Questions and Answers Submitted 02-25-2026 .pdf

Questions and Answers

BPM054263

Seized Drug and Toxicology Analysis Maryland State Police

Attachment B2 Price Sheet

The quantities listed in B2 Price Sheet are not in alignment with the quantities listed in the bid document Section 2.2.1. Please confirm which is correct.

ANSWER: For toxicology specimens, the quantities listed in 2.2.1 are the correct quantities for this bid.

(FA IV) THC and Cannabinoids tab – botanical and non-botanical are listed, is this for decision point, meaning less than or greater than 1%, or full THC quant, meaning an actual number? Alternatively, may two additional line items be added for each year to differentiate between decision point and quant testing?

ANSWER: The intent was for those fields to refer to decision point testing. Two additional line items can be added to differentiate between decision point and quant testing.

(FA III) Tox Blood Drug Analysis tab - Tox Blood Drugs – minimally, what compounds should be included in the scope of testing? Will preference be given to contractors that include more impairment compounds?

ANSWER: Compounds should minimally follow our current scope of testing. This includes:

Amphetamine Fentanyl Oxycodone

Alprazolam Hydrocodone Oxymorphone

Benzoylecgonine Hydromorphone PCP

Buprenorphine Lorazepam Phenobarbital

Butalbital Methadone Temazepam

Clonazepam Methamphetamine THC

Codeine Morphine 11-OH-THC

Cocaine Nordiazepam THC-COOH

Diazepam Oxazepam Zolpidem

Preference will be given to contractors that can meet our current scope of testing.

Section 1.1.3 We have 37 chemists performing seized drug analysis who are certified as Forensic Chemists by the Maryland Department of Health. In lieu of including the certificates with our response, would it be acceptable to include a table with chemist names, certificate numbers, and dates issued (with copies of certificates available upon request)?

ANSWER: Yes, a table would be acceptable. However, the organizational chart/table with this information (and any updates) should be provided monthly.

Section 2.2.1 The MDSP-FSD anticipates having approximately 1,250 Seized Drug cases (non- THC/Cannabinoid), 1,250 THC/Cannabinoid quantification cases, 500 Toxicology Blood Alcohol Concentration cases and 500 Toxicology Blood Drug cases from which evidence could be tested over the life of this contract.

• Will MDSP-FSD limit the number of cases going to a vendor?

• If yes, please define the limit or approximate number of cases to a single vendor per year of this contract.

ANSWER: No there's no limit to the number of cases going to one vendor

Section 2.2.3 The test method will provide a quantitative value for delta-9-THC in percent by weight or provide a semiquantitative result that reports if the sample has greater than 1% delta-9- THC by weight.

• Please provide which test, quantitative value or greater than 1% for delta-9 THC, MDSP-FSD prefers? Is it advantageous for MDSP-FSD to select an Offeror(s) that provide both testing options?

ANSWER: Value greater than 1% THC. It is not advantageous for MDSP-FSD to select an Offeror(s) that provides both testing options.

Section 2.2.4 The number of cases for evidence testing is expected to entail both evidence sent directly from the MDSP-FSD (“in-house outsourcing”) and evidence sent directly from police agencies that have been given written permission by the MDSP-FSD to have their evidence analyzed under the auspice of this contract (“direct outsourcing”).

• What does MDSP-FSD anticipate the frequency of direct outsourcing to be?

ANSWER: Direct outsourcing will be very infrequent.

• How many agencies does MDSP-FSD anticipate will send evidence directly to the vendor (“direct outsourcing”)?

ANSWER: Currently, MDSP-FSD has only one (1) agency set up to direct outsource and have no plans to implement direct outsourcing with any other submitting agencies.

• Please confirm that the burden of permission and approval to submit evidence to the contractor’s lab will be provided by MDSP-FSD. Meaning that evidence submitted by MD police agencies is presumed by the contractor to have approval by MDSP-FSD.

ANSWER: Yes, we supervise the Direct Outsourcing and do the manifest so we are aware of, and approve, any direct outsourcing on our contract. For toxicology specific cases, direct outsourcing can only be requested after consultation with the Chief Toxicologist.

• If cases are received by this contactor via “direct outsourcing”, can MDSP-FSD guarantee that the same terms and conditions listed in this RFP and resulting contract be applicable to the direct outsourcing agency?

o If not, please provide the details of the required specifications that are not in alignment with this RFP and resulting contract.

ANSWER: Yes, the same Ts&Cs from our contract will apply.

Section 2.3.1 Each analyst performing Toxicology analysis at the laboratory, must agree to undergo annual Toxicology proficiency testing (https://anab.ansi.org/en/forensic-accreditation/proficiency-testing). The Contractor must provide documentation that accrediting body approved external proficiency tests are being taken by their analysts.

Each analyst who will be performing analysis on casework from the MDSP-FSD must have successfully completed all of their external proficiency tests in the discipline they are performing testing (Seized Drug and/or Toxicology) prior to and during the contract period.

• Our lab is accredited by ANAB and ANAB has approved our toxicology testing on a segmented workflow where individuals are not graded by handling a proficiency from beginning to end. Please confirm that the State would allow the lab to provide a list of proficiency tests that each analyst touches and provide a running score of the proficiency test performance to fulfill this requirement?

ANSWER: Yes, this is acceptable for CDS and Tox.

https://anab.ansi.org/en/forensic-accreditation/proficiency-testing

If at any time during the contract period, an analyst who is performing analysis on casework for the MDSP-FSD does not successfully complete a proficiency test or demonstrates other inaccuracies in testing procedures in the discipline they are performing testing (Seized Drug and/or Toxicology), that analyst must immediately cease conducting MDSP-FSD casework and the MDSP-FSD contract monitor must be notified within three

(3) days of the Root Cause Analysis.

• For toxicology, can the contractor provide the list of proficiency tests that each analyst touches and provide a running score of the PT performance? The ability to mesh the two, due to multiple analysts touching each PT sample is difficult, and the actual failure of the PT sample may or not be directly related to any one analyst, or an instrument, or standard issue.

ANSWER: Yes, this is acceptable.

• Is the contractor only required to provide the ANAB external reported PT’s and not all of the PT’s that an analyst participates in?

ANSWER: MDSP-FSD would prefer all PT’s. If analysts are completing internal PTs as well, and there is an issue with an analyst passing an internal PT, MSP-FSD will need to be notified.

• This lab is required to provide root cause analysis to its accrediting bodies within 30 days please confirm that the State can accept the same requirement. If any cases are identified during the root cause analysis of the proficiency failure, MDSP-FSD would be notified as soon as identified.

ANSWER: Within 30 days is acceptable for CDS.

Once the corrective action is complete, the analyst has successfully completed an additional proficiency test, and the MDSP-FSD contract monitor has given written approval upon receipt of all pertinent documentation, the analyst may resume work.

• This lab has policies and procedures in place, approved by its accrediting bodies, including ANAB, that outline the removal and reinstatement of an analyst performing analysis on casework. Will the State accept this laboratory’s polices/procedures given that they are approved by ANAB and this accreditation is a requirement of the RFP? These SOPs can be provided upon request for the State to review.

ANSWER: MDSP-FSD will need to review the policy before making a decision on the acceptability. MDSP-FSD will need documentation that all corrective actions were completed and signed off by NMS QA.

Section 2.3.1.1

The Contractor shall supply individuals who can pass the MDSP-FSD security clearance requirements for any position that will have access to sensitive case information (Personal Identifying Information).

• Does the MDSP-FSD security clearance requirements apply to the Contractor’s off-site outsourcing or only to the operation of an on-site (at MDSP-FSD) facility?

ANSWER: This applies to anyone who has access to sensitive case information, either on-site or off-site.

• Will the contractor’s pre-employment background check process satisfy MDSP- FDS security clearance requirements?

o If yes, can this acceptance be provided formally in an addendum?

o If not, please provide the specific MDSP-FSD security clearance requirements or specific COMAR section if different than the Security Clearance specifications listed in Section 3.7.2 of this RFP?

ANSWER: In this RFP, Section 3.7 discusses EFT, and security clearances are covered in the Professional Services Supplemental. In addition to what is stated in that supplemental, the following is also required:

The offeror’s laboratory shall have a documented random drug testing program for the employees. All personnel with access to drug evidence associated with this contract must have been subjected to a drug test within the past 24 months and may be subject to random drug testing during the duration of the contract. Documented verification of this requirement will be provided to the MDSP-FSD contract monitor upon the start of the contract or within 1 week of any personnel being newly assigned to the contract.

Furthermore, no personnel with access to drug evidence associated with this contract shall have ever had a positive drug test for a controlled substance that cannot be legitimately explained. Any personnel testing positive for a controlled substance without a legitimate explanation will be removed immediately from working on this contract. Notification of the MDSP-FSD contract monitor must occur within 1 day of any personnel testing positive for a controlled substance without a legitimate explanation.

Section 2.3.1.1 The certifying scientists for seized drug analysis must be qualified for certification by MDH prior to working on MSP casework. The technical personnel must be approved by the Chief Toxicologist at MDSP prior to working on MSP casework. All personnel hired after the last documented audit must demonstrate documentation of the educational requirements as defined by our laboratory for Seized Drug and Toxicology analysis.

• Is it acceptable to state that “certifying scientists for seized drug analysis” also includes “chemist/analyst/forensic scientist for seized drug analysis” in the above statement?

ANSWER: Yes, that would include analyst/chemist/forensic scientist.

• What are the specific educational requirements defined by MDSP-FSD for both Seized Drug and Toxicology analysis? Can the State please clarify the process for submission and approval of the contractor’s technical personnel and the documentation of personnel’s education requirements? Our lab is accredited by ANAB and therefore as part of that requirement our lab is required to be able to document that our laboratory staff have the necessary and appropriate credentials to perform work covered under the scope of the RFP.

ANSWER: Educational requirements must follow COMAR 10.51.06.15. AND 10.10.09

For CDS (defined as Certified Chemist and Certified Chemical Analyst):

- Hold a bachelor’s degree from an accredited college or university with a major in chemistry, medical technology, biology, physics, pharmacy, pharmacology, or forensic science.

- Have completed courses in analytical and organic chemistry; and

- Have completed a basic training program for certified chemists or certified chemical analyst. * For CDS (defined as Certified Analyst)

- Possess a high school diploma or its equivalent

- Have completed a basic training program for certified analyst*

* Basic training program includes either a training program offered by the US Department of Justice, US Drug Enforcement Administration, or a training program in the discipline of controlled dangerous substances provided by a forensic laboratory licensed by the Maryland Department of Health.

For toxicology

- Possess a bachelor’s or advanced degree in natural science, forensic science, or a closely related field of science; and

- Have successfully completed a training program for forensic toxicology, as determined by the laboratory director.

- Additionally, the resume/CV of the scientist must be reviewed and approved by the Chief Toxicologist (Note: Interns are NOT approved to perform casework on toxicology cases).

Section 2.3.1.2 The Contractor must also provide a copy of the laboratory table of organization which includes all personnel who will be involved in any way with this contract to the MDSP- FSD contract monitor. Job titles shall be indicated for at least the following: Technical Leader, Quality Assurance Officer, and all analysts/technicians qualified to perform forensic casework analysis. Updated documentation shall be provided to the State monthly whenever a change is made to the table or personnel roster. The contractor shall provide a contact person(s) who will be the liaison with the State representative who will handle administrative and technical issues.

• Would providing updated organizational charts, monthly when published, be acceptable? If not, can the state please clarify what constitutes a “change” that the state needs to be made aware of on a monthly basis?

o If not, can the State please provide position descriptions of the included job titles so that the Contractor can ensure appropriate equivalent positions are included?

ANSWER: Providing the Organization Chart monthly is acceptable

Section 2.3.1.3 The Contractor’s Laboratory shall maintain a copy of its Procedures Manuals for Seized Drug analysis and Toxicology analysis. At minimum, the Table of Contents for the methods and standard operating procedures shall be provided to the State no later than 10 calendar days after contract award.

• Given that this laboratory’s methods are proprietary, can the MDSP-FSD accept that this laboratory provide a list of its SOPs by name no later than 10 calendar days after award and a physical or electronic review of the methods.

ANSWER: A list is acceptable. MSP-FSD must be notified of updates to SOPs and be able to review these updates upon request. A summary email of SOP changes should be sent to MSP-FSD.

Section 2.3.1.3 Whenever the procedures are updated/changed, a notice of the changes must be received within 5 calendar days. Prior to the initial transfer of evidence to the contractor, a meeting shall be made between the contractor and the MDSP-FSD to allow for review of the contractor’s methods and procedures and establish detailed casework processing guidelines in accordance with the contractor’s Procedures Manuals and the goals of the MDSP-FSD.

• Would MDSP-FSD accept a notice of change within 30 calendar days verses 5 calendar days?

ANSWER: 30 calendar days is acceptable

• Is MDSP-FSD receptive to signing a nondisclosure agreement (NDA) prior to viewing proprietary analytical methods?

ANSWER: MSP-FSD is willing to sign a NDA prior to reviewing the methods

• Is MDSP-FSD willing to view proprietary analytical methods on-site or virtually?

ANSWER: MSP-FSD would prefer to view the methods virtually.

• Can the MDSP-FSD confirm that the lab is compliant with this requirement by notifying the State of changes to SOPs that would directly affect MDSP-FSD testing within 5 calendar days?

ANSWER: A notice of changes within 5 days of any SOPs that affect our testing is acceptable

Section 2.3.1.4 At minimum, the Table of Contents for the QA Manual shall be provided to the MDSP- FSD contract monitor no later than 10 calendar days after contract award. Whenever the procedures are updated/changed, a notice of the changes must be received within 5 calendar days. Prior to the initial transfer of evidence to the contractor, a meeting shall be made between the contractor and MDSP-FSD to review the QA Manual.

• Would MDSP-FSD accept a notice of change within 30 calendar days verses 5 calendar days?

ANSWER: Yes, we already have copies of the QA manual and have received update notifications on SOPs. However, we will require updated versions of the QA Manual and will also request it if changes are made.

Section 2.3.1.5 The Contractor’s Laboratory shall supply documentation to the MDSP-FSD contract monitor of any corrective action taken within 5 business days to address any quality assurance issues identified throughout the contract.

• Given that the lab is ANAB accredited, notification timeframe of corrective actions to the State should be consistent with the notification to its accrediting bodies of significant quality assurance issues (within 30 days). The lab prepares these notifications with disclosure packets, that are included in case files as relevant.

Please confirm that the State would be willing to require a longer timeframe for notifications of corrective actions to align with accrediting bodies and this laboratory’s policies and procedures so long as the lab shall make MDSP-FSD aware of any corrective actions that directly affect the results of MDSP-FSD testing within 5 days.

ANSWER: 30 days is acceptable, as long as the vendor makes us aware of any corrective actions that directly affect the results of MDSP-FSD testing within 5 days.

Section 2.3.1.6 The Contractor’s Laboratory shall protect the confidentiality of the data.

• If the Contractor has confidentiality statements, signed by employees, already on file, prior to the effective date of this Contract, would these confidentiality agreements satisfy this requirement?

• Does MDSP-FSD have a preferred Maryland-specific confidentiality agreement?

o If yes, may a blank confidentiality agreement be provided formally in an addendum?

ANSWER: The Contractor’s confidentiality agreements signed prior to the contract are acceptable.

Section 2.3.2.2.B Any discrepancies/errors in proficiency tests must be reported to the MDSP-FSD contract monitor within three days of completion of the root cause analysis.

• The lab is required to provide root cause analysis to its accrediting bodies within 30 days, please confirm that MDSP-FSD can accept the same requirement so that this laboratory can maintain compliance with its own policies and procedures approved by ANAB so long as any errors in proficiency tests that directly affect the results of MDSP-FSD will be communicated within 3 days.

ANSWER: 30 days is acceptable so long as any errors in proficiency tests that directly affect the results of MDSP-FSD will be communicated within 3 days

Section 2.3.2.2.E Issuing a report and chain of custody to the MDSP-FSD or, for directly outsourced work, the submitting agency and the MDSP-FSD, within one week of completion of the analysis of a case. Returning all remaining forensic case samples or sub-samples to the MDSP- FSD or, for directly outsourced work, the submitting agency, within two weeks of completing the analysis of a shipment of cases.

• It is general practice of this laboratory to return evidence to clients in a batch-in/batch-out process for Drug ID. For toxicology, a batch-in/batch-out process is not generally utilized. Is it acceptable to return toxicology specimens once per month and out-of-batch (once reported)?

ANSWER: Yes, so long as it is clearly defined what cases are being sent back to MSP-FSD for internal tracking purposes.

Section 2.3.3.2 The Contractor shall provide a written summary (either hardcopy or electronic) of the validation, and proof of management review of such validation, prior to the contract being finalized and demonstrate that these methods are currently operational within their laboratory.

• Please confirm that MDSP-FSD will accept validation summaries to be sent upon request instead of prior to the execution of the contract given that our lab confirms hundreds of compounds? Otherwise please provide a defined scope of testing.

ANSWER: Yes validation summaries can be sent upon request.

Section 2.3.3.4 Although the specific details as to the number of case samples, the timing of the return of results, and shipments of samples will be organized between the MDSP-FSD contract monitor and the Contractor, the Contractor must be capable of obtaining a turn-around-time for all testing associated with a case not to exceed 60 working days.

• The contractor assumes this statement’s intent is to ensure that evidence is returned to MDSPFSD within 60 days from receipt of evidence. Please advise.

o If yes, this contractor makes efforts to analyzed and return Drug ID cases in a batchin/batch-out format and can meet the 60 working days requirement. However, for toxicology casework, a batch-in/batch-out process is not generally utilized. Is it acceptable to return toxicology specimens once per month and out-of-batch (once reported)?

ANSWER: Yes, it would be acceptable to return toxicology specimens once per month and out-of-batch once the results have been reported.

Section 2.3.3.4 The possibility of analyzing rush cases that will require a shorter turn-around-time will be worked out between the Contractor and the MDSP-FSD contract monitor.

• May the contractor invoice an Expedited Processing Fee (per sample) for rush casework?

ANSWER: Yes MSP-FSD will accept an expedited fee per sample for a rush request.

• What is the expected number of rush cases to be submitted on yearly basis?

ANSWER: MSP-FSD would expect the number of rush requests to be minimal (under 100 specimens/year).

Section 2.3.3.6 The Contractor shall notify the MDSP-FSD contract monitor in writing immediately if the samples appear to be damaged during the shipping or if the sample identifiers do not match the shipping manifest.

• Please confirm that the reference to: “in writing” includes email.

ANSWER: Email notification is acceptable.

Section 2.3.3.7 The Contractor shall identify the samples throughout the testing process with the State’s unique identification number or the number provided to the vendor on the manifest list.

This number will include a MDSP-FSD case number for each case and an item number for each item. All reporting documents (electronic and hard copy) shall have samples identified by MDSP-FSD case and item numbers.

• It is the practice of this contractor to have clients submit individual shipping manifests for Drug ID submissions and Toxicological submissions. With that said, the two shipping manifests require different information to be supplied by the client and are formatted differently. Regardless of the type of case, when samples are received their information is entered into our LIMS, to include the State’s unique ID, and they are assigned a unique vendor lab number as the vendor receives thousands of samples and there is the potential for different agencies to have the same ID. The laboratory report and internal COC utilize the vendor’s unique number that is associated to the States unique ID. Is this process acceptable?

ANSWER: Yes, this is acceptable, the vendor number along with the State’s unique ID on the report and internal COC suffices.

Section 2.3.3.8 Procedural changes in analysis by the Contractor shall not be implemented unless approved by the MDSP-FSD contract monitor. The Contractor shall provide documentation for these changes to the MDSPFSD contract monitor.

• Given that ANAB accreditation is a requirement of this RFP is MDSP-FSD willing to accept procedural changes that comply with this laboratory’s accrediting bodies?

ANSWER: We will accept general procedural changes, as long as it doesn’t affect our agreed upon sampling plan or reporting requirements.

Section 2.3.3.11 The Contractor’s Uncertainty of Measurement will be evaluated by MDSP-FSD to ensure that it meets our reporting needs.

• What is the Uncertainty of Measurement reporting need for Blood Alcohol (BAC) testing? Does MDSP-FSD have specific requirements/limits?

ANSWER: The Uncertainty of Measurement must be in line with the requirements of COMAR 29.05.03.03: For blood tests for alcohol content, the accepted scientific uncertainty in measurement is plus or minus 0.005 gram/100 milliliters or 10 percent of the average of measurements, whichever is greater

Section 2.3.3.14 If a discovery request is received, the Contractor may be required to provide the case notes, all electronic data generated, and any QA/QC documentation associated with the case, along with whatever documentation is required to meet the discovery request and may have to meet a deadline set by the Court.

• Will the contractor need to gain approval from MDSP-FSP prior to fulfilling the discovery request?

ANSWER: Yes MDSP-FSD will need to approve any discovery requests

• May the contractor invoice for discovery requests?

o If yes, please update Attachment B Seized Drug and Toxicology Analysis

12.1.2020 to allow for invoicing.

ANSWER: Yes, you can invoice MDSP-FSD for discovery requests.

• What percent of cases (or how many per year) are anticipated to have discovery requests?

ANSWER: Approximately 5% of cases or less will have a discovery request for CDS or toxicology analysis

• How long will the Contractor have to meet the discovery request deadline?

ANSWER: Discovery requests should be fulfilled within 15 working days for CDS and toxicology analysis.

Section 2.3.3.15 All case records must be retained for 30 years or provided to the MDSP-FSD at the end of the contract period.

• Can the MDSP-FSD please confirm which retention requirement is correct since Section 23 Retention of Records of the Contract states retention shall be 3 years.

If the 30-year requirement is correct will MDSP-FSD be willing to accept the contractor’s retention polices and procedures as approved by its accrediting bodies so long as while the data is retained, its securely protected until it ages out of the laboratory’s systems according to its retention policies?

ANSWER: The MSP-FSD retention schedule for CDS and Toxicology case records is 30 years. Section 23 mentions 3 years OR any applicable federal or State retention requirements (such as HIPAA) or condition of award, whichever is longer.

Section 2.3.3.16 The final report and Chain of Custody shall be provided within a week of analysis, which may be before the batch of casework is completed.

• Typically, this contractor allows for 15 days to provide a report and chain of custody to clients. Therefore, 30 days are allowed for testing and 15 days for report and chain of custody, not to exceed a 45-day turnaround time from receipt of evidence to report and chain of custody delivery. Is this acceptable?

ANSWER: Yes, a 45 day TAT is acceptable, MDSP-FSD does not need the reports within a week of the casework being completed.

• Does MDSP-FSD foresee cases received via “direct outsourcing” to have a different turnaround time requirement less than 45 days?

o If yes, please specify these requirements.

ANSWER: The same 45 day TAT will apply to direct outsourcing.

Section 2.3.3.17 The Contractor shall not subcontract or ship out to any other organization the handling, processing, analysis, or reporting of work unless prior approval is granted.

• Is it acceptable for a contractor’s laboratory to utilize their own network of separate ANAB ISO 17025 accredited and State of Maryland Department of Health Licensed laboratories to perform Seized Drug testing?

ANSWER: This is not acceptable due to the demand for chemists in court and the costs associated with court appearances.

Section 2.3.3.19 Reports must be generated for all cases subjected to Seized Drug or Toxicology analysis whether or not results are obtained.

• Are formal reports required on stop-work cases? For example, MDSP-FSD notifies the contracting laboratory that analysis is no longer required, prior to that case being opened. Is a formal report required in this instance? Are there additional instances in which a formal report is not required?

ANSWER: A report that states that the case was not examined with the reason why is required. There are no instances in which a formal report or a report that the case was not examined would not be required.

Section 2.3.5 The Contractor shall provide the State’s Attorney Office (SAO) with the appropriate litigation package (case file, QA data, procedure manuals and qualifications of the scientist(s)) for contested positive results within two (2) business days of a written request by the Contract Monitor.

• Please define “contested positive results”.

ANSWER: Contested positive results are defined as the presence of a CDS or positive toxicology finding.

• If the contractor receives a request from the SAO for a litigation package, and the MDSP-FSD is not available for written approval, what are the alternate means for written approval from MDSPFSP?

ANSWER: MDSP-FSD will provide sufficient contacts so that you will always be able to obtain written approval. ‘Written approval’ can include e-mail.

• The litigation package as defined by MDSP-FSD requires more than two (2) business days to collate the voluminous documentation. May contractor confirm receipt of such requests within two (2) business days, then provide the documentation in an agreed upon time frame?

ANSWER: Yes, this is acceptable.

• What percent of cases are anticipated to have litigation requests?

ANSWER: Litigation requests are anticipated to be less than 5% of casework.

• Please confirm that the MDSP-FSP shall enforce this requirement upon request of the Contractor for litigation packages as they apply for Drug ID cases, but please confirm that the State shall accept the contractor working with the SAO to provide DUID and BAC litigation packages in a timely manner.

ANSWER: As mentioned above, discovery packets can be provided within 15 working days.

Section 2.3.5 Upon written request by the Contract Monitor, the Contractor shall make laboratory personnel available to provide a deposition or testimony and documentation as required in support of any administrative and/or court actions. The laboratory personnel shall be required to provide the deposition or testimony by telephone, video conferencing, in-person or through sworn affidavit, as specified by the State.

• Please confirm that the MDSP-FSD and MDSP-FSD’s clients (State’s Attorney Offices) shall agree to provide the contractor with Subpoenas a minimum of 14 days in advance of testimony date.

ANSWER: MDSP-FSD cannot confirm that State’s Attorney’s Offices will be able to provide the contractor with subpoenas a minimum of 14 days in advance of the testimony date. However, per MDSP-FSD Administrative Manual, subpoenas for court with less than five days notice do not need to be honored.

(Note that this is in line with MD Rule 2-510 (d).

• In judicial districts and jurisdictions served by MDSP-FSD, what is the volume of cases where contractor personnel will be subpoenaed?

ANSWER: Personnel will be subpoenaed in approximately 50% of cases.

• In judicial districts and jurisdictions served by MDSP-FSD, what percentage of cases will laboratory personnel be asked to personally appear?

ANSWER: Laboratory personnel appearance is required in approximately 10% of submissions.

• In judicial districts and jurisdictions served by MDSP-FSD, are key stakeholders willing to work with this contractor and MDSP-FSD to ensure a 24-hour written/email notification of need for witnesses to appear?

ANSWER: MDSP-FSD cannot ensure that there will be a 24-hour notice of need for witnesses from SAOs.

• Will the judicial districts and jurisdictions served by the MDSP-FSD understand and work with vendors when witnesses cannot appear due to conflicting subpoenas from other jurisdictions?

ANSWER: MDSP-FSD can request that SAO’s work with the vendor when there’s a conflict, but MDSP-FSD is not able to ensure a resolution that is satisfactory to both parties.

• Will personnel from MDSP-FSD communicate to the SAOs the importance of

“calling off” witnesses with judicial districts and jurisdictions served, so the contractor’s witnesses can be freed up to appear and testify in other jurisdictions?

ANSWER: MDSP-FSD can communicate with the SAOs about the importance of being “called off”, but we cannot ensure that SAOs will comply. The burden of communication would fall on NMS to communicate with the SAO regarding specific trials.

Section 2.4.2 Personnel Experience The offeror shall ensure that all technical personnel assigned to work on the Contract have two (2) years of experience in Seized Drug analysis or Toxicology analysis and a Bachelor’s degree in chemistry, biology, biochemistry, genetics, medical technology, pharmaceutical science or related physical, natural or forensic science from an accredited college or university.

• Instead of two (2) years of experience in Seized Drug analysis, is MDSP-FSD willing to accept one (1) year experience analyzing casework and being MDH certified?

ANSWER: Two years of CDS evidence experience is preferred.

• Regarding Toxicology, would MDSP-FSD allow work to be reviewed/signed by a Toxicologist who has the two (2) years of experience, not necessarily in analytical analysis? ANAB regulatory requirements do not dictate years of experience, only required training/competency. Many analysts that perform routine duties (sample log in, extraction, etc), although trained and documented as required by ANAB, may not have 2 years’ experience. However, Toxicologists typically will have the requisite experience.

ANSWER: Any person performing toxicology work must be reviewed and approved by the Chief Toxicologist per COMAR 29.05.03.09. MDSP-FSD prefers two (2) years of experience.

Section 2.5 Substitution of Personnel

• This contractor’s laboratory is accredited by ANAB and therefore as part of that requirement our laboratory is required to be able to document that our staff have the necessary and appropriate training and credentials to perform work covered under the scope of the RFP. Additionally, our laboratory is required under our accreditation to adhere to our internal policies and procedures on staffing, removal, and replacement of key personnel, which has been approved by our accrediting bodies. Given the staffing requirements of our accrediting bodies, can the state accept this contractor’s laboratory staffing requirements on placement, removal, and replacement in lieu of this requirement and instead of being subject to MDSP- FSD’s approval?

ANSWER: For CDS, MDSP-FSD will need to be notified when new scientists are assigned to work on our cases. We then would need proof of their MDH card before they start working on any Maryland project. We would prefer a notice that personnel who have previously analyzed CDS evidence are no longer working with the vendor and/or are no longer able to testify in person. For toxicology, Maryland law requires that the Chief Toxicologist of MDSP-FSD must approve any new scientists/analysts before toxicology casework can be performed. Personnel no longer performing toxicology testing will need to be removed from the approval list.

Section 3.3 Invoicing

• May the Contractor utilize their standard invoice?

ANSWER: Yes

Section 3.14.1.D Cyber Security / Data Breach Insurance – Five million dollars ($5,000,000) per occurrence. The coverage must be valid at all locations where work is performed or data or other information concerning the State’s claimants or employers is processed or stored.

• Please confirm that umbrella coverage would satisfy the requirements in this section.

ANSWER: coverage amended to $10,000,000 and RFP updated

Section 5.3.2. Tab B Claim of Confidentiality: Any information which is claimed to be confidential and/or proprietary information should be identified by page and section number and placed after the Title Page and before the Table of Contents in the Technical Proposal, and if applicable, separately in the Financial Proposal.

• Please confirm that the REDACTED version of the confidential information should be placed in the applicable section within the Technical Proposal and the NON-REDACTED version of the confidential information should be placed after the Title Page / before the TOC?

ANSWER: Confirmed.

Section 5.3.2.Tab G Include individual resumes for Key Personnel, including Key Personnel for any proposed subcontractor(s), who are to be assigned to the project if the Offeror is awarded the Contract. Each resume should include the amount of experience the individual has had relative to the Scope of Work set forth in this solicitation.

• Due to the large number of staff that may be involved in the analysis for this contract, would it be acceptable to provide CVs for key personnel to include Toxicologists and Supervisory Personnel with our response (which would be over 50 CVs alone) and also include a spreadsheet of all qualified staff (that includes positions, degrees, years at company, etc.) with CVs available upon request for them?

ANSWER: Anyone performing toxicology testing must be approved by the Chief Toxicologist. A spreadsheet of all qualified and Chief Toxicologist approved staff is acceptable. Personnel who are no longer performing toxicology testing must be removed from the spreadsheet. New personnel must have CVs reviewed and approved by the Chief Toxicologist of MDSP-FSD prior to being added to the spreadsheet.

Section 5.3.2 Tab Q Attachment R Corporate Diversity Addendum

• Is this addendum only required if the contract award amount for the life of the contract exceeds $1,000,000?

ANSWER: Confirmed.

Exhibit 2 – Sample Contract

Section 10.1-10.2

• May this section be modified to be mutual?

ANSWER: Yes, you may modify the applicable sections and submit them along with your technical proposal. All exceptions will be taken into consideration when evaluating the Offeror’s proposal. The State reserves the right to accept or reject any exceptions. Reference: Section 4.15 of the RFP.

Section 19.1

• Could this section be modified to say: “Time is an essential element of the contract, subject to reasonable extensions mutually agreed to by the parties”?

ANSWER: Yes, you may modify the applicable sections and submit them along with your technical proposal. All exceptions will be taken into consideration when evaluating the Offeror’s proposal. The State reserves the right to accept or reject any exceptions. Reference: Section 4.15 of the RFP.

Exhibit 2 – Sample Contract