[Senate Report 119-81]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 192
119th Congress } { Report
SENATE
1st Session } { 119-81
_______________________________________________________________________
CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE MANUFACTURING FEASIBILITY ACT
__________
R E P O R T
of the
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
on
S. 1872
October 16, 2025.--Ordered to be printed
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
69-010 WASHINGTON : 2025
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
one hundred nineteenth congress
first session
TED CRUZ, Texas, Chairman
JOHN THUNE, South Dakota MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
JERRY MORAN, Kansas EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska GARY C. PETERS, Michigan
MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
TODD YOUNG, Indiana TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
TED BUDD, North Carolina JACKY ROSEN, Nevada
ERIC SCHMITT, Missouri BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico
JOHN CURTIS, Utah JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER, Colorado
BERNIE MORENO, Ohio JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania
TIM SHEEHY, Montana ANDY KIM, New Jersey
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware
CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming
Brad Grantz, Majority Staff Director
Lila Harper Helms, Democratic Staff Director
Calendar No. 192
119th Congress } { Report
SENATE
1st Session } { 119-81
======================================================================
CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE MANUFACTURING FEASIBILITY ACT
_______
October 16, 2025.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Cruz, from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 1872]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, to
which was referred the bill (S. 1872) to direct the Secretary
of Commerce to conduct a study on the feasibility of
manufacturing in the United States products for critical
infrastructure sectors, and for other purposes, 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. 1872 is to direct the Department of
Commerce to conduct a study on products utilized in critical
infrastructure that are being imported into the United States
due to manufacturing, material, or supply chain constraints and
the feasibility of manufacturing them within the United States.
BACKGROUND AND NEEDS
Critical infrastructure undergirds the American economy.
Pursuant to Presidential Policy Directive 21,\1\ the Department
of Homeland Security has identified 16 critical infrastructure
sectors whose assets, systems, and networks are considered
vital to the United States and whose incapacitation or
destruction would have a debilitating effect on the country.
These sectors are the chemical sector, commercial facilities
sector, communications sector, critical manufacturing sector,
dams sector, defense industrial base sector, emergency services
sector, energy sector, financial services sector, food and
agriculture sector, government services and facilities sector,
healthcare and public health sector, information technology
sector, nuclear reactors, materials and waste sector,
transportation systems sector, and water and wastewater
sector.\2\ Ensuring these sectors remain strong, functioning,
and resilient is important to the health of the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Obama Administration, Executive Office of the President of the
United States, Office of the Press Secretary, ``Presidential Policy
Directive 21--Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience,''
February 12, 2013, https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-
office/2013/02/12/presidential-policy-directive-critical-
infrastructure-security-and-resil.
\2\``Critical Infrastructure Sectors,'' Department of Homeland
Security Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, April 2,
2024, https://www.cisa.gov/topics/critical-infrastructure-
security-and-resilience/critical-infrastructure-sectors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critical infrastructure depends on manufacturing. After the
COVID-19 pandemic, various supply chain shortages showed that
U.S. domestic manufacturing faces several challenges, including
global supply chain reliance, labor shortages, high production
costs, and outdated infrastructure.\3\ These challenges can
create national security and economic issues for the
country.\4\ As products within critical infrastructure sectors
are inherently vital to the national and economic security of
the United States, the Department of Commerce should know what
products are being manufactured outside of the United States
and the feasibility of their production within the United
States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\Sean Harapko, ``How COVID-19 Impacted Supply Chains and What
Comes Next,'' Ernst & Young, May 27, 2025, https://www.ey.com/en_us/
insights/supply-chain/how-covid-19-
impacted-supply-chains-and-what-comes-next.
\4\Natalie Tham and Jack McGee, ``Making Things, Better: Federal
Support for U.S. Manufacturing,'' Bipartisan Policy Center, April 3,
2024, https://bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/federal-
support-for-manufacturing/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS
S. 1872 would do the following:
Direct the Secretary of Commerce to conduct a study
on products within critical infrastructure sectors that
are being imported into the United States and the
benefits and feasibility of manufacturing them within
the United States.
Require the study to be reported to Congress and be
made publicly available.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
S. 1872, the Critical Infrastructure Manufacturing
Feasibility Act, was introduced on May 22, 2025, by Senator
Ernst (for herself and Senator Blunt Rochester) and was
referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate. On June 25, 2025, the Committee
met in open Executive Session and, by voice vote, ordered S.
1872 reported favorably with an amendment (in the nature of a
substitute).
H.R. 1721, a House companion bill, was introduced on
February 27, 2025, by Representative Miller-Meeks (for herself
and Representative Schrier) and was referred to the Committee
on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives. On
March 4, 2025, that Committee met in open Executive Session
and, by voice vote, ordered H.R. 1721 reported favorably
without amendment. Representative Houchin is an additional
cosponsor. On April 28, 2025, H.R. 1721 passed the House by
voice vote under suspension of the rules.
118th Congress
H.R. 5390, the Critical Infrastructure Manufacturing
Feasibility Act, was introduced on September 12, 2023, by
Representative Miller-Meeks (for herself and Representatives
Bucshon, Spanberger, Kuster, Johnson (OH), and Schrier) and was
referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House
of Representatives. Representatives Blunt Rochester and Craig
were additional cosponsors. On December 6, 2023, that Committee
met in open Executive Session and, by vote of 45-0, ordered
H.R. 5390 reported favorably without amendment. On May 14,
2024, H.R. 5390 passed the House by voice vote under suspension
of the rules.
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
Office:
S. 1872 would require the Department of Commerce to
identify within each critical infrastructure sector high-demand
products that are imported to the United States because of
manufacturing, material, or supply chain constraints. The
department would analyze the feasibility, costs, and benefits
of producing such products in the United States and report its
findings to the Congress.
Based on the cost of similar activities, CBO estimates that
implementing S. 1872 would cost $1 million for the work of four
employees in 2026, at a cost of about $220,000 each, along with
the purchase of data and survey contracts. Any related spending
would be subject to the availability of appropriated funds.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Margot Berman.
The estimate was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy
Director of Budget Analysis.
Phillip L. Swagel,
Director, Congressional Budget Office.
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
S. 1872 would not create any new programs or impose any new
regulatory requirements, and, therefore, would not subject any
individuals or businesses to new regulations.
Economic Impact
S. 1872 is not expected to have a negative impact on the
Nation's economy.
Privacy
S. 1872 would have no impact on the personal privacy of
individuals.
Paperwork
S. 1872 would not increase paperwork requirements for
private individuals or businesses. The bill would require one
report from the Secretary of the Department of Commerce within
18 months after the enactment of this legislation on products
used in critical infrastructure sectors that are in high demand
and being imported due to a manufacturing, material, or supply
chain constraint in the United States. The report would also
analyze the costs and benefits of manufacturing in the United
States, the feasibility of manufacturing in the United States,
the feasibility and impediments to manufacturing the products
in certain areas within the United States, and any regulatory
barriers to manufacturing the products within the United
States. The Secretary would be required to submit the report to
Congress, with a classified annex, and publish the report on
the public website of the Department of Commerce.
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
rule.
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
Section 1. Short title.
This section would provide that the bill may be cited as
the ``Critical Infrastructure Manufacturing Feasibility Act''.
Section 2. Study on critical infrastructure manufacturing in the United
States.
This section would define the term ``critical
infrastructure sector''. This section would also direct the
Secretary of Commerce to conduct a study no later than 1 year
after enactment to identify any product necessary for the
construction, maintenance, operation, or restoration of each
critical infrastructure sector that is in high demand and being
imported due to a manufacturing, material, or supply chain
constraint in the United States; analyze the costs and benefits
to manufacturing any of those products within the United
States; identify if any of those products can be feasibly
manufactured in rural areas or industrial parks; and identify
any Federal barriers that inhibit or increase the cost of
manufacturing the products within the United States.
This section would require the results of the study to be
reported to Congress no later than 18 months after enactment
and would include recommendations relating to manufacturing the
products in the United States. It would also require the
Secretary to make an unclassified report publicly available on
the Department of Commerce's website.
Lastly, this section would clarify that this Act would not
expand the Secretary of Commerce's authority to compel
information.
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.