APPENDIX 7
Motor Vehicle Competitions
A. General
- This Appendix provides joint guidance by OMB and The General
Services Administration (GSA) for use in cost comparisons involving the
provision of motor vehicle fleet management services. It apples to conversions
to or from in-house, contract or interservice support agreement (ISSA).
Agencies should consider the costs, benefits and feasibility of using the
agency's fleet management system, the GSA Interagency Fleet Management System
(IFMS), other ISSA providers and qualified commercial management providers.
B. Specific
- 1. Cost comparisons will comply with Part I and Part II of this
Supplement, and as discussed in this Appendix.
- 2. Cost comparisons should distinguish between the benefits of
centralized Government vehicle acquisition and the potential benefits of fleet
acquisition, operation, maintenance, and disposal management support services.
Solicitations should permit or may require offerors to compete vehicle asset
costs separately from fleet management services.
- 3. In accordance with Part I, Chapter 2 of this Supplement, all
Government offerors will certify that their performance cost estimates or
reimbursable rates are calculated in accordance with this Supplement.
- 4. Agencies may include all of their fleet requirements, including
those currently being met by the GSA/IFMS or the private sector. Vehicles
currently provided by the GSA/IFMS may be included in the agency's in-house
cost estimate as IFMS vehicles.
C. Developing the requesting agency's in-house motor vehicle
fleet management costs
- 1. The requesting agency's in-house costs are calculated as provided
in Parts I and II of this Supplement and entered on Lines 1 through 7 as
appropriate. Care should be taken to separate vehicle asset costs (cost of
vehicles) from vehicle acquisition and other administrative management support
costs.
D. Developing comparable motor vehicle fleet costs
- 1. Competitions between a requesting agency, private sector offeror,
the GSA/IFMS or another ISSA offeror may require that the requesting agency
make certain adjustments in scope and cost to ensure that the cost comparison
is equitable. These scope and cost adjustments, as discussed below, include:
--Contract Price
--Contract Administration Costs
--Additional Costs
--One-time Conversion Costs
--Gain/Loss on Disposal/Transfer of Assets
--Federal Income Taxes
--Other Adjustment Costs
--Minimum Differential
- 2. Contract Price (Line 9 and Line 16).--The contract price is the
price proposed by the lowest priced, fully qualified commercial offeror, IFMS
or ISSA offeror. This will be obtained by issuing a solicitation requesting
offers. The agency should be careful that the solicitation accurately describes
its fleet management needs.
- 3. Contract administration costs (Line 10 and Line 17).
- Include costs, as appropriate from Part II Table 3-1.
- 4. One-time conversion costs (Line 11 and Line 18).
a. One-time conversion costs may result when a contractor, IFMS or
ISSA offeror takes over the operation of the fleet. This can involve the costs
of the transfer of Government-owned supplies or temporary labor costs incurred
to facilitate the transition to a new fleet manager.
b. When items of material become available for transfer to the
contractor, IFMS or ISSA, material related conversion costs may result. If
materials consumed as a part of the requesting agency's MEO are clearly
identified in the PWS to be transferred to the contractor, IFMS or ISSA, the
value of those materials and supplies are common costs and not considered a
part of the comparison.
c. If, however, those same materials are not to be provided to the
contractor, IFMS or ISSA offeror, but are instead to be transferred to another
agency location or excessed, the value of that material should be subtracted
from the contract, IFMS or ISSA offers as a net savings to the Government
resulting from the conversion.
- 5. Gain on disposal of assets (Line 12 and Line 19).
a. If an agency requires the contractor, IFMS or ISSA to replace
existing Government (agency) owned vehicles (assets) by a specific date, the
projected fair market value of those existing assets, as established by
generally available industry guides, are subtracted from the contractor's, IFMS
or ISSA's cost estimates. These values represent a net "savings" caused by
conversion.
b. Agencies may provide that vehicle replacement by the contractor,
IFMS or ISSA offeror will be in accordance with the Government's existing or
MEO replacement schedule. In this case, all parties to the competition should
assume replacement at the same rate. Values from existing fleet to the
Government apply to all alternatives equally.
c. Agencies may also continue to provide vehicles for contractor,
IFMS or ISSA fleet management. No adjustments are necessary.
d. Finally, agencies may require replacement by the contractor,
IFMS or ISSA offeror and may allow the IFMS or ISSA offeror to simply assume
ownership of the existing fleet as Federal agencies. In this case, the agency,
IFMS or ISSA offeror receives a gain--and a considerable competitive advantage
over the contract bid--estimated at the fair market value of the existing
fleet. An amount equal to the fair market value of the existing fleet is added
to the agency, IFMS or ISSA offeror bid at Line 19 for cost comparison
purposes.
- 6. Federal income tax (Line 13 and Line 20).
a. Agencies should recognize the current contract support
identified in Line 6, above. Calculate the total Federal Income Tax, based upon
the contractor's offer (Line 9) and Appendix 5, Tax Rate Table. Subtract from
the contractor's estimated tax liability the Federal taxes paid within the in-
house cost estimate (estimated from the appropriate share of Line 6 and as
described in the Management Plan) and enter the remainder.
b. The same treatment may be afforded to the GSA/IFMS or ISSA
offer, if the offeror certifies the value of its contract support contained
within its overall cost estimate. This estimate must be available to the
requesting agency's Independent Review Officer for review and concurrence.
7. Conversion differential (Line 7, Line 14 and Line 21).
- The standard minimum differential, as provided in Part II of this
Supplement, shall be applied to the contract, IFMS and ISSA offers. If the cost
comparison is being conducted to determine if motor vehicle fleet management
services should be converted from contract, IFMS or ISSA performance to
in-house agency operation, the conversion differential is added (on Line 7) to
the in-house performance cost estimate. If the cost comparison is being
conducted to determine if motor vehicle fleet management services should be
converted from in-house operation to contract, IFMS or ISSA performance, the
conversion differential is added (on Line 14 and Line 21) to the contract, IFMS
or ISSA performance cost estimates.
- 8. Other IFMS/ISSA Scope Adjustments (Line 22).
a. It is not the intent of this Supplement to require the IFMS or
other potential ISSA offerors to alter their methods of operation to provide
unique or site specific services. While such services may meet agency missions
and may legitimately be included in the solicitation, additional adjustments to
the IFMS/ISSA cost estimate may be necessary to reflect differences in the
bids. Examples of such services include: dispatching, vehicle transition,
maintenance work warranties, certain disposal services/costs, accessory
installations and removals, tire replacements, etc.
b. Agencies should identify the differences between the
requirements of the solicitation (contractor bid) and the IFMS/ISSA cost
estimate. The agency determines if any item or combination of items will impact
the agency's ability to perform. If the agency's ability to perform would be
adversely impacted, the IFMS/ISSA cost estimates may be rejected as
non-responsive. If the differences will have minimal agency performance
implications, and/or can continue to be performed by agency personnel, the
IFMS/ISSA cost estimates will be adjusted for purposes of comparison with the
contractor and MEO offers, based upon the comparable costs contained in the
agency's MEO.
c. A complete record of all adjustments to the contractor's, IFMS
and ISSA's cost estimates should be maintained and made available to the public
upon request.
E. Motor vehicle cost comparison
- 1. A Motor Vehicle Cost Comparison Form (MVCCF) has been developed.
Use of this form will help agencies move through the cost comparison in a
structured manner. The Form has been set up with five sections. Each section
relates to a different set of costs or to the evaluation itself. Within each
section, the appropriate cost elements have been shown.
- 2. Each cost listed is projected for all periods of the cost
comparison. The first year will reflect current estimated costs. For each of
the following years, the inflation factors provided by this Supplement shall be
used for each element of cost that is affected by inflation. A minimum of one
year and three option years will be used for comparative purposes.
- 3. With the completion of the MVCCF, the agency may evaluate the
alternatives. In order to do this, the total Lines (Lines 8, 15 and 23) should
be entered on Lines 24, 25 and 26, respectively. The decision is based upon the
lowest overall cost to the Government over the minimum five-year cost
comparison period. Enter the decision as appropriate.
THE A-76/MV COST COMPARISON FORM FOR MOTOR VEHICLE FLEETS
Performance Periods (Fiscal Years)
Base Option Option Option Option
A. DEVELOPMENT OF IN-HOUSE COSTS Year Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Total
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -------
1. Personnel
2. Material
3. Other Direct
4. Cost of Capital
5. Overhead
6. Additional
7. Conversion Differential
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -------
8. Total In-house
B. DEVELOPMENT OF CONTRACT COSTS
9. Contract Price
10. Contract Administration
11. One-time Conversion
12. Gain on Disposal
13. Federal Income Taxes ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
14. Conversion Differential
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -------
15. Total Adjusted Contract Price
C. DEVELOPMENT OF IFMS OR ISSA COSTS
16. IFMS/ISSA cost estimate
17. Contract Administration
18. One-time Conversion
19. Gain on Disposal
20. Federal Income Taxes ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
21. Conversion Differential
22. Other Scope Adjustments
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ------
23. Total Adjusted IFMS or ISSA Price
D. COST COMPARISON
24. In-House --------
25. Contract --------
26. IFMS and/or ISSA --------
E. DECISION
_____ Retain In-House
_____ Contract
_____ Consolidate to GSA/IFMS or ISSA
_____ Convert from Contract to: In-house, IFMS or ISSA
THE A-76/MV COST COMPARISON FORM FOR MOTOR VEHICLE FLEETS
27. In-House MEO Certified By:__________________________ Date: _______
__________________________
Office and Title
"I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the
in-house organization reflected in this cost comparison is the
most efficient and cost effective organization that is fully
capable of performing the scope of work and tasks required by
the Performance Work Statement. I further certify that I have
obtained from the appropriate authority concurrence that the
organizational structure, as proposed, can and will be fully
implemented - subject to this cost comparison, in accordance
with all applicable Federal regulations.
28. In-House Cost Estimate Prepared By:_________________ Date: ________
29. Independent Reviewer: _________________________ Date: ________
_________________________
Office and Title
"I certify that I have reviewed the PWS, Management Plan, In-
house, GSA/IFMS or ISSA cost estimates and supporting
documentation available prior to bid opening and, to the best
of my knowledge and ability, have determined that: (1) the
ability of the in-house MEO to perform the work contained in
the Performance Work Statement at the estimated costs included
in this cost comparison is reasonably established and, (2)
that all costs entered on the cost comparison have been
prepared in accordance with the requirements of Circular A-76
and its Supplement.
30. Cost Comparison Completed By: _________________ Date: ________
31. Contracting Officer: _________________ Date: ________
32. Tentative Cost Comparison
Decision Announced By: _________________ Date: ________
33. Appeal Authority (if applicable): _________________ Date: ________
Return to List of Circulars |
Circular A-76 | Table of
Contents
| OMB Home Page |
Budget Information |
Legislative Information |
Management Reform/GPRA | |
Grants Management |
Financial Management |
Procurement Policy | |
Information & Regulatory Policy |
Special Topics |
The Budget | Legislative Information | Management Reform/GPRA Grants Management Financial Management | Procurement Policy | Information & Regulatory Policy Contact the White House Web Master
Privacy Statement |