RFI - Statewide eDiscovery System 8-24-26.pdf

Commonwealth’s Attorneys’ Services Counsil (CASC)

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI)

Virginia Statewide Criminal Case E-Discovery System

RFI Number: 127072

RFI Issue Date: August 24, 2026

RFI Due Date: September 30, 2026, 5:00 PM Eastern

RFI Submission: Information must be submitted via attachment using the Commonwealth’s e-Procurement portal (eVA) by September 30, 2026 at 5:00 p.m.

Question about this RFI shall be in writing directed to: alamm01@wm.edu by due date.

No documents or submissions will be accepted via email.

1. Purpose

The Commonwealth of Virginia is issuing this Request for Information (RFI) to gather information from qualified vendors regarding configurable, commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) or Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) Criminal Case E-Discovery systems capable of supporting the Commonwealth’s Constitutional, statutory, and court-ordered criminal justice discovery obligations. This project has no specified go-live date.

This RFI is for market research only. It does not constitute a solicitation and will not result in a contract award. It is being ordered pursuant to a directive from the Virginia General Assembly, who directed in their 2026 Biannual Budget as follows:

"A. The Commonwealth's Attorneys' Services Council shall provide to the Chairs of the House Appropriations and Senate Finance and Appropriations Committees, no later than November 15, 2026, a report with options, including associated costs and any necessary statutory changes, for establishing shared infrastructure for electronic storage and dissemination of discovery materials, including approaches and funding strategies used in the other states, with the goal of leveraging economies of scale and improving the uniformity of IT infrastructure and discovery practices in Commonwealth's Attorneys' offices across the state."

2. Background

The Commonwealth is considering whether to implement a statewide E-Discovery system.

If that program were deployed, it would require:

• Commonwealth-wide use by approximately 2,000 prosecution-side users uploading files and approximately 2,000 to 3,000 defense-side users viewing and downloading files.

• Design for high-volume digital evidence exchange, including very large video files from body-worn cameras, dash cameras, interview rooms, surveillance systems, forensic extractions from digital evidence and mobile devices, and third-party evidence sources.

• Use of scalable architecture for large-file storage, transfer, indexing, and delivery, so capacity can grow without major redesign or service interruption.

• Ability to handle uploads and downloads of files of any size, including individual files that may be 1 TB or larger, seamlessly and without impact on operations.

• Support for centralized evidence storage with secure web-based upload, streaming, download, and case-based access. The system shall not rely on email attachments, shared network drives, or manual physical media as the primary method for exchanging evidence.

• Flexible and configurable access controls that permit multiple levels and types of access, from uploading to downloading, that are configurable to both folders and files and allow multiple individuals various levels of access depending on authority.

• Customer service and contact center support.

• Unauthorized access detection and identity verification.

• Data analytics and program reporting, including detailed historical disclosure manifests.

• Integration with existing Commonwealth and local data systems (including but not limited to law enforcement systems that store and share video and other data, such as Axon, Motorola, etc.).

• Support for open APIs and documented integration methods for case management, evidence systems, identity management, and audit tools.

• Strong encryption for files in transit and files at rest.

• Files and folders must be maintained separately for each of Virginia’s 120 separate jurisdictions.

• Compliance with Virginia and Federal statutory and regulatory requirements, including but not limited to CJIS compliance.

Given the statutory deadline, the Commonwealth is evaluating existing E-Discovery platforms with proven implementations in other U.S. states.

3. Information Requested

The Commonwealth requests detailed responses to the following sections. Vendors may attach supplemental materials.

3.1 Vendor Profile

• Company name, website, headquarters address (physical & mailing address), and years in operation.

• Experience delivering statewide or large-scale E-Discovery systems, especially those of similar size and scope as described herein for other public sector clients, including details of adherence to original timeline and budget.

• Number of E-Discovery implementations completed, especially those of similar size and scope as described herein for other public sector clients, including details of adherence to original timeline and budget.

• Contact information for this RFI (name, title, email address, etc.).

3.2 E-Discovery System Overview

Provide a description of your E-Discovery solution, including:

• Whether the solution is SaaS, COTS, configurable, or custom-built.

• System architecture overview.

• Hosting model (cloud provider, region, compliance certifications).

• Core E-Discovery modules included out-of-the-box.

• Scalability and performance characteristics.

• Accessibility capabilities.

• Mobile responsiveness.

3.3 Functional Capabilities

Describe how your system supports the following E-Discovery functions:

Criminal Discovery Workflow

• Organization of discovery materials by criminal case, defendant, charge, incident, or other agency-defined identifier.

• Authorized prosecution users to assemble selected files and materials into a defined discovery disclosure set for release to one or more authorized defense recipients.

• Prosecution users to distinguish materials that have been received, reviewed, approved for disclosure, withheld or restricted, and disclosed.

• Ability to provide supplemental discovery disclosures after an initial disclosure has been made. Supplemental disclosures to be identifiable separately from prior disclosures while maintaining a complete history of all materials previously provided.

• Authorized users to add newly received discovery to an existing case without recreating or redistributing the entire prior disclosure. Authorized users to replace or share superseding versions of files while preserving the original file and historical disclosure record where required.

• Clear warnings or controls intended to prevent accidental disclosure of files that have not been approved for release.

• File-level and folder-level controls for materials that are privileged, work product, restricted, subject to protective orders, or otherwise not authorized for disclosure.

• Workflows for identifying materials requiring redaction before disclosure.

• Segregation of NCIC, VCIN, and other restricted criminal justice information so that such information is not inadvertently disclosed to an unauthorized recipient.

• Different discovery materials within the same case to be disclosed to different defense recipients when appropriate.

• Support for cases involving multiple defendants and multiple defense attorneys without automatically providing each recipient access to discovery intended for another defendant or recipient.

• Available disclosure manifest identifying the materials included in each disclosure.

• Notifications to defense recipients when new or supplemental discovery is made available.

• Transfer or reassignment of a case to another prosecutor without loss of discovery history, permissions, or audit information.

Statewide Governance and Administration

• Commonwealth-wide implementation across multiple independent Commonwealth’s Attorney offices and other authorized participating agencies.

• Centralized statewide administration while preserving appropriate local administrative authority for participating offices.

• Logical segregation of cases, files, users, metadata, and other information among participating jurisdictions, up to 120 separate jurisdictions total.

• Users and local administrators shall not be permitted to access another jurisdiction's information solely because that jurisdiction participates in the statewide system.

• Delegated local administrators may manage authorized users, roles, cases, and other permitted functions within their jurisdiction.

• Commonwealth-level administrators to define which administrative functions are controlled centrally and which may be delegated to participating offices.

• Commonwealth administrative privileges shall be role-based and limited according to least-privilege principles.

• Distinguish system administration privileges from privileges permitting access to substantive case information wherever practicable. System administration should not permit access to file content or data except in exceptional circumstances. Any exceptional access must be approved, time-limited, logged, and auditable

• Audit records of administrative actions performed by Commonwealth and local administrators.

• Commonwealth-wide aggregate reporting on system utilization, storage, performance, security, and other administrative measures without unnecessarily exposing case-level information.

• Transfer or reassignment of users, cases, and administrative responsibilities when authorized by the Commonwealth.

• Vendor shall describe proposed governance and multi-tenant architecture, including how data and administrative privileges are segregated among participating jurisdictions.

• Vendor shall identify which configuration settings may be established Commonwealth-wide, which may be delegated to individual jurisdictions, and how conflicts between statewide and local settings are handled.

• Solution shall support controlled cross-jurisdictional sharing or collaboration when expressly authorized, without providing either jurisdiction general access to the other jurisdiction's cases or data.

Compatibility with Common Criminal Justice File Formats

• Direct ingestion from common evidence sources and file repositories if such integrations are approved by the Commonwealth, to include evidence.com (Axon), Motorola, and law enforcement RMS systems.

• Compatibility with and ability to view common document formats (e.g. .doc, .txt, .rtf, .docx, .pdf, .xls, .xlsx)

• Compatibility with and ability to view by streaming common video formats and codecs (e.g. .mp4, .mov, .webm, .avi, .mkv.)

• Compatibility with and ability to view by streaming common law enforcement video sources (e.g. Axon, Motorola, etc.).

• Compatibility with PC, Mac, Android, and iOS platforms.

Video Processing and Streaming

• Support for streaming playback of video evidence through a web browser without requiring the recipient to download the full file first.

• Support for adaptive streaming so playback remains usable across varying network conditions.

• Support for server-side video processing to create streamable versions of uploaded video while preserving the original evidence file.

• Original uploaded file shall be retained in its native format and available for authorized download.

• Solution shall generate thumbnails, duration, file size, format, and other basic metadata for uploaded video where technically feasible.

• Ability to allow a user to begin playback within a reasonable time after selecting a file, subject to network conditions and file processing status.

• Solution will support asynchronous video processing, including creation of browser-playable derivatives, without delaying preservation of the original evidence.

Large File Management

• Ability to handle large files, sometimes up to 1 TB per file, without impact on regular operations.

• Ability to handle simultaneous upload of data from approximately 2,000 users (prosecutors, paralegals, law enforcement officers) per day of video and data files.

• Ability to handle simultaneous download of data from approximately 3,000 data recipients (defense counsel) per day of video and data files.

• Support for multipart or chunked upload for large files.

• User-visible display of upload status, progress, failed items, and completed items to the user.

• Automatic detection and reporting of upload failures, corrupt files, incomplete files, and duplicate files. System must support retry logic for failed uploads without requiring the user to reassemble the file set manually. No file upload “time-out” permitted; failures to upload files must result in a visible and clear notification to a user.

• Ability for users to use drag-and-drop upload, folder upload, and batch upload.

Access Controls

• Use of unique individual user accounts, role-based access, and least privilege.

Below, these levels are referred to as “Manager, User, and Recipient.”

• User privileges shall be reviewed at least monthly and removed when no longer needed.

• Multi-factor authentication for all accounts. Authentication shall be replay-resistant.

• Users shall be required to log out at the end of each work period.

• Manager-level access for management-level prosecutors. Files and folders should be accessible on a jurisdiction-wide basis for management-level prosecutors.

• User-level access for trial prosecutors and paralegal staff, allowing upload, download, and replacement of files within assigned cases.

• Contributor-level access for law enforcement officers and staff, allowing upload of files to specific case folders.

• Recipient-level access for defense counsel and non-privileged prosecutor staff to review files in specific case folders. Recipient -level access to include potential for secure download of individual files and grouped case materials by authorized recipients, or view-only access where such access level is set by the prosecutor.

• Only authorized prosecution-side users may manage sharing decisions. Recipients (e.g. defense counsel) should be recipients, not access administrators.

• Unauthorized access detection and identity verification

• User-controlled access controls that permit or deny user-level access to upload or review data on a case-folder basis. Access controls must allow instant changes to access authority when necessary. Support for expiring access, revoked access, and replacement of previously shared file sets.

• Clear notice to users when content is still processing, temporarily unavailable, or removed from access.

• Notification to recipient users when a file or folder is uploaded, created, changed, or made available to the recipient.

• Prosecutor-controlled access controls that permit or deny recipient-level access to upload or review data on a case-folder basis. Access controls must allow instant changes to access authority when necessary.

• File-level permissions that permit or deny full-access users and recipient-level users to access certain restricted files, based on legal restrictions, court-ordered restrictions, or confidentiality requirements.

• Remote access sessions shall be encrypted.

• Agency-managed devices shall be identified and authenticated before network connection.

• Mobile devices used to process, store, or transmit CJI shall use full-device or container-based encryption.

• Vendor shall describe how the proposed solution provides secure and reliable access to discovery materials for defense counsel and other authorized external recipients who are not connected to Commonwealth networks.

External Recipient (Defense Counsel) Access and Usability

• Vendor shall describe the processes for recipient registration, identity verification, authentication, multi-factor authentication, password reset, account recovery, account deactivation, and administrative support.

• Support for recipient (e.g. defense counsel) user registration and account creation.

Accounts should be useable throughout system, and not jurisdiction dependent.

• 24/7 support for password reset and user login issues, including with self-service password reset. Support for MFA tokens.

• Ability for recipients (e.g. defense counsel) to interact with system while on non- COV networks. No VPN requirements.

File Restrictions for Confidentiality and Privacy

• Support for file redactions that restrict access based on individualized recipient authorizations

• File-level restrictions for sensitive material such as juveniles, victims, witnesses, medical records, and protected law enforcement information.

Search, Organization, and Operations

• Files to be organized by case, matter, defendant, incident, or other agency-defined structure, on a jurisdictional basis. All data must be segregated between the 120 independent jurisdictions in Virginia.

• Support for bulk tagging, metadata assignment, and indexing for large evidence sets.

• Users with file management privileges to have ability to identify files that are new, shared, viewed, downloaded, failed, missing, or pending processing.

• Support for queue management and administrative reporting for large transfer workloads.

• User-visible dashboards or reports showing upload volume, download volume, streaming activity, storage consumption, and processing backlog.

• Administrative tools for retention, purge, legal hold, and audit review consistent with agency policy.

Performance and Scale

• Optimization for Commonwealth-wide concurrent use by up to 2,000 users and up to 3,000 recipients, to remain responsive during peak filing and disclosure periods, with substantial concurrent upload, streaming, and download activity.

• Capability for scaling storage, processing throughput, and delivery bandwidth independently as demand grows.

• Support for high-volume case disclosures containing multiple large data, forensic, and video files.

• Support for content delivery optimization or equivalent delivery architecture for geographically distributed users.

• Vendor shall describe the tested and recommended capacity limits for concurrent uploads, concurrent streams, concurrent downloads, total storage volume, and daily transfer volume.

• Vendor shall describe how the platform avoids performance degradation when many users are uploading and many recipients are streaming at the same time.

• Vendor shall identify any practical file-size thresholds, storage thresholds, or throughput assumptions required to meet proposed performance commitments.

Reliability and Availability

• Fault-tolerant file transfer and storage services with no single point of failure for core evidence access functions.

• Protection against data loss caused by interrupted uploads, storage failures, or processing failures.

• Automatic recovery or re-queuing of failed background processing jobs.

• Monitoring and alerting for transfer failures, processing backlogs, storage issues, and delivery issues.

• Backup, disaster recovery, and service restoration capabilities appropriate for mission-critical criminal case operations. Vendor shall state its target availability, recovery time objective, and recovery point objective for this service.

CJIS Compliance

• Compliance with the FBI CJIS Security Policy v6.1 dated June 25, 2026, and any successor version in effect during the contract term.

• Compliance with 28 C.F.R. Part 20, the CJIS Security Addendum, applicable NCIC and III rules, and all state CJIS Systems Agency / CJIS Systems Officer requirements.

• Compliance with any required CJIS Security Addendum.

• Support for any FBI, state CSA/CSO, and agency audits, inspections, evidence requests, and corrective action plans.

CJIS: Data Classification, Use, and Dissemination

• The solution shall identify, classify, and separately control Criminal Justice Information (CJI), Criminal History Record Information (CHRI), Interstate Identification Index (III) data, National Crime Information Center (NCIC) information, Virginia Criminal Information Network (VCIN) information, and other restricted criminal justice data to the extent present in the solution.

• Information obtained from the III shall be treated as CHRI.

• NCIC restricted files information, and any analogous VCIN-restricted information, shall be protected at the same level as CHRI.

• The solution shall not treat all criminal discovery material as CJI solely because it relates to a criminal case.

• The solution shall support separate classification and access controls for nonpublic discovery material that is not CJIS-regulated but is subject to statute, court rule, court order, protective order, privilege, work product, sealing, juvenile protections, victim or witness protections, medical/privacy restrictions, or agency policy.

• Access to CHRI and other CJI shall be limited to authorized users for authorized purposes.

• The solution shall support item-level segregation, review, redaction, and approval workflows so that CHRI, NCIC, III, VCIN, and other restricted criminal justice data are not included in a disclosure set unless the Commonwealth determines that disclosure is authorized by applicable law, court rule, or court order.

• The solution shall prevent restricted criminal justice data from being automatically included in discovery packets or bulk disclosures.

• If the Commonwealth lawfully discloses CHRI or other restricted criminal justice data in discovery, the solution shall support recipient-specific controls, disclosure warnings, and no-further-dissemination notices where required.

• The solution shall maintain complete audit records of access, review, approval, disclosure, download, revocation, and deletion actions involving restricted criminal justice data.

• The vendor shall describe how the solution distinguishes CJIS-regulated information from other confidential discovery material and how each category is protected, reviewed, and disclosed.

Encryption, Hosting, and Security Operations

• CJI in transit shall be protected for confidentiality and integrity using CJIS-approved cryptographic mechanisms.

• CJI at rest outside a physically secure location shall be encrypted.

• Cryptography shall meet current CJIS, NIST, FIPS, and state CSA/CSO requirements.

• Metadata derived from unencrypted CJI shall be protected as CJI.

• Metadata derived from unencrypted CJI shall not be used for advertising or other commercial purposes.

• CJI may be stored in cloud environments only within the physical boundaries of an APB-member country under the legal authority of an APB-member agency.

• The vendor shall disclose all locations where CJI may be stored, backed up, processed, or accessed.

• The vendor shall maintain hardened baseline configurations, documented network topology, and formal change control with security impact review, testing, documentation, and retained change records.

• The vendor shall maintain continuous monitoring, intrusion detection or prevention, malicious code protection, and vulnerability scanning for systems that process, store, or transmit CJI.

• Security-relevant patches shall be installed within CJIS timeframes: critical within 15 days, high within 30 days, medium within 60 days, and low within 90 days.

Case Management Reporting and Analytics

• Date and time logs of when data is uploaded by a prosecutor and when data is received by specific defense counsel users. Analytics must be specific to both individual files and individual users.

• Date and time logs shall contain identity of the user, date and time, action taken, file or case affected, and outcome of the action.

• Chain-of-custody records for uploaded, processed, viewed, shared, streamed, downloaded, replaced, and deleted files.

• Authorized users may generate or export a complete discovery history for a case

3.4 Implementation Timeline

Provide a detailed implementation timeline, including:

• Project phases

• Key milestones

• Critical path dependencies

• Assumptions (e.g., staffing, data readiness, integration availability)

• Fastest implementation achieved to date

• Whether vendor would be able to meet a December 2028 go-live

3.5 Integrations

Describe your experience integrating with:

• State identity systems (e.g., Okta, Azure AD)

• Law enforcement body camera storage systems (e.g. Axon, Motorola, etc.)

• Prosecutor case management systems (e.g., Journal Technologies, Karpel, Software Unlimited, Spartan, etc.)

• Law enforcement RMS and document management systems (e.g. Omni, NewGen, etc.)

• Commercial video surveillance video footage (e.g. Ring, Walmart, Target, etc.)

• Digital device forensic software (e.g. Cellebrite, Magnet, X-Ways, etc.)

Include preferred integration patterns (APIs, batch, message queues).

3.6 Security & Compliance (COV-Aligned)

Provide information on the following security and compliance elements relevant to the Commonwealth of Virginia:

• Hosting model and cloud provider

• Data encryption at rest and in transit

• Identity and access management controls

• Audit logging and monitoring

• Vulnerability management and patching processes

• Disaster recovery and business continuity capabilities

• Compliance with Commonwealth of Virginia Information Security Standard SEC-525

• Compliance with VITA Cloud Services requirements

• Compliance with CJIS requirements

• Support for Commonwealth identity solutions

• U.S.-based data residency

Note: The Commonwealth does not require FedRAMP authorization for E-Discovery solutions. Vendors may provide FedRAMP information if available, but it is not required.

3.7 Operations & Support

Describe:

• Overall architecture for large-file upload, storage, video processing, streaming, and download delivery.

• How proposed architecture supports anticipated Commonwealth user population and growth.

• Sizing assumptions for storage volume, daily ingestion, peak concurrent uploads, peak concurrent streams, and peak concurrent downloads.

• Any third-party components, network dependencies, or customer-managed infrastructure required to achieve proposed performance.

• Methods for testing performance at scale

• Provide representative benchmark or production-scale examples if available.

• Identify any customer responsibilities required for bandwidth, user device standards, or local office network performance.

• Describe procedures for implementing retention schedules, legal holds, purge workflows, case-close archiving, bulk export, and migration support.

• Provide detailed description of data ownership under the proposal.

3.8 Cost Model (Non-Binding)

Provide rough-order-of-magnitude (ROM) pricing for:

• Implementation

• Licensing or subscription

• Hosting

• Support and maintenance

This is not a bid and will not be used for evaluation.

3.9 Lessons Learned, Risks, and State Considerations

The Commonwealth requests that vendors provide insights based on prior E-Discovery projects or similar criminal justice discovery and file-sharing system implementations.

Please include:

1. Key risks encountered during previous implementations, including:

o Alignment challenges o Data quality or data availability issues o Integration delays o Staffing or operational readiness gaps o Timeline risks o Vendor-state governance issues

2. Mitigation strategies that were effective in addressing these risks.

3. Critical success factors that states must have in place prior to implementation, including:

o Policy clarity and stability o Data readiness o Integration availability o Staffing levels o Decision-making structures o Testing and UAT capacity

4. Recommendations for the Commonwealth based on your experience delivering E- Discovery or similar programs.

5. Common pitfalls that states should avoid.

6. Dependencies or prerequisites that materially affect implementation timelines.

3.10 Records Management, Data Portability, and Contract Transition

Retention and Records Management

• Support for configurable retention schedules based on case type, case status, jurisdiction, record type, and other Commonwealth-defined criteria.

• Support for automated retention and disposition workflows subject to Commonwealth approval and applicable records-retention requirements.

• Support for archive of closed cases without loss of associated metadata, disclosure history, or audit information.

• Maintain documentation of records disposition and deletion activities.

Legal Hold

• Permit authorized users to place legal or administrative holds on cases, files, or other records.

• Legal holds shall suspend otherwise applicable automated deletion or disposition processes.

• Maintain an audit history identifying when a hold was imposed, modified, or released and by whom.

• Support for multiple simultaneous holds affecting the same records where necessary.

Data Ownership and Export

• All Commonwealth and agency data stored in the solution shall remain the property of the Commonwealth or originating agency, as applicable.

• Support for bulk export of case files, original evidence files, metadata, folder and case relationships, disclosure records, recipient information, audit records, and other State-owned information.

• Exported information shall be provided in documented, non-proprietary or commonly usable formats wherever practicable.

• Export processes shall preserve file integrity and the relationships necessary to associate exported files and records with the appropriate cases.

• Vendor shall identify any information maintained by the solution that cannot be exported and explain why.

Contract Transition and Vendor Exit

• Describe process for returning or transferring Commonwealth data upon contract expiration or termination.

• Describe the tools and services available to support migration to a successor system.

• Identify anticipated charges associated with bulk data export, migration, and transition assistance.

• Provide reasonable transition assistance to the Commonwealth and any successor contractor.

• Following successful migration and Commonwealth authorization, the vendor shall securely delete remaining Commonwealth data, including applicable copies and backups, in accordance with CJIS and Commonwealth requirements and provide certification of destruction where required.

• Describe how Commonwealth data would remain available and recoverable in the event of vendor insolvency, cessation of business, or discontinuation of the proposed service.

4. Response Instructions

4.1 Submission Format

Responses should be submitted electronically in PDF or Word format.

4.2 Submission Deadline

Responses are due by Wednesday, September 30, 2026 at 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time.

4.3 Submission location: eVA

Submission must be submitted via attachment using the Commonwealth’s e-Procurement portal (eVA).

4.4 eVA Submittal Support

In the event of technical difficulties, supplier should contact eVA Customer Care at 1-866- 289-7367, via email at eVACustomerCare@DGS.Virginia.gov, https://eva.virginia.gov/get-help-customer-care.html or https://eva.virginia.gov/supplier-training-materials.html.

5. Confidentiality

The information received in response to this RFI is intended to be used for market research, pursuant to a directive from the Virginia General Assembly, who directed in their 2026 Biannual Budget as follows:

"A. The Commonwealth's Attorneys' Services Council shall provide to the Chairs of the House Appropriations and Senate Finance and Appropriations Committees, no later than November 15, 2026, a report with options, including associated costs and any necessary statutory changes, for establishing shared infrastructure for electronic storage and dissemination of discovery materials, including approaches and funding strategies used in the other states, with the goal of leveraging economies of scale and improving the uniformity of IT infrastructure and discovery practices in Commonwealth's Attorneys' offices across the state."

CASC intends to use generalized price information submitted in response to this RFI as part of its mandated report to the General Assembly on November 15, 2026, without attributing specific prices to specific vendors. Responses to this RFI will then be supplied in the vent mailto:eVACustomerCare@DGS.Virginia.gov https://eva.virginia.gov/get-help-customer-care.html https://eva.virginia.gov/get-help-customer-care.html https://eva.virginia.gov/supplier-training-materials.html of future procurement based upon such funds as are allocated by the General Assembly after submission of this report. The information received in response to this RFI is therefore intended to be used for planning and budgetary purposes in support of a potential RFP(s) issued after the General Assembly reviews the report mandated above.

Virginia Code §2.2-4342(B) provides that “Cost estimates relating to a proposed procurement transaction prepared by or for a public body shall not be open to public inspection.”

Pursuant to Virginia Code § 2.2-4342(F), trade secrets or proprietary information submitted by a Supplier in connection with a procurement transaction shall not be required to be released under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (Va. Code § 2.2-3700 et seq.) so long as the Supplier:

· invokes the protections of § 2.2-4342(F) in writing prior to or upon submission of the data or other materials,

· identifies specifically the data or other materials to be protected, and

· states the reasons why protection is necessary.

The Supplier should submit a completed Attachment A: Supplier Trade Secret or Proprietary Information Form with its response that specifies the exact items in the Supplier’s response that the Supplier deems proprietary or trade secret information and the reason it deems that specific information as proprietary or trade secret and include a redacted copy of the response with proprietary information redacted in the document (Word or Adobe PDF).

6. Disclaimer

This RFI is issued solely for information and planning purposes. It does not commit the Commonwealth to any procurement action.