PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 131.
Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · May 3, 2007
Public Buildings Cost Reduction Act of 2007 - (Sec. 2) Requires the Administrator of General Services to establish a program to accelerate the use of more cost-effective technologies and practices at General Services Administration (GSA) facilities. Requires such program to: (1) ensure centralized responsibility for the coordination of cost reduction recommendations, practices, and activities of all relevant federal agencies; (2) provide technical assistance and operational guidance to tenants in order to achieve a 20% reduction in operational costs through the application of cost-effective technologies and practices from 2003 levels at GSA facilities by not later than five years after this Act's enactment; and (3) establish methods to track the success of departments and agencies with respect to the reduction goal.
Requires the Administrator, as part of such program, to: (1) review the current use of cost-effective lighting technologies in GSA facilities and the availability to managers of GSA facilities of cost-effective lighting technologies; and (2) establish a cost-effective lighting technology acceleration program to achieve maximum feasible replacement of existing lighting technologies with more cost-effective lighting technologies in each GSA facility using available appropriations.
Requires the Administrator to annually ensure that a manager responsible for accelerating the use of cost-effective technologies and practices is designated for each GSA facility. Requires the Administrator to annually submit to Congress a plan that: (1) identifies the specific activities needed to achieve a 20% reduction in operational costs; (2) describes activities required and carried out to estimate the funds necessary to achieve such reduction; (3) describes the status of the implementation of cost-effective technologies and practices at GSA facilities; (4) identifies within the planning, budgeting, and construction process all types of GSA facility-related procedures that inhibit new and existing GSA facilities from implementing cost-effective technology and practices; (5) recommends language for uniform standards for use by federal agencies in implementing cost-effective technologies and practices; (6) reviews the budget process for capital programs with respect to alternatives for permitting federal agencies to retain all identified savings accrued as a result of the use of cost-effective technologies and practices and identifying cost savings that accrue from cost-effective technologies and practices; (7) achieves cost savings through the application of such technologies and practices sufficient to pay the incremental additional costs of installing them by not later than the five years after the date of installation; and (8) includes recommendations to address each of the matters and a plan for implementation of each recommendation.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 3) Requires the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish a demonstration program under which the Administrator shall provide competitive grants program to assist local governments with respect to local government buildings to: (1) deploy cost-effective technologies and practices; and (2) achieve operational cost savings, through the application of such technologies and practices.
Provides that the federal share of the cost of an activity carried out using a grant shall be 40%. Requires the Administrator to waive up to 100% of the local share of the cost of any grant under this Act if the community is economically distressed, pursuant to objective economic criteria established by the Administrator.
Requires the Administrator to issue guidelines to implement the grant program.
Authorizes appropriations to carry out this Act.
Requires the Administrator to report to Congress on the cost savings achieved, action taken, recommendations made under this Act, and any recommendations for further action.
Terminates the program on September 30, 2012.
People & committees
Sen. Boxer, Barbara [D-CA] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 131.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Boxer with amendments. With written report No. 110-60.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Boxer with amendments. With written report No. 110-60.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Ordered to be reported with amendments favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. (text of measure as introduced: CR S3840-3842)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S3840)
Introduced in Senate
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 S.992 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 S.992 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 S.992 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 S.992 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.