PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Feb 9, 2016
Construction Reform Act of 2016
(Sec. 2) This bill requires the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to use industry standards, standard designs, and best practices in carrying out medical facility construction.
A super construction project is one for the construction, alteration, or acquisition of a medical facility involving a total expenditure of more than $100 million (but does not include an acquisition by exchange).
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The VA shall provide, on a non-reimbursable basis, a non-VA federal entity with: (1) design, planning, and construction assistance; (2) project documents; and (3) other assistance upon request.
With respect to a proposed change to a contract entered into by a non-VA federal entity with which the VA has entered into an agreement that is estimated at a value of less than $250,000, the entity shall issue a final decision regarding such change within 30 days.
With respect to a proposed contract change estimated at a value of $250,000 or more:
the VA may make recommendations to the entity;
the VA may issue the final decision regarding the change within 30 days after the entity proposes it; and
if the VA does not issue a final decision within 60 days after the entity proposes the contract change, the entity shall issue a final decision regarding the change no later than 90 days after it proposes the change.
The VA shall ensure that each VA employee with responsibilities relating to the construction or alteration of medical facilities undergoes ongoing professional training and development.
The VA is prohibited from:
obligating or expending funds for advance planning or design for any super construction project until 60 days after congressional notification,
obligating funds for a major medical facility project or a super construction project by more than 10% of the amount approved by law unless certain congressional committees approve the obligation, or
using bid savings amounts or funds for other than their original purpose before 30 days after notifying those committees unless each committee approves the obligation.
The VA shall enter into a contract with an appropriate non-department federal entity to conduct an external forensic audit of: (1) the medical center construction project in Aurora, Colorado; and (2) the expenditures relating to any major medical facility or super construction project when such expenditures exceed the amount approved by law by more than 25%.
The VA must complete a 10-year master plan for: (1) each existing VA medical facility by December 31, 2016, and (2) each new VA medical facility by not later than the earlier of the date on which activation is completed or the date of the facility's formal dedication.
(Sec. 3) There is established in the Office of Inspector General an Assistant Inspector General for Construction who shall be responsible for conducting, supervising, and coordinating audits, evaluations, and investigations of the planning, design, contracting, and construction of VA facilities and infrastructure, including major and minor construction projects and leases.
People & committees
Rep. Miller, Jeff [R-FL-1] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H601-602)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H601-602)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3106.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H601-603)
Mr. Miller (FL) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 277.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. H. Rept. 114-364.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. H. Rept. 114-364.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote .
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Hearings Held by the Subcommittee on Health Prior to Introduction and Referral.
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3106 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3106 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3106 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3106 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.