This bill names the United States Postal Service facility at 1225 Kempsville Road in Virginia Beach, Virginia, the "Colonel Edward Shames Post Office Building," and directs that any existing federal references to that facility be read as references to the new name.
For practitioners, the bill is narrowly targeted and procedural: it changes how the facility is identified in statutes, maps, and other federal records but does not authorize new programs or appropriate funds. The practical work will fall to the Postal Service and federal/state record-keepers to update signs and databases.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill designates the USPS facility at 1225 Kempsville Road (Virginia Beach) with a commemorative name and instructs that any federal law, map, regulation, document, or record that mentions the facility be read as using that new name. It does not include funding or operational directives.
Who It Affects
Directly affected parties are the United States Postal Service (for signage and internal records), federal agencies and publication systems that maintain legal and cartographic references, and local authorities responsible for community signage and communications. Constituents and community groups in Virginia Beach gain the symbolic recognition.
Why It Matters
Naming bills are small on statutory scope but matter in practice: they change official nomenclature used across federal systems, impose minor administrative duties, and set precedents for how Congress honors individuals through federal property names.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill is a classic, targeted congressional naming measure. It picks out a single postal facility by street address and gives it a commemorative name; Congress frequently uses this mechanism to honor individuals without altering the substance of agency authority or service delivery.
The designation itself is declarative: once enacted, the building carries the new name for ceremonial and reference purposes.
The statute also contains a "references" clause. That clause says that whenever federal law, maps, regulations, documents or records refer to the facility, they should be treated as referring to the facility under its new name.
Practically, that means agencies that publish lists of USPS facilities, federal property inventories, or other official materials will update nomenclature; it also helps avoid ambiguity in legal citations that mention the facility by name.The bill is silent on money and timing. It does not appropriate funds or alter postal operations, so the Postal Service will absorb any costs associated with producing external signage, updating internal systems, or providing notice to the public.
Local governments and federal record-keepers will likewise need to update files and maps to reflect the new name. Because the measure addresses only naming and references, it leaves day-to-day postal functions and mail delivery unchanged.Implementation will be administrative rather than legislative: the USPS and affected federal offices will have to coordinate on signage, databases (including federal property inventories and mapping services), and printed materials.
Absent an appropriation or an express effective date, the new name takes legal effect only upon enactment, and agencies must decide the pace and scope of technical updates based on their budgets and procedures.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill designates the USPS facility at 1225 Kempsville Road in Virginia Beach as the Colonel Edward Shames Post Office Building and identifies that facility by street address.
Section (b) is a references clause: any federal law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other record that refers to the facility will be treated as referring to it by the new name.
The text contains no appropriation and does not change postal operations, benefits, or service levels — it is purely nominal and administrative.
The bill applies only to that single, specified facility and does not create naming authority beyond this designation or any new obligations for private parties.
Practical implementation — new signage, updates to federal databases and maps, and publication changes — will be handled by the Postal Service and other record-keeping agencies, which will bear the costs unless Congress provides funding in a separate measure.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Designation of the facility
This subsection names the postal facility at the listed street address after Colonel Edward Shames. Its legal effect is narrow: the statute changes the facility's official commemorative name for all federal purposes, which governs how the building will be identified in ceremonial contexts and in official lists of federal properties. Because the provision is limited to naming, it does not alter property ownership, usage rights, or postal service obligations.
References clause — updating federal records
This subsection requires that any existing federal reference to the facility be treated as a reference to the new name. That is an operational instruction to federal publishers and record-keepers: statutes, regulations, maps, and documents that previously named or cited the facility should be read as if they used the commemorative name. The language reduces the risk of conflicting citations, but it does not mandate how quickly agencies must update databases or physical signs, nor does it appropriate funds for those changes.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Government across all five countries.
Explore Government in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Virginia Beach community and local veterans groups: they receive public recognition in the form of an official federal designation tied to a local building, which can aid commemorative activities and local identity.
- Family or descendants of Colonel Edward Shames: the naming is a formal honor that memorializes the individual at a federal facility within his or her community.
- Congressional office and district constituents: the sponsor's district sees a visible, tangible recognition that can be used for constituent engagement and local ceremonies, and local civic organizations gain a named site for events.
Who Bears the Cost
- United States Postal Service: the agency will need to pay for signage, updates to its facility inventory, and any public communications unless Congress appropriates funds separately. Those are operational costs absorbed within USPS budgets.
- Federal and state record-keepers and mapping authorities: agencies that maintain official lists, maps, and databases must update nomenclature and printed materials, which requires staff time and potential minor IT or publication work.
- Local government and municipal services: city and county offices that reference federal facilities in their planning documents or wayfinding may need to update digital and physical materials, absorbing modest administrative expense.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill balances the legitimate public interest in honoring an individual against the government's interest in efficient, consistent record-keeping: it grants a symbolic federal recognition while shifting the modest but nontrivial administrative and fiscal burden of implementing that recognition onto agencies without providing funding or deadlines.
Two practical tensions are baked into a simple naming bill. First, the law guarantees a new official name and tells federal record-keepers to treat prior references as references to that name, but it does not provide funds or a timeline.
That shifts implementation costs and prioritization to agencies that already have competing workloads and fixed budgets, meaning the visible rollout (signs, web pages, printed materials) may be delayed or limited.
Second, the references clause reduces legal ambiguity but can create administrative friction. Agencies must decide whether to revise archival records, update statutory or regulatory texts where the facility is named, or leave legacy citations intact while noting the new name.
Those choices affect legal research, mapping services, and historical records. The statute also creates a broader governance question about naming policy: every facility naming sets precedent, and frequent symbolic namings cumulatively increase administrative burdens across the federal government.
Finally, because the bill confines itself to naming and contains no substantive changes to property rights or service delivery, its main risks are practical and reputational rather than legal: local controversy about a namesake, mismatches between the new name and existing databases, or costs borne by agencies with no added resources.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.