PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Sep 27, 2006
Dam Safety Act of 2006 - Amends the National Dam Safety Program Act to require (currently, authorizes) the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers, to maintain and update information on the inventory of dams in the United States, including an assessment of each dam based on inspections completed by either a federal agency or a state dam safety agency.
Requires the strategic plan for dam safety prepared by the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to establish performance measures, in addition to goals, priorities, and target dates, toward effectively administering the Act to improve dam safety.
Authorizes appropriations for the National Dam Safety Program, the National Dam Inventory, research, training, and staff. Sets forth a formula for the allocation of funds among eligible states, based partly on the number of dams in a state relative to all states. Limits the amount allocated to a state to 50% of the reasonable cost of implementing the state dam safety program. Provides that the Director and the National Dam Safety Review Board shall determine the amount allocated to states. Prohibits the use of funds to construct or repair any dam.
People & committees
Rep. Kuhl, John R. "Randy", Jr. [R-NY-29] · R–NY
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 Environment and Public Works.
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 voice vote. (text: CR H7622-7623)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H7622-7623)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4981.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7622-7624)
Mr. Kuhl (NY) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Ordered to be Reported (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.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
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.4981 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.4981 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.4981 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.4981 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.