PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 467.
Congressional Research Service
Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Nov 19, 2014
Energy Savings Through Public-Private Partnerships Act of 2014 - Amends the National Energy Conservation Policy Act (NECPA) to revise requirements for energy savings performance contracts. (These contracts allow federal agencies to work with private contractors on energy efficiency upgrades to federal facilities.)
Directs each federal facility energy manager to provide an explanation regarding life cycle cost-effective measures that have not been implemented as part of the web-based compliance certification system. (Life cycle costs are the total cost of owning, operating, and maintaining a building over its useful life.)
Requires the Department of Energy (DOE) to report to the President and Congress on each agency's energy savings performance contracts and utility energy service contracts, including their investment value and their energy savings.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Expands the kinds of energy conservation measures that may be implemented under the contracts by including those involving energy consuming devices and required support structures.
Prohibits agencies from limiting recognition of operation and maintenance savings associated with energy systems that were modernized or replaced with energy conservation measures and water conservation measures (e.g. lower energy and water bills thanks to energy efficiency and conservation measures).
Authorizes agencies to sell or transfer energy savings and apply the proceeds to fund a contract.
Expands the meaning of energy savings to include: (1) the use, sale, or transfer of energy incentives, rebates, or credits (including renewable energy credits) from federal, state, or local governments or utilities; and (2) any revenue generated from a reduction in energy or water use, more efficient waste recycling, or additional energy generated from more efficient equipment.
People & committees
Rep. Gardner, Cory [R-CO-4] · R–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 467.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 113-627.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 113-627.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
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.2689 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.2689 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.2689 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.2689 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.