiyear 

contract beginning in fiscal year 2014 to purchase several variants 

of the C–130J aircraft for the Air Force and the Marine Corps. The 

C–130 is a medium-sized transport aircraft that performs a broad 

variety of airlift and support missions. CBO estimates that under 

such a contract, the Air Force would buy 72 aircraft for its active 

and reserve component squadrons and seven aircraft for the Marines over the 2014–2018 period at a cost of $5.8 billion. The services estimate that a single multiyear contract would cost about 

$600 million less than five annual contracts. • Section 121 would authorize the Navy to pursue a multiyear 

contract beginning in fiscal year 2014 to purchase E–2D Advanced 

Hawkeye aircraft. The E–2D is an airborne command, control and 

surveillance aircraft. CBO estimates that the Navy would buy 32 

aircraft over the 2014–2018 period at a cost of $4.6 billion. The 

service estimates that a single multiyear contract would cost about 

$520 million less than five annual contracts. • Section 141 would authorize the Missile Defense Agency 

(MDA) to enter into one or more multiyear contracts for the procurement of ground-based interceptors. In addition, the provision 

would allow MDA to enter into contracts for advance procurement 

associated with those interceptors. The bill would authorize $107 

million in advance procurement authority in 2014 to purchase longlead items associated with the interceptors. CBO estimates that 

the MDA would use the multiyear contract authority to purchase 

14 additional interceptors for the Fort Greely site and 20 interceptors for the East Coast Missile site. CBO estimates that those 34 

interceptors would require additional appropriations of nearly $1.9 

billion over the 2014–2018 period. An additional $500 million 

would be required beyond 2018 to complete the purchase of the 34 

interceptors. CBO estimates that purchasing those interceptors 

under multiple annual contracts would cost about $300 million 

more than a multiyear procurement contract. 

• Section 142 would authorize the Department of Defense to 

enter one or more multiyear contracts over the 2014–2018 period 

for a variety of medium and heavy tactical vehicles. The services 

have no plans for such a multiyear contract, but requested $240 

million to purchase 1,057 such vehicles in 2014. CBO has no basis 

on which to estimate the cost of a multiyear contract for those and 

additional vehicles in subsequent years. 

East Coast Missile Defense Site. Section 232 would require that 

the Secretary of Defense ensure that a missile defense site on the 

East Coast of the United States is constructed and operational by 

2018. Based on information from the Missile Defense Agency, CBO 

estimates that preparing and operating the site would require apVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:06 Jun 12, 2013 Jkt 081414 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR102P2.XXX HR102P2

PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
11 

propriations of $2.3 billion over the 2014–2018 period. That $2.3 

billion amount includes the costs for buying ground equipment 

($1.2 billion), building the facilities and constructing the silos 

(nearly $900 million), and operations ($200 million). 

CBO estimates that DoD would purchase 20 ground-based interceptors to deploy to the new East Coast site. The costs of those 

interceptors are included above under the discussion of the 

multiyear contract authority provided under section 141. 

Increased Cost Cap for the CVN–78 Aircraft Carrier. Section 122 

of the bill would increase, to $12.9 billion, the cost cap for acquiring the CVN–78 aircraft carrier, the lead ship of the Ford class of 

nuclear aircraft carriers. That amount is currently capped at nearly 

$11.8 billion. Public Law 109–364 established a cost cap of $10.5 

billion that was later revised to $11.8 billion in 2010 under the authority of the Secretary of the Navy to make adjustments to the 

cap for costs incurred primarily because of inflation through fiscal 

year 2010. Under that same authority, the cap can be further increased to $12 billion to reflect inflation since 2010. The Congress 

has appropriated more than $11.5 billion for the CVN–78 through 

2013. CBO expects that DoD will use its current-law authority to 

increase the cost cap to $12 billion; thus, we estimate that raising 

that cap to $12.9 billion would increase the need for appropriations 

for constructing the CVN–78 by $0.9 billion over the 2014–2015 period. 

Repair of Vessels in Foreign Shipyards. Section 1023 would require all vessels that are part of the Military Sealift Command 

(MSC) to be treated as though they are assigned to home ports in 

the United States or Guam. MSC vessels are often stationed overseas for two or more consecutive years. During such deployments, 

the Navy considers those ships to be forwarded deployed (that is, 

to not have a home port), allowing maintenance and repair work 

on those ships to be performed in foreign shipyards. Because they 

do not have to transit back to the United States during their deployments, those ships have lower fuel costs and are able to spend 

more time on station. In contrast, ships that are homeported in the 

United States are required to have all maintenance and repair 

work performed domestically, except in emergencies. 

Implementing this provision would require all MSC vessels that 

are stationed overseas to transit back to the United States or 

Guam for routine repairs. The Navy reports that about 35 ships 

would be affected by this provision. Based on information from the 

Navy, trips back to the United States for repairs would increase 

fuel costs by $35 million to $40 million annually, and reduce the 

time each vessel can spend on station. The Navy estimates that the 

cost for repairs and maintenance performed domestically would, on 

average, be higher that the costs charged overseas. However, CBO 

does not currently have the information needed to estimate that increased cost. 

Incrementally Funded Construction Projects. Division B would 

authorize DoD to begin two construction projects while authorizing 

appropriations for a portion of the cost in advance. The bill would 

authorize $373 million for those projects in 2014; an additional 

$195 million in authorizations and appropriations would be required in subsequent years to complete those projects. Additionally, 

the bill would authorize the appropriation of $1,261 million for subVerDate Mar 15 2010 05:06 Jun 12, 2013 Jkt 081414 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR102P2.XXX HR102P2

PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
12 

sequent increments of 10 projects that were authorized in prior 

years. 

Mental Health Assessments. Two sections would increase the 

number of mental health assessments administered to military personnel. CBO estimates that the combined cost of those additional 

assessments would be $210 million over the 2014–2018 period. 

Section 701 would require DoD to administer a mental health assessment to deployed personnel once every six months. Based on 

current deployment levels, CBO estimates DoD would need to deploy an additional 20 mental health professionals to conduct those 

assessments. Based on information from DoD, CBO estimates the 

cost to deploy each of those additional personnel would be about 

$150,000 per year. In addition, there would be a cost to DoD to replace those personnel in the continental U.S. (CONUS), so that current mental health caseload demands can be met. CBO estimates 

DoD would need to pay for an additional 25,000 hours per year of 

mental health services in CONUS to compensate for the loss of the 

deployed mental health professionals, at a cost of over $100 per 

hour. In total, CBO estimates section 701 would cost about $5 million per year, or about $25 million over the 2014–2018 period. 

Section 702 would require DoD to administer a person-to-person 

mental health assessment to all active duty members on a periodic 

basis. Based on discussions with DoD, CBO believes the department would administer the assessments during a service member’s 

annual health assessment. While certain aspects of mental health 

are already addressed during the periodic health assessment, it is 

not clear whether the current approach is sufficient to meet the requirements of section 702. For this estimate, CBO assumes health 

professionals would need to add an additional 15 minutes per assessment to fully meet the requirements. The total number of personnel requiring mental health assessments each year would be 

about 1.3 million (excluding deployed personnel and those already 

receiving pre- and post- deployment mental health assessments). At 

an additional cost of about $25 per assessment (the billing rates for 

health professionals are about $100 per hour), CBO estimates section 702 would cost $185 million over the 2014–2018 period. 

Sikes Act. Section 313 would extend by five years—from 2015 to 

2019—authorizations of up to $4.5 million annually for activities 

related to the Sikes Act, which promotes cooperation between the 

Department of Interior (DOI) and DoD in planning and developing 

fish and wildlife resources on military land. Under current law, the 

authorizations for those activities will expire in 2014. CBO estimates that through 2018, authorizations in H.R. 1960 for the DOI 

and DoD would total $12 million and $6 million, respectively. 

Direct Spending and Revenues 

Several provisions in H.R. 1960 would affect direct spending. 

CBO estimates that those provisions would decrease net direct 

spending by $2 million over the 2014–2023 period (see Table 4). 

Retired Pay Inversion. In 1975, a law was enacted that required DoD to recalculate the annuities of military retirees to take 

into account any additional cost-of-living adjustments (COLA) that 

would have occurred had members retired at earlier dates, if they 

were eligible to do so; this provision is referred to as the Tower 

Amendment. In instances where an earlier retirement would have 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
13 

2For military personnel who entered service prior to 1981, retirement pay is based on their 

final annual pay at the time they retired. In certain instances, it would have been more advantageous, from a financial perspective, if the member had retired at an earlier date. For example, 

assume the member retired in the month of October after exactly 20 years of service. If the 

member’s initial annuity was $1,000 per month and his first COLA was 3 percent, his retired 

pay the following January would have been $1,030. However, if the member waited until that 

January to initially retire and in the intervening three months received a pay raise of 1.5 percent, the member’s initial retired pay in January (including the impact of the additional three 

months of service) would have only been $1,028. The member would have been better off retiring 

the previous October. 

resulted in a larger annuity, DoD was directed to recalculate using 

that earlier date.2

Subsequently, a new method of computing retired pay was enacted into law. The new method (known as ‘‘High-36 Average’’) applies to all personnel who entered the service after 1980. DoD believed that the Tower Amendment did not apply to that new provision of law. However, a recent audit concluded that the Tower 

Amendment does apply to those who retire using the High-36 Average method of computation and that a number of those retirees 

stand to benefit from its application. DoD believes they are now required to make retroactive retirement payments back to the year 

2000 (the year in which retirees started receiving annuities under 

the High-36 plan), and that they will also have to recalculate payments to future retirees to determine if those payments should be 

increased. Section 622 would prevent most of those higher payments from taking place, by specifying that the Tower Amendment 

applies to High-36 retirees only in very limited circumstances. 

Based on an analysis of DoD retirement statistics and COLAs 

published by the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS), 

CBO estimates that about 370,000 former members have retired 

using the High-36 Average method of computation since 2000, and 

that, under current law, about 15 percent of those will benefit from 

application of the Tower Amendment. Of those who will benefit, 

CBO estimates the average retroactive payment should be about 

$1,000 per person, or almost $60 million in total. Section 622 would 

prevent those retroactive payments from being made. 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
14 

TABLE 4—ESTIMATED IMPACT OF H.R. 1960 ON DIRECT SPENDING 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2014– 2018 2014– 2023 

Retired Pay Inversion 

Estimated Budget Authority .......................................... ¥38 ¥49 ¥12 ¥13 ¥14 ¥15 ¥16 ¥17 ¥18 ¥20 ¥126 ¥212 

Estimated Outlays ......................................................... ¥38 ¥49 ¥12 ¥13 ¥14 ¥15 ¥16 ¥17 ¥18 ¥20 ¥126 ¥212 

Special Immigrant Visas for Iraqi and Afghan Allies 

Estimated Budget Authority .......................................... 2 5 10 10 15 15 15 15 15 15 42 117 Estimated Outlays ......................................................... 2 5 10 10 15 15 15 15 15 15 42 117 

TRICARE Prime Service Areas 

Estimated Budget Authority .......................................... 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 18 33 Estimated Outlays ......................................................... 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 18 33 

Servicemember Qualification for Mortgage Refinancing 

Estimated Budget Authority .......................................... 4 3 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 11 19 Estimated Outlays ......................................................... 4 3 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 11 19 

National Defense Stockpile 

Estimated Budget Authority .......................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Outlays ......................................................... 2 10 10 10 5 4 0 0 0 0 37 41 

Total Changes in Direct Spending 

Estimated Budget Authority ................................. ¥28 ¥37 4 1 5 4 3 3 2 0 ¥55 ¥43 

Estimated Outlays ................................................ ¥26 ¥27 14 11 10 8 3 3 2 0 ¥18 ¥2 

Note: H.R. 1960 also would affect revenues. However, CBO estimates that effect would be insignificant. 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
15 

In addition, CBO estimates section 622 would reduce future pay- ments by more than $10 million annually over the next 10 years. 

That amount includes both the added payments to current retirees 

(which would average about $200 a year each), as well as increased 

payments for those who will retire during that period and stand to 

benefit from application of the Tower Amendment. In total, CBO 

estimates that enacting section 622 would reduce spending from 

the Military Retirement Fund by $212 million over the 2014–2023 

period. 

Special Immigrant Visas for Iraqi and Afghan Allies. Section 1216 would amend the Afghan Allies Protection Act of 2009 (8 

U.S.C. 1101 note) to extend by four years (through the end of fiscal 

year 2018) the period during which special immigrant visas can be 

provided to certain Afghans. Eligible immigrants under that provision are Afghans who were employed by the United States Government at some point since 2001 and are experiencing an ongoing serious threat as a consequence. 

The provision also would make available to those individuals 435 

additional visas in each year from 2014 to 2018; their spouses and 

children would not count against that number. Because those special immigrants (including their spouses and children) are eligible 

for public benefits to the same extent as refugees, they could receive subsidies through health insurance exchanges, Medicaid benefits, nutrition benefits, and Supplemental Security Income, if otherwise eligible, upon arrival in the United States. CBO estimates 

that direct spending for those benefits would increase by $117 million over the 2014–2023 period. 

TRICARE Prime Service Areas. At the beginning of fiscal 

year 2014, several TRICARE Prime Service areas are scheduled to 

be eliminated. Section 711 would require DoD to continue to make 

the TRICARE Prime benefit available to beneficiaries currently residing in those areas. Most of the 170,000 affected beneficiaries are 

retirees of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps, and their 

dependents. Health benefits for those personnel are paid by the Defense Health Program, which is subject to annual appropriations. 

However, about 2.5 percent of the population are retirees and dependents of retirees of the Coast Guard, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the Uniformed Corps of the Public 

Health Service. Health benefits for those beneficiaries are paid 

from mandatory appropriations. Based on information from DoD, 

CBO estimates section 711 would increase direct spending for those 

beneficiaries by $33 million over the 2014–2023 period. 

For a more complete overview of section 711, as well as additional details about CBO’s estimating methodology, see the related 

discussion in the ‘‘Spending Subject to Appropriation’’ section of 

this estimate. 

Servicemember Qualification for Mortgage Refinancing. 

Section 553 would make it easier for certain servicemembers to refinance mortgages on homes that they do not occupy. Under current law, borrowers must occupy a home to be eligible for a guarantee from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) on cash-out refinancing loans. Further, private-sector lenders generally charge 

higher interest rates for loans on homes that are not occupied by 

the borrower, which discourages some of those borrowers from refinancing. Section 533 would require servicemembers to be treated 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
16 

3 Under the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, the subsidy cost of a loan guarantee is the 

net present value of estimated payments by the government to cover defaults and delinquencies, 

interest subsidies, and other expenses, offset by any payments to the government, including 

origination fees, other fees, penalties, and recoveries on defaulted loans. Such subsidy costs are 

calculated by discounting those expected cash flows using the rate on Treasury securities of comparable maturity. The resulting estimated subsidy costs are recorded in the budget when the 

loans are disbursed. 

as if they occupied the home when they refinance, if they left the 

home because of change-of-station or deployment orders. As a result, some additional borrowers would qualify for cash-out refinancing loans that are guaranteed by VA. Others would choose to 

refinance loans that they would otherwise not have because they 

would receive lower interest rates; some of those loans also would 

be guaranteed by VA. 

VA guarantees lenders a payment of up to 25 percent of the outstanding loan balance (subject to some limitations on the original 

loan amount) in the event that the veteran defaults. Such guarantees enable veterans to get better loan terms such as lower interest 

rates or smaller down payments. The subsidy costs of VA loan 

guarantees are paid from mandatory appropriations.3 Guaranteeing additional loans would increase subsidy outlays. Based on 

the annual number of loan guarantees that VA currently provides 

for servicemembers, CBO expects that over the next 10 years, VA 

would guarantee an additional 10,000 loans under this provision. 

Those guarantees would increase direct spending by $19 million 

over the 2014–2023 period, CBO estimates. 

National Defense Stockpile. Section 1411 would modify the 

purchasing authority for the National Defense Stockpile by authorizing the recovery of strategic and critical materials embedded in 

excess components owned by the U.S. military or other federal 

agencies before those components are sold for scrap. 

Section 1412 would allow the Stockpile Manager to spend up to 

$41 million from the National Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund 

to purchase six new materials over the 2014–2019 period. All of 

those materials have been identified as necessary to meet military 

needs. Based on information from DoD, CBO estimates that enacting sections 1411 and 1412 would increase direct spending by $41 

million over the 2014–2019 period. 

Other Provisions. Other provisions in the bill would have insignificant effects on direct spending or revenues, generally because 

few people would be affected, or because the net budgetary impact 

would be small. 

• Section 512 would modify rules related to the selective early 

retirement of reserve personnel. In certain circumstances, those 

changes might affect the number of former reserve members drawing retired pay in a given year. 

• Section 527 would enhance protections for military whistleblowers from acts of reprisal and also would require that the service records of victims of reprisal action be corrected. CBO estimates 

that correcting those records would result in some individuals receiving retroactive payments, benefits, or awards that were improperly denied. 

• Section 528 would allow certain requirements for medical examinations to apply to proceedings conducted under the Uniform 

Code of Military Justice. CBO estimates that under that provision 

some servicemembers would receive a higher characterization of 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
17 

discharge and, therefore, become eligible for certain benefits administered by VA. 

• Section 585 would award the Purple Heart to servicemembers 

who were killed or wounded in the attacks at a recruiting station 

in Little Rock, Arkansas, on June 1, 2009, and at Fort Hood, Texas, 

on November 5, 2009. Receipt of the Purple Heart is directly tied 

to eligibility for Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC), 

which is a mandatory benefit. CBO estimates that some of those 

servicemembers who would receive the Purple Heart under this 

provision would as a result earn CRSC. In addition, members of 

the Armed Forces or civilian employees of DoD who were killed or 

wounded in those attacks would be deemed to have been killed or 

wounded in a combat zone or while serving with the Armed Forces 

in a contingency operation. Awarding that status would provide eligibility for certain benefits that would increase direct spending and 

decrease revenues. 

• Section 592 would allow the Army to enter into contracts with 

private entities to provide certain services at Arlington National 

Cemetery, such as transportation. Some of those contracts could include third-party financing of capital assets that, in CBO’s judgment, should be recorded up front in the federal budget. 

• Section 594 would establish a Commission on Service to the 

Nation and allow the Commission to collect and spend gifts, bequests, and devises of services or property. 

• Section 714 would create a pilot program to improve the collection of third-party reimbursements at military treatment facilities. 

In certain circumstances, expenses associated with third-party collection activities are recorded as direct spending. 

• Section 1061 would allow the Secretary of Defense to accept 

and spend contributions for the operation of the Conflict Records 

Research Center. 

• Sections 1084 and 3502 would allow the federal government to 

insure without premium, private entities that transport U.S. cargo 

and personnel in the event that the private planes and vessels used 

are damaged in an act of war. CBO estimates that the probability 

of paying claims on such insurance would be negligible. 

• Section 1303 would extend by three years the authority that 

allows DoD to spend contributions received from the private sector 

and foreign governments for use on activities associated with the 

Cooperative Threat Reduction program. The current authority to 

accept and spend those contributions will expire on December 31, 

2015. Under section 1303, any amounts not spent by December 31, 

2018 would be returned to the donor. 

• Section 2803 would make available for spending by DoD an insignificant amount of collections in a moribund account for military 

housing. 

Pay-as-you-go considerations: The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act 

of 2010 establishes budget-reporting and enforcement procedures 

for legislation affecting direct spending or revenues. The net 

changes in outlays that are subject to those pay-as-you-go procedures are shown in the following table. Enacting H.R. 1960 would 

have no significant effect on revenues. 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
18 

CBO ESTIMATE OF PAY-AS-YOU-GO EFFECTS FOR H.R. 1960 AS REPORTED BY THE HOUSE 

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES ON JUNE 7, 2013 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2013– 

2018 

2013– 

2023 

NET INCREASE OR DECREASE (¥) IN THE DEFICIT 

Statutory Pay-As-YouGo Impact ............... 0 ¥26 ¥27 14 11 10 8 3 3 2 0 ¥18 ¥2 

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: The bill would impose intergovernmental and private-sector mandates as defined in 

UMRA on mortgage lending institutions. The bill would require 

mortgage lenders to consider active-duty servicemembers who have 

been relocated for certain reasons to be considered the occupants 

of the residences that secure mortgages for the purpose of refinancing. Because of the small number of loans that would be affected, CBO estimates that the costs of complying with the mandate would be small and well below the annual threshold established in UMRA for intergovernmental mandates ($75 million in 

2013, adjusted annually for inflation). Based on information about 

current industry practices, CBO estimates that the costs to private 

lending institutions of complying with the mandate would probably 

fall below the annual threshold established in UMRA for privatesector mandates ($150 million in 2013, adjusted annually for inflation). 

Section 552 would preempt state laws governing child custody if 

those laws are inconsistent with or provide less protection to the 

rights of a parent who is a servicemember than those provided 

under the bill. That preemption would be an intergovernmental 

mandate as defined in UMRA. While the mandate would limit the 

application of state laws, it would impose no duty on states that 

would result in additional spending. 

Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Defense Authorizations— 

Kent Christensen, Military Construction and Multiyear Procurement—David Newman, Military and Civilian Personnel—Dawn 

Regan, Military Retirement and Health Care—Matthew Schmit, 

Operation and Maintenance—Bill Ma, Kent Christensen, and 

Jason Wheelock, Missile Defenses, Ships, and Stockpile—Raymond 

J. Hall; Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: J’nell L. 

Blanco, Impact on the Private Sector: Elizabeth Bass. 

Estimate approved by: Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant Director 

for Budget Analysis. 

Æ 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING