PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Conservation and Forestry.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 23, 2015
Forest Service and Department of the Interior Law Enforcement Improvement Act of 2015
This bill makes a Regional Forester for a Forest Service region responsible for all Forest Service law enforcement personnel assigned to that Region. The Chief of the Forest Service, however, acting through the Director of Law Enforcement, shall remain responsible for the Investigations Division.
The Department of Agriculture (USDA), with respect to the Forest Service, and the Department of the Interior, with respect to its land management agencies, shall establish a Federal Lands Law Enforcement Review Board to review and make recommendations regarding:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
law enforcement incidents of concern involving agency law enforcement personnel,
proposed changes to agency law enforcement policy,
the cooperative law enforcement program, and
training of agency law enforcement personnel.
If a political subdivision of a state contains 25,000 acres or more of federal land, all or a majority of which is either National Forest System land or land under Interior jurisdiction, USDA or Interior, as appropriate, shall try to develop a memorandum of understanding with that political subdivision to address the specific roles and coordination between Forest Service or Interior law enforcement personnel and local law enforcement.
People & committees
Rep. Hardy, Cresent [R-NV-4] · R–NV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Conservation and Forestry.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Lands.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 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.3824 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.3824 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.3824 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.3824 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.