PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jul 5, 2016
Saint Francis Dam Disaster National Memorial Act
(Sec. 3) This bill authorizes the Department of Agriculture (USDA) to establish the Saint Francis Dam Disaster National Memorial at the Dam site in Los Angeles County, California, to honor the victims of the Saint Francis Dam disaster of March 12, 1928. The Memorial shall be managed by the Forest Service.
(Sec. 4) USDA shall submit to Congress, by three years after this bill's enactment, recommendations regarding:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
the planning, design, construction, and long-term management of the Memorial;
the proposed boundaries;
a visitor center and educational facilities; and
ensuring public access to the Memorial.
(Sec. 5) The bill establishes the Saint Francis Dam Disaster National Monument on specified National Forest System land administered by USDA in Los Angeles County for the purpose of conserving and enhancing the cultural, archaeological, historical, watershed, educational, and recreational resources and values of the Monument.
(Sec. 6) USDA shall develop a management plan for the Monument by four years after this bill's enactment. USDA shall manage the Monument: (1) in a manner that conserves and enhances its cultural and historic resources, and (2) in accordance with the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974. The bill limits the use of motorized vehicles but permits grazing within the Monument.
(Sec. 7) No additional funds are authorized to carry out this bill's requirements.
People & committees
Rep. Knight, Stephen [R-CA-25] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
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 H4255-4256)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H4255-4256)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5244.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H4255-4257)
Mrs. Lummis moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 502.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 114-650.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 114-650.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Federal Lands Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Lands.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural 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.5244 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.5244 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.5244 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.5244 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.