Private, no accountPrivacy details: browsing privately, no account needed
You're browsing privately, no account needed. Your region stays in this session and your precise location is never stored.What we store
H.R. 2419 · 109th CongressEnacted

Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 2006

Latest action. Became public lawWhat a bill becomes when enacted, numbered by Congress and order of enactment: Public Law 119-4 is the 4th law of the 119th Congress.Read the full definition (opens a new tab) No: 109-103. · November 19, 2005

Live record from Congress.gov, updated as the official record changes.
What this bill would do
Official summary · Congressional Research Service

(This measure has not been amended since the Conference Report was filed in the House on November 7, 2005. The summary of that version is repeated here.)

Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 2006 - Title I: Department of the Army - Civil - Makes FY2006 appropriations to the Department of the Army and its Corps of Engineers for: (1) civil functions pertaining to rivers and harbors, flood control, shore protection, storm damage reduction, and aquatic ecosystem restoration; (2) planning assistance to the state of Ohio for Stark County watershed basin study; (3) a comprehensive hurricane protection analysis and design, conducted in close coordination with the state of Louisiana, to develop flood control, coastal restoration, and hurricane protection measures for South Louisiana; (4) certain flood damage reduction projects on the Mississippi River and its tributaries (including Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee); (5) regulatory program for navigable waters and wetlands; (6) the formerly utilized sites remedial action program; and (7) general administrative expenses and related civil works functions.

Prohibits funds otherwise available to the Corps of Engineers from being available for the rehabilitation and lead and asbestos abatement of the dredge McFarland.

(Sec. 102) Limits agreements proposed for execution by the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works or the United States Army Corps of Engineers after enactment of this Act to total credits and reimbursements for all applicable projects not to exceed $100 million in each fiscal year.

(Sec. 103) Prohibits the Army Corps of Engineers from using funds to support activities related to any proposed new landfill in the Muskingum Watershed if specified conditions prevail.

(Sec. 104) Bars the use of funds to demonstrate or implement any plans divesting or transferring any Civil Works missions, functions, or responsibilities of the United States Army Corps of Engineers to other government agencies without specific direction in a subsequent Act of Congress.

(Sec. 105) Bars the use of funds made available in this Act to carry out any activity relating to closure or removal of the St. Georges Bridge across the Intracoastal Waterway, Delaware River to Chesapeake Bay, Delaware and Maryland, including a hearing or any other activity relating to preparation of an environmental impact statement concerning the closure or removal.

The summary continues for 61 more paragraphs. Read it in full on Congress.gov

Written by analysts at the Congressional Research Service and published on Congress.gov, not by Civibrief. Summarized at the "Public Law" stage on November 19, 2005. It describes the bill, it is not the legal text.

Status
Introduced
May 18, 2005
In committee
Passed a chamber
Cleared Congress
Enacted
November 19, 2005
Where this sits in the process
Common questions
Composed from the official record
Where is it in the process, and what happens next?

This bill has been enacted. It is law.

The record's latest action, on November 19, 2005: Became Public Law No: 109-103.

Has anyone actually voted on it?

No. No roll call in this Congress cites this measure. That is the ordinary outcome: most measures never reach a recorded floor vote, and a committee ends most of them simply by not acting.

A vote is not the only thing that happens to a measure. Hearings, markups, and referrals are all recorded actions, and none of them is a vote of the full chamber.

Who is behind it?

DAVID HOBSON (R-OH) introduced it on May 18, 2005. No cosponsors are recorded.

Cosponsoring is a formal signature on the text. It is not a commitment to vote for the measure, it does not bind anyone's party, and a long list of cosponsors is a measure of attention rather than of prospects.

Every answer above is assembled from this measure's own record on Congress.gov and from published counts of what Congress has passed before. Civibrief does not predict outcomes and takes no position on any measure.

Vote history

  1. House
    Passed
  2. Senate
    Passed
  3. President
    Signed into law
No recorded votes yet
No roll call in this Congress cites this bill. Most bills die in committee without ever reaching a recorded floor vote.