Streamlining the Procurement of Transportation Services Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 12:29:09 -0500 To: "AO - All Administrative Officers" From: "Alice A. Sabatini, Division Administrative Officer, WRD" Subject: Streamlining the Procurement of Transportation Services Cc: "Elizabeth A Brenner, Management Assistant, Reston, VA" If you have input for this policy team, please send them directly to Bert Simon by April 16, 1999. A negative response is not required. In Reply Refer To: Mail Stop 231 MEMORANDUM March 30, 1999 To: Division Administrative Officers From: Bert Simon Chief, Branch of Materials Management Subject: Streamlining the Procurement of Transportation Services The General Services Administration (GSA) has a policy team studying the possible use of bank cards and the expanded use of commercial bills of lading (CBL) for obtaining transportation services. Questions that the team is considering are listed in the attachments. We will prepare a bureau response to this initiative, and we welcome your comments regarding these questions or other related transportation issues. These comments should be e-mailed to bsimon@usgs.gov by April 16, 1999ADMIN-StreamliningADMIN-Streamlining. We plan to participate in the interagency meetings that GSA would hold in collaboration with Federal agencies, and we will keep offices informed of developments. For further assistance or clarification concerning this matter, please call (703) 648-7283. We thank you for your participation. 2 Attachments CCC Questions CBL Questions Attachment 1 Commercial Credit Cards For many years, the Federal Government has almost exclusively used a specialized form of purchase order, the Government bill of lading, to purchase freight transportation services. In very limited instances it has also used commercial bills of lading. Greater emphasis is now being placed on adopting standard commercial practice whenever possible. This emphasis is being reflected in considering the possible use of the commercial commercial credit cards, rather than the traditional bill of lading, for the purchase of transportation services. The Transportation Policy Team is interested in anyone's comments about the pro's and con's of approving the use of the commercial credit cards (CCC). Some questions the Team is considering are: o From the shipper's perspective - Is the Government giving anything up by using the CCC instead of the GBL? Does the CCC offer any advantages in terms of ease of use over the GBL? What are the ramifications in terms of accountability? o From the carrier's perspective - What changes would a carrier have to make to accomodate use of the CCC in, for example, its rating, and accounting procedures? If a carrier is required by law to accomplish a bill of lading, how does the use of a CCC affect that requirement? What terms and conditions would apply to a CCC based transaction; i.e., the same terms as the CBL? the GBL? the CCC? or the Uniform Commercial Code? o From the traffic manager's perspective - What dollar limitation on the CCC would have to exist to make it feasible to use? What kind of arrangements would a traffic manager have to make with a carrier? Would there be any lessening of the paperwork burden; for example, a record of the pieces and weight? o From the finance office's perspective - What problems will the use of CBLs cause; for example, funding coding? automated system capability? tracking of issuing office? How would transportation purchase information be collected for submission of GSA's Office of Transportation Audits? Would it be feasible to continue to relieve the certifying office of his/her liability for improper payments? Send your comments to these questions via e-mail to bsimon@usgs.gov . Attachment 2 Commercial Bills of Lading For many years, the Federal Government has almost exclusively used a specialized form of purchase order, the Government bill of lading, to purchase freight transportation services. The use of the commercial bill of lading has been used, but only under very limited circumstances; for example, for shipments whose charges would be less than $100 or when a Government bill of lading was not readily available. Greater emphasis is now being placed on adopting standard commercial practice whenever possible. This emphasis is being reflected in considering the possible use of the commercial bill of lading, rather than the traditional Government bill of lading (GBL), for the purchase of transportation services. The Transportation Policy Team is interested in anyone's comments about the pro's and con's of approving the use of the commercial bill of lading (CBL). Some questions the Team is considering are: o From the shipper's perspective - Is the Government giving anything up by using the CBL instead of the GBL? Does the CBL offer any advantages in terms of ease of use over the GBL? What are the ramifications in terms of accountability? o From the carrier's perspective - Does the substitution of one document for another create any efficiencies or economies for a carrier? What would be the impact on a carrier once it would be required to furnish and complete the CBL? To what extent do individual carriers have their own CBL, rather than that contained in tariffs such as the National Motor Freight Classification? o From the traffic manager's perspective - If different carriers have different CBLs, is standardization necessary? How would that standardization take place? If the NMFC is not a controlling document in the shipment of your freight, what effect would there be on your traffic once the NMFC becomes a controlling document because it is referenced on the CBL? o From the finance office's perspective - What problems will the use of CBLs cause; for example, funding coding? automated system capability? tracking of issuing office? How difficult will be it be identify CBLs so they can be transmitted to GSA for postpayment audit? Send your comments to these questions via e-mail to bsimon@usgs.gov.