Industry Day Q-A CRM.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 34 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- FA88192023SN001
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Hemisphere Industry Day Brief (As Presented).pptx | PPTX presentation | |
| Hemisphere Industry Day Attendees.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| DRAFT Hemisphere Industry Day Brief.pptx | PPTX presentation | |
| (CUI) Staffing Matrix 5Jan23.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| (CUI) HEMI PWS 5Jan23.docx | DOCX document |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
CRM
| General | ||
| Do you have an Org Chart you can publish? | Publicly available org charts can be found here: https://www.ssc.spaceforce.mil/Portals/3/SSC%20Org%20Chart_updates_10_2022_1.pdf | |
| When are industry day risks due? | The Government needs industry day risks ASAP but we will receive feedback up until RFP release. | |
| Will charts be available as well as the meeting recording? | The as-presented charts will be posted with this CRM. We will attempt to upload the recording to SAM.gov, but we may be unable to due to file size restriction. | |
| Will you be releasing the list of companies who participated? | We have reached out to all attendees for consent to release their names as part of the Industry Day Sam.gov posting. | |
| Can you mention how many RFIs you received? | The Government cannot release that information. | |
| Do the PEOs have subordinate Delta’s? If so, would SSC provide a list of those subordinate Delta’s? Reference: Hemisphere Industry Day slides 7 and 9 name supported Delta’s…but not the provider Delta. | SDACP Deltas: Space Domain Awareness, Strategic Warning & Surveillance, Space Warfighting, Warfighter Enterprise, Advanced MILSATCOM, and Innovation & Prototyping |
BMC3 Deltas: Operational C2, Tactical C3, and Data Transport Product Support
| What are two or three things that are key for industry to be able to provide you for this effort to be successful? | An efficient and detailed transition plan, addressing security and staffing; evidence to support security and personnel qualification requirements. | |
| What is the biggest challenge in your current organization? | The Government's biggest challenge is hiring skilled people with appropriate clearances. | |
| Facilities | ||
| Could you mention size requirements for SCIF space and if we need to have REDLAN already in place or just the ability to install? | We are seeking two SCIF/SAPF spaces located in El Segundo, CA. The intent is for Government and Contractor employees to reside in one of the spaces and the other is a facility with both unclass and classified workspace and a digital engineering collaboration environment (SpaceDEN). More detailed requirements are not available at this time. | |
| Given the time that it takes companies to get a facility cleared, do you know when you think you will have your facility requirements clearly defined? | All facility requirements will be in the RFP. Our goal is to provide facility requirements in the draft RFP as well. | |
| How will this contract interact with SpaceDEN? | This effort will encompass the Maple facility, which hosts SpaceDEN. The Maple facility is a leased space and the awardee would assume the existing lease agreement. SpaceDEN is located in El Segundo, CA. | |
| Where does your SCIF need to be located? | The Government requires two SCIF/SAPFs to be located in El Segundo, CA, but beyond that, we are open to SAPFs in other parts of the country that contractors can access and work remotely, as long as they can meet our requirements. The two SCIF/SAPFs in El Segundo are the only facility requirements. | |
| Are SCIF spaces for Government use as well, not just for contractor use? | The SCIF/SAPF spaces are for Government and Contractor use. | |
| What is the intent of breaking away the facility requirements into their own task orders and can the Government provide clarification as to what that task order would look like? | The two facilities will be captured within one or two task orders, along with personnel support. The facilities will be incidental to the overall task order effort with the majority of the scope on the task order being professional services support. We have not decided whether both facilities will be on one task order with associated supporting personnel or each will be on its own task order with associated personnel. This is an adjustment from what was verbalized at Industry Day (facilities will not be separated and on their own task order). | |
| Will we have the facility requirements for draft RFP or final RFP? | The goal is to provide facility requirements in the draft RFP. | |
| Would you consider options besides having a SCIF available on day 1? | The two SCIF/SAPF requirements mentioned above need to be ready for use at the end of the transition period. | |
| Are you considering a facility contract/TO all in one or breaking those out? | The Government has not decided one way or another yet. See line 16. | |
| For facility requirements, does the Government have the locations fully established or are you still working out where you need that capability? | The Government has requirements in El Segundo, CA. We are also open to SAPFs in other parts of the country that contractors can access to work remotely, in lower cost, easier to hire locations. | |
| For the digital engineering collaboration space, can you elaborate on what your needs really are there? | The digital engineering collaboration space on Hemisphere is SpaceDEN, which is located within the Maple facility. This is currently a leased facility by the incumbent that has both unclassified and classified spaces. The task order scope will include the existing lease and associated professional services. | |
| Are you looking for your own standalone space, or are you open to co-used spaces where other entities that are space related are a part of? | Due to the nature of classified material, classified spaces will need to be compartmentalized. Co-use in terms of an open and shared space will likely not be an option. However, if there are separately secured areas within one larger classified space, that may be possible. | |
| What's the intent of the classified space as a service (CSAAS)? | The Government is seeking SCIF/SAPF space that is ready to use and provided and maintained by the Contractor. See line 16. | |
| Does the Government plan on finishing the SpaceDEN? | The Government's understanding is that the SpaceDEN will be complete by the time Hemisphere starts. | |
| Communication network for the CSaaS, will there be post award time to get the networks up and approvals within the CSaaS? | We will have a 90 day transition period following contract award in which the expectation is that those items are set up. | |
| What are the network requirements? | At a minimum: NIPR (with unclassified phones), SIPR, JWICS (With classified VOIP), vIPer, AF7 (level 3,4,5), SGN | |
| Is the SpaceDEN being stood up right now? Are you expecting a contractor to take over the existing space? Would you accept a better solution? | SpaceDEN is being stood up now and is expected to be complete by the time Hemisphere starts. See line 21. | |
| Can you provide more insight on digital collaboration space? What are the expectations for collaboration? | The digital collaboration space that was referred to at Industry Day is the SpaceDEN. SpaceDEN is located within the Maple facility that offers both unclass and classified workspace. See line 21. | |
| Is the program office interested in making investments to building out SCIF space in support of the IDIQ duration? | The Government is only focused on the two SCIF/SAPF spaces at this time, which need to be fully functional no later than at the end of the transition period. | |
| Are you expecting us to have a list of SCIF space/office space and their locations as part of our proposal? | Yes, SCIF/SAPF space specifically. But we do have planned a 90 day transition period with the expectation that facilities are available at the end of the 90 day period. | |
| Does the SCIF space have to be owned by the prime or can we have subs? | There are currently no restrictions. | |
| On the facility requirement, the SpaceDEN in particular is unique. Is the intent of the Government to make that TO a sole source TO? | We have not determined how we will award TO(s) that include a facility(ies). See line 16. | |
| Current/Other Contracts | ||
| Can you state who the incumbent is? | The Government cannot release that information. | |
| Without sharing the incumbent, can you share if there is one incumbent or multiple? | There is more than one incumbent performing work on standalone contracts. | |
| What is the total FTE count of the current incumbent staff? | The current incumbent staff has approximately 300 FTEs on the overall contract. The Government is looking to do a task order approach, and each individual task order will have fewer FTEs. | |
| Is this work an expansion on current incumbent work | This effort encompasses both current scope on the existing contract and new scope. | |
| Have you released the incumbent's contract number? | The Government cannot release the incumbent's contract number. | |
| Can you tell us whether the incumbent contracts are run as TOs within an IDIQ, or BPAs, etc.? | The incumbent contracts are run as standalone contracts. | |
| How much of the incumbent work being performed is in LA and how much is being done at the contractor's site? | The majority of the work is being executed in LA at Government sites. | |
| What is the relationship of the Hemisphere contract to other SDACP contracts such as Stardust and the upcoming GSIS contract? | All separate sets of requirements. Intent of this scope is to be a separate IDIQ. | |
| Will there be an OCI if companies propose to both the GSIS effort and the Hemisphere effort? Will there be additional scope details to assist with a mitigation plan? | You may propose to both but must submit an OCI mitigation plan per FAR 9.5. There will not be additional scope details other than what will be provided in the RFPs for each effort. | |
| Is there any information you could provide us with to better understand if an OCI is present? Data, A&AS type work, etc.? Anything in particular you're looking out for? | It is not necessarily an OCI if you apply for two contracts. An example of a potential OCI is when one individual is dividing their between two contract and the associated perception. The burden of proof is on the contractor to convince the Government that there is not an OCI going on, and must be disclosed to the PCO and provided in a mitigation plan. | |
| An RFP was recently released on 23 Feb for Data as a Service. Scope is to help SSC get arms around all the data and do analytics. Does Hemisphere require use of any of that data and could we perform on both? | Since that effort has received proposals, it is locked down informationally. That team will not be able to share too much information with our team. We are not too familiar with that effort. General information for OCI is that you are required to submit an OCI mitigation plan with your proposal, and the burden of proof is on you to convince us that there is not an OCI. | |
| The GSIS contract originated in SZ, has BC scope and SSIO scope. You have overlap in SE and test & development. What scenario/type would this fall under? | We need to go back and delineate between the two because that does become difficult for us to manage. But it's not a particular type of OCI and we rely on industry to let us know what type it is and submit an adequate mitigation plan. | |
| Small Business | ||
| SY usually has a small business quota of over 30%. Is that what the Government is expecting for the IDIQ or for each of the TOs? | The Government is still in the market research phase and there are no set requirements for small business yet. | |
| Is the Government considering more than one Small Business awardee? | Notionally, yes. The Government is trying to maximize Small Business participation. | |
| What is the threshold for a small business to win a task order? | The Government has not determined the threshold yet. | |
| Will you use a Small Business pool or Full and Open to compete the TOs? | The Government has not determined TO award procedures yet. | |
| Will small businesses be able to bid on TOs that are unrestricted to large businesses? | Notionally, yes, we do not intend to limit their bidding. | |
| Any chance this will go small? | We have a lot of interest in small business so there is a possibility. | |
| Acquisition Strategy | ||
| Will the value of the total MAC IDIQ require contract approval at SAF/SQ or AF SAE? | This is at the PEO level. | |
| Will TOs be awarded with the IDIQ or will they be separate proposals? | Due to our timeline, we are expecting to award the IDIQ and TOs in parallel. Our RFP will delineate how many TOs we are intending to award. | |
| Do you know what the minimum barriers will be for IDIQ entrance? Anyone that puts in a proposal? | This is something the Government will articulate in the RFP and instructions to offerors. At this time, we have not decided what the minimum will be. | |
| Do you know how many IDIQ awardees there will be? | We do not know how many task orders we will award to yet. | |
| Can you bid into the IDIQ without bidding into a task order? Can you go after a TO later? | Theoretically, yes. However, it is not something we have determined yet. We are working to determine an off-ramp/on-ramp strategy for the pool of awardees. | |
| Will the TOs have their own transition plan, separate evaluation criteria, separate source selection, etc.? | The Government will use streamlined ordering procedures. The same evaluation criteria will be used throughout the life of the IDIQ. We will be utilizing FAR 16.505 as opposed to FAR PART 15. | |
| How are you thinking about innovation and how your requirements will change over a 10 year ordering period? | We are trying to build in the flexibility to on ramp and off ramp contractors and scope. We need a contract that is responsive to our evolving requirements. | |
| What is the intent of having a Multiple Award IDIQ? | A multiple award IDIQ allows for maximum competition and flexibility to meet our continuously evolving requirements. It is also more advantageous for the government in administration of the effort as it allows us to push responsibility of managing the TOs to the requirements owners. | |
| How are you going to manage future contract requirements, PoP, etc.? Will we be penalized if we do not submit an offer for future TOs? | The way we are going to break out requirements is not set at this time. Once we finalize it, we will have a better idea of how many TOs we intend to award initially. We do not know what TOs we will award in the future either, but it will be clear in the instructions of offerors. | |
| Will rates that are proposed be for the entire PoP or more for TO level? | We are thinking of gearing it more towards the TO level. Easier to estimate 5 years out vs 10. | |
| Have you considered what happens to integration if you push contract responsibility down? | The Government does not intend to break out the requirements to the point where integration would be an issue. | |
| If the Government does choose to break up the requirements by organization, how would you de-conflict the task? | The Government has not determined how we will deconflict similar scope/tasks across Tos for multiple organizations. | |
| Will the RFP be structured to propose for the IDIQ pool and also propose for the specific TOs? Will it be broken out? | Yes. There will be clear instructions about what we intent to award in the RFP. | |
| Are the TOs based on skillsets or by the 3 letter organization? Are the materiel leaders on board? Do they already have their inputs into these TOs? | The Government has not determined how the TOs will be broken out. The requirements were provided by each program office and are encompassed in the staffing matrix and PWS. | |
| At face value, some of the constructs make it look like only 5 TOs will be awarded. Can you tell us if there are going to be more than that? | None of these constructs are decided upon. We have not determined how requirements will be broken up into TOs. We also have multiple mission partners utilizing this contract and we want to keep flexibility in mind to add additional TOs in the future. We want to emphasize that we are not set on that first construct (ref chart with requirements breakouts) | |
| Will this be a prime only bid or are you looking for teams to throw in bids? | We are not precluding any type of arrangement at this time. | |
| Do you know how the breakout is going to be? Two big? Two small? | That has not been determined. | |
| Can you describe what your plans are to establish an internal team to the PEO to manage the IDIQ? | We have it set up currently where we have one PM and one PCO over the entire IDIQ. Currently, there is not a plan to have a separate PMO team manage the IDIQ, but requirements owners will act as CORs for each individual TO we issue.. We will have a board to determine new customers and scope moving forward, but that is all we have planned. The intent right now is for the IDIQ to be at the directorate level. It is not for all of SSC. | |
| Where are you guys in the process of figuring out if you're doing an IDIQ or not? Do you have primes yet? Is this a brand new contract situation? | Right now we are leaning towards the multiple award IDIQ but still in the market research phase, and have not received formal approval. We do not have primes yet. | |
| Will you have to qualify across the board for all of the requirements? | Our intent is to break it up so that you do not have to qualify for all of the requirements, but rather certain TOs. | |
| Have you considered whether all teaming has to be accomplished at the Multiple Award IDIQ level or at the TO level? We've seen that you can bring on a sub after contract award to fill a position. | The Government cannot tell you who to subcontract with and the Government would leave it up to you. | |
| Would SSC consider a multi-award contract award structure (such as set aside task order(s)), or evaluation criteria that encourages participation of non-traditional entities such as academic and not-for-profit organizations capable of inserting innovation capabilities into lifecycle contracts with long periods of performance like Hemisphere? | We are not trying to prescribe or preclude participation by certain types of entities. If an entity can meet our requirements, they are welcome to submit offers. The Government is very interested in innovation and will welcome proposals that encompass innovation. | |
| Is the government considering use of OASIS at all? | The Government will not be using OASIS. We plan to create our own IDIQ. | |
| Does the Government envision this IDIQ taking on STS or SAFS's task orders within NC3 today? | We have one STS requirement that we have absorbed into the Hemisphere scope. | |
| Have you finalized a NAICS code? | No, not yet. | |
| Regarding pre-determined labor rates, what kind of consideration are you providing in terms of escalation models for ongoing contracts? | We are intending for this IDIQ to be 10 years, but each individual TO PoP will be restricted to a 5 year PoP, which shortens exposure to economic turbulence. We are looking into what mechanisms there are to re-open the rates if we need to, but they will likely be proposed at the TO level. We understand that we need to be flexible in this environment. | |
| Are you considering any disabled veteran owned direct awards? | We are just gathering information at this point. | |
| When will the RFP drop? | Mid summer in July. | |
| What kind of contract are you doing | That has not been determined yet, we are leaning toward a Multiple Award IDIQ. | |
| What is the timeline of determining the acquisition strategy? | We are still developing our acq strategy using market research. We are targeting draft RFP release and acq strat approval in May. | |
| Will you allow cross teaming on the IDIQ? | We have not decided one way or the other. | |
| Do you anticipate past performance being used? | We are not sure how/if we are going to use Past Performance. We are going to try to build our evaluation criteria to not preclude small businesses. | |
| Is Hemisphere combining two or more contracts as well as adding additional work? | Yes. | |
| Was cost of living and inflation over 10 years taken into consideration of the Government Estimate? | Yes. | |
| Have you considered including scenario questions in your RFP or hours against each labor category for evaluation? | No, not yet. | |
| Has evaluation criteria been determined yet. | No, not yet, but the Government will take feedback | |
| Is there an estimated ceiling? | Not at this time. | |
| Will past performance from subcontractors be evaluated or just the prime's? | We have not decided this yet, but our goal is to make this process as easy as possible and maximize small business participation. | |
| Will Government personnel lead the transition? Is the transition timeframe 90 days? | It was a request by several companies that we have a Government POC lead the transition. The Jan - March timeframe is intended to be the transition period (approx 90 days). | |
| Does SSC intend to include on-ramp opportunities for new vendors given the long period of performance for Hemisphere? | Yes, but how we will do this has not been determined. This will be part of our acquisition strategy. | |
| As far as an integration team, do you have a PMO-led team that understands the requirements from all the PEOs and a COR that will help manage everything? | This effort is under one PEO (Brig Gen Sejba) supporting both SDACP and BMC3. For initial award and TOs, we have a source selection evaluation team who will recommend IDIQ and TO awardees to the PEO. Each TO should have their own COR. We do not currently have an overarching PMO team at the IDIQ level. | |
| Have you considered a competitive bid range for cost evaluation? | No, we are considering adding a pre-determined rate per labor category mix which we would evaluate for cost realism, reasonableness, and balanced pricing. The price would then be multiplying those rates by hours. We will allow industry to propose rates. | |
| Have you considered locality adjustments for rates? | Yes and we encourage different rates for different locations. | |
| Do the materiel leaders have the option to use another contract vehicle besides this one? | Yes, but this contract is being stood up to directly support SZ and BC materiel leaders' needs for professional services. | |
| Can you share information on the larger portfolio efforts? | Not at this time. | |
| Why aren't you using OASIS or OASIS plus? | We have looked into GSA OASIS. Having our own IDIQ gives us more flexibility and ability to respond to our evolving requirements if we own and manage our contract, versus if another agency manages it. | |
| What is the pricing requirement at the IDIQ level? | We have not decided yet, but the Government is thinking about pre-determined rates (set by offerors) that we would evaluate for cost realism, reasonableness, and balanced pricing at onset of award. | |
| How would it be determined which mission partners can use this contract | The Government will establish a board of directors that will review the contract scope and any requests, and determine if whether their participation on this contract is allowed. | |
| Would SSC specify a list of mission partners referenced in Slide 10 (Requirements Overview – Support) of the 28 Feb Hemisphere Industry Day Presentation? | SAF/SQ, SAF/AQL, SWAC, SSDP | |
| Is there an estimate on how many more programs (mission partners) will utilize Hemisphere? | No, we do not have a plan right now to add more mission partners. We do need to be flexible in order to support potential mission partners in the future. | |
| Under a multi-award HEMISPHERE contract structure, does SSC have a desired number of prime awardees at the IDIQ level? | That has not been decided yet. | |
| Has SSC determined HEMISPHERE instruction and evaluation criteria for past performance requirements to be evaluated at the IDIQ-level | We are not sure how/if we are going to use Past Performance. We are going to try to build our evaluation criteria to not preclude small businesses. | |
| Security | ||
| If the IDIQ is unclassified will the proposal be unclassified? | Yes. | |
| Is it possible for a classified addendum to be added to the RFP? | Right now we do not have any classified requirements. | |
| Will most work be on SIPR? | Most work will be done at classifications higher than SIPR (TS//SCI level). This includes JWICS and SAP networks. | |
| Is there a plan on classified TOs? | Not at this time | |
| Requirements | ||
| Under the Cyber Security section in the PWS, one task is to "draft and staff a program spectrum plan." Could you elaborate a bit more on that please? | This requirement will be removed. | |
| Will the IDIQ proposal require key personnel? | We have not thought through what we are going to require since we are still in the market research stage. | |
| Do you anticipate Modeling and Simulation work to be done on this contract or do you anticipate the M&S positions be reviewers and coordinators of accepting, integrating and reviewing products? | The Government expects the latter: reviewers and coordinators. | |
| Can you describe what type of work will require the software engineering experience for java, python, Dev Sec Ops? Will it be hands-on or oversight? | It will be oversight. | |
| In terms of training Government personnel and possibly training the trainer, would you be looking for past performance in doing regular training? | We will not look for past performance on training. This training requirement is more akin to a "lunch and learn" where a contractor with past experience provides an educational session on a specific topic (e.g. PPBE cycle, how to write a tech eval, briefing techniques, etc.). | |
| Staffing Matrix: Is your intent that we staff all of those positions in the staffing matrix or is that an estimate of what you're thinking for the categories and capabilities requested? | The intention is to have all positions filled as early as possible and critical positions filled, with work ready to be performed, at the start of work performance (on day 1 following the transition period). We have received a lot of feedback commenting on critical positions and how there are currently a lot of them. We do need to find a better way to delineate between them, but program offices currently want all critical positions filled immediately with remaining positions filled as early as possible. |
The staffing matrix covers all of our requirements at this point in time. It is intended that TOs will cover portions of the work encompassed by the staffing matrix.
| Does everyone listed as "critical" positions in the staffing matrix have to have specific knowledge, education and training? | The knowledge, experience, and education listed in the staffing matrix are currently the qualifications required for each position. We are trying to work with the requirements owners to figure out where tradeoffs and equivalencies are applicable. We are trying to make it more flexible. |
| Your requirements state that contractors will provide training as needed. Can you elaborate on what type of training you're referring to? | A good example is a lunch and learn, e.g., educating program office teams through the PPBE cycle, how to write a tech eval, briefing techniques, etc. We will not be requiring positions that are exclusively for training government employees. |
| Is the Modeling and Simulation on this contract intended to be done in the SpaceDEN? | Yes, SpaceDEN as well as in support of other efforts. |
| Regarding the FTE counts, if there was a 30 FTE count for senior acquisition leads, are those FTEs intended to be competed and awarded across different TOs? | Each row in the staffing matrix belongs to a specific program office. Depending on how we slice and dice our requirements, certain FTEs may all be under one TO. For example, if TOs are separated by program office, all of a program's FTEs would be under one TO. Even if TOs are separated by functional support, the scenario provided (30 FTE for senior acq leads) all 30 would be under one TO. |
| What are you anticipating in terms of position vacancies? Is there a minimum time that positions can be vacant before a contractor is penalized? | The requirement is being defined; however, the government is projecting that critical and key personnel positions are filled quickly. The requirements will be updated in the draft and final RFP. |
| Will A&AS tasks be mixed with technical acquisition? | At this time there is a mix of requirements for different customers; however, the requirements are being defined. |
| Is the intent to also bring in MBSE type capabilities to support the various organizations beyond your A&AS organizations? Is the intent to bring in digital expertise? How is Hemisphere going to be executed? | It is not something we are focusing on. Any of those requirements would be listed in the staffing matrix, but beyond that, we are not trying to hire that capability in particular. |
| The operating locations didn't match the staffing matrix. Is the matrix going to be expanded to reflect the industry day slides? | The staffing matrix is the most accurate right now, but we will provide an update for the draft RFP and final RFP. |
| How much remote work would be allowed if any? | We are open to remote work. Most work on this contract is classified, so personnel would be required to go into a classified facility to do that work. However, that facility does not necessarily have to be in LA. For work that is unclassified, telework will likely be allowed. |
| Does the 90 day transition include SAPF access? | Yes, the goal is to have personnel through the PAR process access during the transition period. |
| If we don’t have a 70 person SCIF, will we be disqualified at the IDIQ level? | The intention is to do facilities as a separate task order because several companies do not have that capability. You would still be able to compete at the IDIQ level. |
Acronyms
| A&AS | Advisory & Assistance Services |
| AF SAE | Air Force Service Acquisition Executive |
| COR | Contracting Officer Representative |
| CSaaS | Classified Space as a Service |
| GSIS | |
| MAC IDIQ | Multi-Award Contract Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity |
| MP | Mission Partner |
| NAICS | North American Industry Classification System |
| NBSTE | |
| NC3 | |
| OCI | Organizational Conflict of Interest |
| PAR | Program Access Request |
| PEO | Program Executive Officer |
| PMO | Program Management Office |
| PoP | Period of Performance |
| PPBE | Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution |
| RFI | Request for Information |
| RFP | Request for Proposal |
| SAFS | |
| SAPF | Special Access Program Facility |
| SCIF | Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility |
| SDACP | Space Domain Awareness and Combat Power |
| STS | |
| TO | Task Order |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .