PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 26, 2015
Federal Prison Industries Competition in Contracting Act of 2015
Amends federal criminal code provisions relating to Federal Prison Industries, Incorporated (FPI) to establish governmentwide procurement policies for purchases from FPI based upon competitive procedures. Specifies conditions under which a contract award may be made to FPI using other than competitive procedures.
Revises rulemaking procedures for approving new FPI products or services. Requires the Chief Operating Officer of FPI to submit a proposal for new FPI products or services to the Board of Directors of FPI with a detailed analysis of the probable impact on the private sector of a proposed expansion of sales from such new products or services.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Prohibits the total dollar value of FPI sales to the federal government in FY2016-FY2020 from exceeding specified percentages of FPI sales for a base period.
Amends the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 to require the head of an executive agency, before purchasing a product listed in the latest FPI catalog, to conduct market research to determine whether the FPI product is comparable to products available from the private sector that best meet the agency's needs in terms of price, quality, and time of delivery.
Requires the Board of Directors of FPI to prescribe hourly wage rates for inmates performing work for or through FPI. Requires: (1) an hourly minimum rate of not less than $2.50 for inmates whose term of imprisonment will expire in not more than two years, and (2) a biannual review of inmate wage rates.
Directs the Board of Directors of FPI, not later than September 30, 2016, to increase the maximum wage rate for inmates to 50% of the minimum wage rate under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, and to 100% of such wage rate not later than September 30, 2021.
Establishes within the Federal Bureau of Prisons (FBP) the Enhanced In-Prison Educational and Vocational Assessment and Training Program to provide: (1) in-prison assessments of inmates' needs and aptitudes, (2) a full range of educational opportunities, (3) vocational training and apprenticeships, and (4) comprehensive release-readiness preparation.
Amends the federal criminal code to authorize inmates with work assignments within FPI to perform work for a tax-exempt charity, religious organization, or local governmental unit or school district (eligible entities) that have an agreement with FPI. Establishes the position of Inmate Work Training Administrator to create alternative inmate work opportunities within eligible entities.
Directs the Chief Operating Officer of FPI to develop proposals to have FPI donate products and services to charitable organizations that provide goods or services to low-income individuals.
Establishes within the FBP the Cognitive Abilities Assessment Demonstration Program to assess the cognitive abilities and perceptual skills of inmates to prepare such inmates to return to society and reduce recidivism. Requires such demonstration program to be conducted for three consecutive fiscal years beginning during FY2016 at 12 federal correctional institutions and to be offered to 6,000 inmates who are within 5 years of release.
Requires the Director of the FBP to offer prerelease employment assistance to inmates.
Authorizes private for-profit business entities to participate in work-based training and apprenticeship programs for federal prison inmates.
Prohibits FPI from directly offering for commercial sale products produced or services furnished by federal inmates, including through any form of electronic commerce.
Terminates authority for inmate work-based training programs after September 30, 2022, and requires all agreements relating to such programs to be performed before October 1, 2027.
Directs the Government Accountability Office to undertake an on-going assessment of inmate work-based training programs.
Requires the Director of FBP to be appointed by the President (currently, by the Attorney General).
Requires the Board of Directors of FPI to issue regulations defining "prison-made product," "prison-furnished service," "specific product," and "specific service."
People & committees
Rep. Huizenga, Bill [R-MI-2] · R–MI
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 Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 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.1699 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.1699 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.1699 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.1699 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.