PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 27, 2016
Prescribed Burn Approval Act of 2016
This bill prohibits the Forest Service from authorizing a prescribed burn (i.e., a planned fire intentionally ignited) on Forest Service land if, for the county or contiguous county in which such land is located, the national fire danger rating system is indicating an extreme fire danger level.
Nonetheless, the Forest Service may authorize a prescribed burn under such a condition if it coordinates with the applicable state government and local fire officials.
People & committees
Sen. Thune, John [R-SD] · R–SD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 114-275.
Became Public Law No: 114-275.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H7159)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H7159)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 3395.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7159-7160)
Mr. Lucas moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (text: CR S6493)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(text: CR S6493)
Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry discharged by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S6493)
Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry discharged by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S6493)
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Introduced in Senate
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 S.3395 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 S.3395 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 S.3395 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 S.3395 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.