PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 111-315.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Dec 18, 2010
(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the House on December 1, 2010. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Amends the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 to authorize the Secretary of the Army to accept and expend funds contributed by non-federal public entities to expedite the evaluation of permits of such entities related to projects for a public purpose under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Army through December 31, 2016.
Directs the Secretary to ensure that the evaluation of permits carried out using such funds: (1) is reviewed by the District Commander of the Corps District in which the project or activity is located (or the Commander's designee), or by the Commander of the Corps Division in which the District is located if the permit evaluation is initially conducted by the District Commander; and (2) utilizes the same procedures for decisions that would otherwise be required for the evaluation of permits for similar projects or activities not carried out using such funds. Prohibits funds contributed for the evaluation of permits from being used for such review.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary to ensure that all final permit decisions carried out using such funds are made available to the public, including on the Internet.
Requires the budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, to be determined by reference to the latest statement titled "Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation" for this Act submitted for printing in the Congressional Record by the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, provided that such statement has been submitted prior to the vote on passage.
People & committees
Rep. Larsen, Rick [D-WA-2] · D–WA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 111-315.
Became Public Law No: 111-315.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Cleared for White House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S8605)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S8605)
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 H7823-7824)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H7823-7824)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 6184.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7823-7826)
Ms. Johnson, E. B. moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
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: Apr 7, 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.6184 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.6184 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.6184 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.6184 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.