PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jul 31, 2007
Integrated Deepwater Program Reform Act - Prohibits the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating from using a private sector entity as a lead systems integrator for future Integrated Deepwater Systems Program (Program) procurements. Allows completion of existing delivery and task orders. Allows the Secretary to obtain assistance from federal agencies and, by grant, contract, or cooperative agreement, from private sector entities. Directs the Secretary, subject to exception, to use full and open competition for certain Deepwater Program acquisitions. Imposes other Program requirements, including certain required contract terms, development of a life cycle cost estimate, and assignment of a separate contract officers.
(Sec. 3) Requires the Coast Guard commandant to appoint or designate a career reserved employee as Chief Acquisition Officer for the Coast Guard to monitor Coast Guard acquisition activities, increase the use of full and open competition, and ensure the use of detailed performance specifications when performance-based contracting is used. Requires the commandant, subject to appropriations, to establish special rate supplements that provide higher pay levels for employees necessary to carry out the amendment made by this paragraph.
(Sec. 4) Directs the Secretary to cause each cutter, other than a National Security Cutter, acquired after enactment of this Act to be classed by the American Bureau of Shipping. Requires certain other testing and certification to be done by independent third parties. Requires the Secretary to cause the first in class of a major asset acquisition of a cutter or an aircraft to be subjected to an assessment of operational capability conducted by the Secretary of the Navy.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 5) Requires specified reports, including concerning : (1) National Security Cutters; (2) the Program, (3) change orders; (4) technology risks and maturity; (5) cost overruns, (6) a plan for management of acquisitions programs, financial management, engineering and logistics management, and contract management; and (7) any Coast Guard mission performance gap due to the removal of Program assets from service.
(Sec. 7) Authorizes the Secretary to enter into a memorandum of understanding or a memorandum of agreement with the Secretary of the Navy to provide for the use of the Navy Systems Commands to assist the Coast Guard with the oversight of Coast Guard major acquisition programs.
People & committees
Rep. Cummings, Elijah E. [D-MD-7] · D–MD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Received in the Senate.
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 the Yeas and Nays (2/3 required): 426 - 0 (Roll No. 773). (text: CR H8930-8932)
House roll call 773 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays (2/3 required): 426 - 0 (Roll No. 773).(text: CR H8930-8932)
House roll call 773 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H9229-9230)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 2722.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR 7/31/2007 H8930-8935)
Mr. Cummings moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 172.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 110-270.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 110-270.
Ordered to be Reported 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 Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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.2722 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.2722 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.2722 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.2722 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.