PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 108-268.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Jul 2, 2004
(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the House on June 14, 2004. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Directs the Secretary of the Navy to transfer the parcel of Department of the Navy real property in the District of Columbia known as the Nebraska Avenue Complex to the administrative jurisdiction of the Administrator of General Services to accommodate the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Authorizes the Secretary to retain jurisdiction over that portion of the Complex that, as of this Act's enactment date, is being used to provide Navy family housing. Directs the Secretary, within nine months, to: (1) complete the transfer of the Complex to the Administrator; and (2) relocate Navy activities at the Complex to other locations.
Makes the Secretary of DHS responsible for the payment of the costs to move furnishings and equipment related to the initial relocation of Navy activities from the Complex and costs incident to the initial occupancy by such activities of interim leased space. Authorizes appropriations to DHS for FY 2005 through 2007.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Expresses the sense of Congress that the Secretary of the Navy should receive, from Federal agencies other than the Department of Defense (DOD), funds authorized and appropriated for the purpose of covering reasonable costs incurred by the Secretary to permanently relocate Navy activities from the Complex. Directs the Secretary to submit to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and Congress an initial and revised estimates of such costs; (2) use relocation funds received from sources outside DOD to relocate Navy activities from the Complex; and (3) notify Congress in writing when a decision is made to carry out a military construction project using such funds.
Directs the Secretary of the Navy, at the end of the five-year period beginning on the date on which the transfer of the Complex is to be completed, to submit to Congress a report specifying: (1) the total amount needed to cover both the initial and permanent costs of relocating Navy activities; (2) the total amount of the initial relocation costs paid by the Secretary of DHS; and (3) the total amount of appropriated funds received by the Secretary of the Navy from sources outside DOD to cover the permanent relocation costs. Directs: (1) the President to certify to Congress whether the amounts specified in the report are sufficient to cover both the initial and permanent relocation costs; and (2) the Administrator, if the President certifies that such amounts are insufficient, to restore the Complex to the Navy's jurisdiction, at the request of the Secretary, who then shall convey the Complex by competitive sale and deposit amounts received in a special Treasury account to be used for facility maintenance and repair or environmental restoration.
People & committees
Rep. Hunter, Duncan [R-CA-52] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 108-268.
Became Public Law No: 108-268.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S7114-7115)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S7114-7115)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
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 H3897-3898)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H3897-3898)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4322.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3897-3900)
Mr. Hunter moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Readiness.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
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: Jun 6, 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.4322 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.4322 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.4322 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.4322 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.