Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?
                                                      Calendar No. 298
115th Congress      }                                    {      Report
 2d Session         }                                    {     115-204




                              R E P O R T

                                 of the



                                 S. 701


                February 5, 2018.--Ordered to be printed


                         U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 

79-010                         WASHINGTON : 2018 

                     one hundred fifteenth congress
                             second session

                   JOHN THUNE, South Dakota, Chairman
 ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi         BILL NELSON, Florida
 ROY BLUNT, Missouri                  MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
 TED CRUZ, Texas                      AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
 DEB FISCHER, Nebraska                RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
 JERRY MORAN, Kansas                  BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
 DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska                 EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
 DEAN HELLER, Nevada                  TOM UDALL, New Mexico
 JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma            GARY C. PETERS, Michigan
 MIKE LEE, Utah                       TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
 RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin               TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
 CORY GARDNER, Colorado               CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
 TODD C. YOUNG, Indiana               JON TESTER, Montana
                       Nick Rossi, Staff Director
                 Adrian Arnakis, Deputy Staff Director
                    Jason Van Beek, General Counsel
                 Kim Lipsky, Democratic Staff Director
           Christopher Day, Democratic Deputy Staff Director

                                                      Calendar No. 298
115th Congress      }                                   {       Report
 2d Session         }                                   {      115-204




                February 5, 2018.--Ordered to be printed


Mr. Thune, from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany S. 701]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, to 
which was referred the bill (S. 701) to improve the 
competitiveness of United States manufacturing by designating 
and supporting manufacturing communities, having considered the 
same, reports favorably thereon with an amendment (in the 
nature of a substitute) and recommends that the bill (as 
amended) do pass.

                          Purpose of the Bill

    The purpose of S. 701, the Made in America Manufacturing 
Communities Act of 2017, is to improve the competitiveness of 
United States manufacturing by designating and supporting 
manufacturing communities.

                          Background and Needs

    The Investing in Manufacturing Communities Partnership 
(IMCP) was established by the Department of Commerce (DOC) at 
the Economic Development Administration (EDA) to incentivize 
and facilitate collaboration among private and public sector 
stakeholders in U.S. manufacturing communities. The IMCP is 
designed to support growth in the U.S. manufacturing sector, 
new manufacturing jobs, regional economic growth, and regional 
economic and workforce development objectives. Between 2014 and 
2015, 2-year IMCP designations were awarded to 24 locally 
organized, public-private consortiums across the United States 
that successfully demonstrated best practices in advancing 
innovative regional manufacturing economies.
    In order to qualify for an initial designation, an 
applicant is required to demonstrate the strength of an 
existing manufacturing industry in its region or community and 
to describe its proposed strategies to target investments and 
achieve measurable progress in six areas. The six areas are as 
follows: workforce and training; research and innovation; 
infrastructure and site development; supply chain support; 
trade and international investment; and operational improvement 
and capital access. Twelve of the 24 IMCP designations were 
renewed in November 2016, while the remaining 12 IMCP 
designations continued through 2017.
    The following IMCP participating agencies have identified 
existing programs that are aligned with manufacturing and have 
agreed to provide preferential consideration to program 
applications submitted for manufacturing communities: the DOC, 
the EDA, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, 
the International Trade Administration, the Department of 
Agriculture, the Department of Defense, the Department of 
Education, the Department of Energy, the Department of Housing 
and Urban Development, the Department of Labor, the Department 
of Transportation, the Environmental Protection Agency, the 
Small Business Administration, the National Science Foundation, 
the Appalachian Regional Commission, and the Delta Regional 
    The bill, which would make the IMCP program permanent, is 
supported by the following organizations: the American Small 
Manufacturers Coalition, the American Sustainable Business 
Council, the Association for Manufacturing Technology, the 
Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, the 
Manufacturing Alliance of Communities, the National Association 
of Counties, the National Association of Development 
Organizations, the National Skills Coalition, the National 
Tooling and Machining Association, the North American Die 
Casting Association, the Precision Machined Products 
Association, the Precision Metalforming Association, and the 
U.S. Conference of Mayors.

                         summary of provisions

    S. 701 would codify the existing IMCP program at the DOC to 
improve the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturing by 
designating consortiums as manufacturing communities and 
authorizing Federal agencies to provide them with preferential 
consideration for grant programs and financial and technical 
assistance. Pursuant to the bill, the DOC would designate 
consortiums as manufacturing communities for 2 years using a 
competitive process, including a process for renewal, and 
specified criteria. Recipients of financial or technical 
assistance from participating agencies would be allowed to use 
the funds to improve the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturing 
with investments that may include infrastructure, access to 
capital, promotion of exports and foreign direct investment, 
equipment upgrades, workforce training, energy or process 
efficiency, and other specified purposes.

                          Legislative History

    Senator Gillibrand (for herself and Senators Blumenthal, 
Moran, Capito, King, and Collins) introduced S. 701 on March 
22, 2017. The bill is also cosponsored by Senators Baldwin, 
Feinstein, and Klobuchar.
    A previous version of the bill, S. 2526, was introduced in 
the 114th Congress. S. 701 is identical to a first degree 
amendment offered by Senators Blumenthal and Klobuchar to S. 
3084, the American Innovation and Competitiveness Act, which 
was adopted by the Committee by voice vote on June 29, 2016. 
That provision was not ultimately included in the final version 
of S. 3084 that was enacted into law in January 2017.
    On April 5, 2017, the Committee met in open Executive 
Session and, by voice vote, ordered the bill reported favorably 
with an amendment (in the nature of a substitute). At the 
markup, the Committee adopted an amendment offered by Senator 
Klobuchar to allow the inclusion of information about the 
participation of women and underrepresented minorities in the 
application of a consortium to be a manufacturing community, 
and to permit the use of financial or technical assistance 
under the program for workforce recruitment and retention, 
including that of women and underrepresented minorities.

                            Estimated Costs

    In accordance with paragraph 11(a) of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate and section 403 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee provides the 
following cost estimate, prepared by the Congressional Budget 

S. 701--Made in America Manufacturing Communities Act of 2017

    S. 701 would expand and codify into law an existing pilot 
program that designates some consortiums of private and public 
sector entities that aim to improve manufacturing in a 
particular region as ``manufacturing communities'' and offers 
them preferential consideration for some federal assistance. 
Those designations expire in 2017.
    Under the bill, the Department of Commerce (DOC) also would 
be required to develop a program to which groups of public and 
private sector entities could apply to be designated as a 
manufacturing community. Such a designation would last for two 
years and could be renewed for a maximum of four additional 
years. Manufacturing communities would be eligible for 
preferential consideration for financial or technical 
assistance or awards from participating federal agencies or 
    Based on an analysis of information from DOC and the Small 
Business Administration, CBO estimates that implementing S. 701 
would cost $5 million over the 2018-2022 period for the 
Economic Development Administration within DOC to operate the 
program and for increased administrative costs to federal 
agencies that participate in the program; such spending would 
be subject to the availability of appropriated funds.
    Enacting S. 701 would not affect direct spending or 
revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply. CBO 
estimates that enacting S. 701 would not increase net direct 
spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 
10-year periods beginning in 2028.
    S. 701 contains no intergovernmental or private sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and 
would not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal 
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Stephen Rabent. 
The estimate was approved by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy 
Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

                      Regulatory Impact Statement

    In accordance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides the 
following evaluation of the regulatory impact of the 
legislation, as reported:

                       number of persons covered

    The bill would cover consortiums that are already subject 
to similar eligibility policies and procedures under the 
existing program at the DOC. Each would include at least one 
institution of higher education, private sector entity, and 
government entity. Currently, there are 24 consortiums that 
have been granted manufacturing community designations by the 
DOC under 2 rounds of designations.

                            economic impact

    The bill is intended to have a positive economic impact 
with respect to manufacturing competitiveness for individuals, 
consumers, and businesses affiliated with or located near 
designated manufacturing communities. Specifically, a member of 
a consortium designated as a manufacturing community may 
receive preferential consideration for and subsequent award of 
financial or technical assistance under a program of a 
participating agency. Such assistance may include investments 
in infrastructure, access to capital, promotion of exports and 
foreign direct investment, equipment or facility upgrades, 
workforce training, recruitment and retention, energy or 
process efficiencies, business incubators, site preparation, 
advanced research, supply chain development, and small business 


    The bill would not impact the personal privacy of 
individuals, since the bill would affect institutions of higher 
education, private companies, and State and local governments 
that voluntarily apply through consortiums to be designated as 
manufacturing communities or receive financial or technical 
assistance from the DOC under the IMCP program.


    The bill would not increase paperwork requirements for 
eligible consortiums that voluntarily apply to participate 
beyond what is currently required under the existing IMCP 
program. Under the bill, applications to the IMCP program would 
include the following: a description of the regional boundaries 
of the consortium; a description of the manufacturing 
concentration of the consortium; an integrated assessment of 
the local industrial ecosystem of the region of the consortium; 
an evidence-based plan for developing components of such 
ecosystem; a description of the investments and the 
implementation strategy the consortium intends to use to 
address gaps in such ecosystem; and a description of the 
outcome-based metrics, benchmarks, and milestones that the 
consortium will track to gauge performance of the strategy of 
the consortium.

                   Congressionally Directed Spending

    In compliance with paragraph 4(b) of rule XLIV of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides that no 
provisions contained in the bill, as reported, meet the 
definition of congressionally directed spending items under the 

                      Section-by-Section Analysis

Sec. 1. Short title.

    This section would provide that the Act may be cited as the 
``Made in America Manufacturing Communities Act of 2017.''

Sec. 2. Definitions.

    This section would define the terms ``Manufacturing 
Community Support Program,'' ``participating agency,'' 
``participating program,'' and ``Secretary.''

Sec. 3. Program to designate and support manufacturing communities.

    This section would require the Secretary of Commerce to 
establish a program to improve the manufacturing 
competitiveness of U.S. manufacturing by designating 
consortiums for 2 years and supporting them as manufacturing 
communities. The eligibility requirements for such a consortium 
would include it do the following: represent a region that is 
large enough to contain critical elements of the key 
technologies or supply chain prioritized by the consortium and 
small enough to enable close collaboration among the 
consortium's members; include at least one institution of 
higher education, a private sector entity, and a government 
entity; and have a lead applicant that is a district 
organization, an Indian tribe, a State or political subdivision 
of a State, an institution of higher education, or a nonprofit 
organization or association cooperating with a political 
subdivision of a State. This section also would provide for 
competitive application and renewal processes. The section 
would allow other Federal agencies to support the manufacturing 
communities by awarding them financial or technical assistance, 
providing preferential consideration when members of a 
consortium apply for Federal or technical assistance, or 
providing a Federal point of contact to help consortiums access 
Federal funds or technical assistance.

                        Changes in Existing Law

    In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee states that the 
bill as reported would make no change to existing law.