Informational Guidance |
IG5336.91
Simplified Acquisition of Base Engineer
Requirements (SABER)
January 2004
IG5336.9100 General
IG5336.9101 Scope
This guidance provides suggestions and procedures designed to assist contracting officers and civil engineers in the award and contract administration of Simplified Acquisition of Base Engineer Requirements (SABER) contracts. The guidance contained herein is informational. Contracting officers and civil engineers are encouraged to adapt their SABER-like acquisitions and processes to meet their local needs and the local environment.
IG5336.9102 Definitions
(a) SABER contract generally means a fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (ID/IQ) contract. A SABER contract includes a collection of detailed task specifications that encompass most types of real property maintenance, repair, and construction work. SABER contracts normally include options for work in years beyond the initial performance period. The significant features of a SABER contract are:
(1) Unit Price Guides (UPG). UPGs include commercial pricing tools such as computer cost databases and libraries of hard copy books. Although rare, they might also include government-developed unit price books. UPGs consist of detailed task specifications along with a standard unit of measure and a unit price for each. Because the task specifications and prices apply to a general area or industry, it is necessary to tailor the UPG to the costs and practices of a specific location. This step, which is called “localization,” is critical to the success of a SABER Program. Government and commercial software alternatives are available for the localization process and for compiling the basic task listings and standard unit prices. Examples of commercially available UPGs are those published by WinEstimator Inc., Timberline Software, and R.S. MEANS, Inc. If you decide to use one of these software tools you should validate its accuracy prior to developing any actual delivery order (DO) pricing.
(2) Coefficients. Coefficients are factors that are multiplied against the standard unit prices in the UPG to calculate DO prices. Offerors propose coefficients to cover cost elements such as overhead, profit, minimum design costs, G&A expenses, bond premiums, and gross receipts taxes. The number of coefficients in a SABER contract depends on the installation’s requirements. Coefficients may include bands or ranges based on dollar levels, standard and non-standard hours, range or isolated site work, or work in secured areas. Contracting officers should strongly consider using a tiered approach for coefficients based on the dollar volume of workload because a contractor’s overhead decreases as workload increases. For example, the RFP and resultant contract should stipulate that if the contractor receives more than a designated dollar amount of work in a given year (i.e., $3M), then a lower coefficient shall be used after the designated volume is reached. Price-Volume discounting is a standard commercial practice and contracting officers should consider its benefits and potential savings when developing the acquisition strategy. Coefficients also reflect the offeror’s perception of the accuracy of the UPG. UPGs that are consistently lower than prices found in the local economy will cause the contractor to offer higher coefficients. Inconsistent or unbalanced UPGs increase the uncertainty in preparing proposals. This can lead to high coefficients or inequitable pricing of SABER contracts.
(b) SABER minimum design means a design effort that is incidental to accomplishing the required task. The extent of the design will depend upon the complexity of each task. Generally, however, if the contractor needs to hire the services of a registered architect or engineer to accomplish the design effort, it is outside the parameters of minimum design. The contractor will have to provide sufficient design documentation to substantiate the proposed approach for the task. This documentation may include any or all of the following:
(1) Statement of Work (technical description of the task).
(2) Work flow chart similar to a PERT diagram.
(3) Detailed cost estimate.
(4) Justification for any non-prepriced items (NPIs).
(5) Material Approval Submittals.
(6) Verified As-Built Drawings.
(7) Shop drawings showing basic layout and planning of the work.
(8) Manufacturer’s or technical drawings/schematics for fabrication and assembly of
structural elements.
(9) Form, fit, and attachment details for installation of materials/equipment.
(10) Design calculations to substantiate proposed layout and sizing of utilities and structural
elements (i.e., HVAC loads, lighting, platform supports, etc.).
(c) SABER delivery order (DO). Prices for individual SABER DOs are a result of applying the contractor’s coefficients to items covered by the UPG and negotiating prices for items that are not included in the UPG. These non-prepriced items (NPIs) must be within the basic intent and general scope of the contract and be negotiated separately from UPG items prior to issuance of the DO.
IG5336.9103 Purpose of the SABER Program
(a) The purpose of the Air Force SABER program is to expedite contract award of civil engineer requirements by reducing civil engineer design work and acquisition lead-time. SABER is best suited for non-complex, minor construction, and maintenance and repair projects that require minimum design. Larger, more complex requirements may be better suited for Multiple Award Construction Contracts (MACC), task specific ID/IQ contracts (i.e., paving), or stand-alone one-time contracts. Contracting officers should use sound business judgment in selecting the best acquisition strategy for construction projects and should not pick a strategy solely on ease of execution.
(b) Benefits of a successful SABER program include:
(1) Improved customer service and responsiveness. After contract award, the time required to estimate, propose, negotiate, and issue DOs for individual projects is usually three to four weeks, or less; and
(2) An incentive for a highly motivated contractor to produce high quality work in a timely manner. While an ID/IQ contract must guarantee a minimum dollar value of work, award of additional work is dependent on the quality and timeliness of the contractor’s prior performance under the contract.
IG5336.9104 Limitations to the use of SABER Contracts
(a) General. SABER is not appropriate for large, complex construction projects that require extensive design effort or for predominately single skill/material projects for which competitively awarded contracts or single trade ID/IQ contracts would be more cost effective.
(b) Architect-engineer (A-E) services.
(1) SABER is not an appropriate acquisition approach for A-E services as defined in FAR 36.601-4(a). The Brooks Act (40 U.S.C. 541-544) requires use of specific procedures (see FAR 36.6) to acquire A-E services.
(2) Task specifications in SABER UPGs and corresponding coefficients include: minor design efforts needed to complete a project, such as basic layout and planning of work; fabrication and assembly of structural elements; form fit and attachment details for installation of materials and/or equipment; production of shop and/or record drawings; and other similar activities which do not require the services of a registered architect or engineer.
(3) A SABER contract is not normally the proper vehicle to execute a project that was designed using A-E services except in limited circumstances such as:
(i) An A-E designed project which requires validation/updating due to age of the design; or,
(ii) An A-E design which did not proceed beyond 35 percent completion and the remaining design effort will not require a significant amount of A-E services.
(c) Non-personal services. Non-personal services subject to the provisions of the Service Contract Act (e.g., a DO solely to install carpet when the labor involved exceeds $2,500) are not SABER requirements. The Department of Labor (DOL) has jurisdiction over whether a particular requirement is classified as construction work subject to Davis Bacon Act or services to which the Service Contract Act applies. DOL guidance provides that services such as carpet installation, landscaping, asbestos removal, and building demolition may be performed as construction when the work is incidental to a larger construction project. If the preponderance of the work is non-personal services, even though there may be some incidental related construction work, the project falls under the Services Contract Act and is not a candidate for SABER.
IG5336.9110 Acquisition Planning
IG5336.9111 SABER Working Group
(a) Successful SABER programs require a team effort. CE, Contracting and other affected functionals should form a multi-functional team to plan and implement SABER acquisitions.
(b) The SABER multi-functional team should concentrate on:
(1) Estimating the expected scope of the SABER Program for the installation or civil engineer organization and determining the guaranteed minimum amount to be included in the contract.
(2) Investigating the feasibility of establishing a joint effort with other nearby bases (including Army, Navy, Air Force Reserve, and National Guard installations) as possible sources for funding the initial and any subsequent contract minimums.
(3) Determining the most efficient organizational structure for the SABER multi-functional team and identifying the types of personnel needed.
IG5336.9112 SABER Specifications and the UPG
Based on the SABER requirements and budget as established, the Base Civil Engineer (BCE), prepares the SABER program specifications. These include the master specification and the technical or guide specifications. The master specification describes the overall scope of the SABER Program and is part of Section C in the RFP. The technical specifications define specific construction standards for tasks to be ordered under the contract and form the basis for developing line item work tasks in the UPG. After developing the specifications, the BCE chooses the UPG.
IG5336.9113 Request for Proposal (RFP)
The SABER RFP should closely mirror the format and content of a large construction solicitation. Unique features of a SABER RFP generally include the following:
(1) A description of the coefficient(s) that the offeror must propose to include a lower coefficient for work above an established annual threshold.
(i) The factors that generally make up the coefficient(s);
(ii) Individual coefficients for standard hours, non-standard hours, geographically separated ranges or sites, secured areas, and/or varying project magnitudes, as appropriate;
(2) The applicable UPG and any related software, hard copies, and computer support requirements;
(3) A sample SABER project (using a project that will actually be awarded later under the resulting SABER contract);
(4) The level of architectural/drafting support to be performed by the contractor; and
(5) A provision for adding non-prepriced items (NPIs) to the contract.
IG5336.9120 SABER Execution and Contract Administration
IG5336.9121 Processing Civil Engineer Project Orders After Contract Award
(a) The SABER project manager should issue project orders that:
(1) Include a statement of work, including concepts, sketches, and drawings;
(2) Identify any statutory cost limitations;
(3) Furnish any special instructions or requirements; and
(4) Include required cost comparisons, justifications, and approvals.
(b) Site visit. The SABER project manager/inspector, contracting officer representative, using organization, and contractor should normally conduct a scope validation/site visit for each project order to discuss topics such as:
(1) Site access;
(2) Methods and alternatives for accomplishing work;
(3) Definition and refinement of requirements;
(4) Requirements for plans, sketches, drawings, etc;
(5) Detailed scope of work; and
(6) Time requirements for completion, phasing requirements, and liquidated damages.
(c) Contractor’s project order proposals. The contractor develops a detailed price proposal by identifying necessary tasks in the UPG, verifying as-built drawings, refining quantities, pricing NPIs, preparing working drawings, and developing performance times. The SABER program manager may need to answer questions from the contractor and clarify technical aspects of the project.
(d) DO negotiation.
(1) The contract administrator reviews the contractor’s proposal for scope, compliance, completeness, and reasonableness. This review should verify that individual line items prices are the same as in the UPG. The contract administrator then forwards the technical proposal to the SABER program manager for a technical review. They both evaluate the proposed method of construction, tasks, quantities, performance schedules, and any contractor drawings.
(2) After completing initial evaluations, the SABER team reviews the proposal with the contractor. The contracting officer, with assistance from the SABER program manager, establishes the government’s negotiation objective, including any variations involving tasks, methodology, quantities, NPIs, and timelines.
(3) After completing negotiations, the contracting officer prepares a price negotiation memorandum (PNM) in accordance with FAR 15.406-3. A sample Delivery Order file checklist is available at Appendix B.
IG5336.9122 Adding non-prepriced items (NPIs) to the Contract
(a) Negotiating prices for NPIs and incorporating them in a DO does not incorporate the items into the contract for subsequent use as a priced item. To permit subsequent use, the contracting officer must incorporate prices for NPIs by supplemental agreement into the SABER contract itself, in which case they become pre-priced items under the contract. This may occur with an annual update to the UPG or separately at another time during the year.
(b) When negotiating prices for NPIs, ensure the prices include only direct costs. If the contract incorporates a static coefficient for the life of the contract, an economic price adjustment (EPA) clause (see Appendix A) will adjust the prices for these items in subsequent contract periods.
IG5336.9123 Funding
(a) In order to expedite year-end or emergency requirements, the contracting officer may process SABER projects up to the point of award in advance of full project funding. Prior to requesting the contractor’s proposal, the contracting officer should either obtain from the contractor a no-cost agreement (in case the order does not materialize) with acknowledgment that funds are not available, or utilize a line item for project estimating. The latter compensates the contractor for the level of effort expended in estimating, designing, and negotiating the project order in advance of full funding. Any payment the contractor receives under this line item will be offset by a reduction from the negotiated price of the DO if the project results in an award.
(b) The contracting officer normally establishes milestones for actions in support of end-of-year actions to ensure sufficient lead time for SABER review, approval requirements, receipt of preliminary SABER project cost estimates, technical analyses, and negotiations.
IG5336.9130 Options
IG5336.9131 Option Price Adjustments
There are several ways to structure SABER contracts to allow for option price adjustments. One strategy is to incorporate a static UPG for the duration of the contract and allow offerors the opportunity to propose different coefficients for each of the contract periods. Another approach is to incorporate a static coefficient, or coefficients, and update the UPG each period. A third strategy, and probably the most cumbersome and least desirable, is to incorporate a static coefficient and a static UPG. This last approach requires use of an EPA clause to adjust option prices. Appendix A contains a sample clause.
SAMPLE CLAUSE FOR SABER ECONOMIC PRICE ADJUSTMENT (EPA)
(a) Coefficient(s) for SABER options under this contract will be adjusted annually to recognize variations in labor, equipment, and material costs as stated below.
(b) The Market Trends Construction Cost Index (CCI) for the city of [insert where the work is to be performed] as published in the McGraw-Hill publication “Engineering News Record (ENR)” will be used to determine adjustments to the contract coefficients for options under this contract. To determine the amount of adjustment, the contracting officer calculates the change in the index appearing in the issue of ENR published during the month prior to the effective date of the option from [the contracting officer enters the most recently published index at the time of initial contract award]. Eighty percent of this variation will be applied to [the contracting officer enters the coefficient for the initial period of the contract]. If the publication of the index should be discontinued, the parties to the contract will negotiate a replacement index or new contract provision. If a replacement index or contract provision cannot be agreed upon, the contracting officer may unilaterally determine the contract adjustment method, and the contractor may dispute the determination under the Disputes Clause. Adjustments to option year contract coefficients must be determined in accordance with the following formulae:
(1) To calculate the new coefficient use:
C = Ci * f
Where:
C = New Coefficient;
f = Adjustment Factor; and
Ci = Contract pricing coefficient at contract award.
(2) To calculate the Adjustment Factor use:
f = ((CCIc - CCIi) / CCIi) * 80% + 1
Where:
CCIc = the ENR index for the option; and
CCII = the ENR index for the initial contract award.
(c) Adjustment calculations for second and subsequent option years will each be based on the contract coefficient for the initial contract period.
EPA Coefficient-Index Matrix
Action ENR Index Adjustment Factor Coefficient
Contract Award 110.0 N/A 1.03
Option 1 115.4 1.039 1.07
Option 2 130.2 1.147 1.18
Option 3 125.1 1.110 1.14
Option 4 100.0 .927 .96
NOTE: Round calculation results as done in this example.
EPA Calculations
Column 2 - ENR Indices for the options are taken from the issue of the McGraw-Hill publication ENR published during the month prior to the effective date of the option. The ENR Index for the Contract Award is the most recent ENR index published during the month prior to initial contract award.
DELIVERY ORDER FILE CHECKLIST
CONTRACT NO: DELIVERY ORDER NO:
DATE ORDER AWARDED:
CONTRACTOR/SUBCONTRACTOR:
AMOUNT OF THIS ORDER:
Checklist Item |
Yes |
No |
1. Does file contain properly approved and classified work request (AF Form 332)? |
||
2. Are sufficient funds available and documentation contained within the file? |
||
3. Is the memorandum for record of site visit adequate? |
||
4. Does the file contain statement of work revisions for changes as a result of the site visit or negotiations? |
||
5. Does the contractor’s proposal contain: |
||
(a) Proposal for the scope as stated in the request for proposal? |
||
(b) Pricing by line item in accordance with the SABER UPG? |
||
(c) Non-prepriced items? |
||
(d) Method of construction? |
||
(e) Other items as stated in the request for proposal? |
||
6. Does the file contain an adequate technical evaluation? |
||
7. Does the Record of Negotiations provide sufficient detail of the negotiated variances in price, period of performance, quantities, statement of work changes, negotiated methodology, etc.? |
||
8. Is DD Form 1155 complete and does it contain: |
||
(a) Accounting and appropriation data? |
||
(b) Scope of work? |
||
(c) Period of performance? |
||
(d) Any mandatory methodologies? |
||
(e) Negotiated NPIs? |