To authorize issuance of certificates of documentation authorizing certain vessels to engage in coastwise trade in the carriage of natural gas, and for other purposes.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Dec 15, 2010
Authorizes the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating to issue a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement for the vessels LNG GEMINI, LNG LEO, and LNG VIRGO. Limits authorized coastwise trade for each vessel to the carriage of natural gas, as defined in the Deepwater Port Act of 1974.
Prohibits a vessel transported in Dry Dock #2 (if, during such transportation, such dock remains connected by a utility or other connecting line to pierside moorage in Ketchikan, Alaska) from being considered merchandise for the purposes of certain coastwise trade requirements a vessel must otherwise meet before engaging in merchandise transportation.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 2, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.6524 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.6524 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.6524 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.6524 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.