U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

79–010 

" ! SENATE 115TH CONGRESS

2d Session 

REPORT

2018

115–218 

Calendar No. 365 

CONCRETE MASONRY PRODUCTS RESEARCH, EDUCATION, AND PROMOTION 

ACT OF 2017 

R E P O R T 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND 

TRANSPORTATION 

ON

S. 374 

MARCH 22, 2018.—Ordered to be printed 


congress.#13
(II) 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION 

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 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia MARGARET WOOD HASSAN, New Hampshire 

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. 365 

115TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 115–218 

CONCRETE MASONRY PRODUCTS RESEARCH, EDUCATION, 

AND PROMOTION ACT OF 2017 

MARCH 22, 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. 374] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, to 

which was referred the bill (S. 374) to enable concrete masonry 

products manufacturers to establish, finance, and carry out a coordinated program of research, education, and promotion to improve, maintain, and develop markets for concrete masonry products, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon without amendment and recommends that the bill do pass. 

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of S. 374, the Concrete Masonry Products Research, 

Education, and Promotion Act of 2017, is to enable concrete masonry products manufacturers to establish, finance, and carry out 

a ‘‘check-off’’ program, a coordinated program of research, education, and promotion to improve, maintain, and develop markets 

for concrete masonry products. 

BACKGROUND AND NEEDS

Concrete block is a durable product used in the construction of 

public infrastructure, commercial facilities, and homes. Virtually 

every congressional district has at least one concrete masonry producer, and nationwide the industry employs thousands of workers. 

The economic downturn, however, affected the industry. 

Check-off programs are industry-wide, coordinated efforts to promote research, marketing, and education regarding specific catVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:35 Mar 24, 2018 Jkt 079010 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR218.XXX SR218
2 

egories of generic products. They allow producers of commodities to 

collect funds from their members to support promotion efforts. Promotion must be generic and cannot focus on a particular producer. 

Ultimately, check-off programs seek to improve the market position 

of commodities by expanding markets, increasing demand, and developing new uses for these products. 

Currently, there are 35 commodity check-off programs in place 

(e.g., the programs that sponsor campaigns like ‘‘Got Milk?’’ and 

‘‘Pork, the Other White Meat,’’ and ‘‘The Incredible, Edible Egg’’). 

These programs allow entire industries to pool their resources with 

non-branded commodities. While most check-off programs are agriculture-related, check-off programs for the propane and oil heat industries also exist. Because check-off campaigns traditionally involve agricultural commodities, the Department of Agriculture has 

authorized most of them. The Department of Commerce (DOC) 

would authorize the check-off program that S. 374 envisions. It 

would be the first commodity check-off program to be administered 

by the DOC. 

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS

S. 374 would build off of the long-established Federal check-off 

program for agricultural goods and would establish a similar program for concrete masonry products. The bill would direct the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to create a Concrete Masonry Products Board (Board). The Board’s mission would be to develop, finance, and carry out a collective research, education, and promotion campaign to maintain, strengthen, and expand the marketplace for concrete masonry products. Mandatory fees assessed on 

concrete masonry manufacturers would be collected by the Board 

and would finance these activities. Further, S. 374 would authorize 

the Secretary to issue other orders related to concrete masonry, 

subject to simple majority votes in referenda, and would provide 

the Secretary with numerous tools to implement and enforce the 

Act. S. 374 includes limitations on the obligation of funds, a Government Accountability Office (GAO) reporting requirement, and a 

requirement that the DOC study and report on the propriety of applying a commodity check-off program model to a non-agricultural 

industry. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

S. 374 was introduced on February 14, 2017, by Senator Blunt 

(for himself and Senator Nelson). The measure is also cosponsored 

by 10 other Senators and was referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate. On August 2, 

2017, in open Executive Session, the Committee, by voice vote, ordered the bill reported favorably without amendment. 

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: 

3 

S. 374—Concrete Masonry Products Research, Education, and Promotion Act of 2017 

Summary: S. 374 would establish the Concrete Masonry Products 

Board (board), upon approval of a referendum by producers of masonry products made from concrete (CMP), such as cinder blocks. 

The board would develop research and education programs as well 

as efforts to promote CMP in domestic markets. Funding for those 

activities would be derived from assessments on CMP manufacturers based on the number of masonry units sold each year. The bill 

would direct the Secretary of Commerce to organize and hold the 

referendum; the agency’s costs would be reimbursed by the board 

from initial collections of assessments. 

CBO estimates that enacting S. 374 would increase net revenues 

by $77 million and increase direct spending by $71 million over the 

2018–2027 period, leading to a net decrease in the deficit of $6 million over the 10-year period. Pay-as-you-go procedures apply because enacting the legislation would affect direct spending and revenues. In addition, CBO estimates that implementing S. 374 would 

cost $2 million over the 2017–2022 period; such spending would be 

subject to the availability of appropriated funds. 

CBO estimates that enacting S. 374 would not increase net direct 

spending or on-budget deficits by more than $5 billion in any of the 

four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2028. 

S. 374 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would not affect the 

budgets of state, local, or tribal governments. 

S. 374 would impose private-sector mandates on CMP manufacturers. On the basis of information from industry experts, CBO estimates that the annual cost of the mandates would fall well below 

the annual threshold established in UMRA for private-sector mandates ($156 million in 2017, adjusted annually for inflation). 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary effect of S. 374 is shown in the following table. The costs of 

this legislation fall primarily within budget function 370 (commerce 

and housing credit). 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2017– 

2022 

2017– 

2027 

INCREASES IN REVENUES 

Estimated Revenues ....................... 0 0 6 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 10 31 77 

INCREASES IN DIRECT SPENDING 

Estimated Budget Authority ............ 0 0 6 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 6 31 73 

Estimated Outlays ........................... 0 0 3 9 8 8 8 9 9 9 7 29 71 

NET INCREASE OR DECREASE (¥) IN THE DEFICIT FROM INCREASES IN DIRECT SPENDING AND REVENUES 

Impact on Deficit ............................ 0 0 ¥3 1 * * * * * * ¥3 ¥3 ¥6 

Note: * = between ¥$500,000 and zero, components may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

Basis of estimate: In CBO’s view, the board that would be established under S. 374 would be acting on behalf of the federal government. While the board would be formed only upon approval by a 

majority of the producers of CMP, once created, the requirement to 

pay assessments would be compulsory and could be enforced by the 

federal government’s sovereign authority, for example through a 

court order. Hence, in keeping with guidance specified by the 1967 

4 

1For more information see, How CBO Determines Whether to Classify an Activity as Governmental When Estimating Its Budgetary Effects, Congressional Budget Office, June 2017. 

President’s Commission on Budget Concepts, the proposed board’s 

cash flows should be recorded in the federal budget.1

Based on information from industry representatives, CBO anticipates that the referendum would be approved by the industry and 

that the board and supporting staff would be appointed near the 

end of fiscal year 2018. We expect that assessments would be collected beginning in the first half of fiscal year 2019; the bill would 

require assessments to be paid quarterly. 

The bill would apply to producers of both concrete block and concrete pavers, but CBO expects that only producers of concrete block 

would participate in the referendum. Because there is little differentiation among concrete blocks across manufacturers, all producers of concrete blocks would benefit from an industry-wide research and promotion program. Manufacturers of concrete pavers, 

on the other hand, are able to distinguish their products in ways 

that allow consumers to recognize individual brands. Consequently, 

those producers have little incentive to participate in an industrywide marketing effort. Based on information from manufacturers of 

concrete pavers, CBO expects that those producers would not participate in the referendum. 

For this estimate, CBO assumes that the bill will be enacted 

near the end of 2017, that the necessary amounts will be appropriated each year. Estimated spending is based on historical patterns for similar programs. 

Revenues 

S. 374 would authorize the Board to levy an assessment of one 

cent on each concrete block product sold by all CMP manufacturers 

in the United States. Based on information from industry experts 

and historical sales information, CBO expects about 1.1 billion concrete blocks will be sold in 2018 and we expect sales to grow with 

inflation, yielding, on average, estimated collections of about $12 

million per year. Those amounts would be recorded in the budget 

as revenues, because payment of the assessments would be compulsory, and could be enforced by federal courts. CBO estimates that 

enacting S. 374 would increase gross revenues by $105 million over 

the 2018–2027 period. 

Because excise taxes and other indirect business taxes (such as 

assessments by the board) reduce the base of income and payroll 

taxes, higher amounts of those indirect business taxes would lead 

to reductions in revenues from income and payroll taxes. As a result, gross assessments would be partially offset by a loss of receipts of about 25 percent each year. Thus, CBO estimates that enacting S. 374 would increase net revenues by $77 million over the 

2018–2027 period. 

Direct spending 

S. 374 would authorize the board to spend a portion of the 

amounts collected, without further appropriation, on research and 

education efforts as well as on programs to promote sales of CMP. 

The bill also would authorize the board to borrow funds to cover 

the board’s start-up expenses and to invest collections in interestVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:35 Mar 24, 2018 Jkt 079010 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR218.XXX SR218
5 

bearing securities issued by the Treasury, thereby generating additional funding for its activities. Expenditures of assessments and 

accrued interest would be considered direct spending. 

S. 374 would limit the board’s authority to spend its estimated 

collections throughout the 2018–2029 period and would further 

limit the board’s authority to obligate funds in 2027 and 2028. Over 

that period, the board would be authorized to obligate 73 percent 

of its estimated collections. The bill also creates a formula that authorizes the board to obligate more or less than this amount depending on whether the board over or under estimated its collections in previous years or did not obligate the full amount it was 

authorized to obligate. For this estimate, CBO expects the board to 

estimate its collections accurately and to obligate the entire authorized amount each year. In 2027 and 2028, the board would be required to further limit obligations to 62 percent of the last actual 

collection in those years. Based on historical spending patterns for 

similar activities, CBO estimates that expenditures by the proposed board would total $71 million over the 2018–2027 period. 

Beginning in 2030, the obligation limitations would expire and 

the board would be authorized to spend the full amount of its estimated collections. The board also would be authorized to spend a 

portion of the amounts that were collected but unavailable for obligation over the 2019–2030 period, as well as the interest earned on 

any such amounts during that period. CBO estimates that $52 million would be available to spend from those amounts. 

Spending subject to appropriation 

S. 374 would direct the Secretary of Commerce to develop an 

order to establish the board and set out its authorities, and to conduct a referendum among eligible CMP manufacturers to approve 

the order. After passage of the referendum, the Secretary would be 

responsible for approving the board’s programs and budgets each 

year. The bill also would direct the Secretary of Commerce and the 

Government Accountability Office to prepare several reports for the 

Congress to explain the effect the board has on the concrete masonry block industry and the effectiveness of the referendum model 

on a nonagricultural industry. Based on the cost of similar reports 

and activities, CBO estimates that implementing those provisions 

would cost about $2 million over the 2017–2022 period, assuming 

the availability of appropriated funds. 

Pay-As-You-Go considerations: The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act 

of 2010 establishes budget-reporting and enforcement procedures 

for legislation affecting direct spending or revenues. The net 

changes in outlays and revenues that are subject to those pay-asyou-go procedures are shown in the following table. 

CBO ESTIMATE OF PAY-AS-YOU-GO EFFECTS FOR S. 374, AS ORDERED REPORTED BY THE SENATE 

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION ON AUGUST 2, 2017 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2017– 

2022 

2017– 

2027 

NET INCREASE OR DECREASE (¥) IN THE DEFICIT 

Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Impact .... 0 0 ¥3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 ¥3 ¥3 ¥6 

Memorandum: 

Changes in Revenues ............ 0 0 6 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 10 31 77 

6 

CBO ESTIMATE OF PAY-AS-YOU-GO EFFECTS FOR S. 374, AS ORDERED REPORTED BY THE SENATE 

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION ON AUGUST 2, 2017—Continued 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2017– 

2022 

2017– 

2027 

Changes in Outlays ............... 0 0 3 9 8 8 9 9 9 9 7 29 71 

Note: Components may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

Increase in long-term direct spending and deficits: Each year beginning in 2030, the board would be authorized to spend up to 20 

percent of the amounts it previously collected but was not authorized to spend over the 2018–2029 period, as well as any interest 

accrued on those funds. CBO estimates that this newly available 

balance would total $52 million and would be spent without further 

appropriation in 2030 and later years. 

Moreover, because the obligation limitation on the board’s authority to spend its estimated collections would expire in 2029 and 

because the board would be authorized to spend gross assessments 

collected after 2029, rather than the net collections after accounting for reductions in revenues from income and payroll taxes, CBO 

estimates that, on net, implementing S. 374 would increase the deficit in each year beginning in 2030. However, CBO estimates that 

enacting S. 374 would not increase net direct spending or on-budget deficits by more than $5 billion in any of the four consecutive 

10-year periods beginning in 2028. 

Estimated impact on state, local, and tribal governments: S. 374 

contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in UMRA and 

would not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal governments. 

Estimated impact on the private sector: S. 374 would impose private-sector mandates on manufacturers of concrete masonry products, such as cinder blocks. Those manufacturers would be required 

to pay to the board an assessment of one cent per masonry unit 

sold. CBO estimates that the cost of this mandate would amount 

to about $12 million annually on average. The bill also would impose mandates on CMP manufacturers by requiring them to maintain records and make those records available for inspection as required by the board. Based on information from industry experts, 

the cost of complying with the recordkeeping requirements would 

be small. Consequently, CBO estimates that the aggregate cost of 

the private-sector mandates in the bill would fall well below the 

annual threshold established in UMRA ($156 million in 2017, adjusted annually for inflation). 

Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Stephen Rabent; Impact on 

State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Rachel Austin; Impact on 

the Private Sector: Logan Smith. 

Estimate 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: 

7 

NUMBER OF PERSONS COVERED

The legislation would apply to manufacturers of concrete masonry products. 

ECONOMIC IMPACT

The legislation is not expected to have an adverse economic impact on the Nation. 

PRIVACY

S. 374 would not have a negative impact on the personal privacy 

of individuals. 

PAPERWORK

S. 374 would require the Secretary to issue a proposed order and 

allow for public comment and review before its adoption to establish the Board. The Board would be required to submit, for approval, to the Secretary any contracts or agreements to carry out 

the Board’s mission, and the Board would be required to submit 

periodic audits and reviews to the Secretary. S. 374 would require 

a study and report by the Secretary to examine the propriety and 

efficacy of applying the commodity check-off program model to a 

non-agricultural industry. S. 374 also would require the Comptroller General of the United States to submit to Congress and the 

Secretary a report examining how the Board spends assessments 

collected, among other things. 

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 ‘‘Concrete Masonry Products Research, Education, and Promotion Act.’’ 

Section 2. Declaration of policy 

This section would contain congressional findings that concrete 

masonry products are important to the U.S. economy and that 

nothing in the bill would be construed to control production of concrete masonry products. 

Section 3. Definitions 

This section would define certain terms used in the Act. 

Section 4. Issuance of orders 

This section would require the Secretary to issue an order to 

manufacturers of concrete masonry products, to publish the order 

in the Federal Register within 90 days after receiving a proposed 

8 

order or a request for a proposed order, and to provide for no less 

than a 30-day comment period. 

Section 5. Required terms in orders 

This section would set the terms for the order required under 

section 4 of this bill. The order would include terms establishing 

a ‘‘Concrete Masonry Products Board’’ to carry out a generic promotion, research, and information program for concrete products. 

The terms of the order would require manufacturers and importers 

to maintain and make available specified records. 

Section 6. Assessments 

This section would require concrete manufacturers to pay assessments with respect to concrete manufactured and marketed in the 

United States. No less than 50 percent of the assessments paid by 

a manufacturer would be required to be used to support research, 

education, and promotion programs and projects in support of the 

geographic region of that manufacturer. 

Section 7. Referenda 

This section would provide for a 60-day period preceding the proposed effective date of an order, during which the Secretary would 

conduct a referendum for order approval among the manufacturers 

required to pay assessments. This section also would outline referendum procedures. 

Section 8. Petition and review 

This section would allow a person, subject to the order, to file a 

petition with the Secretary and would establish jurisdiction in Federal district court for review of the petition. 

Section 9. Enforcement 

This section would establish jurisdiction in Federal district court 

for enforcement of the order. 

Section 10. Investigation and power to subpoena 

This section would confer upon the Secretary investigatory powers, including subpoena authority, as necessary to administer this 

legislation. 

Section 11. Suspension or termination 

This section would direct the Secretary to suspend or terminate 

any order or provision that obstructs or does not tend to effectuate 

the purposes of this Act or that is not favored by a majority of persons voting in a referendum. 

Section 12. Amendments to orders 

This section would protect the petition and review provisions of 

section 8 of the legislation from further amendment. 

Section 13. Effect on other laws 

This section would contain an explicit non-preemption clause concerning other Federal or State law authorizing research, education, 

and promotion relating to concrete masonry products. 

9 

Section 14. Regulations 

This section would authorize the Secretary to issue additional 

regulations as may be necessary to carry out this Act consistent 

with the power vested in the Secretary under this legislation. 

Section 15. Limitation on expenditures for administrative expenses 

This section would provide that funds appropriated to carry out 

this legislation may not be used for the payment of the expenses 

or expenditures of the Board in administering the order. 

Section 16. Limitations on obligations of funds 

This section would prohibit the Board from obligating excess 

funds, as determined by a formulation set forth in this section. It 

would require that such excess funds be deposited in an escrow account and would establish requirements for the release of such 

funds from escrow. 

Section 17. Study and report by the Government Accountability Office 

This section would require a GAO study to examine how the 

Board spends assessments collected, including the following: the 

extent to which the Board’s reported activities would help achieve 

its annual objectives; the market impact of the Board’s activities, 

including changes in demand, market share of competing products, 

overall market size, jobs, prices, cost to the Federal Government; 

whether key statutory requirements are met; and the issues regarding the program’s oversight and administration. The Study 

would be submitted to Congress and the Secretary. 

Section 18. Study and report by the Department of Commerce 

This section would require a study and report by the Secretary 

to examine the propriety and efficacy of applying the commodity 

check-off program model to a non-agricultural industry, no later 

than 3 years after the date of enactment of this Act. 

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. 

Æ