PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Sep 25, 2006
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on September 6, 2006. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Ice Age Floods National Geologic Route Designation Act of 2006 - Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the National Park Service (NPS), and with the concurrence of the agency having jurisdiction over such roads, to designate a vehicular tour route from Missoula, Montana, to the Pacific Ocean along existing public roads linking certain nationally significant natural and cultural sites associated with the Ice Age Floods, which shall be known as the "Ice Age Floods National Geologic Route."
Requires the Secretary to prepare and transmit to specified congressional committees a description of sites along the Route and a general plan, which shall include the location and description of unique geographic or geologic features and significant landforms and important cultural resources.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the general plan to include proposals for a comprehensive interpretive program of the Route.
Requires the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the NPS Director, to administer a program for interpretation of the Route.
Authorizes the Secretary to provide other federal, state, tribal, and local nonprofit or private entities with technical assistance in developing interpretive devices and materials with respect to sites linked by segments of the Route administered by such entities.
Instructs the Secretary to ensure that the Route is marked with appropriate signs and other markers to guide the public.
Declares that nothing in this Act shall be construed to require any private property owner to allow public access (including federal, state, or local government access) to such private property, or to modify any provision of federal, state, or local law with regard to public access to or use of private lands.
Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Hastings, Doc [R-WA-4] · R–WA
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 Energy and Natural Resources.
Received in the Senate.
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 H6941-6942)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H6941-6942)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate H.R. 383.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6941-6942)
Mr. Renzi moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 359.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 109-619.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 109-619.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on National Parks Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
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.383 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.383 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.383 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.383 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.