[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 185 (Monday, November 13, 2017)]
[House]
[Pages H9143-H9145]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                FEDERAL ACQUISITION SAVINGS ACT OF 2017

  Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules 
and pass the bill (H.R. 3071) to require executive agencies to consider 
equipment rental in any cost-effectiveness analysis for equipment 
acquisition, and for other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 3071

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Acquisition Savings 
     Act of 2017''.

     SEC. 2. COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS OF EQUIPMENT RENTAL.

       (a) Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Equipment Rental.--
       (1) In general.--With respect to any cost-effectiveness 
     analysis for equipment acquisition conducted on or after the 
     date that is 180 days after the date of the enactment of this 
     Act, the head of each executive agency shall consider 
     equipment rental in such cost-effectiveness analysis.
       (2) Federal acquisition regulation.--The Federal 
     Acquisition Regulation shall be revised to implement the 
     requirement under paragraph (1).
       (b) Study of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.--Not later than 
     two years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
     Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the 
     Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and 
     Governmental Affairs of the Senate a comprehensive report on 
     the decisions made by the executive agencies with the highest 
     levels of acquisition spending, and a sample of executive 
     agencies with lower levels of acquisition spending, to 
     acquire high-value equipment by lease, rental, or purchase 
     pursuant to subpart 7.4 of the Federal Acquisition 
     Regulation.
       (c) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Equipment rental.--The term ``equipment rental'' means 
     the acquisition of equipment by contract from a commercial 
     source for a temporary period of use with no fixed duration.
       (2) Executive agency.--The term ``executive agency'' has 
     the meaning given that term in section 102 of title 40, 
     United States Code.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Jody B. Hice) and the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. 
Kelly) each will control 20 minutes.

[[Page H9144]]

  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.


                             General Leave

  Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent 
that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and 
extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under 
consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Georgia?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3071, introduced by my 
colleague from Georgia (Mr. Carter), and which I have cosponsored.
  The Federal Acquisition Savings Act of 2017 would require the 
government to consider renting equipment over buying or leasing that 
equipment. The Government Accountability Office reported that agencies 
annually spend an average of more than $200 billion on purchasing or 
leasing equipment, with purchasing accounting for almost all of that 
spending.
  The Federal Acquisition Savings Act of 2017 provides an opportunity 
to save money when obtaining equipment. The current rules encourage 
agencies to consider the most cost-effective way to obtain equipment, 
but only between purchasing or leasing. Renting is not an option.
  H.R. 3071 requires agencies to consider renting equipment as a cost-
saving measure over purchasing or leasing. The bill also directs that 
the Federal Acquisition Regulation be revised to implement this policy. 
Renting equipment can provide a more cost-effective and flexible 
alternative to buying or leasing.
  When purchasing equipment, the purchaser makes a long-term investment 
and assumes the total cost of ownership for that equipment. However, 
some short-term needs can be met without assuming the cost of 
purchasing and maintaining equipment. Leasing or renting are options in 
such cases. Leasing should be considered, but, depending on an agency's 
needs, leasing may not be the best low-cost option. Typically, leases 
involve defined leasing periods and are specific to a single piece of 
equipment.
  In addition, leasing may require a large upfront outlay of capital, 
and, under a lease, the government is generally responsible for the 
cost of maintenance, insurance, and storage of the equipment. 
Alternatively, rental for a temporary period with no fixed duration may 
fit the need and provide a more flexible option.

                              {time}  1630

  Renting equipment may be cost-effective because rental agreements 
typically cover costs such as storage, maintenance, insurance, 
transport, and licensing.
  Other State and local governments have used the equipment rental 
option with great success, but the Federal Government has not widely 
adopted this low-cost option. For example, the Texas Department of 
Transportation reported saving $10.8 million due to a rental program. 
They reported renting more than 1,200 pieces of equipment at a cost of 
$18.9 million and purchasing 931 assets costing more than $40 million.
  The Mississippi Department of Transportation commissioned a study on 
their equipment management processes and systems, and that study found 
that renting equipment, such as bulldozers and motor graders, to 
supplement their fleet was the most cost-effective option. In fact, 
that study found that Mississippi could realize over $13,000 in annual 
cost savings and $180,000 in lifecycle cost savings per bulldozer unit.
  H.R. 3071 presents an opportunity to realize cost savings in 
obtaining equipment by directing agencies to consider the rental 
option.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Representative Buddy Carter for his 
leadership on this bill. I urge my colleagues to support it, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. KELLY of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  H.R. 3071, the Federal Acquisition Savings Act, as amended, would 
require Federal contracting officers to consider short-term rentals in 
addition to long-term leasing or purchasing when acquiring equipment 
agencies need. I would like to thank Chairman Gowdy and Representative 
Carter for working with the minority in a bipartisan manner to address 
concerns that were raised about the bill as introduced.
  The Federal Acquisition Regulation is currently unclear about whether 
short-term rentals are permitted. Rental equipment, as opposed to 
purchasing or leasing, can be a cost-effective option for Federal 
agencies in certain circumstances.
  This bill would provide additional flexibility by allowing such 
rentals. It would also improve efficiency by requiring the cost-
effectiveness of renting to be considered by Federal contracting 
officers. I support giving contracting officers additional tools to 
make the most cost-effective decisions.
  The bill, as amended, also would require GAO to produce a report card 
on the use of renting or leasing by Federal agencies. The requirements 
for that report were very burdensome for GAO in the bill as introduced. 
I know we all value GAO's work and want to make the best use of its 
resources. I am glad that those reporting requirements have been 
streamlined.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor and 
privilege to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Carter), the sponsor of the bill.
  Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my legislation, H.R. 3071, 
the Federal Acquisition Savings Act of 2017. This legislation seeks to 
modernize our government's outdated acquisition strategies, while 
simultaneously acting as good stewards of valuable taxpayer dollars.
  My bill would simply require Federal agencies to consider renting as 
a cost-effective alternative in equipment acquisition, giving the 
government options that the private sector has undertaken and has seen 
success and cost savings with.
  As previously reported by the Government Accountability Office, the 
GAO, the Federal Government spends more than $200 billion, on average, 
either purchasing or leasing equipment. Of those acquisition decisions, 
purchasing of equipment accounts for more than 99 percent of that 
share.
  Federal agencies are instructed to consider the cost-effectiveness of 
these strategies as they move through the process, but even that has 
been found to be lacking. The GAO has found that, in many instances, 
Federal agencies don't even bother to undertake these analyses. That 
means that the taxpayers are the ones who lose out as Federal agencies 
sidestep these responsibilities and undertake what is, many times, the 
easiest but most expensive route--purchasing.
  This is an issue the committee and this body have been looking at for 
years. In 2012, the GAO issued a report finding that contracting 
officials from the Air Force and Department of the Interior did not 
perform the lease-versus-purchase analysis for many of the contracts 
awarded. In July of 2013, GSA issued an RFI seeking to determine if 
there is a distinction between leasing and renting of equipment. The 
overwhelming response to the RFI indicated that amending the Federal 
Acquisition Regulation, the FAR, to include renting would be pertinent. 
However, the GSI did not act on that recommendation.
  These actions have resulted in this legislation and the good-faith 
effort to ensure taxpayer dollars are spent wisely and that the Federal 
requirements for Federal acquisition are followed.
  Under subpart 7.4 of the FAR, agencies are directed to conduct a 
case-by-case evaluation of the cost between leasing and purchasing. As 
I mentioned earlier, many of those analyses aren't conducted.
  Amending this part of FAR will open up new avenues and will allow 
them to pursue successes and cost savings being used in the private 
sector. For instance, the Texas Department of Transportation reported 
savings of $10.8 million within the fleet operations division. These 
savings are realized when the additional costs of ownership are 
factored, including maintenance, transportation, and other areas.

[[Page H9145]]

  In addition to this example, the Mississippi Department of 
Transportation commissioned a study finding that they could find 
significant cost savings per unit if they utilized renting equipment as 
an option. Rental agreements are often thought of as short-term 
transactions with no fixed duration. This gives the renter--in this 
case, the Federal agencies--more say in how the equipment is used and 
the duration of the need for that equipment. For instance, specialized 
equipment that is only needed several times a year or is needed in 
varying locations can be sourced via renting to reduce overhead costs.

  As this body continues to pursue meaningful legislation to reduce the 
burden on our constituents and streamline the government, this is a 
great step forward. My bipartisan legislation will reduce waste in the 
Federal Government while giving them the opportunity to pursue new and 
innovative ways to source equipment.
  Too often, we see areas of mismanagement within the Federal 
Government that can and should be addressed, and this is a chance to 
help correct the ship one step at a time.
  This bipartisan legislation passed the Oversight and Government 
Reform Committee with overwhelming support, and I thank my colleagues 
on the committee and on this bill for their support and persistence in 
addressing shortfalls in the Federal Government.
  Mr. Speaker, please join me in support of this legislation and help 
us ensure future acquisition decisions are done with the taxpayers in 
mind.
  Ms. KELLY of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I am grateful for this 
bill, and I urge its adoption.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Jody B. Hice) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3071, as amended.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on that, I demand the yeas 
and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this motion will be postponed.

                          ____________________