Loren Data's SAM Daily™

FBO DAILY ISSUE OF AUGUST 26, 2011 FBO #3562
MODIFICATION

59 -- Response to Industry Questions for 06 July 2011 Draft Section L&M SOLICITATION W15P7T-11-R-C001 Global Tactical Advanced Communications Systems (GTACS) and Services

Notice Date

8/24/2011
 

Notice Type

Modification/Amendment
 

NAICS

334290 — Other Communications Equipment Manufacturing
 

Contracting Office

ACC-APG (C4ISR), HQ CECOM CONTRACTING CENTER, 6001 COMBAT DRIVE, ABERDEEN PROVING GROU, MD 21005-1846
 

ZIP Code

21005-1846
 

Solicitation Number

W15P7T11RC001
 

Response Due

9/30/2011
 

Archive Date

11/29/2011
 

Point of Contact

Stephen Jenniss, 443 861 1989
 

E-Mail Address

ACC-APG (C4ISR)
(stephen.jenniss@us.army.mil)
 

Small Business Set-Aside

Partial Small Business
 

Description

Response to Industry Questions for 06 July 2011 Draft Section L&M SOLICITATION W15P7T-11-R-C001 Global Tactical Advanced Communications Systems (GTACS) and Services The following are questions and responses 1 through 50 to Draft Section L & M questions from industry received as of 13 July 2011, 4:30pm Eastern Standard Time. Q1. There are contracts in which a company is performing as a subcontractor to another company on a similar and relevant program as defined by the GTACS Draft PWS, and these two companies are also known direct competitors for the GTACS opportunity. This is a possible Organizational Conflict of Interest (FAR part 9.5) to directly solicit a Past Performance Survey from these companies, as these GTACS competitors may have "impaired objectivity" in their responses. Therefore, please confirm that a Past Performance Survey is not required for a company which is a subcontractor to a known and direct GTACS competitor, due to an OCI concern. If these subject Past Performance Surveys are required in this situation, please advise if these requests can be submitted directly to the government customer (not competitor), due to the aforementioned rationale. R1. The answer to this question will be posted at a later date. Q2. As it appears that 60% or more of the contract value will be met through the purchase of material goods (hardware), will the RFP allow for fee to be applied on all material purchases? R2. Fixed price contracts are described in FAR 16.201 and there is no separation of cost elements in such contracts. FAR Part 16.3 describes in detail the various types of Cost Reimbursement contracts and how fee is approached in such contracts. Q3. Reference: Page 3 - The table has been renamed to Table 2 Question: Is there a Table 1 or is this an error? R3. This should be Table 1 Q4. Reference: Page 3 - L2(c) "Each file of the proposal shall consist of Table of Contents, Executive Summary Section and the Narrative discussion." Question: Is there a page limit for the required Executive Summary per volume? If so please advise page limit of executive summary per volume. R4. The answer to this question will be posted at a later date. Q5. Reference: Page 3 - Regarding the Executive Summary for Technical Volume. Question: Since the technical volume will likely be evaluated by three separate teams for each sample task, will the government distribute the Executive Summary for this volume to each of the same task evaluation teams? R5. Yes Q6. Reference: Page 4 - L 2 (i) - first sentence refers to Table 1 Question: Should this be Table 2 on page 3? R6. Yes, Section L&M have been revised for the final RFP Q7. Reference: Page 6 - Section 3 Subcontracts Question: Should this section be "Subcontractors"? R7. Subcontracts Q8. Reference: Page 6 - Section 3 Question: Does the Government want the information of all proposed subcontractors or only the major subcontractors? R8. Major subcontractors only Q9. Reference: Page 9 Question: Will Instructions for WBS Cost Elements worksheets be released prior to the final RFP? R9. No Q10. Reference: Page 9 - "Instructions for Cost Elements are identified in following subparagraphs of this section and an example of the submission workbook is provided at Attachment04, ST Cost Detail.xls." Question: Will Attachment 4 be released prior to the final RFP? R10. Attachment 4 will not be released prior to RFP. Q11. Reference: Page 10 - (i) Question: Will Enclosure 5 be released prior to the final RFP? R11. All enclosures will not be released prior to the RFP Q12. Reference: Page 12 - section (e) Question: Should this be section (g)? R12. The above reference cannot be found Q13. Reference: Page 12 - Section (f) Question: Should this be section (h)? R13. The above reference cannot be found Q14. Does the government intend to provide additional information regarding the weighting of evaluation criteria within each volume? R14. The weighting is defined section M Q15. Reference: Page 15 - (c) - "Adequacy of Approach: The Sample Task will be evaluated to determine whether the Offeror's methods and approach demonstrate adequate and complete consideration of and satisfaction of the requirements specified in the solicitation. The Sample Tasks will be evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement of the solicitation has been addressed in accordance with the proposal submission section of the solicitation." Question: When referring to "in the solicitation" is the Government referring to requirements in sample task, section L and PWS? R15. The answer to this question will be posted at a later date. Q16. Reference: On page 4, section (ii) opening paragraph, the government removed relevancy of PWS for Past Performance but left Sample Tasks in the new draft, but on page 6 of the same section, (ii)(c), "citing the applicable Government PWS paragraph number" is still requested. Question: Could the government provide more insight into what references to the PWS are required and if a new PWS will be issued prior to the final RFP? R16. The Offeror shall utilize the solicitation PWS as a reference when providing examples of relevant work their Major Subcontractors have completed. Q17. Reference: General Question: To avoid repetition in the 3 Sample Tasks (ST), and to maximize technical content in the ST page counts, will the Government please consider a concise 10 page Management and Risk Control Plan which describes the overall team construct, management controls and tools, and unique facilities that would be applicable to all 3 ST responses? R17. The Contracting Officer has taken this under consideration and has decided that the current methodology is sufficient enough in detail to ascertain an Offeror's ability to manage the Risk associated with this effort. Q18. Reference: L.2.c - Content Requirements, Page 3. "Each file of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents, Executive Summary Section, and the Narrative discussion." Question: Please provide a summary of what is desired in the Narrative Discussion for Volume V, Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations; and if Narrative Discussions for Volume V will be evaluated. R18. Section L 'Instructions to Offerors' of Volume V - Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations as listed in the draft L&M which was posted provides the answer to this question. Additional clarification can be found in FAR Part 15 and clause FAR clause 52.212-2. Q19. Reference: L.2.c(ii) - Volume II - Past Performance (FACTOR), page 4. "Aspects of relevancy include similarity of service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and degree of subcontract/teaming for those development, production and sustainment sample tasks attached to the RFP. Question: The referenced phrase has been modified from the previous draft to require relevancy against the sample tasks in lieu of the overall contract PWS. Would the government prefer to see references for work that are specifically relevant to the sample tasks (however focused they may be) as well as references that show relevance against the contract-level PWS? Additionally, should relevant work cited be limited to the specific system types discussed in the sample tasks, or would the Government prefer to see a range of relevant system types covered across the referenced work? Please give additional guidance in this area; it is currently unclear whether offerors should focus only on the sample tasks to show relevancy or whether we should focus on both the sample tasks and the contract-level PWS. R19. The answer to this question will be posted at a later date. Q20. Reference: L.2.c(iii)(b) Volume III, SBPP, page 6, para iii (b). "Total Contract Value (including options)": L.2.c(iii)(d), page 7, under NOTE - "All percentages should use TOTAL CONTRACT VALUE as a baseline." : SB Subcontracting Plan, para 3(a), page 9 - "base your percentages on TOTAL CONTRACT VALUE". Question: How is "Total Contract Value" calculated? Is the Total Contract Value simply the sum of the offeror's proposed prices for the three sample tasks? Does Total Contract Value = Total Evaluated Price? Please clarify. R20. "Total Contract Value" (TCV) For the purposes of the Small Business PARTICIPATION plan - the TCV will be $10B. Offerors are required to propose a percentage of the total acquisition value dollars to be awarded to small business subcontractors or teaming partners. The dollars proposed must correlate to the dollars and percentages identified in the SB subcontracting plan. For how to determine Total Evaluated Price, see Section M: 'Price/Cost Evaluation Approach'. Q21. Reference: L.2.c(iii)(f)(2), Page 9 Question: In accordance with the Draft Section L, Volume III, # (2) on Page 9; Each large Business Offeror shall provide a small business Subcontracting Plan that contains all the elements required by FAR 52.219-9. In accordance with this clause, goals are to be stated as a percentage of subcontracting dollars. What are the specific goals to be achieved by Large Businesses on the Subcontracting Plan? R21. Refer to Draft Section L & M page 16; 3, g. Q22. Reference: M.A, Basis for Award, page 13. "Offerors remaining within the competitive range..." Question: What specific criteria will be used to establish a competitive range? R22. The Contracting Officer will establish the competitive range once all proposals have been received and evaluated in accordance with Section M. Q23. Reference: M.A, Basis for Award, page 13. "Offerors remaining within the competitive range..." Question: If a bidder is in the competitive range, how will the Government assess best value to make/not make an award? R23. The answer to this question will be posted at a later date. Q24. Reference: M.B.1, Factor 1 - Technical, page 13. "Each subfactor will be evaluated and adjectivally rated individually." Question: What adjectival ratings will be used to distinguish proposal section evaluation from another? The RFP mentions an "acceptable" rating, but no scale or range of ratings is provided. Recommend that section M include this rating scale, along with the specific criteria that would be evaluated to determine a given rating. Also recommend that a similar rating scale and criteria be provided for the past performance and small business participation plan evaluations. R24. The source selection process will be following DOD source selection guidelines (4 March 2011) of which the adjectival ratings are described. The Government will not be releasing them separately. Q25. Reference: M.C - Evaluation Approach, Page 14. "Any Offeror that is already affiliated with or is contemplating any contractual relationship with any of the above companies shall notify the Contracting Officer as soon as possible, but no later than ten (10) days after issuance of the solicitation." Question: Is the contractual relationship intended to be related specifically to this effort; or does it pertain to any other relationship the parties may have beyond this solicitation? R25. This reference pertains to any and all relationships to the parties mentioned both with this solicitation and beyond it. Q26. Reference: M.C.1 - Past Performance Evaluation Approach. Page 15 Question: Please confirm that the Past Performance Evaluation Approach should be re-numbered with a "2." R26. Correct Q27. Reference: PWS Section 1.0 - Scope. The PWS specifically states "The GTACS program and contract will provide the flexibility and responsiveness needed to support the mission of PEO C3T, its PMs, PdMs and PDs." Question: Throughout the PWS all work and Task Areas 1, 2, and 3 focus on providing services and solutions for tactical C3 systems. The PEO C3T systems provide the tactical communications infrastructure which enable voice, data and video communications on the battlefield not only for Army communications elements but for Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Systems as well. Interoperability requirements need to be understood by the potential bidders to propose services and solutions that are seamlessly integrated into the overall tactical battlefield. Will the PWS and Task Areas 1, 2 and 3 specifically define the C3 systems interoperability requirements for all external hardware, software and communications systems that PEO C3T is required to interface within CONUS and OCONUS locations? Will the respective Interface Control Documents and Systems Architecture Information Exchange Requirements be provided for Task Areas 1 through 3 (and the respective Sample Tasks if applicable) that require solutions to be integrated into the overall PEO C3T System of Systems Enterprise? R27. The answer to this question will be posted at a later date. Q28. As part of the prime's proposal, will the prime be required to submit rate schedules for itself and separate rate schedules for its subcontractors? R28. Prime offerors will be required to submit an excel file that contains the Prime's direct and indirect rates applicable to performance of the three sample tasks. Additionally, the prime contractors will be required to provide Cost and Price Analysis (CAPA) documentation for all subcontractor and interorganizational transfers' costs proposed in the three sample tasks that exceed $700K. This CAPA documentation shall address the following (which will be included in the cost and pricing spread sheet to be released with the final RFP): 1. Was adequate price competition obtained or its absence properly justified? 2. Did the Prime contractor adequately assess and dispose of subcontractors' alternate proposals, if offered? 3. Does the Prime contractor have a sound basis for selecting and determining the responsibility of the particular subcontractor? 4. Has the Prime contractor performed adequate cost or price analysis or price comparisons and obtained certified cost or pricing data and data other than certified cost or pricing data if no exception applies? 5. Does the Prime offeror have a DCAA approved purchasing system? Q29. Are the Table of Contents and Executive Summary included in the page counts of Volumes I and II as defined in Table 2 of the Draft Section L & M? R29. No Q30. Reference: Per page 4, 1st paragraph, the current Draft Section L and M says the following: The TEP shall address the information indicated in parenthesis and italics in the applicable Sample Task. Question: Would you please clarify what is meant by information indicated in parenthesis and italics? R30. Reference will be removed. Q31. Reference: section L, 2, c, pg 3 Question: Request that the Government consider not requiring an Executive Summary for each of the five (5) files listed in Table 2. Recommend that the Executive Summary be included only with the first file (Volume 1, Technical). R31. The answer to this question will be posted at a later date. Q32. Reference: section L, iii, Volume II, pg 4 Question: In accordance with Section L and M, past performance reporting is required for subcontractors who will be providing hardware, software or services whose subcontract is for more than 20% of any sample task. Please advise how many days will industry have to provide past performance to the Government for these 20% subcontracts. If industry is allowed the full 30 day proposal response periods to submit past performance assessment questionnaires by their past performance program customers, it will allow industry an opportunity to internally compete the requirements, thus providing the best partnering solution with regard to technical, price, and small business considerations. R32. The answer to this question will be posted at a later date. Q33. Reference: section L, iii, Volume III, b, pg 6 Question: "Total Contract Value" is no longer equal to "Total Evaluated Price" as was originally stated in a previous Q&A. It appears that the current definition of "Total Contract Value" is the sum of bidder's prices for ST1 + ST2 + ST3 including options. Please confirm this assumption. R33. "Total Contract Value" (TCV) For the purposes of the Small Business PARTICIPATION plan - the TCV will be $10B. References to the Small Business SUBCONTRACTING Plan normally request either the dollars or percentages intended to be subcontracted. Each offeror will only be held to the percentages proposed not the dollars as an offeror may not reach the ceiling." For how to determine Total Evaluated Price, see Section M: 'Price/Cost Evaluation Approach'. Q34. Reference: section L, iii, Volume III, pg 7 Question: Draft Section L and M state that Offerors are to provide a list of small business's within Volume III, and that small and large subcontractors performing on any one of the three sample tasks are to be referenced in the Technical Proposal. Because GTACS is a broad Contract to support all of PEO C3T Program Management Offices and Programs, it is highly possible that not all team members products and services will be utilized in the 3 evaluated sample tasks, but may be utilized on future GTACS efforts. The inclusion and discussion of all team members and subcontractors at contract award is recommended to avoid time consuming requests and modifications in future Task Order awards, and will ensure PEO C3T has broad technology-based teams to perform all work necessary as defined by the PWS. Therefore, it is suggested that the Government add a teammate matrix that is matched to the PWS, as part of the RFP and provide ample space for a complete team identification and role/capability-based response. R34. The government has taken this under consideration and will not be requiring a team mate matrix. The team should be discussed within the proposal in accordance with section L. Q35. Reference: section L, iii, Volume III, e, pg 7 Question: Regarding the section starting, "(e) List principal supplies/services to be subcontracted to. Be specific as possible (i.e. references to statement of work, etc) that will demonstrate a variety and complexity of work: Please define "principal" in this context, since there may be very differing perceptions of this. R35. The answer to this question will be posted at a later date. Q36. Reference: section L, iii, Volume III, e, pg 7 Question: The HBCU/MI category appears in the underlined structure on the bottom of page 7, but does not appear in the structure on the top of page 7. Please advise if bidders will be required to meet any specific Government defined HBCU/MI goals. It had been understood that the HBCU reference had been removed in a previous question response. R36. The answer to this question will be posted at a later date. Q37. Reference: section L, iv, Volume IV, p 9 Question: Request the Government provide an example of the draft attachment 04, ST_Cost Detail.xls and the instructions for WBS cost element and cost elements worksheets, as soon as possible. The Pre-solicitation Draft Performance Risk Assessment Questionnaire for SOLICITATION W15P7T-11-RC001 GTACS and previous responses R1, R31, R32 and R52 all indicated the Government would provide the workbook. Please advise when this important document can be provided. Early release of this document will be beneficial in reduction of industry questions and possible resulting delays. R37. All solicitation attachments will be released when the RFP is posted unless otherwise notified. Q38. Reference: section L, iv, Volume IV, p 9 Question: Suggest that the Government consider providing the WBS and cost worksheets formats. Also, we suggest the cost worksheet format utilize the Government fiscal year versus the contractor fiscal year, for clarity and consistency across all proposal responses. R38. The Government has taken this under consideration and is remaining with contractor fiscal year. Q39. Reference: section L, iv, Volume IV, p 9 Question: Section L under Volume IV - Cost Price states, "Each WBS Cost Summary Worksheet will have for each Cost Element, a reference to a worksheet (single tab within workbook) containing the supporting calculations, formulas, and line item details necessary for the Government to evaluate the individual components of the Cost Element by WBS by Contractor Fiscal Year." It was mentioned in the previous industry responses (R1, R2, R3, R31, R32, R52) that this workbook will be government defined and provided. Please confirm that it is still the plan for this workbook to be Government defined and provided. R39. Correct Q40. Reference: section L, iv, Volume IV, I, pg 10 Question: Regarding the section starting "..each Offeror proposed labor category shall also map to a government provided labor category (see Enclosure 05)". Please advise when the Government will provide Enclosure 05 and how many labor categories are included. Early release of this document would be beneficial in reduction of industry questions and possible resulting delays. R40. All solicitation attachments will be released when the RFP is posted Q41. Reference: section L., iv, Volume IV, pg's 10 & 12 Question: The previous Responses to Draft Sections L&M Questions from Industry, dated June 15, 2011 state (R40, R43, R75 and R76) that certified cost or pricing data will not be required, but that other than cost or pricing data may be requested for the evaluation of sample tasks. In revised Draft Section L& M section (iv. Subcontracts/Interdivisional Efforts), it states that the prime contractor must provide the cost/price analysis for all S/IE costs over $700K. However, the later section (d, Cost/Price Proposal Supporting documents), states that the prime contractor must have available the cost/price analysis and source selection data for all S/IE costs over $700K. Please advise which of these conflicting sections should be followed. R41. The answer to this question will be posted at a later date. Q42. Reference: section L., iv, Volume IV, pg 11 Question: Section IV - Cost-Price (Factor), vii. Fee/Profit states that FPRA or FPRA can be used in lieu of indirect cost pool components. However, Section IV - Cost-Price (Factor), v. Indirect Costs requests a detailed breakdown of Indirect Costs. Please advise if the FPRA or FPRA data can also be used in lieu of the Indirect Costs detail. R42. If an offeror provides a valid FPRA for a specific cost element (direct or indirect), a breakdown for that specific direct or indirect cost will not be required. Q43. Reference: section M, 4, pg 18 Question: It is stated in the section that CLINs (0001-0002) will become part of the contract. Please define these CLINS. Please advise if these CLINS will be contractually incorporated at the IDIQ vehicle award or at future task order awards. R43. The answer to this question will be posted at a later date. Q44. Reference: General Question: Please advise estimated schedule for Draft RFP and RFP. An estimated schedule would be of great benefit to Industry for planning and resource allocation purposes. R44. Estimate fourth quarter FY11 Q45. Reference: General Question: This Draft release appears to rescind or ignore some of the previously released answers to Industry questions as posted. Please advise if the current Draft Section L&M dated 6/24/2011supersedes previous answers which would now appear in conflict. R45. The draft Section L&M supersedes previous versions, and is consistent with previous Government responses. Q46. Reference: Jun 15, 2011 Government Answers to Questions and Comments. Q57: Please confirm that a winning prime will not be allowed to bring on additional sub-contractors following an award. R57: The winning Prime will be allowed to bring additional Subcontractors on following the award. "The request for the replacement of a sub-contractor after contract award shall be formally made to the contracting officer in writing - along with accompanying rationale for replacement. R56: The Government does not intend to eliminate the term "enforceable commitment, Enforceable commitment serves as a mean to ensure Small Business participation and as a deterrent from switching Small Business team members without the approval of the Contracting Officer and the Chief Associate Director of CECOM Small Business. Comment: The Government's 15 June, 2011 response addressed the addition of a subcontractor. However, the response relates it to the "replacement" of a subcontractor. The addition of a subcontractor is not the same as the replacement of a subcontractor. The term "replacement" alludes to dropping a subcontractor and substituting with another subcontractor. The term "addition" refers to bringing on a new subcontractor but not switching the new subcontractor for another from the Prime's list of subcontractors. Question: Can the Government confirm that a winning prime will be allowed to bring on additional subcontractors following an award without having to remove an existing subcontractor from the Prime's team? R46. The winning prime can bring on additional subcontractors on a case by case basis with the approval of the Contracting Officer. Q47. Reference: The previous question Question: Will the addition of a subcontractor require the approval of the Contracting Officer and the Chief Associate Director of CECOM Small Business? R47. Approval of the Contracting Officer only. Q48. Reference: Page 3 and 9, 24 June 2011 Draft Section L&M Section L, Page 3: COST.zip Page 3: All price data shall only be contained in the PRICE-COST.xls file. Page 9: Instructions for Cost Elements are identified in following subparagraphs of this section and an example of the submission workbook is provided at Attachment 04, ST_Cost Detail.xls. Question: Will the Government release drafts of the spreadsheets to be used for the Price Volume? R48. All solicitation attachments will be released when the RFP is posted Q49. Reference: Page 6 - 9, 24 June 2011Draft Section L&M Section L (iii) VOLUME III - SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN; Section M, 3. SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN EVALUATION APPROACH (b) Total Contract Value: (Include options, etc) $___________ (d) Dollar Value and Percentage of Total Contract Value of Subcontracts Planned All percentages should use TOTAL CONTRACT VALUE as a baseline. (f) SDB and HBCU/MI target participation must be expressed as dollars and percentages of TOTAL CONTRACT VALUE...Last column of table "% OF TOTAL CONTRACT VALUE" (3) In order to comply with the requirements for the Small Business Participation Plan, please be sure you have: (a) Based your percentages on TOTAL CONTRACT VALUE g.... The Small business requirements for this procurement are as follows: Small Business: 23% of the total contract value. Small Disadvantaged Business: 5% of the total contract value; Woman-Owned Small Business: 5% of the total contract value; Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone) Small Business: 3% of the total contract value; Veteran Owned Small Business: 3% of the total contract value; Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business: 3% of the total contract value. Question: What is the definition of the "Total Contract Value?" Is it one of the potential definitions below? If so, which one? If not, what is the Government's definition? (a) Total Evaluated Price (TEP) after the multipliers for each sample task is applied to the price for each Sample Task. (b) Total Price Proposed by Offeror for the sum of all the Sample Tasks before the sample task multipliers are applied? (c) Government's estimated ceiling of $10B? R49. "Total Contract Value" (TCV) See Question/Response #20 above. Q50. Reference: Page 7-8, 24 June 2011Draft Section L&M Section L (iii) VOLUME III - SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN (FACTOR). (e) List principal supplies/services to be subcontracted to. (f) SDB and HBCU/MI target participation must be expressed as dollars and percentages... (e) Prior Performance Information: (f) Extent of Commitment: Question: Would the government consider renumbering the sections of the Small Business volume (or portions of it) to clarify the order for consistency? For example, on pages 7 and 8, (e) and (f) are immediately followed by another (e) and (f). R50. The numbering and lettering has been corrected All interested parties should continue to watch the Federal Business Opportunities Page (FEDBIZOPS) under the Solicitation # W15P7T-11-R-C001 for further information. Contracting Office: U.S. ARMY CONTRACTING COMMAND ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND 6001Combat Drive, CCCE-CBC Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD. 21005-1846 Point(s) of Contact: Mr. David Hansen, Contract Specialist Phone: 443-861-4988 E-mail: david.e.hansen1.civ@mail.mil Mr. Stephen Jenniss, Contract Specialist Phone: 443-861-4989 E-mail: stephen.w.jenniss.civ@mail.mil Ms. Barbara Hansen, Contracting Officer/Group Chief Phone: 443-861-5061 E-mail: barbara.a.hansen28.civ@mail.mil
 

Web Link

FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/notices/672e470e24f3f2c68ff72c70e59ddb7b)
 

Place of Performance

Address: ACC-APG (C4ISR) HQ CECOM CONTRACTING CENTER, 6001 COMBAT DRIVE ABERDEEN PROVING GROU MD

Zip Code: 21005-1846
 

Record

SN02547910-W 20110826/110825000414-672e470e24f3f2c68ff72c70e59ddb7b (fbodaily.com)
 

Source

FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)

---

| FSG Index  |  This Issue's Index  |  Today's FBO Daily Index Page |