PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Sep 16, 2008
Heavy Duty Hybrid Vehicle Research, Development, and Demonstration Act of 2008 - Directs the Secretary of Energy to establish a competitive research, development, demonstration, and commercial application program to provide between three and seven grants of up to $3 million per year each to applicants to carry out projects to advance research and development and to demonstrate technologies, including plug-in hybrid technology, for advanced heavy duty hybrid vehicles.
Requires each grant recipient shall be required to complete two phases: (1) phase one, research and demonstration of advanced hybrid technology by producing or retrofitting one or more advanced heavy duty hybrid vehicles; and (2) phase two, demonstration of advanced manufacturing processes and technologies by producing or retrofitting 50 advanced heavy duty hybrid vehicles.
Directs the Secretary to: (1) conduct research into alternative power train designs for use in advanced heavy duty hybrid vehicles; and (2) establish a pilot program through the National Laboratories and Technology Centers of the Department of Energy to research and test the effects on the domestic electric power grid of the widespread use of plug-in hybrid vehicles, including plug-in hybrid vehicles that are advanced heavy duty hybrid vehicles.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Authorizes appropriations for FY2009-FY2011.
Amends the United States Energy Storage Competitiveness Act of 2007 to direct the Secretary to conduct an applied research program on energy storage systems to support vehicles with a gross weight over 16,000 pounds.
People & committees
Rep. Sensenbrenner, F. James, Jr. [R-WI-5] · R–WI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Received in the Senate.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR 9/22/2008 H8539-8540)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR 9/22/2008 H8539-8540)
Considered as unfinished business.
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Hall (TX) objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 6323.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8539-8541)
Ms. Edwards (MD) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 553.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Science and Technology. H. Rept. 110-855.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Science and Technology. H. Rept. 110-855.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Science and Technology.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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.6323 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.6323 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.6323 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.6323 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.