Inactive

AMENDMENT 0005 N62742-25-R-1800 INDEFINITE DELIVERY/INDEFINITE QUANTITY CONTRACT FOR ARCHITECT-ENGINEER SERVICES FOR COMPREHENSIVE LONG-TERM ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION NAVY (CLEAN VII) FOR NAVAL FACILITIES ... AMENDMENT 0005 N62742-25-R-1800 INDEFINITE DELIVERY/INDEFINITE QUANTITY CONTRACT FOR ARCHITECT-ENGINEER SERVICES FOR COMPREHENSIVE LONG-TERM ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION NAVY (CLEAN VII) FOR NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING SYSTEMS COMMAND PACIFIC ALL INFORMATION NEEDED FOR INTERESTED PARTIES TO SUBMIT A STANDARD FORM (SF) 330, ARCHITECT ENGINEER QUALIFICATIONS, IS CONTAINED HEREIN OR IN AN ATTACHMENT. THERE IS NO SEPARATE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) PACKAGE TO DOWNLOAD. This procurement will result in the award of one Cost-Plus-Fixed Fee (CPFF) Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract for multi-discipline Architect-Engineer (AE) services in support of the Department of the Navy’s (DON) Environmental Restoration (ER) Program consisting of the Installation Restoration (IR) Program and Munitions Response (MR) Program in compliance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and other similar programs. Required services will be performed at various Navy and Marine Corps facilities within the Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command (NAVFAC) Pacific (PAC) Area of Responsibility (AOR). Work will be performed predominantly in NAVFAC Hawaii (HI), NAVFAC Marianas (MAR), NAVFAC Northwest (NW) and NAVFAC Southwest (SW) areas of responsibility. Although these are the principal geographical areas of performance, the Contractor(s) may be required to perform at other locations within the NAVFAC Pacific area of responsibility including Japan, Okinawa, Diego Garcia and other areas in the Pacific and Indian Oceans. Work may also be added and performed anywhere outside of the NAVFAC Pacific AOR, as required by the Government. The exact location of the required effort will be specified in the individual Contract Task Orders (CTOs). The Contractor may also, on occasion, be tasked to perform work for other NAVFAC Components, Department of Defense (DoD) or other federal agencies as required by the Government. This contract may include performance of work on private, Federal or other than Federal lands that are associated with the environmental sites identified above. See Attachment A for the scope of services anticipated under the resultant contract. This proposed contract will be solicited on an UNRESTRICTED basis. The Small Business size standard classification is North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) Code 541330, Engineering Services. Small business size standard is $25,500,000. The Government seeks the most highly qualified firm to perform the required services, based on the demonstrated competence and qualifications, in accordance with the selection criteria. This contract will be procured in accordance with 40 USC Chapter 11, Selection of Architects and Engineers, as implemented by FAR Subpart 36.6. The resulting contract will be a CPFF IDIQ contract for a base period of one year and four one-year option periods, and will include FAR clause 52.217-8 Option to Extend Services to extend the contract an additional 6 months. The ceiling for this procurement is established at $980,000,000. The guaranteed minimum is established at $5,000 for the contract term including option years. The fixed fee negotiated under each task will not exceed seven (7) percent. The market research study N62742-25-R-1800 conducted by NAVFAC PAC included an assessment of relevant qualifications and capabilities of potentially qualified firms. As a result of the market research analysis, a determination was made to solicit this procurement on an unrestricted basis inviting full and open competition. The NAVFAC PAC small business office concurs with this decision. Offerors must be registered in the System of Award Management (SAM) at time of submission of an offer or quotation and at time of contract award. For instructions on registering with SAM, see the SAM website at https://www.sam.gov/. The awarded contract will be subject to specific provisions addressing the avoidance of organizational conflicts of interest. The prime firm for this contract will be required to perform throughout the contract term. Interviews may be scheduled with firms slated as the most highly qualified. Firms slated for interviews may be asked to clarify information contained in the SF 330 submittal. Elaborate presentations are not desired. SELECTION CRITERIA Firms responding to this announcement will be evaluated to determine the most highly qualified firm to perform the required services in accordance with the selection criteria contained in this announcement. Failure to comply with instructions or provide complete information may affect the firm’s evaluation or disqualify the firm from further consideration. Criteria are listed in descending order of importance. Specialized Recent Relevant Experience/Technical Competence Professional Qualifications of the Key Personnel Capacity to Accomplish Work and Ability to Accomplish Multiple Projects Concurrently Past Performance on Relevant Contracts Quality Control Program Firm’s Location in the General Geographical Area of the Project and Knowledge of the Locality of the Project Commitment to Small Business Utilization Volume of Work Awarded by DoD During the Previous 12 Months Projects submitted in the SF 330 shall be projects completed by the prime firm and any team subconsultant. Projects not performed by the prime firm and any team subconsultant will be excluded from further consideration. It is anticipated that interviews for slated firms will be conducted at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii. Firms that are submitting information as a Joint Venture (JV) or a Limited Liability Company (LLC) shall submit their JV Agreement and/or LLC Operating Agreement as an attachment. Failure to do so will result in the rejection of the SF 330 from further consideration. In addition, please ensure that the agreements address the following: a. A detailed statement outlining the following in terms of percentages where appropriate: (1) The relationship of the team/partners/parties in terms of business ownership, capital contribution, profit distribution or loss sharing. (2) The management approach in terms of who will conduct, direct, supervise, and control. (3) The structure and decision-making responsibilities of the partners/parties in terms of who will control the manner and method of performance of work. (4) Identify (by name and title) the personnel having the authority to legally bind the partners/parties (including authority to execute the contract documents). b. A list of partners/parties, to include company name, CAGE numbers, address, point of contact, Email address, phone number and facsimile number. If the firm is a JV, information regarding the performance of recent, relevant projects shall be submitted to demonstrate the capabilities of the joint venture entity; however, if there is an insufficient amount of or no information relevant to the joint venture, information pertaining to each joint venture team member/partner shall be submitted. If a project submitted to demonstrate experience and past performance was performed by a JV, and not all JV team members/partners that performed the work remain on the JV team responding to this announcement, the submission should only address the work performed by team members/partners to the JV responding to this announcement. (For instance, if a past performance project was performed by a JV with partners A, B, C, and D and the JV is now composed of partners A, C, D, and E, the description of their role/responsibility in the projects, experience and past performance on the project should focus on the work performed by partners A, C, and D only). Likewise, if the JV firm or one of its team members/partners worked as a subcontractor on a project submitted to establish experience and past performance, the description should clearly describe the roles and responsibilities and work actually performed by the JV firm or team member/partner, rather than the work performed by the prime contractor or other subcontractors on the project as a whole. The submission should also state the percentage of the total project value performed under the subcontract. If the project description does not clearly delineate the work performed and the percentage of the total contract performed by the JV or its team members/partners responding to this announcement, the project may be eliminated from consideration due to the inability to accurately assess relevance and experience. If a firm is utilizing or relying on experience or past performance information from affiliates/subsidiaries/parent companies/LLC/LTD member companies (where the name of the entity is not exactly as stated on the SF 330), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate how the affiliate/subsidiary/parent firm/LLC/LTD member companies will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract in order for the experience, past performance, and/or key personnel information of the affiliate/subsidiary/parent firm/LLC/LTD member companies to be considered. The proposal shall state the specific resources (e.g. workforce, management, facilities, or other resources) that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member companies will commit toward the performance of the contract. If meaningful involvement is not demonstrated in the proposal, the affiliate, subsidiary or parent company’s experience or past performance and/or key personnel information will not be considered. A subcontractor’s experience and past performance will not be given the same level of consideration as that of either a prime contractor or a joint venture member/partner because there is no direct legal relationship between the Government and a subcontractor. Criterion 1- Specialized Recent Relevant Experience/Technical Competence (SF 330, Part I, Section F): Basis of Evaluation: SF 330s shall be evaluated on specialized experience on recent, relevant projects for the prime firm and proposed team subcontractors in performing multiple projects involving field investigations and preparing studies/analysis/work plans/remediation oversight for environmental restoration projects and other technical support services consistent with the intended scope in Attachment A. A firm’s recent relevant project experience will be evaluated against the needs of the services and requirements of this announcement. More favorable consideration may be given to any of the following, which are NOT listed in any order of precedence: Project cost. Project/site size (land or underwater surface area, and/or depth, and/or subsurface volume). Types and complexity of work performed in the projects. Types, volume of contaminants/munitions, considering the respective risk/hazards. Level of visibility and stakeholder/public input on projects. Level of self-performance by the prime firm. Experience working for the DoD. Experience working on a cost contract. Experience working on CERCLA projects. Experience working on projects within the NAVFAC PAC, HI, MAR, NW, and/or SW AORs. Experience working on projects with logistical challenges and site conditions (e.g. islands or remote locations). Experience addressing sites with emerging contaminants. Experience with munition response investigations utilizing geophysical survey for anomaly detection, location, and classification. Experience with assessment of large-scale surface or underground fuel release(s). Experience with assessment of contamination of underwater sediment. DEFINITION OF RECENT RELEVANT PROJECT: A relevant project is defined as a project whose scope of work was same/similar to the types of projects that may be ordered under the resultant contract and shall have required the performance of one or more of the services described in this announcement (see Attachment A). A recent project is further defined as having been completed or substantially completed (at least 85%) within ten years of the issuance of this announcement. Submission Requirements: Provide a maximum of ten (10) recent, relevant projects, of which a minimum of one (1) but no more than two (2) projects involving Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl (PFAS) and a minimum of one (1) but no more than two (2) projects involving munitions response investigation. The SF 330 shall list the percentage of work performed on the entire project. For submittal purposes, a project must be a stand-alone contract, or a single contract task order under an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract. The SF 330 shall submit no more than two (2) single-sided or one (1) double-sided page per recent, relevant project. If more than two (2) single-sided or one (1) double sided page is submitted, the Government will not consider the information on the additional pages. Criterion 2 - Professional Qualifications of the Key Personnel (SF 330, Part I, Sections E and G) Basis of Evaluation: SF 330s shall be evaluated on the professional qualifications and capabilities of the Key Personnel to be assigned to this contract. The following key personnel must be included: Program Manager Technical Director Senior Scientist Senior Human Health Risk Assessor Senior Ecological Risk Assessor Health and Safety (H&S) Manager Quality Assurance (QA) Manager. Key Personnel and their duties/responsibilities/minimum qualifications are defined as: Program Manager: Responsibilities include overall management of this contract. Duties include ensuring compliance with the contract terms and conditions; quality control; review of contract task order (CTO) project documents to ensure product consistency; assigning personnel consistent with contract requirements; understanding and ensuring compliance with CERCLA, RCRA, TSCA and SDWA regulations, their state/local counterparts, and other applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs); and performing as the Contractor's representative. The qualified individual for this position shall have as a minimum: Undergraduate degree from an accredited university or college or industry accepted equivalent accreditation of the educational institution in an engineering or scientific discipline. Six (6) years of experience managing multiple concurrent projects at multiple locations. Four (4) years of the work experience shall be as a senior manager or project manager working on DoD-funded CERCLA projects, including budget and schedule management, project planning, and stakeholder interaction. Technical Director: Responsibilities include ensuring effective execution of projects; controlling project schedule and cost; recommending changes to improve project efficiency and effectiveness of overall execution of work; reviewing change proposals to ensure accuracy and appropriateness; understanding and ensuring compliance with CERCLA, RCRA, TSCA and SDWA regulations and their state regulation counterparts, and other ARARs; and ensuring the submission of quality technical reports. The qualified individual for this position shall have as a minimum: Undergraduate degree from an accredited university or college or industry accepted equivalent accreditation of the educational institution in an engineering or scientific discipline. Six (6) years of experience managing multiple concurrent projects at multiple locations. Three (3) years of the work experience shall be as a senior manager or project manager working on DoD-funded CERCLA projects, including budget and schedule management, project planning, and stakeholder interaction. Senior Scientist: Responsibilities include consulting with the Program Manager, Technical Director, and the Project Manager on scientific issues related to ER projects. Areas of specialty include geology, hydrology, and chemistry. Typical duties include identification of sampling requirements; collecting and interpreting field, chemical, and earth science data; evaluating contaminant and toxicity levels; supporting Navy in interface with regulators and performing field consultations. The qualified individual shall have as a minimum: Graduate degree from an accredited university or college or industry accepted equivalent accreditation of the educational institution in a scientific or engineering discipline. Five (5) years of experience working on CERCLA projects. Senior Human Health Risk Assessor: Responsibilities include preparing human health risk assessments for ER projects; interfacing with regulators and the Navy and Marine Corps Risk Assessors on technical issues; providing guidance, expertise, and oversight of all human health risk assessments performed under the program to ensure consistency of approach and compliance with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Navy requirements. The qualified individual shall have as a minimum: Graduate degree from an accredited university or college or industry accepted equivalent accreditation of the educational institution in a scientific discipline. Five (5) years of experience preparing human health risk assessments in accordance with EPA and DoD requirements. Senior Ecological Risk Assessor: Responsibilities include preparing ecological risk assessments for ER projects; interfacing with regulators and the Navy’s Ecological Risk Subject Matter Experts (SME) on technical issues; providing guidance, expertise, and oversight of all ecological risk assessments performed under the program to ensure consistency of approach and compliance with EPA and Navy requirements. The qualified individual shall have as a minimum: Graduate degree from an accredited university or college or industry accepted equivalent accreditation of the educational institution in a scientific discipline. Five (5) years of experience preparing ecological risk assessments in accordance with EPA and DoD requirements. Health and Safety (H&S) Manager: Responsibilities include implementing and overseeing the firm's H&S program and plans in accordance with the OSHA regulations and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Safety and Health Requirements Manual EM38511. The H&S Manager shall be either a Certified Safety Professional (CSP) by the Board of Certified Safety Professionals with experience in the Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) field or a Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH) by the American Board of Industrial Hygienists. The qualified individual shall have as a minimum: Four (4) years of experience in the H&S aspects of CERCLA field investigations. Quality Assurance (QA) Manager: Responsibilities include developing, maintaining, and enforcing the Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) program; oversight of an analytical laboratory program; analytical database management; and performing field and laboratory QA audits. In addition, the QA Manager provides internal QA surveillance as specified in the DoD Policy and Guidance for Acquisitions Involving Environmental Sampling or Testing. The qualified individual shall have as a minimum: Undergraduate degree from an accredited university or college or industry accepted equivalent accreditation of the educational institution in a scientific or engineering discipline. Five (5) years of QA/QC experience managing ER projects. Five (5) years of experience in implementing the Uniform Federal Policy for Quality Assurance Project Plan (UFP-QAPP). Favorable Considerations: Key personnel qualifications and experience will be evaluated against the needs of the services and requirements of this announcement and may be evaluated more favorably considering the depth and breadth of demonstrated qualifications and experience. More favorable consideration may be given to any of the following, which are NOT listed in any order of precedence: Project cost. Project/site size (land/underwater surface area, and/or depth, and/or subsurface volume). Types and complexity of work performed in the projects. Level of visibility and stakeholder/public input on projects. Experience working for the DoD. Experience working in the NAVFAC PAC, HI, MAR, NW, and/or SW AORs. Experience working on a cost contract. Experience working on CERCLA projects. Experience working on projects with logistical challenges and site conditions (e.g. islands or remote locations). Experience addressing sites with emerging contaminants. Experience with assessment of large-scale surface or underground fuel release(s). Experience with assessment of contamination of underwater sediment. Relevance of educational degree. Active professional registration(s)/licenses. For the QA Manager: It is more favorable that the individual be certified by the American Society for Quality or equivalent organization as a Certified Manager of Quality/Organizational Excellence (CMQ/OE), Certified Quality Engineer (CQE), or a Certified Quality Auditor (CQA). Submission Requirements: Complete one Section E for each key person listed above, providing all requested information. For Section E, Block 13, specify the proposed role of the key person for this contract. Provide a maximum of five (5) recent relevant projects for each key personnel. Experience that is not related to the work described in this announcement should not be included and will not be considered if included. A letter of commitment shall be provided for each proposed Key Personnel that does not currently work for the firm and shall include the key person’s role in the contract. Firms shall not submit Section E for personnel who will not be assigned as Key Personnel under this contract. Failure to completely fill out Section E for Key Personnel may affect the evaluation of your SF 330. Key Personnel experience may include experience gained while not employed by the firm. Criterion 3 – Capacity to Accomplish Work and Ability to Accomplish Multiple Projects Concurrently (SF 330, Part I, Section H): Basis of Evaluation: The SF 330 shall be evaluated on the firm’s capability and capacity to deliver on-schedule tasks/products of the type described in this announcement. Describe how your firm managed and responded to a surge of multiple rapidly developing projects along with maintaining planned projects in regard to preparing technical and cost proposals for a cost-reimbursement contract. If you have had this situation and have had lessons learned, please state. If you have not experienced this, please say how your proposed organizational structure would handle this situation. Offerors are requested to provide a detailed narrative describing a prior project experience that demonstrates the following capabilities: The firm's ability to expeditiously develop and submit both technical and cost proposals for a cost-reimbursement contract, including a demonstrated understanding of the complexities and negotiation nuances associated with cost-type contracts (e.g., allowable costs, indirect rates, cost realism, and billing procedures); The firm's capacity to manage its existing workload while ensuring adequate availability of the team and key personnel during the specified contract performance period, including the ability to respond to potential emergency requirements or surge staffing needs. The firm's experience coordinating and collaborating with other contractors working on separate but related contracts within the same program or project, including methods used to avoid conflict or duplication of effort. Any innovations the firm has implemented to improve contract management, such as the use of information management systems, tools, or technologies that enhanced project quality, increased efficiency, or streamlined reporting and communication. Offerors should support their response with specific examples, project outcomes, and, where applicable, quantified results. The SF 330 shall also describe the proposed location of the program management office and how this organization will be advantageous to the Government and a detailed description of the organizational structure and how it will function to execute projects at various geographical locations. More favorable consideration may be given to any of the following, which are NOT listed in any order of precedence: Firms who demonstrate substantial overlapping projects or overlapping projects significantly in excess of $10 million in value. Firms who are able to demonstrate experience working in the NAVFAC PAC, HI, MAR, NW, and SW AORs simultaneously. Submission Requirements: Describe the firm’s ability to complete multiple large and small task orders concurrently using the criteria above. Criterion 4 - Past Performance on Relevant Contracts (SF 330, Part I, Section H and/or Attachment B): Basis of Evaluation: Firms will be evaluated on past performance with Government agencies and private industry in terms of work quality, compliance with schedules, cost control, and stakeholder/customer satisfaction. Evaluating past performance and experience will include information provided in Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) or Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) for Criterion 1 projects and may include customer inquiries, Government databases, and other information available to the Government including contacts with points of contact in other criteria. Submission Requirements: SUBMIT A COMPLETED CPARS EVALUATION FOR EACH PROJECT UNDER CRITERION 1. IF A COMPLETED CPARS EVALUATION IS NOT AVAILABLE, the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) (Attachment B) included in this notice is provided for the firm or its team members to submit to the client for each project included under Criterion 1, Specialized Experience. DO NOT SUBMIT A PPQ WHEN A COMPLETED CPARS IS AVAILABLE. IF A CPARS EVALUATION IS NOT AVAILABLE, ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQs should be submitted with your SF 330. If the firm is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before the response date set forth in this notice, firms should complete and submit with their responses the first page of the PPQ (Attachment B), which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Firms may submit a PPQ previously submitted under a different Notice/RFP (legible copies are acceptable) as long as it is on the same form as posted with this Synopsis. Firms should follow up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If requested by the client, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command Pacific, Code ACQ76, Attn: Kori-Ann Tanaka via email at koriann.k.tanaka.civ@us.navy.mil, prior to the response date. Firms shall not incorporate by reference into their response PPQs or CPARS previously submitted in response to other AE services procurements. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation. Firms may provide any information on problems encountered and the corrective actions taken on projects submitted under Criterion 1 Specialized Experience. Firms may also address any adverse past performance issues. Information shall not exceed four (4) single-sided pages or two (2) double-sided pages in total and will not be considered as part of the page limitation set forth in the SF 330 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS section of this announcement and shall be clearly marked as pertaining to Criterion 4, Past Performance on Relevant Contracts. Awards, letters of commendation, certificates of appreciation, etc. shall not be submitted and will not be considered in the evaluation. The firm’s past performance evaluation will be based upon customer satisfaction in the execution of the recent relevant projects submitted for Criterion 1. In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information in the evaluation of past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the CPARS using all CAGE numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming partners, former firms, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the SF 330, inquiries of owner representatives, Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the firm. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the firm. Criterion 5 – Quality Control Program (SF 330, Part I, Section H): Basis of Evaluation: SF 330s will be evaluated on the demonstrated effectiveness of the firm’s quality control program used to ensure technical accuracy of finished product. Submission Requirements Describe your quality control program and include an example of how the program has worked successfully for one of the projects submitted under Criteria 1, or explain how the plan will work if it has not been used previously. Describe the design quality control organization structure; and list the personnel responsible for each phase of the design quality control. Describe how you intend to track review comments. Describe the methodology that will be used to eliminate errors and inconsistencies between all disciplines and consultants needed to deliver on-schedule tasks/products of the type described in this announcement and for the incorporation of lessons learned and review comments. Additionally, discuss any QA/QC lessons learned that have led to the proposed plan. Provide an organizational chart showing the inter-relationship of management and team components. Criterion 6 – Firm’s Location in the General Geographical Area of the Project and Knowledge of the Locality of the Project (SF 330, Part I, Section H): Basis of Evaluation: Provided that the application of this criterion leaves an appropriate number of qualified firms, given the nature and size of the contract, firms will be evaluated on the location of their office or offices that will be performing the work under this contract and demonstrated knowledge of the general geographic areas in which projects could be located. Evaluation of firms will include consideration of their location within the general geographic area of the anticipated projects. Submission Requirements: 1. Indicate location of the office(s) that will be performing the work, including main offices, branch offices, and offices of team members. 2. Provide a narrative describing the team’s knowledge of the primary geographic areas to be covered by this contract. Criterion 7 – Commitment to Small Business Utilization (SF 330, Part I, Section H): Basis of Evaluation and Submission Requirements : Firms will be evaluated in terms of the extent to which they have identified and committed to Small Business (SB), Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB), Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB), Historically Underutilized Business Zone Small Business (HUBZoneSB), Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB), Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB), and if applicable, Historically Black Colleges or Universities and Minority Institutions (HBCU/MI) in performance of this contract, whether as a joint venture, teaming arrangement, or subcontractor. The Government will evaluate proposals based on: (A) Past performance in utilization of small business concerns, and (B) Participation of small business concerns for this requirement. In support of (A), all firms shall provide historical data on utilization of SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZoneSB, VOSB, SDVOSB and HBCU/MI. Large Businesses shall submit three “final” or “most recent” Individual Subcontracting Reports (ISRs) for similar contracts of relative size which show compliance with utilizing the various types of small business firms noted above. If ISRs are not FINAL or MOST RECENT they will not be considered. If subcontracting goals were not met, provide an explanation. If Individual Subcontracting Reports were not appl...