PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Power.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 25, 2015
Utility Energy Service Contracts Improvement Act of 2015
This bill amends the National Energy Conservation Policy Act to make explicit that utility energy service contracts (UESCs) may have a contract period of up to 25 years. UESCs are contracts that allow utilities to provide federal agencies with energy and water efficiency improvements and demand reduction services.
UESC conditions must include requirements for measurement, verification, and performance assurances or guarantees of the savings.
People & committees
Rep. Kinzinger, Adam [R-IL-16] · R–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Power.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.1630 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.1630 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.1630 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.1630 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.