PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 22, 2015
Federal Leadership in Energy Efficient Transportation Act of 2015 or the FLEET Act of 2015
Amends the National Energy Conservation Policy Act to expand the definition of "energy or water conservation measure" under such Act to include, in the case of a contract in which the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) is a party: (1) the purchase or lease of low emission and fuel efficient vehicles; (2) the upgrade of USPS vehicles to increase average fuel economy and reduce carbon dioxide emissions; or (3) the construction or maintenance of infrastructure to support such vehicles, including electric vehicle charging stations. Expands the program of agency incentives for conserving energy to include in utility incentive programs measures to support the use of low emission and fuel efficient USPS vehicles.
Prohibits USPS from awarding a contract for a vehicle, or purchasing or leasing a vehicle for use by USPS, including a passenger car, light truck, or medium or heavy-duty vehicle, unless the vehicle meets certain minimum carbon dioxide emissions standards and average fuel economy standards.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Prohibits USPS from meeting the requirements of this Act by: (1) reducing the frequency of mail delivery, (2) closing post offices or postal distribution facilities, (3) taking any action to restrict or diminish a collective bargaining agreement or eliminate or reduce employee benefits, or (4) entering into a contact with a private company to perform duties that are currently performed by postal employees who are bargaining unit employees.
People & committees
Rep. Huffman, Jared [D-CA-2] · D–CA
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 Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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 Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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 Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.1963 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.1963 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.1963 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.1963 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.