- 1 -

Fiscal Year 2019

Military Construction 

Appropriations Act

Summary of the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs 

Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year 2019

As of September 21st, 2018

Bill Status

Passed in 

Committee

Passed in 

Chamber Agreement Final Passage Signed into Law

House 

May 8, 2018



June 8, 2018 

Sept 10, 2018



Sept 13, 2018 

Senate  Sept 21, 2018

June 7, 2018



June 25, 2018



Sept 12, 2018
- 2 -

Executive Summary

This guide provides only a short summary and analysis of the many provisions in the bill. To 

obtain a complete understanding of any particular provision, users are encouraged to review the 

actual legislative language. The bill and accompanying report are available on the NGB-LL web 

page at www.nationalguard.mil/ll. 

Summary: 

The Senate and House passed the FY19 Minibus Appropriations for Military Construction and 

Veterans’ Affairs. The minibus provides $190.1M for Army National Guard MILCON and $129.1M 

for Air National Guard MILCON. Also, Section 125 provides additional funding for the Army 

National Guard ($22 million) and Air National Guard ($54 million) for projects on the Services 

Unfunded Priority lists.

Army National Guard

(All Dollars in Thousands)

Army 

National 

Guard

FY19

President’s 

Budget 

Request

HAC-M

Mark

Delta 

from 

FY19

Request

SAC-M

Mark

Delta 

From 

FY19

Request

Final 

Bill

Delta 

From 

FY19

Request

Total $180,122 $180,122 - $190,122 $10,000 $190,122 $10,000

Minor 

Construction $18,100 $18,100 - $28,100 $10,000 $28,100 $10,000

Planning & 

Design $16,622 $16,622 - $16,622 - $16,622 -

Sec. 125 - $11,000 $11,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000

Sec. 126 - - - -$10,000 -$10,000 -$10,000 -$10,000

Air National Guard

(All Dollars in Thousands)

Air 

National 

Guard

FY19

President’s 

Budget 

Request

HAC-M

Mark

Delta 

from 

FY19

Request

SAC-M

Mark

Delta 

From 

FY19

Request

Final 

Bill

Delta 

From 

FY19

Request

Total $129,126 $129,126 - $139,126 $10,000 $129,126 -

Minor 

Construction $23,626 $23,626 - $33,626 $10,000 $23,626 -

Planning & 

Design $18,500 $18,500 - $18,500 - $18,500 -

Sec. 125 - $62,000 $62,000 $11,000 $11,000 $54,000 $54,000

Provisions of Interest

Sec. 104 – None of the funds made available in this title may be used to begin construction of new bases in 

the United States for which specific appropriations have not been made.
- 3 -

Sec. 107 – None of the funds made available in this title for minor construction may be used to transfer or 

relocate any activity from one base or installation to another, without prior notification to the Committees on 

Appropriations of both Houses of Congress.

Sec. 113 – The Secretary of Defense shall inform the appropriate committees of both Houses of Congress, 

including the Committees on Appropriations, of plans and scope of any proposed military exercise involving 

United States personnel 30 days prior to its occurring, if amounts expended for construction, either 

temporary or permanent, are anticipated to exceed $100,000.

Sec. 125 – For an additional amount for the accounts and in the amounts specified, to remain available until 

September 30, 2023: "Military Construction, Army", $94,100,000; "Military Construction, Navy and Marine 

Corps", $196,850,000; ''Military Construction, Air Force" $118,450,000; "Military Construction, Army 

National Guard", $22,000,000; "Military Construction, Air National Guard", $54,000,000; ''Military 

Construction, $23,000,000; and Army Reserve'' "Military Construction, Air Force Reserve", $84,800,000: 

Provided, That such funds may only be obligated to carry out construction projects identified in the respective 

military department's unfunded priority list for fiscal year 2019 submitted to Congress: Provided further, That 

such projects are subject to authorization prior to obligation and expenditure of funds to carry out 

construction: Provided further, That not later than 30 days after enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the 

military department concerned, or his or her designee, shall submit to the Committees on Appropriations of 

both Houses of Congress an expenditure plan for funds provided under this section.

Sec. 126 – (Recession of Funds) Of the unobligated balances available to the Department of Defense from 

prior appropriation Acts, the following funds are hereby rescinded from the following accounts in the amounts 

specified: "NATO Security Investment Program", $25,000,000; "Military Construction, Air Force" 

$31,158,000; "Military Construction, Army National Guard", $10,000,000; "Family Housing Construction, 

Navy and Marine Corps", $2,138,000; and "The fund established in section 1013(d) of the Demonstration 

Cities and Metropolitan Development Act of 1966 ( 42 U.S.C. 337 4)", $15,333,000: Provided, That no 

amounts may be rescinded from amounts that were designated by the Congress for Overseas Contingency 

Operations/Global War on Terrorism or as an emergency requirement pursuant to a concurrent resolution on 

the budget or the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, as amended.

Sec. 127 – For the purposes of this Act, the term ‘‘congressional defense committees’’ means the 

Committees on Armed Services of the House of Representatives and the Senate, the Subcommittee on 

Military Construction and Veterans Affairs of the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate, and the 

Subcommittee on Military Construction and Veterans Affairs of the Committee on Appropriations of the 

House of Representatives.

Sec. 129 – Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 

available by this or any other Act may be used to consolidate or relocate any element of a United States Air 

Force Rapid Engineer Deployable Heavy Operational Repair Squadron Engineer (RED HORSE) outside of 

the United States until the Secretary of the Air Force (1) completes an analysis and comparison of the cost 

and infrastructure investment required to consolidate or relocate a RED HORSE squadron outside of the 

United States versus within the United States; (2) provides to the Committees on Appropriations of both 

Houses of Congress (‘‘the Committees’’) a report detailing the findings of the cost analysis; and (3) certifies 

in writing to the Committees that the preferred site for the consolidation or relocation yields the greatest 

savings for the Air Force: Provided, That the term ‘‘United States’’ in this section does not include any 

territory or possession of the United States.

House Report Language of Interest 

Army National Guard Readiness Centers Investment—The Committee remains concerned by the failure 

of the Army to prioritize investment in Army National Guard Readiness Centers. These facilities are critical 

infrastructure in the protection of the homeland and in responding to domestic emergencies. Their 

deteriorating conditions are detrimental to the readiness of the Army Guard and present significant safety 

concerns. The Committee encourages the Army to accelerate investments in Readiness Centers within the 

fiscal year 2020 future years’ defense program to include the $1,200,000,000 for the Army National Guard 

transformation Plan. 
- 4 -

Fiscal Year 2018 National Guard Reporting Requirement—Since fiscal year 2012 the Committee has 

noted the need to bolster National Guard resources and explore public-private partnerships with state and 

local governments. Due to the late passage of the fiscal year 2018 bill, the reporting requirement regarding 

this issue remains outstanding. Therefore, the Committee reiterates its interest in this report and looks 

forward to its submission. 

Senate Report Language of Interest 

Federal, State and Local Intelligence Collaboration — The Committee remains supportive of collaborative 

intelligence fusion centers that utilize National Guard facilities. These centers allow Federal, state, local, and 

tribal law enforcement officials to collaborate and share intelligence and threat information, and co-locating 

them with National Guard facilities offers opportunities for cost savings. The Committee urges the 

Department, the services, and the National Guard Bureau to prioritize needed workplace replacement 

projects, including Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility [SCIF] projects to conduct state and 

Federal intelligence analysis, in the fiscal year 2020 and future budget submissions.

Army National Guard Readiness Center Investment — The Committee remains concerned that the 

Department of the Army has not adequately prioritized funding to implement the ‘‘Affordable Readiness’’ 

strategy recommended by the 2014 Army National Guard Readiness Center Transformation Master Plan 

[RCTMP]. While the committee understands that the Army must balance these additional costs with existing 

infrastructure demands, the Committee also notes that the fiscal year 2019 Military Construction request for 

the Army National Guard was a 14 percent decrease from the fiscal year 2018 request, representing its 

smallest portion of the Army military construction budget since 2008. Except for the fiscal year 2015 budget 

request, the funding level is at its lowest in the post-2001 era. The Committee urges the Army to provide 

additional funding for the Army National Guard in its future years defense program in order to expedite 

execution of the RCTMP.

Canadian Forces Base Gagetown — The Committee is aware that many National Guard veterans engaged 

in training activities at Canadian Forces Base [CFB] Gagetown in the 1950s and 1960s. The Committee is 

also aware that Veterans Affairs Canada approved one-time, lump sum payments to eligible veterans 

exposed to Agent Orange and other defoliants who served at CFB Gagetown, and that American veterans 

who served there between June 20 and June 24, 1964, are currently eligible for an Agent Orange Registry 

Health Exam from the Veterans Health Administration. The Committee urges the Department to establish 

and maintain a health registry for American veterans who were stationed or underwent training at CFB 

Gagetown between 1956 and 2006 and who have subsequently experienced health problems which may be 

attributed to Agent Orange or other defoliants. The Committee further urges the Department to commission 

an independent study tasked with investigating the linkage between service at CFB Gagetown and the 

development of health problems and disease associated with exposure to Agent Orange.

Rescissions — The Committee recommends an administrative provision rescinding prior year unobligated 

funds due primarily to project bid savings and the slow execution of projects.

Conference Report Language of Interest 

Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS) and Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) – The conference report provides 

$14,000,000 in additional funds for identification, mitigation, and clean-up costs across the Department of 

Defense for PFOS and PFOA. DOD is directed to submit a spend plan for these additional funds to the 

Committees no later than 30 days after enactment of this Act.

Demolition of Previous BRAC Facilities – The conferees are concerned that the Department of Defense 

does not have an adequate plan for demolishing previous BRAC sites. For example, the Ontario International 

Airport was the Ontario Air National Guard Station that was established in 1949. This facility remained in 

operation for decades, assisting training and support for the Korean, Vietnam, and countless other wars and 

conflicts. In 1997, the facility was closed, yet the old site has sat largely unchanged for 20 years due to the 

environmental hazards of demolition. The conferees urge the Department to dedicate funds to demolish 

BRAC facilities and turn the land over to the local community as quickly as possible.
- 5 -

Army National Guard Project List

(All Dollars in Thousands)

State

ARNG Military Construction

Project Description

President’s 

Budget 

Request

HAC-M 

Mark

SAC-M

Mark

Final 

Bill

AK Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson $27,000 $27,000 $27,000 $27,000

IL Marseilles Automated Record Fire Range $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000

MT Malta National Guard Readiness Center $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000

NV North Las Vegas National Guard Readiness 

Center $32,000 $32,000 $32,000 $32,000

NH Pembroke National Guard Readiness Center $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000

ND Fargo National Guard Readiness Center $32,000 $32,000 $32,000 $32,000

OH

Camp Ravenna Automated Multipurpose 

Machine Gun Range $7,400 $7,400 $7,400 $7,400

SD Rapid City National Guard Readiness Center $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000

Air National Guard Project List

(All Dollars in Thousands)

State

ANG Military Construction Project 

Description

President’s 

Budget 

Request

HAC-M

Mark 

SAC-M

Mark

Final 

Bill

CA Channel Islands ANGS – C-130J Flight 

Simulator Facility $8,000 $8,000 $8,000 $8,000

HI Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam – Addition to 

F-22 LO/CRF B3408 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000 $17,000

IL Greater Peoria Regional Airport – New Fire 

Crash/Rescue Station $9,000 $9,000 $9,000 $9,000

LA New Orleans NORTHCOM – Construct Alert 

Apron $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000

NY Francis S. Gabreski Airport – Security 

Forces/ Comm. Training Facility $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000

PA Fort Indiantown Gap – Replace Operations 

Training/ Dining Hall $8,000 $8,000 $8,000 $8,000

VA Joint Base Langley-Eustis Construct Cyber 

Ops Facility $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000