Adobe Web Conferencing Network Software Replication by DoD/DISA

To Whom It May Concern:

This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act. I hereby request the following records:

Adobe Web Conferencing Network Software Replication by the DoD/DISA

FOIA REQUEST OVERVIEW – April 12,2015

Data requested in this FOIA is specific to the contract that was awarded to iCES© Corporation located at 8229 Boone Boulevard, Suite 102 Vienna, Virginia, hereafter refereed to as ICES, iCES or ICES Corporation, by the Defense Information System Agency (DISA) within the United States Department of Defense (DoD) for a project to accomplish software development, hereafter refereed to as the “project.” The project was to build, replace, integrate and modify software (source code languages, operating software code, scripts, etc.) a web conferencing replacement system referred to by DISA as the Defense Connect Online (DCO) Replacement system, or to replace the software functionality of an original web conferencing system provided by Adobe, deemed to be operating insufficiently because of the Adobe software within the provided Adobe web conferencing software package to DoD/DISA.

FOIA data requested here is scoped as ALL software efforts executed by the ICES Corporation contract effort to include network, client server and mobile software attached to, or connecting to other software, regardless of any different names or labels used by others defining various sub-systems or modules. The scope of this FOIA request includes all software development efforts and deliverable no matter how remotely connected to the ICES contract effort.

DETAILED RESPONSE INSTRUCTIONS

1) Please mark all response to match the requesting letter/number designations located in the beginning of the request. For example A1, A2, A3, etc. Clearly mark all response to match the requesting FOIA letter/number designations in the upper left of each page of your response. Please notate boldly the requesting FOIA letter/number on each page of your responses, paginating each page in ascending numerical order.

2) All data provided in response to this FOIA shall be specific to the project. Generalized policy; PowerPoint briefing; general agency guidance; contract boilerplate and other boiler plate responses, superfluous front and back matter ARE NOT DESIRED. “Substantive pages” is defined as pages containing specific data, specific to the project past boilerplate document front matter. Only data SPECIFIC to the “project” (as used by and produced by the project) is desired.

3) Data, documents, web pages and evidence are meant to be “information”, regardless of the information's media (paper, all e-mails, web page or other information in digital or other forms.) It is the information begin sought here, regardless of its media, form or representation, digital or otherwise.

4) Please provide specific citations of any authority granted exclusion from meeting FAR requirements and exclusions from any other legal contracting compliance, by individual FOIA request, marked with FOIA request letter/number designation(s).

5) No explanation, rationale or justification is sought if there is no data available to meet a specific FOIA request here. Simply note - “Not Present, Not Applicable, or Other (Short rationale).”

Sincerely Yours,

Dr. Yuno Parks, Lead Engineer
Federal Telecommunications Labs (FTL)
Defense Wide Base (DWB) Division

Specific FOIA Requests Begin Below

A1 – Tasking documentation from the Army customer to DISA requesting the Project be accomplished by DISA.

A2 – Copies of MIPR(s) and/or other documentation that accomplished the transfer of funds from the Army customer forwarded to DISA to include dollar amount(s) listed.
Total amount of funds expended on the Project. Amount of funds return by DISA to the customer of the project. Dollar shortfall (monies still needed) to complete, evolve, modify or enhance the Project. List (top level, not complete technical details) of functional additions, enhancements, modifications, operational shortfalls remaining to complete the Project. (1st 50 substantive pages only)

A3 – Copies of specific functional/feature requirements sent from the Army to DISA representing project requirements to be met to include any listings of specific Adobe web conferencing software features and functionality desired by the customer in the project results. (1st 50 substantive pages only)

A4 – Technical evaluation(s) accomplishing a Quality of Service (QOS) network analysis, or similar technical evaluation, validating that the Adobe web conferencing software insufficiency of (the first DCO) was software specific, not network specific, justifying the need to replace the first Adobe DCO software by incurring the costs of a complete re-write of the Adobe web conferencing software functionality, or the second DCO development contract (ICES Corporation) effort by DISA designed to replicate the functionality of the Adobe web conferencing product to replace it. (1st 40 substantive pages only)

A5 – Evidence of any technically detailed discussions with, or requests to or from, Adobe regarding the insufficiency of the first DCO software, or Adobe wed conferencing software provided by or to Adobe. Show evidence of attempts to resolve purported Adobe software performance issues within the Adobe web conferencing software product. (1st 30 substantive pages only)

A6 – Evidence of (both legally and technically) qualified U.S. Department of Defense legal analysis of the individual functional requirements and implementing software operational functional, operating solutions within the second DCO developed by the ICES contractor that identified all potential software patent and copyright infringements or violations created within the functional replication of Adobe's web conferencing software product. List all software patents and copyright infringements identified inadvertently incorporated into the second web conferencing system, the DCO replacement (Adobe web conferencing software replacement) accomplished by the ICES software development contract effort. If no such analysis was performed, simply state – not available. (1st 30 substantive pages only)

A7 – Evidence of market research performed to examine alternatives to meeting project requirements for redeveloping the Adobe web conferencing functionality before initiating the ICES project contract effort (FAR 7.102) (1st 10 substantive pages only)

A8 – Project Acquisition Plan (AP) addressing all relevant FARs specific to the project (FAR 7.105) (1st 30 substantive pages only)

A9 – DISA acquisition Team Member names identified in the AP; Identification of designated COTR within the AP; role of each team member and official job description for each team member listed in the AP acting in a COTR role. If AP does not list the team members designated or acting as COTRs, provide the names and official job descriptions, along with organization position title of primary government staff that were responsible for tasking the contractor and review of task deliverables in the role of a COTR.(FAR 7.102(b), FAR 7.1105)

A10 – Copies of any substantive training certifications or other evidence of Contract Officer Technical Representative (COTR) training(s) for the government individuals designated in the contract or SOW who acted in the role of COTR by performing task definitions, tasking and task evaluations on the project.

A11 – Requests for Information (RFIs) performed to identify alternate solutions to meet the DoD needs for a replacement web conferencing system other than incurring the contract costs to develop the second DCO (Defense Connect Online) web conferencing system through ICES contract. (FAR 15.201, FAR 14.105, FAR 15.201)

A12 – Documented rational for the contract type selected. (FAR 7.103, 7.105, 16.103)

A13 – If other than firm fixed price contract, document(s) containing approval and signature at least one level above the contracting officer. (FAR 7.103)

A14 – Author and/or origin of Adobe web conferencing software features and functionality passed from the Army to DISA that supported analysis of Adobe or project feature and function requirements to be replicated within the project software by ICES contract.

A15 – For other than firm-fixed price contract, provide plan to transition to firm-fixed price contract to the maximum extent possible. (FAR 7.105)

A16 – Evidence that an independent government cost estimate was performed (FAR 7.105; 36.605)

A17 – Project Development milestone plan by defined SOW tasks (FAR 7.103(b)(20)

A18 – Evidence COTR required training analysis, or an authorization to perform COTR duties (FAR 15.201)

A19- Evidence that contractor access to federal facility was planned with due diligence to meet project requirements.(FAR 7.103(u))

A20 – Evidence Agency planners complied with capital planning and investment control requirements in 40 USC 11312 and OMB Circular A-130 specific to this project.(FAR 7.103(t))

A21 – Evidence that IT security requirements in FISMA, OMB’s implementing policies (including Appendix III of OMB Circular A-130) and NIST guidance and standards were followed; the security checklist for each “program module and script file” requiring security surveillance and compliance. The configuration management (list, file, data, etc.) of all operating software modules (executable software programs) used to comply in detail with federal, DOD and DISA security requirements (FAR 7.103(u), 39.101, 39.106)

A22—Evidence that appropriate information technology (IT) security policies and requirements, including use of common security configurations available from NIST at http://checklists.nist.gov were incorporated into the SOW and any detailed checklists developed showing cognizance and specific compliance with this guidance (FAR 39.101(d))

A23 – Detailed evidence that the DIACAP (or replacement IT security processes) from the DISA Field Security Office (FSO) were complied with in detail, by specific operating software module. Show the detailed results of analysis and security solutions for each software vulnerability identified by the DISA FSO security guidance(s) in-place, at the time. Provide specific citations of the FSO guidance used by date, title and version.

A24 – Copy of 8(a) contract, copy of Offering Letter sent to SBA (FAR 19.804)

A25 – If 8(a) acquisition, and project requirement met the test for a single source 8(a) acquisition, please provide exempting authority documentation exempting project contract as competitive (FAR 19.805-1)

A26 – Copies of any communications from higher DISA or DoD authority providing exemption from compliance for any broad general FAR requirements for the project.

A27 – If contractor's past performance was not to be evaluated, provided documented rationale (FAR 15.403(c)(3)(iii))

A28 – If there is a claim that the ICES contractor past performance was evaluated responsibly with due diligence, provide the iCES corporate experience response and evidence an evaluation was performed on the corporate experience provided by ICES to include past project POCs that were contacted and interviewed, past, specific project descriptions provided by ICES and phone numbers of the past/present CO and/or COTR responsible for oversight of the previous contracts cited by the ICES contractor as qualifying as. Evidence of a review that ICES corporate experience was sufficient enough to validate ICES's claim on the GSA Contractor Registration site of having multi-million dollars worth of software development (software authoring) experience that only seemed to appear on the GSA site, listed in the last year but not in the previous years (FAR 15.403(c)(3)(iii))

A29 -If CO believes that advance notice published in FedBizOpps was not appropriate, provide exempting citation and authority (FAR 6.3, 6.4, 6.5)

A30 – Evidence of selection criteria was used to select ICES that evaluated ICES's capacity to accomplish work in required time period (FAR 36.602-1(a)(3))

A32- Evidence that a due diligence was performed the evaluation of ICES's representation(s) of their past performance on contracts with Government agencies and private sector in terms of cost control, quality of work and compliance with performance schedules. Please provide copies of both the ICES corporate experience provided and evidence that the ICES corporate experience provided was evaluated with due diligence in a defined process. Provide evidence of that evaluation process along with the data resultant evaluation results achieved.(FAR 36.602-1(a)(4))

A33 – Evidence that the RFP or SOW clearly stated all factors and sub-factors and their relative importance (FAR 15.304(d))

A34 – Technical evaluation to determine ICES's compliance with applicable Section 508 accessibility standards (Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act as amended, 29 U.S.C. Section 794(d))

A35 – Requirements listed within the project Statement of Work (SOW) requiring the project deliverable created by ICES to achieve compliance with applicable Section 508 accessibility standards (Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act as amended, 29 U.S.C. Section 794(d))

A36 – Evidence of evaluation of eligible firms and responses to/from the Fedbizopps concerning contractor opportunities for the project effort to be awarded (FAR 36.602-3)

A37 – Evidence that there was due diligence in evaluating the ICES qualifications in accordance with criteria specified in the SOW (FAR 36.602-1, 36.602-3(b))

A38 – Evidence of evaluation that at least three(3) of the most highly qualified firms regarding concepts and the relative utility of alternative methods of furnishing the required services? (FAR 36.602-3(c))

A39 – Evidence of evaluation and prepared report to the designated selection authority detailing strengths/weaknesses for each evaluation criterion, discussions held, and recommending, in order of preference, at least 3 firms that are considered to be the most highly qualified to perform the required project services? (FAR 36.602-3(d))

A40 – Evidence that the selection authority reviewed selection recommendations and made the final selection in the form of listing, in order of preference of the firms considered most highly qualified to perform the project work? (FAR 36.602-4)

A41- Provide the project SOW, Task Description, Delivery Date(s) Schedule, Task Performance Measurement Criteria and detailed Task requirements and testing plan for each defined task deliverable. Provide copy of software development and software engineering documentation requirements included in the SOW as well as the DoD and DoD (Chief Information Officer) CIO required software development and software engineering guidance to be followed by ICES. Provide any justifying rationale along with authoritative citations exempting the project from DoD and the DoD CIO required development guidance compliance. (FAR 11.4)

A42 -If oral SOW or tasking(s) were used, provide evidence of FAR compliance (FAR 15.203(f))

A43 – Listing of all oral tasking to the ICES contractor along with detailed task descriptions and task evaluation of the deliverable associated with each oral tasking (FAR 15.203(f))

A44 – If letter contract was used in a sole source acquisition, provide evidence FAR requirements were considered and met (FAR 15.203(e))

A45 – If contract required contractor to have physical access to a federally-controlled facility or access to a federal information system, provide evidence that FIPS PUB 201, associated OMB guidance was followed by, evidence of contractor compliance and evidence of the COTR's responsibility for performing oversight of the contractor in the area (FAR 4.13 and 52.204-9)

A46 – If oral notice of SOW amendment was used, Provide evidence of compliance (FAR 15.206(f))

A47 – Provide copies or evidence that the RFP provided a clear basis for award
(FAR 15.304)

A48 – Evidence that the RFP adhered to pricing policy and used order of precedence for determining type of certified cost or pricing data required and CO compliance with prohibition on obtaining cost or pricing data or obtaining waiver (FAR 15.402, 15.403-1, 15.403-4(a)(2))

A49 – If project RFP waived requirement for certified cost or pricing data, please provide copy of DISA approved waiver (FAR 15.403-1(c)(4))

A50 – Evidence that evaluation included a selection report recommending, in order of preference, at least three firms that are considered to be the most highly qualified to perform the required services for the project (FAR 36.602-3(d))

A51 – If ICES was not listed as the most highly qualified by the CO/COTR evaluation, provide evidence of a written explanation of the reason for the preference (FAR 36.603-4(b))

A52—Evidence that http://www.ppirs.gov/ (to access FAPIIS) was used to check ICES past performance and that proper procedures were followed when using FAPIIS for a responsibility determination (FAR 9.104-6)

A53 – Evidence that the contracting officer conducted negotiations IAW FAR Part 15, beginning with the most preferred firm in the final selection (FAR 36.606(a))

A54 — Evidence that per-negotiation objectives, including profit/fee analysis established (FAR 15.406-1, 15.404-4)

A55 — Copy of ICES written final proposal revision received by DISA (FAR 15.307)

A56 — Copy of EEO Clearance received (FAR 22.805)

A57 — List of the origins of all network client/server software modules by project configuration identification and origin of source (downloaded, country of origin, company of origin, etc.) to include the total source code line count OR byte count (+/- 10%)

List of the origins of all mobile software modules by protect configuration identification and origin of source (downloaded, country of origin, company of origin, etc.) to include the total source code line count OR byte count (+/- 10%)

A58 – List of source code program modules by project name marked internally, externally or file ownership (embedded in file headers) with “Federal Telecommunications Labs (FTL)” or “FTL” or “Federal Telecommunications Labs”

A59 — Copy of the last ICES project performance evaluation report (FAR 42.1502(f))

A60 – Copy of the last project status report developed by the government COTR reporting the status of the project to the DISA Command Office and/or the customer.

The requested documents will be made available to the general public free of charge as part of the public information service at MuckRock.com, and is not being made for commercial usage.

In the event that fees cannot be waived, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.

Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to receiving your response to this request within 20 business days, as the statute requires.

Sincerely,

Dr. Yuno Parks, Lead Engineer
Federal Telecommunications Labs (FTL)
Defense Wide Base (DWB) Division

Date: May 3, 2015

To: Michele M. Hayes-Martinez, Paralegal Specialist
DISA/DITCO (DDC1A)
2300 East Drive
Scott AFB, IL 62225
Office: 618-229-9314(DSN) 618-779-9314
Fax: 618-229-9755
michele.m.hayesmartinez.civ@mail.mil

From: Dr. Yuno Parks

Subject: Requested confirmation of FOIA request regarding Adobe Web Conferencing Network
Software Replication by DoD/DISA

Good Afternoon!

1) This is in response to your request for confirmation of the FOIA request cited above. Confirmation has also been provided to your e-mail address as well as to your voice mail where you will find a return phone number. Thank you for you response.

2) Request granting waiver of fees based on merit and rationales presented below.

a) There is no commercial interest in requesting this FOIA.

b) The preponderance of documents (data, information, process information byproduct, etc.) requested in this FOIA were required to be generated by public law expressed in the (Federal Acquisition Regulations (FARS)) based on Title 10 of the United Stares Code that support the requirements for acquisition process compliance and the information generated as a result of that contracting process compliance.

c) The release of the FOIA requested information sought will contribute significantly to public understanding of the operation and activities of the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) and is in the public interest because the FOIA information will contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations and activities of the U.S. Department of Defense, Defense Information System (DISA) regarding DISA's software security responsibility in safeguarding the public in DISA's demonstrated, visible, validated and verified behaviors in managing, developing and fielding of safe, secure, professional engineered software systems.

c.1) Public understandings and public interests are served in understanding if DISA is safeguarding the public's software security interests entrusted to DISA in DISA's development and deployment of safe, secure software or if DISA is expending millions of dollars fielding dangerous, unsecured and unsafe software in a reckless and caviler manner that threatens national security and to what extent national security may be threatened;

c.2) Public understandings and public interests are served in understanding if DISA is safeguarding the public's software security interests entrusted to DISA in DISA's compliance to prescribed software security processes, rules, software management and engineering methods or if DISA is cognizant and adequately aware of the software security process imposed upon them that may now be resulting in dangerous, unsecured, unsafe software fielding in a reckless and caviler manner that threatens national security and to what extend national security may be threatened;

c.3) Public understandings and public interests are served in understanding if DISA is safeguarding the public's software security interests entrusted to DISA in DISA's compliance to prescribed software security processes, rules, software management and engineering methods or if DISA is cognizant, adequately aware and deploying the software security process imposed upon them that mac or may not now be resulting in dangerous, unsecured, unsafe software fielding in a reckless and caviler manner that threaten national security and to what extend national security may be threatened, and

b.4) Public understandings and public interests are served in understanding if DISA is safeguarding the public's software security interests entrusted to DISA in DISA's ability to deploy, detect, verify and validate that DISA software security processes, rules, safe software management, adequately trained qualified software engineering staff (in the correct job series) are using secure software engineering methods to effective levels that either protect or may risk national security and to what extend national security may now be threatened due to reckless disregard or unawareness through improper staff training or less than excellent enterprise direction, tools, processes and leadership, and

c.5) Public understandings and public interests are served in understanding if DISA is safeguarding the public's software security interests entrusted to DISA in DISA's ability to provide clear, effective, accurate software security requirements in DISA's software acquisition contracting processes and that contracting staff and others associated with contracting for software management, software engineering or software maintenance have the requisite processes and method in place to perform responsible, due diligence in reviewing software contract deliverables to detect the presence or absence of required software security processes, rules, safe software management expressed in the contract tasks or Statements of Work (SOW) that will serve to determine the level(s) of effective engineering methods present that serve to either protect or may risk national security.

3) Clarification of specific contract data requested and FOIA information requirements clarification

The preponderance of requested information is specific to each of the FARS referenced associated with each detailed, original FOIA request. The information requirements associated with each of the FARS cited in the original FOIA are explicit in definition per individual FAR references are are widely and conventionally understood and have been clearly understood for decades in both the Information Technology(IT) and general, federal government contract communities. However, any assistance in any further clarification needed if offered in the spirit of effective and professorial cooperation. Typically, the preponderance of the FOIA data requested should reside in the CONTRACT FOLDER for the specific contract cited in the original FOIA. Again, the contract of focus is currently being called – the Defense Collaboration System, or software development to create a web conferencing capability, awarded to the ICES Corporation, specific contact and location information previously provided in the original FOIA request.

4) Thank you for your service to our country. Your public service is appreciated and well understood as my father was in the Army Air Corp in WWII flying missions over Europe and I served for over 20+ in the U.S. Army Chaplin Corp. Please feel free to contact me in any channel provided (Muckrock.com, e-mail or phone) to you that you may choose. I look forward to providing timely assistance to support any additional question you may have to arrive at clarity around the requested information,

Respectfully,

Dr. Yuno Parks

Hello,

Could you please confirm receipt of the communication copied below?

Thank you.

________________

Date: May 3, 2015

To: Michele M. Hayes-Martinez, Paralegal Specialist
DISA/DITCO (DDC1A)
2300 East Drive
Scott AFB, IL 62225
Office: 618-229-9314(DSN) 618-779-9314
Fax: 618-229-9755
michele.m.hayesmartinez.civ@mail.mil

From: Dr. Yuno Parks

Subject: Requested confirmation of FOIA request regarding Adobe Web Conferencing Network
Software Replication by DoD/DISA

Good Afternoon!

1) This is in response to your request for confirmation of the FOIA request cited above. Confirmation has also been provided to your e-mail address as well as to your voice mail where you will find a return phone number. Thank you for you response.

2) Request granting waiver of fees based on merit and rationales presented below.

a) There is no commercial interest in requesting this FOIA.

b) The preponderance of documents (data, information, process information byproduct, etc.) requested in this FOIA were required to be generated by public law expressed in the (Federal Acquisition Regulations (FARS)) based on Title 10 of the United Stares Code that support the requirements for acquisition process compliance and the information generated as a result of that contracting process compliance.

c) The release of the FOIA requested information sought will contribute significantly to public understanding of the operation and activities of the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) and is in the public interest because the FOIA information will contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations and activities of the U.S. Department of Defense, Defense Information System (DISA) regarding DISA's software security responsibility in safeguarding the public in DISA's demonstrated, visible, validated and verified behaviors in managing, developing and fielding of safe, secure, professional engineered software systems.

c.1) Public understandings and public interests are served in understanding if DISA is safeguarding the public's software security interests entrusted to DISA in DISA's development and deployment of safe, secure software or if DISA is expending millions of dollars fielding dangerous, unsecured and unsafe software in a reckless and caviler manner that threatens national security and to what extent national security may be threatened;

c.2) Public understandings and public interests are served in understanding if DISA is safeguarding the public's software security interests entrusted to DISA in DISA's compliance to prescribed software security processes, rules, software management and engineering methods or if DISA is cognizant and adequately aware of the software security process imposed upon them that may now be resulting in dangerous, unsecured, unsafe software fielding in a reckless and caviler manner that threatens national security and to what extend national security may be threatened;

c.3) Public understandings and public interests are served in understanding if DISA is safeguarding the public's software security interests entrusted to DISA in DISA's compliance to prescribed software security processes, rules, software management and engineering methods or if DISA is cognizant, adequately aware and deploying the software security process imposed upon them that mac or may not now be resulting in dangerous, unsecured, unsafe software fielding in a reckless and caviler manner that threaten national security and to what extend national security may be threatened, and

b.4) Public understandings and public interests are served in understanding if DISA is safeguarding the public's software security interests entrusted to DISA in DISA's ability to deploy, detect, verify and validate that DISA software security processes, rules, safe software management, adequately trained qualified software engineering staff (in the correct job series) are using secure software engineering methods to effective levels that either protect or may risk national security and to what extend national security may now be threatened due to reckless disregard or unawareness through improper staff training or less than excellent enterprise direction, tools, processes and leadership, and

c.5) Public understandings and public interests are served in understanding if DISA is safeguarding the public's software security interests entrusted to DISA in DISA's ability to provide clear, effective, accurate software security requirements in DISA's software acquisition contracting processes and that contracting staff and others associated with contracting for software management, software engineering or software maintenance have the requisite processes and method in place to perform responsible, due diligence in reviewing software contract deliverables to detect the presence or absence of required software security processes, rules, safe software management expressed in the contract tasks or Statements of Work (SOW) that will serve to determine the level(s) of effective engineering methods present that serve to either protect or may risk national security.

3) Clarification of specific contract data requested and FOIA information requirements clarification

The preponderance of requested information is specific to each of the FARS referenced associated with each detailed, original FOIA request. The information requirements associated with each of the FARS cited in the original FOIA are explicit in definition per individual FAR references are are widely and conventionally understood and have been clearly understood for decades in both the Information Technology(IT) and general, federal government contract communities. However, any assistance in any further clarification needed if offered in the spirit of effective and professorial cooperation. Typically, the preponderance of the FOIA data requested should reside in the CONTRACT FOLDER for the specific contract cited in the original FOIA. Again, the contract of focus is currently being called – the Defense Collaboration System, or software development to create a web conferencing capability, awarded to the ICES Corporation, specific contact and location information previously provided in the original FOIA request.

4) Thank you for your service to our country. Your public service is appreciated and well understood as my father was in the Army Air Corp in WWII flying missions over Europe and I served for over 20+ in the U.S. Army Chaplin Corp. Please feel free to contact me in any channel provided (Muckrock.com, e-mail or phone) to you that you may choose. I look forward to providing timely assistance to support any additional question you may have to arrive at clarity around the requested information,

Respectfully,

Dr. Yuno Parks

To: Michele M. Hayes-Martinez, Paralegal Specialist

Michele - I do not have the contract #. I have provided EXACTING SPECIFICS for your agency to locate this specific contract. I've not been allowed access to that information. However, it's your to easily obtain with just one phone call,

Respectfully, Yuno Parks

To: Michele M. Hayes-Martinez, Paralegal Specialist

Michele - Simply wait for the DISA FOIA response and it will contain the contract number, OK? I have provided AN ABUNDANCE OF FULLY ADEQUATE INFORMATION FOR YOU TO LOCATE THE CONTRACT NUMBER, AS WELL WITH ONE CALL TO DISA.

Respectfully, Yuno Parks