Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Assessing Contractor Implementation of Cybersecurity Requirements (DFARS Case 2019-D041), 61505-61522 [2020-21123]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 29, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations
System
48 CFR Parts 204, 212, 217, and 252
[Docket DARS–2020–0034]
RIN 0750–AJ81
Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement: Assessing
Contractor Implementation of
Cybersecurity Requirements (DFARS
Case 2019–D041)
Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, Department of
Defense (DoD).
ACTION: Interim rule.
AGENCY:
DoD is issuing an interim rule
to amend the Defense Federal
Acquisition Regulation Supplement
(DFARS) to implement a DoD
Assessment Methodology and
Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification framework in order to
assess contractor implementation of
cybersecurity requirements and enhance
the protection of unclassified
information within the DoD supply
chain.
DATES: Effective November 30, 2020.
Comments on the interim rule should
be submitted in writing to the address
shown below on or before November 30,
2020, to be considered in the formation
of a final rule.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
identified by DFARS Case 2019–D041,
using any of the following methods:
Æ Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Search for
‘‘DFARS Case 2019–D041’’. Select
‘‘Comment Now’’ and follow the
instructions provided to submit a
comment. Please include ‘‘DFARS Case
2019–D041’’ on any attached
documents.
Æ Email: osd.dfars@mail.mil. Include
DFARS Case 2019–D041 in the subject
line of the message.
Comments received generally will be
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. To
confirm receipt of your comment(s),
please check www.regulations.gov,
approximately two to three days after
submission to verify posting.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Heather Kitchens, telephone 571–372–
6104.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES3
SUMMARY:
I. Background
The theft of intellectual property and
sensitive information from all U.S.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:45 Sep 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
industrial sectors due to malicious cyber
activity threatens economic security and
national security. The Council of
Economic Advisors estimates that
malicious cyber activity cost the U.S.
economy between $57 billion and $109
billion in 2016. Over a ten-year period,
that burden would equate to an
estimated $570 billion to $1.09 trillion
dollars in costs. As part of multiple
lines of effort focused on the security
and resiliency of the Defense Industrial
Base (DIB) sector, the Department is
working with industry to enhance the
protection of unclassified information
within the supply chain. Toward this
end, DoD has developed the following
assessment methodology and framework
to assess contractor implementation of
cybersecurity requirements, both of
which are being implemented by this
rule: the National Institute of Standards
and Technology (NIST) Special
Publication (SP) 800–171 DoD
Assessment Methodology and the
Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification (CMMC) Framework. The
NIST SP 800–171 DoD Assessment and
CMMC assessments will not duplicate
efforts from each assessment, or any
other DoD assessment, except for rare
circumstances when a re-assessment
may be necessary, such as, but not
limited to, when cybersecurity risks,
threats, or awareness have changed,
requiring a re-assessment to ensure
current compliance.
A. NIST SP 800–171 DoD Assessment
Methodology
DFARS clause 252.204–7012,
Safeguarding Covered Defense
Information and Cyber Incident
Reporting, is included in all
solicitations and contracts, including
those using Federal Acquisition
Regulation (FAR) part 12 commercial
item procedures, except for acquisitions
solely for commercially available offthe-shelf (COTS) items. The clause
requires contractors to apply the
security requirements of NIST SP 800–
171 to ‘‘covered contractor information
systems,’’ as defined in the clause, that
are not part of an IT service or system
operated on behalf of the Government.
The NIST SP 800–171 DoD Assessment
Methodology provides for the
assessment of a contractor’s
implementation of NIST SP 800-171
security requirements, as required by
DFARS clause 252.204–7012. More
information on the NIST SP 800–171
DoD Assessment Methodology is
available at https://www.acq.osd.mil/
dpap/pdi/cyber/strategically_assessing_
contractor_implementation_of_NIST_
SP_800-171.html.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
61505
The Assessment uses a standard
scoring methodology, which reflects the
net effect of NIST SP 800–171 security
requirements not yet implemented by a
contractor, and three assessment levels
(Basic, Medium, and High), which
reflect the depth of the assessment
performed and the associated level of
confidence in the score resulting from
the assessment. A Basic Assessment is
a self-assessment completed by the
contractor, while Medium or High
Assessments are completed by the
Government. The Assessments are
completed for each covered contractor
information system that is relevant to
the offer, contract, task order, or
delivery order.
The results of Assessments are
documented in the Supplier
Performance Risk System (SPRS) at
https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/ to
provide DoD Components with visibility
into the scores of Assessments already
completed; and verify that an offeror has
a current (i.e., not more than three years
old, unless a lesser time is specified in
the solicitation) Assessment, at any
level, on record prior to contract award.
B. Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification Framework
Building upon the NIST SP 800–171
DoD Assessment Methodology, the
CMMC framework adds a
comprehensive and scalable
certification element to verify the
implementation of processes and
practices associated with the
achievement of a cybersecurity maturity
level. CMMC is designed to provide
increased assurance to the Department
that a DIB contractor can adequately
protect sensitive unclassified
information such as Federal Contract
Information (FCI) and Controlled
Unclassified Information (CUI) at a level
commensurate with the risk, accounting
for information flow down to its
subcontractors in a multi-tier supply
chain. A DIB contractor can achieve a
specific CMMC level for its entire
enterprise network or particular
segment(s) or enclave(s), depending
upon where the information to be
protected is processed, stored, or
transmitted.
The CMMC model consists of
maturity processes and cybersecurity
best practices from multiple
cybersecurity standards, frameworks,
and other references, as well as inputs
from the broader community. The
CMMC levels and the associated sets of
processes and practices are cumulative.
The CMMC model encompasses the
basic safeguarding requirements for FCI
specified in FAR clause 52.204–21,
Basic Safeguarding of Covered
E:\FR\FM\29SER3.SGM
29SER3
61506
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 29, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Contractor Information Systems, and the
security requirements for CUI specified
in NIST SP 800–171 per DFARS clause
2–5 that demonstrate a progression of
cybersecurity maturity.
Level
Description
1 ........................
2 ........................
Consists of the 15 basic safeguarding requirements from FAR clause 52.204–21.
Consists of 65 security requirements from NIST SP 800–171 implemented via DFARS clause 252.204–7012, 7 CMMC practices, and 2 CMMC processes. Intended as an optional intermediary step for contractors as part of their progression to
Level 3.
Consists of all 110 security requirements from NIST SP 800–171, 20 CMMC practices, and 3 CMMC processes.
Consists of all 110 security requirements from NIST SP 800–171, 46 CMMC practices, and 4 CMMC processes.
Consists of all 110 security requirements from NIST SP 800–171, 61 CMMC practices, and 5 CMMC processes.
3 ........................
4 ........................
5 ........................
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES3
252.204–7012. Furthermore, the CMMC
model includes an additional five
processes and 61 practices across Levels
In order to achieve a specific CMMC
level, a DIB company must demonstrate
both process institutionalization or
maturity and the implementation of
practices commensurate with that level.
CMMC assessments will be conducted
by accredited CMMC Third Party
Assessment Organizations (C3PAOs).
Upon completion of a CMMC
assessment, a company is awarded a
certification by an independent CMMC
Accreditation Body (AB) at the
appropriate CMMC level (as described
in the CMMC model). The certification
level is documented in SPRS to enable
the verification of an offeror’s
certification level and currency (i.e. not
more than three years old) prior to
contract award. Additional information
on CMMC and a copy of the CMMC
model can be found at https://
www.acq.osd.mil/cmmc/.
DoD is implementing a phased rollout
of CMMC. Until September 30, 2025, the
clause at 252.204–7021, Cybersecurity
Maturity Model Certification
Requirements, is prescribed for use in
solicitations and contracts, including
solicitations and contracts using FAR
part 12 procedures for the acquisition of
commercial items, excluding
acquisitions exclusively for COTS items,
if the requirement document or
statement of work requires a contractor
to have a specific CMMC level. In order
to implement the phased rollout of
CMMC, inclusion of a CMMC
requirement in a solicitation during this
time period must be approved by the
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition and Sustainment.
CMMC will apply to all DoD
solicitations and contracts, including
those for the acquisition of commercial
items (except those exclusively COTS
items) valued at greater than the micropurchase threshold, starting on or after
October 1, 2025. Contracting officers
will not make award, or exercise an
option on a contract, if the offeror or
contractor does not have current (i.e. not
older than three years) certification for
the required CMMC level. Furthermore,
CMMC certification requirements are
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:45 Sep 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
required to be flowed down to
subcontractors at all tiers, based on the
sensitivity of the unclassified
information flowed down to each
subcontractor.
II. Discussion and Analysis
A. NIST SP 800–171 DoD Assessment
Methodology
This rule amends DFARS subpart
204.73, Safeguarding Covered Defense
Information and Cyber Incident
Reporting, to implement the NIST SP
800–171 DoD Assessment Methodology.
The new coverage in the subpart directs
contracting officers to verify in SPRS
that an offeror has a current NIST SP
800–171 DoD Assessment on record,
prior to contract award, if the offeror is
required to implement NIST SP 800–171
pursuant to DFARS clause 252.204–
7012. The contracting officer is also
directed to include a new DFARS
provision 252.204–7019, Notice of NIST
SP 800–171 DoD Assessment
Requirements, and a new DFARS clause
252.204–7020, NIST SP 800–171 DoD
Assessment Requirements, in
solicitations and contracts including
solicitations using FAR part 12
procedures for the acquisition of
commercial items, except for
solicitations solely for the acquisition of
COTS items.
The new DFARS provision 252.204–
7019 advises offerors required to
implement the NIST SP 800–171
standards of the requirement to have a
current (not older than three years)
NIST SP 800–171 DoD Assessment on
record in order to be considered for
award. The provision requires offerors
to ensure the results of any applicable
current Assessments are posted in SPRS
and provides offerors with additional
information on conducting and
submitting an Assessment when a
current one is not posted in SPRS.
The new DFARS clause 252.204–7020
requires a contractor to provide the
Government with access to its facilities,
systems, and personnel when it is
necessary for DoD to conduct or renew
a higher-level Assessment. The clause
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
also requires the contractor to ensure
that applicable subcontractors also have
the results of a current Assessment
posted in SPRS prior to awarding a
subcontract or other contractual
instruments. The clause also provides
additional information on how a
subcontractor can conduct and submit
an Assessment when one is not posted
in SPRS, and requires the contractor to
include the requirements of the clause
in all applicable subcontracts or other
contractual instruments.
B. Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification
This rule adds a new DFARS subpart,
Subpart 204.75, Cybersecurity Maturity
Model Certification (CMMC), to specify
the policy and procedures for awarding
a contract, or exercising an option on a
contract, that includes the requirement
for a CMMC certification. Specifically,
this subpart directs contracting officers
to verify in SPRS that the apparently
successful offeror’s or contractor’s
CMMC certification is current and meets
the required level prior to making the
award.
A new DFARS clause 252.204–7021,
Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification Requirements, is
prescribed for use in all solicitations
and contracts or task orders or delivery
orders, excluding those exclusively for
the acquisition of COTS items. This
DFARS clause requires a contractor to:
Maintain the requisite CMMC level for
the duration of the contract; ensure that
its subcontractors also have the
appropriate CMMC level prior to
awarding a subcontract or other
contractual instruments; and include
the requirements of the clause in all
subcontracts or other contractual
instruments.
The Department took into
consideration the timing of the
requirement to achieve a CMMC level
certification in the development of this
rule, weighing the benefits and risks
associated with requiring CMMC level
certification: (1) At time of proposal or
offer submission; (2) at time of award;
E:\FR\FM\29SER3.SGM
29SER3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 29, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
or (3) after contract award. The
Department ultimately adopted
alternative 2 to require certification at
the time of award. The drawback of
alternative 1 (at time of proposal or offer
submission) is the increased risk for
contractors since they may not have
sufficient time to achieve the required
CMMC certification after the release of
the Request for Information (RFI). The
drawback of alternative 3 (after contract
award) is the increased risk to the
Department with respect to the schedule
and uncertainty with respect to the case
where the contractor is unable to
achieve the required CMMC level in a
reasonable amount of time given their
current cybersecurity posture. This
potential delay would apply to the
entire supply chain and prevent the
appropriate flow of CUI and FCI. The
Department seeks public comment on
the timing of contract award, to include
the effect of requiring certification at
time of award on small businesses.
C. Conforming Changes
This rule also amends the following
DFARS sections to make conforming
changes:
• Amends the list in DFARS section
212.301 of solicitation provisions and
contract clauses that are applicable for
the acquisition of commercial items to
include the provisions and clauses
included in this rule.
• Amends DFARS 217.207, Exercise
of Options, to advise contracting officers
that an option may only be exercised
after verifying the contractor’s CMMC
level, when CMMC is required in the
contract.
III. Applicability to Contracts at or
Below the Simplified Acquisition
Threshold and for Commercial Items,
Including Commercially Available Offthe-Shelf Items
This rule creates the following new
solicitation provision and contract
clauses:
• DFARS 252.204–7019, Notice of
NIST SP 800–171 DoD Assessment
Requirements;
• DFARS clause 252.204–7020, NIST
SP 800–171 DoD Assessment
Requirements; and
• DFARS clause 252.204–7021,
Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification Requirements.
The objective of this rule is provide
the Department with: (1) The ability to
assess contractor implementation of
NIST SP 800–171 security requirements,
as required by DFARS clause 252.204–
7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense
Information and Cyber Incident
Reporting; and (2) assurances that DIB
contractors can adequately protect
sensitive unclassified information at a
level commensurate with the risk,
accounting for information flowed down
to subcontractors in a multi-tier supply
chain. Flowdown of the requirements is
necessary to respond to threats that
reach even the lowest tiers in the supply
chain. Therefore, to achieve the desired
policy outcome, DoD intends to apply
the new provision and clauses to
contracts and subcontracts for the
acquisition of commercial items and to
Total cost
(in millions)
The following is a breakdown of the
public and Government costs and
savings associated with each component
of the rule:
acquisitions valued at or below the
simplified acquisition threshold, but
greater than the micro-purchase
threshold. The provision and clauses
will not be applicable to contracts or
subcontracts exclusively for the
acquisition of commercially available
off-the-shelf items.
IV. Expected Cost Impact and Benefits
A. Benefits
The theft of intellectual property and
sensitive information from all U.S.
industrial sectors due to malicious cyber
activity threatens U.S. economic and
national security. The aggregate loss of
intellectual property and certain
unclassified information from the DoD
supply chain can undercut U.S.
technical advantages and innovation, as
well as significantly increase risk to
national security. This rule is expected
to enhance the protection of FCI and
CUI within the DIB sector.
B. Costs
A Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA)
that includes a detailed discussion and
explanation about the assumptions and
methodology used to estimate the cost
of this regulatory action is available at
www.regulations.gov (search for
‘‘DFARS Case 2019–D041’’ click ‘‘Open
Docket,’’ and view ‘‘Supporting
Documents’’). The total estimated public
and Government costs (in millions)
associated with this rule, calculated in
perpetuity in 2016 dollars at a 7 percent
discount rate, is provided as follows:
Public
Annualized Costs .........................................................................................................................
Present Value Costs ....................................................................................................................
1. NIST SP 800–171 DoD Assessments
The following is a summary of the
estimated public and Government costs
DoD assessments
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES3
The following is a summary of the
estimated public and Government costs
(in millions) associated with the CMMC
requirements, calculated in perpetuity
20:45 Sep 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
$0.3
3.7
Government
$6.7
96.1
$6,500.7
92,867.3
$9.5
136.2
Total
$16.3
232.3
in 2016 dollars at a 7 percent discount
rate:
Public
Annualized Costs .........................................................................................................................
Present Value Costs ....................................................................................................................
Total
(in millions) associated with the NIST
SP DoD Assessments, calculated in
perpetuity in 2016 dollars at a 7 percent
discount rate:
Public
CMMC requirements
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Govt
$6,500.5
92,863.6
Annualized Costs .........................................................................................................................
Present Value Costs ....................................................................................................................
2. CMMC Requirements
61507
$6,525.0
93,213.6
E:\FR\FM\29SER3.SGM
29SER3
Government
$8.9
127.3
Total
$6,533.9
93,340.9
61508
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 29, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
3. Elimination of Duplicate Assessments
The following is a summary of the
estimated public and Government
savings (in millions) associated with the
elimination of duplicate assessments,
Eliminate duplication
calculated in perpetuity in 2016 dollars
at a 7 percent discount rate:
Public
Annualized Savings .....................................................................................................................
Present Value Savings ................................................................................................................
V. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and
13563 direct agencies to assess all costs
and benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the
importance of quantifying both costs
and benefits, of reducing costs, of
harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This is an economically
significant regulatory action and,
therefore, was subject to review under
section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review, dated September
30, 1993. This rule is a major rule under
5 U.S.C. 804.
VI. Executive Order 13771
The rule is not subject to the
requirements if E.O. 13771, because this
rule is being issued with respect to a
national security function of the United
States.
VII. Regulatory Flexibility Act
DoD expects this rule to have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
within the meaning of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.
Therefore, an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis has been performed
and is summarized as follows:
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES3
A. Reasons for the Action
This rule is necessary to address
threats to the U.S. economy and
national security from ongoing
malicious cyber activities, which
includes the theft of hundreds of
billions of dollars of U.S. intellectual
property. Currently, the FAR and
DFARS prescribe contract clauses
intended to protect FCI and CUI within
the DoD supply chain. Specifically, the
clause at FAR 52.204–21, Basic
Safeguarding of Covered Contractor
Information Systems, is prescribed at
FAR 4.1903 for use in Government
solicitations and contracts and requires
contractors and subcontractors to apply
basic safeguarding requirements when
processing, storing, or transmitting FCI
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:45 Sep 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
in or from covered contractor
information systems. The clause focuses
on ensuring a basic level of
cybersecurity hygiene and is reflective
of actions that a prudent business
person would employ.
In addition, DFARS clause 252.204–
7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense
Information and Cyber Incident
Reporting, requires defense contractors
and subcontractors to provide ‘‘adequate
security’’ to store, process, or transmit
CUI on information systems or
networks, and to report cyber incidents
that affect these systems or networks.
The clause states that to provide
adequate security, the Contractor shall
implement, at a minimum, the security
requirements in ‘‘National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST)
Special Publication (SP) 800–171,
Protecting Controlled Unclassified
Information (CUI) in Nonfederal
Systems and Organizations.’’
Contractors are also required to flow
down DFARS Clause 252.204–7012 to
all subcontracts, which involve CUI.
However, neither the FAR clause, nor
the DFARS clause, provide for DoD
verification of a contractor’s
implementation of basic safeguarding
requirements or the security
requirements specified in NIST SP 800–
171 prior to contract award.
Under DFARS clause 252.204–7012,
DIB companies self-attest that they will
implement the requirements in NIST SP
800–171 upon submission of their offer.
A contractor can document
implementation of the security
requirements in NIST SP 800–171 by
having a system security plan in place
to describe how the security
requirements are implemented, in
addition to associated plans of action to
describe how and when any
unimplemented security requirements
will be met. As a result, the current
regulation enables contractors and
subcontractors to process, store, or
transmit CUI without having
implemented all of the 110 security
requirements and without establishing
enforceable timelines for addressing
shortfalls and gaps.
Findings from DoD Inspector General
report (DODIG–2019–105 ‘‘Audit of
Protection of DoD Controlled
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
-$31.2
-446.1
Government
-$18.2
-259.8
Total
-$49.4
-705.9
Unclassified Information on ContractorOwned Networks and Systems’’)
indicate that DoD contractors did not
consistently implement mandated
system security requirements for
safeguarding CUI and recommended
that DoD take steps to assess a
contractor’s ability to protect this
information. The report emphasizes that
malicious actors can exploit the
vulnerabilities of contractors’ networks
and systems and exfiltrate information
related to some of the Nation’s most
valuable advanced defense technologies.
Although DoD contractors must
include DFARS clause 252.204–7012 in
subcontracts for which subcontract
performance will involve covered
defense information (DoD CUI), this
does not provide the Department with
sufficient insights with respect to the
cybersecurity posture of DIB companies
throughout the multi-tier supply chain
for any given program or technology
development effort.
Furthermore, given the size and scale
of the DIB sector, the Department cannot
scale its organic cybersecurity
assessment capability to conduct on-site
assessments of approximately 220,000
DoD contractors every three years. As a
result, the Department’s organic
assessment capability is best suited for
conducting targeted assessments for a
subset of DoD contractors.
Finally, the current security
requirements specified in NIST SP 800–
171 per DFARS clause 252.204–7012, do
not sufficiently address additional
threats to include Advanced Persistent
Threats (APTs).
Because of these issues and
shortcomings and the associated risks to
national security, the Department
determined that the status quo was not
acceptable and developed a twopronged approach to assess and verify
the DIB’s ability to protect the FCI and
CUI on its information systems or
networks, which is being implemented
by this rule:
• The National Institute of Standards
and Technology (NIST) Special
Publication (SP) 800–171 DoD
Assessment Methodology. A standard
methodology to assess contractor
implementation of the cybersecurity
requirements in NIST SP 800–171,
E:\FR\FM\29SER3.SGM
29SER3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 29, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
‘‘Protecting Controlled Unclassified
Information (CUI) In Nonfederal
Systems and Organizations.’’
• The Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification (CMMC) Framework. A
DoD certification process that measures
a company’s institutionalization of
processes and implementation of
cybersecurity practices.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES3
B. Objectives of, and Legal Basis for, the
Rule
This rule establishes a requirement for
contractors to have a current NIST SP
800–171 DoD Assessment and the
appropriate CMMC level certification
prior to contract award and during
contract performance. The objective of
the rule is to provide the Department
with: (1) The ability to assess at a
corporate-level a contractor’s
implementation of NIST SP 800–171
security requirements, as required by
DFARS clause 252.204–7012,
Safeguarding Covered Defense
Information and Cyber Incident
Reporting; and (2) assurances that a DIB
contractor can adequately protect
sensitive unclassified information at a
level commensurate with the risk,
accounting for information flow down
to its subcontractors in a multi-tier
supply chain.
1. NIST SP 800–171 DoD Assessment
Methodology
In February 2019, the Under Secretary
of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment directed the Defense
Contract Management Agency (DCMA)
to develop a standard methodology to
assess contractor implementation of the
cybersecurity requirements in NIST SP
800–171 at the corporate or entity level.
The DCMA Defense Industrial Base
Cybersecurity Assessment Center’s NIST
SP 800–171 DoD Assessment
Methodology is the Department’s initial
strategic DoD/corporate-wide
assessment of contractor
implementation of the mandatory
cybersecurity requirements established
in the contracting regulations. Results of
a NIST SP 800–171 DoD Assessment
reflect the net effect of NIST SP 800–171
security requirements not yet
implemented by a contractor, and may
be conducted at one of three assessment
levels. The DoD Assessment
Methodology provides the following
benefits:
• Enables Strategic Assessments at
the Entity-level. The NIST SP 800–171
DoD Assessment Methodology enables
DoD to strategically assess a contractor’s
implementation of NIST SP 800–171 on
existing contracts that include DFARS
clause 252.204–7012, and to provide an
objective assessment of a contractor’s
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:45 Sep 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
NIST SP 800–171 implementation
status.
• Reduces Duplicative or Repetitive
Assessments of our Industry Partners.
Assessment results will be posted in the
Supplier Performance Risk System
(SPRS), DoD’s authoritative source for
supplier and product performance
information. This will provide DoD
Components with visibility to summary
level scores, rather than addressing
implementation of NIST SP 800–171 on
a contract-by-contract approach.
Conducting such assessments at a
corporate- or entity-level, significantly
reduces the need to conduct
assessments at the program or contract
level, thereby reducing the cost to both
DoD and industry.
• Provides a Standard Methodology
for Contractors to Self-assess Their
Implementation of NIST SP 800–171.
The Basic Assessment provides a
consistent means for contractors to
review their system security plans prior
to and in preparation for either a DoD
or CMMC assessment.
The NIST SP 800–171 DoD
Assessment Methodology provides a
means for the Department to assess
contractor implementation of these
requirements as the Department
transitions to full implementation of the
CMMC, and a means for companies to
self-assess their implementation of the
NIST SP 800–171 requirements prior to
either a DoD or CMMC assessment.
2. The CMMC Framework
Section 1648 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year (FY)
2020 (Pub. L. 116–92) directs the
Secretary of Defense to develop a riskbased cybersecurity framework for the
DIB sector, such as CMMC, as the basis
for a mandatory DoD standard. Building
upon the NIST SP 800–171 DoD
Assessment Methodology, the CMMC
framework adds a comprehensive and
scalable certification element to verify
the implementation of processes and
practices associated with the
achievement of a cybersecurity maturity
level. CMMC is designed to provide
increased assurance to the Department
that a DIB contractor can adequately
protect sensitive unclassified
information (i.e. FCI and CUI) at a level
commensurate with the risk, accounting
for information flow down to its
subcontractors in a multi-tier supply
chain. Implementation of the CMMC
Framework is intended to solve the
following policy problems:
• Verification of a contractor’s
cybersecurity posture. DFARS clause
252.204–7012 does not provide for the
DoD verification of a DIB contractor’s
implementation of the security
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
61509
requirements specified in NIST SP 800–
171 prior to contract award. DIB
companies self-attest that they will
implement the requirements in NIST SP
800–171 upon submission of their offer.
Findings from DoD Inspector General
report (DODIG–2019–105 ‘‘Audit of
Protection of DoD Controlled
Unclassified Information on ContractorOwned Networks and Systems’’)
indicate that DoD contractors did not
consistently implement mandated
system security requirements for
safeguarding CUI and recommended
that DoD take steps to assess a
contractor’s ability to protect this
information. CMMC adds the element of
verification of a DIB contractor’s
cybersecurity posture through the use of
accredited C3PAOs. The company must
achieve the CMMC level certification
required as a condition of contract
award.
• Comprehensive implementation of
cybersecurity requirements. Under
DFARS clause 252.204–7012, a
contractor can document
implementation of the security
requirements in NIST SP 800–171 by
having a system security plan in place
to describe how the security
requirements are implemented, in
addition to associated plans of action to
describe how and when any
unimplemented security requirements
will be met. The CMMC framework does
not allow a DoD contractor or
subcontractor to achieve compliance
status through the use of plans of action.
In general, CMMC takes a risk-based
approach to addressing cyber threats.
Based on the type and sensitivity of the
information to be protected, a DIB
company must achieve the appropriate
CMMC level and demonstrate
implementation of the requisite set of
processes and practices. Although the
security requirements in NIST SP 800–
171 addresses a range of threats,
additional requirements are needed to
further reduce the risk of Advanced
Persistent Threats (APTs). An APT is an
adversary that possesses sophisticated
levels of expertise and significant
resources, which allow it to create
opportunities to achieve its objectives
by using multiple attack vectors (e.g.
cyber, physical, and deception). The
CMMC model includes additional
processes and practices in Levels 4 and
5 that are focused on further reducing
the risk of APT threats. The CMMC
implementation will provide the
Department with an ability to illuminate
the supply chain, for the first time, at
scale across the entire DIB sector. The
CMMC framework requires contractors
to flow down the appropriate CMMC
E:\FR\FM\29SER3.SGM
29SER3
61510
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 29, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
certification requirement to
subcontractors throughout the entire
supply chain. DIB companies that do
not process, store, or transmit CUI, must
obtain a CMMC level 1 certification. DIB
companies that process, store, or
transmit CUI must achieve a CMMC
level 3 or higher, depending on the
sensitivity of the information associated
with a program or technology being
developed.
• Scale and Depth. DoD contractors
must include DFARS clause 252.204–
7012 in subcontracts for which
subcontract performance will involve
covered defense information (DoD CUI),
but this does not provide the
Department with sufficient insights with
respect to the cybersecurity posture of
DIB companies throughout the multitier supply chain for any given program
or technology development effort. Given
the size and scale of the DIB sector, the
Department cannot scale its organic
cybersecurity assessment capability to
conduct on-site assessments of
approximately 220,000 DoD contractors
every three years. As a result, the
Department’s organic assessment
capability is best suited for conducting
targeted assessments for a subset of DoD
contractors that support prioritized
programs and/or technology
development efforts. CMMC addresses
the challenges of the Department scaling
its organic assessment capability by
partnering with an independent, nonprofit CMMC–AB that will accredit and
oversee multiple third party assessment
organizations (C3PAOs) which in turn,
will conduct on-site assessments of DoD
contractors throughout the multi-tier
supply chain. DIB companies will be
able to directly schedule assessments
with an accredited C3PAO for a specific
CMMC level. The cost of these CMMC
assessments will be driven by multiple
factors including market forces, the size
and complexity of the network or
enclaves under assessment, and the
CMMC level.
• Reduces Duplicate or Repetitive
Assessments of our Industry Partners.
Assessment results will be posted in the
Supplier Performance Risk System
(SPRS), DoD’s authoritative source for
supplier and product performance
information. This will provide DoD
Components with visibility to CMMC
certifications for DIB contractor
networks and an alternative to
addressing implementation of NIST SP
800–171 on a contract-by-contract
approach—significantly reducing the
need to conduct assessments at the
program level, thereby reducing the cost
to both DoD and industry.
C. Description of and Estimate of the
Number of Small Entities to Which the
Rule Will Apply
This rule will impact all small
businesses that do business with
Department of Defense, except those
competing on contracts or orders that
are exclusively for COTS items or
receiving contracts or orders valued at
or below the micro-purchase threshold.
1. The NIST SP 800–171 DoD
Assessment Methodology
According to data available in the
Electronic Data Access system for fiscal
years (FYs) 2016, 2017, and 2018, on an
annual basis DoD awards on average
485,859 contracts and orders that
contain DFARS clause 252.204–7012 to
39,204 unique awardees, of which
262,509 awards (54 percent) are made to
26,468 small entities (68 percent). While
there may be some entities that have
contracts that contain the clause at
Assessment
252.204–7012, but never process CUI
and, therefore, do not have to
implement NIST SP 800–171, it is not
possible for DoD to estimate what
fraction of unique entities fall into this
category. Assuming all of these small
entities have covered contractor
information systems that are required to
be in compliance with NIST SP 800–
171, then all of these entities would be
required to have, at minimum, a Basic
Assessment in order to be considered
for award.
The requirement for the Basic
Assessment would be imposed through
incorporation of the new solicitation
provision and contract clause in new
contracts and orders. As such, the
requirement to have completed a Basic
Assessment is expected to phase-in over
a three-year period, thus impacting an
estimated 8,823 small entities each year.
It is expected that the Medium and High
Assessments, on the other hand, will be
conducted on a finite number of
awardees each year based on the
capacity of the Government to conduct
these assessments. DoD estimates that
200 unique entities will undergo a
Medium Assessment each year, of
which 148 are expected to be small
entities. High Assessments are expected
to be conducted on approximately 110
unique entities each year, of which 81
are expected to be small entities. DoD
Assessments are valid for three years, so
small entities will be required to renew,
at minimum, their basic assessment
every three years in order to continue to
receive DoD awards or to continue
performance on contracts and orders
with options. The following is a
summary of the number of small entities
that will be required to undergo NIST
SP 800–171 DoD Assessments over a
three-year period:
Year 1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES3
Basic ............................................................................................................................................
Medium ........................................................................................................................................
High ..............................................................................................................................................
The top five NAICS code industries
expected to be impacted by this rule are
as follows: 541712, Research and
Development in the Physical,
Engineering, and Life Sciences (Except
Biotechnology); 541330, Engineering
Services; 236220, Commercial and
Institutional Building Construction;
541519, Other Computer Related
Services; and 561210, Facilities Support
Services. These NAICS codes were
selected based on a review of NAICS
codes associated with awards that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:45 Sep 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
include the clause at DFARS 252.204–
7012.
2. The CMMC Framework
Given the enterprise-wide
implementation of CMMC, the
Department developed a five-year
phased rollout strategy. The rollout is
intended to minimize the financial
impacts to the industrial base,
especially small entities, and disruption
to the existing DoD supply chain. The
Office of the Secretary of Defense staff
is coordinating with the Military
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
8,823
148
81
Year 2
8,823
148
81
Year 3
8,823
148
81
Services and Department Agencies to
identify candidate contracts during the
first five years of implementation that
will include the CMMC requirement in
the statement of work.
Prior to October 1, 2025, this rule
impacts certain large and small
businesses that are competing on
acquisitions that specify a requirement
for CMMC in the statement of work.
These businesses will be required to
have the stated CMMC certification
level at the time of contract award.
Inclusion of a CMMC requirement in a
E:\FR\FM\29SER3.SGM
29SER3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 29, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
solicitation during this time period must
be approved by the USD(A&S). It is
estimated that 129,810 unique entities
will pursue their initial CMMC
certification during the initial five-year
period. By October 1, 2025, all entities
receiving DoD contracts and orders,
other than contracts or orders
exclusively for commercially available
off-the-shelf items or those valued at or
below the micro-purchase threshold,
will be required to have the CMMC
Level identified in the solicitation, but
which at minimum will be a CMMC
Level 1 certification. CMMC
certifications are valid for three years;
Year
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
therefore, large and small businesses
will be required to renew their
certification every three years.
Based on information from the
Federal Procurement Data System
(FPDS), the number of unique prime
contractors is 212,657 and the number
of known unique subcontractors is
8,309. Therefore, the total number of
known unique prime contractors and
subcontractors is 220,966, of which
approximately 163,391 (74 percent) are
estimated to be unique small businesses.
According to FPDS, the average number
of new contracts for unique contractors
is 47,905 for any given year. The
Level 1
...............................................................
...............................................................
...............................................................
...............................................................
...............................................................
...............................................................
...............................................................
1–7 ....................................................
665
3,323
11,086
21,248
21,245
21,245
19,180
97,992
Level 2
Level 3
110
555
1,848
3,542
3,541
3,541
3,197
16,334
include the costs associated with
compliance with the existing
cybersecurity requirements under the
clause at FAR 52.204–21 or associated
with implementing NIST SP 800–171 in
accordance with the clause at DFARS
252.204–7012, Safeguarding Covered
Defense Information and Cyber Incident
Reporting. Contractors who have been
awarded a DoD contract that include
these existing contract clauses should
have already implemented these
cybersecurity requirements and
incurred the associated costs; therefore,
those costs are not attributed to this
rule.
D. Description of Projected Reporting,
Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements of the Rule
1. DoD Assessment Methodology
Details on the compliance
requirements and associated costs,
savings, and benefits of this rule are
provided in the Regulatory Impact
Analysis referenced in section IV of this
preamble. The following is a summary
of the compliance requirements and the
estimated costs for small entities to
undergo a DoD NIST SP 800–171
Assessment or obtain a CMMC
certification. For both the DoD
Assessment Methodology and the
CMMC Framework, the estimated public
costs are based on the cost for an entity
to pursue each type of assessment: The
Basic, Medium, or High Assessment
under the DoD Assessment
Methodology; or the CMMC Level 1, 2,
3, 4, or 5 certifications. The estimated
costs attributed to this rule do not
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:45 Sep 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
To comply with NIST SP 800–171 a
company must (1) implement 110
security requirements on their covered
contractor information systems; or (2)
document in a ‘‘system security plan’’
and ‘‘plans of action’’ those
requirements that are not yet
implemented and when the
requirements will be implemented. All
offerors that are required to implement
NIST SP 800–171 on covered contractor
information systems pursuant to DFARS
clause 252.204–7012, will be required to
complete a Basic Assessment and
upload the resulting score to the
Supplier Risk Management System
(SPRS), DoD’s authoritative source for
supplier and product performance
information. The Basic Assessment is a
self-assessment done by the contractor
using a specific scoring methodology
that tells the Department how many
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
timeline required to implement CMMC
across the DoD contractor population
will be approximately 7 years. The
phased rollout plan for years 1–7 for
small entities is detailed below with the
total number of unique DoD contractors
and subcontractors specified. The
rollout assumes that for every unique
prime contractor there are
approximately 100 unique
subcontractors. Each small business
represented in the table would be
required to pursue recertification every
three years in order to continue to do
business with DoD.
Level 4
335
1,661
5,543
10,624
10,623
10,623
9,590
48,999
The top five NAICS code industries
expected to be impacted by this rule are
as follows: 541712, Research and
Development in the Physical,
Engineering, and Life Sciences (Except
Biotechnology); 541330, Engineering
Services; 236220, Commercial and
Institutional Building Construction;
541519, Other Computer Related
Services; and 561210, Facilities Support
Services. These NAICS codes are the
same as the DoD Assessment NAICS
codes and were selected based on a
review of NAICS codes associated with
awards that include the clause at FAR
52.204–21 or DFARS 252.204–7012.
61511
Level 5
0
2
4
6
7
7
7
33
Total
0
2
4
6
7
7
7
33
1,110
5,543
18,485
35,426
35,423
35,423
31,981
163,391
security requirements have not yet been
implemented and is valid for three
years. A company that has fully
implemented all 110 NIST SP 800–171
security requirements, would have a
score of 110 to report in SPRS for their
Basic Assessment. A company that has
unimplemented requirements will use
the scoring methodology to assign a
value to each unimplemented
requirement, add up those values, and
subcontract the total value from 110 to
determine their score.
In accordance with NIST SP 800–171,
a contractor should already be aware of
the security requirements they have not
yet implemented and have documented
plans of action for those requirements;
therefore, the burden associated with
conducting a self-assessment is the time
burden associated with calculating the
score. DoD estimates that the burden to
calculate the Basic Assessment score is
thirty minutes per entity at a
journeyman-level-2 rate of pay (0.50
hour * $99.08/hour = $49.54/
assessment)).
To submit the Basic Assessment, the
contractor is required to complete 6
fields: System security plan name (if
more than one system is involved);
CAGE code associated with the plan; a
brief description of the plan
architecture; date of the assessment;
total score; and the date a score of 110
will be achieved. All of this data is
available from the Basic Assessment
itself, the existing system security plan,
and the plans of action. The contractor
selects the date when the last plan of
E:\FR\FM\29SER3.SGM
29SER3
61512
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 29, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
action will be complete as the date
when a score of 110 will be achieved.
The burden to submit a Basic
Assessment for posting in SPRS is
estimated to be 15 minutes per entity at
a journeyman-level-2 rate of pay (0.25
hour * $99.08/hour = $24.77/
assessment)). Therefore, the total cost
per assessment per entity is
approximately $74.31 ($49.54 + $24.77).
The estimate for the rate of pay for
both preparation and submission of the
Basic Assessment is journeyman-level-2,
which is an employee who has the
equivalent skills, responsibilities, and
experience as a General Schedule (GS)
13 Federal Government employee.
While these are rather simple tasks that
can reasonably be completed by a GS–
11 equivalent employee, or even a GS–
9 clerk, the GS–13 (or perhaps GS–11)
is the most likely grade for several
reasons. First, in a small company, the
number of IT personnel are very limited.
The employee that is available to
complete this task would also have
significant responsibilities for operation
and maintenance of the IT system and,
therefore, be at a higher grade than
would otherwise be required if the only
job was to prepare and submit the
assessment. Second, while the
calculation of the assessment is simple,
the personnel who would typically have
access to and understand the system
security plan and plans of action in
order to complete the Basic Assessment
would be at the higher grade. Third,
while the actual submission is a simple
task, the person who would complete
the assessment and submit the data in
SPRS would be the person with SPRS
access/responsibilities, and therefore at
the higher grade. Fourth, given that
proper calculation of the score and its
submission may well determine
whether or not the company is awarded
the contract, the persons preparing and
submitting the report are likely to be at
a higher grade than is actually required
to ensure this is done properly.
After a contract is awarded, DoD may
choose to conduct a Medium or High
Assessment of an offer based on the
criticality of the program or the
sensitivity of information being handled
by the contractor. Under both the
Medium and High Assessment DoD
assessors will be reviewing the
contractor’s system security plan
description of how each NIST SP 800–
171 requirement is met and will identify
any descriptions that may not properly
address the security requirements. The
contractor provides DoD access to its
facilities and personnel, if necessary,
and prepares for/participates in the
assessment conducted by the DoD.
Under a High Assessment a contractor
will be asked to demonstrate their
system security plan. DoD will post the
results in SPRS.
For the Medium Assessment, DoD
estimates that the burden for a small
entity to make the system security plan
and supporting documentation available
for review by the DoD assessor is one
hour per entity at a journeyman-level-2
rate of pay, a cost of $99.08/assessment
(1 hour * $99.08/hour). It is estimated
that the burden for a small entity to
participate in the review and discussion
of the system security plan and
supporting documents with the DoD
assessor is three hours, with one
journeyman-level-2 and one seniorlevel-2 contractor employee
participating in the assessment, a cost of
$710.40/assessment ((3 hours * $99.08/
hour = $297.24) + (3 hours * $137.72/
hour = $413.16)). Assuming issues are
identified by the DoD Assessor, DoD
estimates that the burden for a small
entity to determine and provide to DoD
the date by which the issues will be
resolved is one hour per entity at a
journeyman-level rate of pay, a cost of
$99.08/assessment (1 hour * $99.08/
hour). Therefore, total estimated cost for
a small entity that undergoes a Medium
Assessment is $908.56/assessment
($99.08 + $710.40 + $99.08).
For the High Assessment, DoD
estimates that the burden for a small
entity to participate in the review and
discussion of the system security plan
Cost/
assessment
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES3
Assessment
and supporting documents to the DoD
assessors is 116 hours per entity at a
cost of $14,542.24/assessment. The cost
estimate is based on 2 senior-level-2
employees dedicating 32 hours each, 8
senior-level-1 employees dedicating 4
hours each, and 10 journeyman-level
employees dedicating 2 hours each ((2
* 32 hours * $137.72/hour = $8,814.08)
+ (8 * 4 hours * 117.08/hour =
$3,746.56) + (10 * 2 hours * $99.08/hour
= 1,981.60)). It is estimated that the
burden to make the system security plan
and supporting documentation available
for review by the DoD assessors, prepare
for demonstration of requirements
implementation, and to conduct post
review activities is 304 hours per entity,
at a cost of $36,133.76/assessment. The
cost estimate is based on 2 senior-level2 employees dedicating 48 hours each,
8 senior-level-1 employees dedicating
16 hours each, and 10 journeyman-level
employees dedicating 8 hours each ((2
* 48 hours * $137.72/hour = $13,221.12)
+ (8 * 16 hours * 117.08/hour =
$14,986.24) + (10 * 8 hours * $99.08/
hour = $7,926.40)). Therefore, total
estimated cost for a small entity that
undergoes a High Assessment is
$50,676/assessment ($14,542.24 +
$36,133.76). DoD considers this to be
the upper estimate of the cost, as it
assumes a very robust information
technology workforce. For many smaller
companies, which may not have a
complex information system to manage,
the information system staff will be a
much more limited, and labor that can
be devoted (or is necessary) to prepare
for and participate in the assessment is
likely to be significantly less than
estimated.
The following table provides the
estimated annual costs for small entities
to comply with the DoD Assessment
requirements of this rule. Since
assessments are valid for three years, the
cost per assessment has been divided by
three to estimate the annual cost per
entity:
Annual
cost/entity
Total
unique
entities
Annual cost
all entities
Basic ................................................................................................................
Medium ............................................................................................................
High ..................................................................................................................
$75
909
50,676
$25
303
16,892
26,469
444
243
$655,637
134,467
4,104,756
Total ..........................................................................................................
........................
........................
27,156
4,894,860
The following table presents the
average annual cost per small entity for
each DoD Assessment as a percentage of
the annual revenue for a small entity for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:45 Sep 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
four of the top five NAICS codes. The
low-end of the range of annual revenues
presented in the table includes the
average annual revenue for smaller
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
sized firms. The high-end of the range
includes the maximum annual revenue
allowed by the Small Business
Administration (SBA) for a small
E:\FR\FM\29SER3.SGM
29SER3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 29, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
business, per the SBA’s small business
size standards published at 13 CFR
121.201. NAICS code 541712 is
Range of annual revenues for
small businesses
(in millions)
NAICS code
541330
236220
541519
561210
...........
...........
...........
...........
$5–16.5 ..................................
$10–$39.5 ..............................
$10–$30.0 ..............................
$10–$41.5 ..............................
2. CMMC Framework
This rule adds DFARS clause
252.204–7021, Cybersecurity Maturity
Model Certification Requirement, which
requires the contractor to have the
CMMC certification at the level required
in the solicitation by contract award and
maintain the required CMMC level for
the duration of the contract. In order to
Basic assessment
annual cost as %
of annual revenue
0.0005–0.0002
0.0002–0.0001
0.0002–0.0001
0.0002–0.0001
standard was based on number of
employees.
Medium assessment
annual cost as %
of annual revenue
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
0.0061–0.0018
0.0030–0.0008
0.0030–0.0010
0.0030–0.0007
achieve a specific CMMC level, a DIB
company must demonstrate both
process institutionalization or maturity
and the implementation of practices
commensurate with that level. A DIB
contractor can achieve a specific CMMC
level for its entire enterprise network or
particular segment(s) or enclave(s),
depending upon where the information
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
High assessment
annual cost as %
of annual revenue
0.3378–0.1024
0.1689–0.0428
0.1689–0.0563
0.1689–0.0407
to be protected is processed, stored, or
transmitted.
The following table provides a highlevel description of the processes and
practices evaluated during a CMMC
assessment at each level; however, more
specific information on the processes
and practices associated with each
CMMC Level is available at https://
www.acq.osd.mil/cmmc/.
Level
Description
1 ........................
2 ........................
Consists of the 15 basic safeguarding requirements from FAR clause 52.204–21.
Consists of 65 security requirements from NIST SP 800–171 implemented via DFARS clause 252.204–7012, 7 CMMC practices, and 2 CMMC processes. Intended as an optional intermediary step for contractors as part of their progression to
Level 3.
Consists of all 110 security requirements from NIST SP 800–171, 20 CMMC practices, and 3 CMMC processes.
Consists of all 110 security requirements from NIST SP 800–171, 46 CMMC practices, and 4 CMMC processes.
Consists of all 110 security requirements from NIST SP 800–171, 61 CMMC practices, and 5 CMMC processes.
3 ........................
4 ........................
5 ........................
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES3
excluded, because it is no longer an
active NAICS code and the prior size
61513
CMMC Assessments will be
conducted by C3PAOs, which are
accredited by the CMMC–AB. C3PAOs
will provide CMMC Assessment reports
to the CMMC–AB who will then
maintain and store these reports in
appropriate database(s). The CMMC–AB
will issue CMMC certificates upon the
resolution of any disputes or anomalies
during the conduct of the assessment.
These CMMC certificates will be
distributed to the DIB contractor and the
requisite information will be posted in
SPRS.
If a contractor disputes the outcome of
a C3PAO assessment, the contractor
may submit a dispute adjudication
request to the CMMC–AB along with
supporting information related to
claimed errors, malfeasance, or ethical
lapses by the C3PAO. The CMMC–AB
will follow a formal process to review
the adjudication request and provide a
preliminary evaluation to the contractor
and C3PAO. If the contractor does not
accept the CMMC–AB preliminary
finding, the contractor may request an
additional assessment by the CMMC–
AB staff.
The costs associated with the
preparation and the conduct of CMMC
Assessments assumes that a small DIB
company, in general, possesses a less
complex and less expansive IT and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:45 Sep 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
cybersecurity infrastructure and
operations relative to a larger DIB
company. In estimating the cost for a
small DIB company to obtain a CMMC
certification, DoD took into account
non-recurring engineering costs,
recurring engineering costs, the cost to
participate in the assessment, and recertification costs:
• Nonrecurring engineering costs
consist of hardware, software, and the
associated labor. The costs are incurred
only in the year of the initial
assessment.
• Recurring engineering costs consist
of any recurring fees and associated
labor for technology refresh. The
recurring engineering costs associated
with technology refresh have been
spread uniformly over a 5-year period
(i.e., 20% each year as recurring
engineering costs).
• Assessment costs consist of
contractor support for pre-assessment
preparations, the actual assessment, and
any post-assessment work. These costs
also include an estimate of the potential
C3PAO costs for conducting CMMC
Assessment, which are comprised of
labor for supporting pre-assessment
preparations, actual assessment, and
post-assessment work, plus travel cost.
• Re-certification costs are the same
as the initial certification cost.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
The following is a summary of the
estimated costs for a small entity to
achieve certification at each CMMC
Level.
i. Level 1 Certification
Contractors pursuing a Level 1
Certification should have already
implemented the 15 existing basic
safeguarding requirements under FAR
clause 52.204–21. Therefore, there are
no estimated nonrecurring or recurring
engineering costs associated with
CMMC Level 1.
DoD estimates that the cost for a small
entity to support a CMMC Level 1
Assessment or recertification is
$2,999.56:
• Contractor Support. It is estimated
that one journeyman-level-1 employee
will dedicate 14 hours to support the
assessment (8 hours for pre- and postassessment support + 6 hours for the
assessment). The estimated cost is
$1,166.48 (1 journeyman * $83.32/hour
* 14 hours).
• C3PAO Assessment. It is estimated
that one journeyman-level-1 employee
will dedicate 19 hours to conduct the
assessment (8 hours for pre- and postassessment support + 6 hours for the
assessment + 5 hours for travel). Each
employee is estimated to have 1 day of
per diem for travel. The estimated cost
E:\FR\FM\29SER3.SGM
29SER3
61514
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 29, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
is $1,833.08 ((1 journeyman * $83.32/
hour * 19 hours = $1,583.08) + (1
employees * 1 day * $250/day = $250
travel costs)).
ii. Level 2 Certification
Contractors pursuing a Level 2
Certification should have already
implemented the 65 existing NIST SP
800–171 security requirements.
Therefore, the estimated engineering
costs per small entity is associated with
implementation of 9 new requirements
(7 CMMC practices and 2 CMMC
processes). The estimated nonrecurring
engineering cost per entity per
assessment/recertification is $8,135. The
estimated recurring engineering cost per
entity per year is $20,154.
DoD estimates that the cost for a small
entity to support a CMMC Level 2
Assessment or recertification is
$22,466.88.
• Contractor Support. It is estimated
that two senior-level-1 employees will
dedicate 48 hours each to support the
assessment (24 hours for pre- and postassessment support + 24 hours for the
assessment). The estimated cost is
$11,239.68 (2 senior * $117.08/hour *
48 hours).
• C3PAO Assessment. It is estimated
that one journeyman-level-2 employee
and one senior-level-1 employee will
dedicate 45 hours each to conduct the
assessment (16 hours for pre- and postassessment support + 24 hours for the
assessment + 5 hours for travel). Each
employee is estimated to have 3 days of
per diem for travel. The estimated cost
is $11,227.20 ((1 senior * $117.08/hour
* 45 hours = $5,268.60) + (1 journeyman
* $99.08/hour * 45 hours = $4,458.60)
+ (2 employees * 3 days * $250/day =
$1,500 travel costs)).
iii. Level 3 Certification
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES3
Contractors pursuing a Level 3
Certification should have already
implemented the 110 existing NIST SP
800–171 security requirements.
Therefore, the estimated engineering
costs per small entity is associated with
implementation 23 new requirements
(20 CMMC practices and 3 CMMC
processes). The estimated nonrecurring
engineering cost per entity per
assessment/recertification is $26,214.
The estimated recurring engineering
cost per entity per year is $41,666.
DoD estimates that the cost for a small
entity to support a CMMC Level 3
assessment or recertification is
$51,095.60.
• Contractor Support. It is estimated
that three senior-level-1 employees will
dedicate 64 hours each to support the
assessment (32 hours for pre- and postassessment support + 32 hours for the
assessment). The estimated cost is
$22,479.36 (3 seniors * $117.08/hour *
64 hours).
• C3PAO Assessment. It is estimated
that one senior-level-1 employee and
three journeyman-level-2 employees
will dedicate 57 hours each to conduct
the assessment (24 hours for pre- and
post-assessment support + 32 hours for
the assessment + 5 hours for travel).
Each employee is estimated to have 5
days of per diem for travel. The
estimated cost is $28,616.24 ((1 senior *
$117.08/hour * 57 hours = $6,673.56) +
(3 journeyman * $99.08/hour * 57 hours
= $16,942.68) + (4 employees * 5 days
* $250/day = $5,000 travel costs)).
iv. Level 4 Certification
Contractors pursuing a Level 4
Certification should have already
implemented the 110 existing NIST SP
800–171 security requirements.
Therefore, the estimated engineering
costs per small entity is associated with
implementation 50 new requirements
(46 CMMC practices and 4 CMMC
processes). The estimated nonrecurring
engineering cost per entity per
assessment/recertification is $938,336.
The estimated recurring engineering
cost per entity per year is $301,514.
DoD estimates that the cost for a small
entity to support a CMMC Level 4
Assessment or recertification is
$70,065.04.
• Contractor Support. It is estimated
that three senior-level-2 employees will
dedicate 80 hours each to support the
assessment (40 hours for pre- and postassessment support + 40 hours for the
assessment). The estimated cost is
$33,052.80 (3 seniors * $137.72/hour *
80 hours)
• C3PAO Assessment. It is estimated
that one senior-level-2 employee and
three journeyman-level-2 employees
will dedicate 69 hours each to conduct
the assessment (32 hours for pre- and
post-assessment support + 48 hours for
the assessment + 5 hours for travel).
Each employee is estimated to have 5
days of per diem for travel, plus airfare.
The estimated cost is $37,012.24 ((1
senior * $137.72/hour * 69 hours =
Average
nonrecurring
engineering
costs
CMMC cert
Level 1 .............................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:45 Sep 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
$9502.68) + (3 journeyman * $99.08/
hour * 69 hours = $20,509.56) + (4
employees * 5 days * $250/day = $5,000
travel costs) + (4 employees * $500 =
$2,000 airfare)).
v. Level 5 Certification
Contractors pursuing a Level 5
Certification should have already
implemented the 110 existing NIST SP
800–171 security requirements.
Therefore, the estimated engineering
costs per small entity is associated with
implementation 66 new requirements
(61 CMMC practices and 5 CMMC
processes). The estimated nonrecurring
engineering cost per entity per
assessment/recertification is $1,230,214.
The estimated recurring engineering
cost per entity per year is $384,666.
DoD estimates that the cost for a small
entity to support a CMMC Level 5
Assessment or recertification is
$110,090.80.
• Contractor Support. It is estimated
that four senior-level-2 employees will
dedicate 104 hours each to support the
assessment (48 hours for pre- and postassessment support + 56 hours for the
assessment). The estimated cost is
$57,291.52 (4 senior * $137.72/hour *
104 hours).
• C3PAO Assessment. It is estimated
that one senior-level-2 employee, two
senior-level-1 employees, and one
journeyman-level-2 employee will
dedicate 93 hours each to conduct the
assessment (32 hours for pre- and postassessment support + 56 hours for the
assessment + 5 hours for travel). Each
employee is estimated to have 7 days of
per diem for travel. The estimated cost
is $52,799.28 ((1 senior * $137.72/hour
* 93 hours = $12,807.96) + (2 senior *
$117.08/hour * 93 hours = $21,776.88)
+ (1 journeyman * $99.08/hour * 93
hours = $9,214.44) + (4 employees * 7
days * $250/day = $7,000 travel costs)
+ (4 employees * $500 = $2,000 airfare)).
vi. Total Estimated Annual Costs
The following table provides a
summary of the total estimated annual
costs for an individual small entity to
obtain each CMMC certification level.
Nonrecurring engineering costs are
spread over a 20-year period to
determine the average annual cost per
entity. Assessment costs have been
spread over a 3-year period, since
entities will participate in a
reassessment every 3 years.
Recurring
engineering
costs
$0
E:\FR\FM\29SER3.SGM
$0
29SER3
Average
assessment
costs
$1,000
Total
annual
assessment
cost
$1,000
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 29, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Average
nonrecurring
engineering
costs
CMMC cert
Level
Level
Level
Level
2
3
4
5
.............................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
The following table presents the
average annual cost per small entity for
CMMC certifications at levels 1 through
3 as a percentage of the annual revenue
for a small entity for four of the top five
NAICS codes. The low-end of the range
NAICS code
541330
236220
541519
561210
...........
...........
...........
...........
For CMMC certification at levels 4
and 5, the following table presents the
annual cost per small entity for CMMC
certification at levels 4 and 5 as a
percentage of the low, average, and high
annual revenues for entities that have
CMMC level 1
annual cost as %
of annual revenue
0.0200–0.0061
0.0100–0.0025
0.0100–0.0033
0.0100–0.0024
20,154
41,666
301,514
384,666
CMMC level 2
annual cost as %
of annual revenue
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
0.5610–0.1700
0.2805–0.0710
0.2805–0.0935
0.2805–0.0676
represented themselves as small in the
System for Award Management (SAM)
for their primary NAICS code and are
performing on contracts that could be
subject to a CMMC level 4 or 5
certification requirements. The values of
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
$6.5 million ................................................................................................
$22.9 million ..............................................................................................
$85 million .................................................................................................
Level 1
1 ...........................................................................................
2 ...........................................................................................
3 ...........................................................................................
4 ...........................................................................................
5 ...........................................................................................
6 ...........................................................................................
7 ...........................................................................................
8 ...........................................................................................
9 ...........................................................................................
10 .........................................................................................
E. Relevant Federal Rules, Which May
Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the
Rule
The rule does not duplicate, overlap,
or conflict with any other Federal rules.
Rather this rule validates and verifies
contractor compliance with the existing
cybersecurity requirements in FAR
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:45 Sep 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
Level 2
$1.99
9.97
33.25
65.73
73.69
96.98
123.26
73.69
96.98
123.26
$5.58
30.39
107.20
232.90
314.23
414.64
509.08
421.22
450.27
483.07
clause 52.204–21 and DFARS clause
252.204–7012, and ensures that the
entire DIB sector has the appropriate
cybersecurity processes and practices in
place to properly protect FCI and CUI
during performance of DoD contracts.
PO 00000
28,050
60,009
371,786
482,874
CMMC level 3
annual cost as %
of annual revenue
1.2002–0.3637
0.6001–0.1519
0.6001–0.2000
0.6001–0.1446
Level 4
certification
cost as % of
annual
revenue
Low ..................................................
Average ............................................
High ..................................................
Year
7,489
17,032
23,355
36,697
Total
annual
assessment
cost
the low, average, and high annual
revenues are based on an average of the
annual receipt reported in SAM by such
entities for FY16 through FY20.
FY16 thru FY20
all 163,391 small entities to achieve
their initial CMMC certifications (and
Average
assessment
costs
SBA’s small business size standards
published at 13 CFR 121.201. NAICS
code 541712 is excluded, because it is
no longer an active NAICS code and the
prior size standard was based on
number of employees.
Annual revenue of entities
represented as small for primary NAICS
The following is a summary of the
estimated annual costs in millions for
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES3
407
1,311
46,917
61,511
of annual revenues presented in the
table includes the average annual
revenue for smaller sized firms. The
high-end of the range includes the
maximum annual revenue allowed by
the SBA for a small business, per the
Range of annual revenues for
small businesses
(in millions)
$5–$16.5 ................................
$10–$39.5 ..............................
$10–$30.0 ..............................
$10–$41.5 ..............................
Recurring
engineering
costs
61515
Level 5
certification
cost as % of
annual
revenue
5.67
1.62
0.43
7.36
2.11
0.56
recertifications every three years) over a
10-year period:
Level 3
$39.86
211.58
742.65
1,595.23
2,105.53
2,746.50
3,342.95
2,669.25
2,867.60
3,091.56
Level 4
$0.00
2.62
5.84
9.67
12.93
15.18
17.43
10.58
10.72
10.86
Level 5
$0.00
3.45
7.67
12.66
16.91
19.82
22.74
13.68
13.90
14.13
F. Description of Any Significant
Alternatives to the Rule Which
Accomplish the Stated Objectives of
Applicable Statutes and Which
Minimize Any Significant Economic
Impact of the Rule on Small Entities
DoD considered and adopted several
alternatives during the development of
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\29SER3.SGM
29SER3
61516
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 29, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES3
this rule that reduce the burden on
small entities and still meet the
objectives of the rule. These alternatives
include: (1) Exempting contracts and
orders exclusively for the acquisition of
commercially available off-the-shelf
items; and (2) implementing a phased
rollout for the CMMC portion of the rule
and stipulating that the inclusion a
CMMC requirement in new contracts
until that time be approved by the
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition and Sustainment.
Additional alternatives were
considered, however, it was determined
that these other alternatives did not
achieve the intended policy outcome.
1. CMMC Model and Implementation
The Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA)
referenced in section IV of this preamble
estimates that the total number of
unique DoD contractors and
subcontractors is 220,966, with
approximately 163,391 or 74% being
small entities. The RIA also specifies the
estimates for the percentage of all
contractors and subcontractors
associated with each CMMC level.
These estimates indicate that the vast
majority of small entities (i.e., 163,325
of 163,391 or 99.96%) will be required
to achieve CMMC Level 1–3 certificates
during the initial rollout. The
Department looked at Levels 1 through
5 to determine if there were alternatives
and whether these alternatives met the
intended policy outcome.
For CMMC Level 1, the practices map
directly to the basic safeguarding
requirements specified in the clause at
FAR 52.204–21. The phased rollout
estimates that the majority of small
entities (i.e., 97,992 of the 163,325 or
60%) will be required to achieve CMMC
Level 1. The planned implementation of
CMMC Level 1 adds a verification
component to the existing FAR clause
by including an on-site assessment by a
credentialed assessor from an accredited
C3PAO. The on-site assessment verifies
the implementation of the required
cybersecurity practices and further
supports the physical identification of
contractors and subcontractors in the
DoD supply chain. In the aggregate, the
estimated cost associated with
supporting this on-site assessment and
approximated C3PAO fees does not
represent a cost-driver with respect to
CMMC costs to small entities across
levels. An alternative to an on-site
assessment is for contractors to provide
documentation and supporting evidence
of the proper implementation of the
required cybersecurity practices through
a secure online portal. These artifacts
would then be reviewed and checked
virtually by an accredited assessor prior
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:45 Sep 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
to the CMMC–AB issuing a CMMC
Level 1 certificate. The drawback of this
alternative is the inability of the
contractor to interact with the C3PAO
assessor in person and provide evidence
directly without transmitting
proprietary information. Small entities
will not receive as much meaningful
and interactive feedback that would be
part of a Level 1 on-site assessment.
For CMMC Level 2, the practices
encompass only 48 of the 110 security
requirements of NIST SP 800–171, as
specified in DFARS clause 252.204–
7012, and 7 additional cybersecurity
requirements. In addition, CMMC Level
2 includes two process maturity
requirements. The phased rollout
estimates that approximately 10% of
small entities may choose to use Level
2 as a transition step from Level 1 to
Level 3. Small entities that achieve
Level 1 can seek to achieve Level 3
(without first achieving a Level 2
certification) if the necessary
cybersecurity practices and processes
have been implemented. The
Department does not anticipate
releasing new contracts that require
contractors to achieve CMMC Level 2.
As a result, the Department did not
consider alternatives with respect to
CMMC Level 2.
For CMMC Level 3, the practices
encompass all the 110 security
requirements of NIST SP 800–171, as
specified in DFARS clause 252.204–
7012, as well as 13 additional
cybersecurity requirements above Level
2. In addition, CMMC Level 3 includes
three process maturity requirements.
These additional cybersecurity practices
were incorporated based upon several
considerations that included public
comments from September to December
2019 on draft versions of the model,
inputs from the DIB Sector Coordinating
Council (SCC), cybersecurity threats, the
progression of cybersecurity capabilities
from Level 3 to Levels 4, and other
factors. The CMMC phased rollout
estimates that 48,999 of the 163,325
small entities or 30% will be required
to achieve CMMC Level 3. The
alternatives considered include
removing a subset or all of the 20
additional practices at Level 3 or
moving a subset or all of the 20
additional practices from Level 3 to
Level 4. The primary drawback of these
alternatives is that the cybersecurity
capability gaps associated with
protecting CUI will not be addressed
until Level 4, which will apply to a
relatively small percentage of non-small
and small entities. Furthermore, the
progression of cybersecurity capabilities
from Level 3 to Level 4 becomes more
abrupt.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
For CMMC Level 4, the practices
encompass the 110 security
requirements of NIST SP 800–171 as
specified in DFARS clause 252.204–
7012 and 46 additional cybersecurity
requirements. More specifically, CMMC
Level 4 adds 26 enhanced security
requirements above CMMC Level 3, of
which 13 are derived from Draft NIST
SP 800–171B. In addition, CMMC Level
4 includes four process maturity
requirements. The DIB SCC and the
public contributed to the specification
of the other 13 enhanced security
requirements. For CMMC Level 4, an
alternative considered is to define a
threshold for contractors to meet 15 out
of the 26 enhanced security
requirements. In addition, contractors
will be required to meet 6 out of the 11
remaining non-threshold enhanced
security requirements. This alternative
implies that a contractor will have to
implement 21 of the 26 enhanced
security requirements as well as the
associated maturity processes. A
drawback of this alternative is that
contractors implement a different subset
of the 11 non-threshold requirements
which in turn, leads to a non-uniform
set of cybersecurity capabilities across
those certified at Level 4.
For CMMC Level 5, the practices
encompass the 110 security
requirements of NIST SP 800–171 as
specified in DFARS clause 252.204–
7012 and 61 additional cybersecurity
requirements. More specifically, CMMC
Level 5 adds 15 enhanced security
requirements above CMMC Level 4, of
which 4 are derived from Draft NIST SP
800–171B. In addition, CMMC Level 5
includes five process maturity
requirements. The DIB SCC and the
public contributed to the specification
of the other 11 enhanced security
requirements. For CMMC Level 5, the
alternative considered is to define a
threshold for contractors to meet 6 out
of the 15 enhanced security
requirements. In addition, contractors
will be required to meet 5 out of the 9
remaining non-threshold enhanced
security requirements. This alternative
implies that a contractor will have
implemented 11 of the 15 enhanced
security requirements as well as the
associated maturity processes. A
drawback of this alternative is that
contractors implement a different subset
of the 9 non-threshold requirements
which in turn, leads to a non-uniform
set of cybersecurity capabilities across
those certified at Level 5.
2. Timing of CMMC Level Certification
Requirement
In addition to evaluating the make-up
of the CMMC levels, the Department
E:\FR\FM\29SER3.SGM
29SER3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 29, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES3
took into consideration the timing of the
requirement to achieve a CMMC level
certification: (1) At time of proposal or
offer submission, (2) in order to receive
award, or (3) post contract award. The
Department ultimately adopted
alternative 2 to require certification at
the time of award. The drawback of
alternative 1 (at time of proposal or offer
submission) is the increased risk for
contractors since they may not have
sufficient time to achieve the required
CMMC certification after the release of
the Request for Information (RFI). The
drawback of alternative 3 (after contract
award) is the increased risk to the
Department with respect to the schedule
and uncertainty with respect to the case
where the contractor is unable to
achieve the required CMMC level in a
reasonable amount of time given their
current cybersecurity posture. This
potential delay would apply to the
entire supply chain and prevent the
appropriate flow of CUI and FCI. The
Department seeks public comment on
the timing of contract award, to include
the effect of requiring certification at
time of award on small businesses.
DoD invites comments from small
business concerns and other interested
parties on the expected impact of this
rule on small entities. DoD will also
consider comments from small entities
concerning the existing regulations in
subparts affected by this rule in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 610. Interested
parties must submit such comments
separately and should cite 5 U.S.C. 610
(DFARS Case 2019–D041), in
correspondence.
VIII. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (PRA) provides
that an agency generally cannot conduct
or sponsor a collection of information,
and no person is required to respond to
nor be subject to a penalty for failure to
comply with a collection of information,
unless that collection has obtained OMB
approval and displays a currently valid
OMB Control Number.
DoD requested, and OMB authorized,
emergency processing of the collection
of information tied to this rule, as OMB
Control Number 0750–0004, Assessing
Contractor Implementation of
Cybersecurity Requirements, consistent
with 5 CFR 1320.13.
DoD has determined the following
conditions have been met:
a. The collection of information is
needed prior to the expiration of time
periods normally associated with a
routine submission for review under the
provisions of the PRA, to enable the
Department to immediately begin
assessing the current status of contractor
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:45 Sep 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
implementation of NIST SP 800–171 on
their information systems that process
CUI.
b. The collection of information is
essential to DoD’s mission. The
collection of information is essential to
DoD’s mission. The National Defense
Strategy (NDS) and DoD Cyber Strategy
highlight the importance of protecting
the Defense Industrial Base (DIB) to
maintain national and economic
security. To this end, DoD requires
defense contractors and subcontractors
to implement the NIST SP 800–171
security requirements on information
systems that handle CUI, pursuant to
DFARS clause 252.204–7012. This DoD
Assessment Methodology enables the
Department to assess strategically, at a
corporate-level, contractor
implementation of the NIST SP 800–171
security requirements. Results of a NIST
SP 800–171 DoD Assessment reflect the
net effect of NIST SP 800–171 security
requirements not yet implemented by a
contractor.
c. Moreover, DoD cannot comply with
the normal clearance procedures,
because public harm is reasonably likely
to result if current clearance procedures
are followed. Authorizing collection of
this information on the effective date
will motivate defense contractors and
subcontractors who have not yet
implemented existing NIST SP 800–171
security requirements, to take action to
implement the security requirements on
covered information systems that
process CUI, in order to protect our
national and economic security
interests. The aggregate loss of sensitive
controlled unclassified information and
intellectual property from the DIB sector
could undermine U.S. technological
advantages and increase risk to DoD
missions.
Upon publication of this rule, DoD
intends to provide a separate 60-day
notice in the Federal Register
requesting public comment for OMB
Control Number 0750–0004, Assessing
Contractor Implementation of
Cybersecurity Requirements.
DOD estimates the annual public
reporting burden for the information
collection as follows:
a. Basic Assessment
Respondents: 13,068.
Responses per respondent: 1.
Total annual responses: 13,068.
Hours per response: .75.
Total burden hours: 9,801.
b. Medium Assessment
Respondents: 200.
Responses per respondent: 1.
Total annual responses: 200.
Hours per response: 8.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
61517
Total burden hours: 1,600.
c. High Assessment
Respondents: 110.
Responses per respondent: 1.
Total annual responses: 110.
Hours per response: 420.
Total burden hours: 46,200.
d. Total Public Burden (All Entities)
Respondents: 13,068.
Total annual responses: 13,378.
Total burden hours: 57,601.
e. Total Public Burden (Small Entities)
Respondents: 8,823.
Total annual responses: 9,023.
Total burden hours: 41,821.
The requirement to collect
information from offerors and
contractors regarding the status of their
implementation of NIST SP 800–171 on
their information systems that process
CUI, is being imposed via a new
solicitation provision and contract
clause. Per the new provision, if an
offeror is required to have implemented
the NIST SP 800–171 security
requirements on their information
systems pursuant to DFARS clause
252.204–7012, then the offeror must
have, at minimum, a current selfassessment (or Basic Assessment)
uploaded to DoD’s Supplier
Performance Risk System, in order to be
considered for award. Depending on the
criticality of the acquisition program,
after contract award, certain contractors
may be required to participate in a
Medium or High assessment to be
conducted by DoD assessor. During
these post-award assessments,
contractors will be required to
demonstrate their implementation of
NIST SP 800–171 security requirements.
Results of a NIST SP 800–171 DoD
Assessment reflect the net effect of NIST
SP 800–171 security requirements not
yet implemented by a contractor.
IX. Determination To Issue an Interim
Rule
A determination has been made under
the authority of the Secretary of Defense
that urgent and compelling reasons exist
to promulgate this interim rule without
prior opportunity for public comment
pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 1707(d) and FAR
1.501–3(b).
Malicious cyber actors have targeted,
and continue to target, the DIB sector,
which consists of over 200,000 small-tolarge sized entities that support the
warfighter. In particular, actors ranging
from cyber criminals to nation-states
continue to attack companies and
organizations that comprise the
Department’s multi-tier supply chain
including smaller entities at the lower
E:\FR\FM\29SER3.SGM
29SER3
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES3
61518
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 29, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
tiers. These actors seek to steal DoD’s
intellectual property to undercut the
United States’ strategic and
technological advantage and to benefit
their own military and economic
development.
The Department has been focused on
improving the cyber resiliency and
security of the DIB sector for over a
decade as evidenced by the
development of minimum cybersecurity
standards and the implementation of
those standards in the National Institute
of Standards and Technology (NIST)
Special Publications (SP) and
implementation of those standards in
the FAR and DFARS. In 2013, DoD
issued a final DFARS rule (78 FR 69273)
that required contractors to implement a
select number of security measures from
NIST SP 800–53, Recommended
Security Controls for Federal
Information Systems and Organizations,
to facilitate safeguarding unclassified
DoD information within contractor
information systems from unauthorized
access and disclosure. In 2015, DoD
issued an interim DFARS rule (80 FR
81472) requiring contractors that handle
Controlled Unclassified Information
(CUI) on their information systems to
transition by December 31, 2017, from
NIST SP 800–53 to NIST SP 800–171,
Protecting Controlled Unclassified
Information in Nonfederal Information
Systems and Organizations. NIST SP
800–171 was not only easier to use, but
also provided security requirements that
greatly increases the protections of
Government information in contractor
information systems once implemented.
And, in 2016, the FAR Council
mandated the use of FAR clause 52.204–
21, Basic Safeguarding of Covered
Contractor Information Systems, to
require all Government contractors to
implement, at minimum, some basic
policies and practices to safeguard
Federal Contract Information (FCI)
within their information systems. Since
then, the Department has been engaging
with industry on improving their
compliance with these exiting
cybersecurity requirements and
developing a framework to
institutionalize cybersecurity process
and practices throughout the DIB sector.
Notwithstanding the fact that these
minimum cybersecurity standards have
been in effect on DoD contracts since as
early as 2013, several surveys and
questionnaires by defense industrial
associations have highlighted the DIB
sector’s continued challenges in
achieving broad implementation of
these security requirements. In a 2017
questionnaire, contractors and
subcontractors that responded
acknowledged implementation rates of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:45 Sep 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
38% to 54% for at least 10 of the 110
security requirements of NIST SP 800–
171.1 In a separate 2018 survey, 36% of
contractors who responded indicated a
lack of awareness of DFARS clause
252.204–7012 and 45% of contractors
acknowledged not having read NIST SP
800–171.2 In a 2019 survey, contractors
that responded rated their level of
preparedness for a Defense Contract
Management Agency standard
assessment of contractor
implementation of NIST SP 800–171 at
56%.3 Furthermore, for the High
Assessments conducted on-site by DoD
to date, only 36% of contractors
demonstrated implementation of all 110
of the NIST SP 800–171 security
requirements.
Although these industry surveys
represent a small sample of the DIB
sector, the results were reinforced by the
findings from DoD Inspector General
report in 2019 (DODIG–2019–105
‘‘Audit of Protection of DoD Controlled
Unclassified Information on ContractorOwned Networks and Systems’’)
indicate that DoD contractors did not
consistently implement mandated
system security requirements for
safeguarding CUI and recommended
that DoD take immediate steps to assess
a contractor’s ability to protect this
information. The report emphasizes that
malicious actors can exploit the
vulnerabilities of contractors’ networks
and systems and exfiltrate information
related to some of the Nation’s most
valuable advanced defense technologies.
Defense contractors must begin
viewing cybersecurity as a part of doing
business, in order to protect themselves
and to protect national security. The
various industry surveys and
Government assessments conducted to
date illustrate the following: Absent a
requirement for defense contractors to
demonstrate implementation of
standard cybersecurity processes and
practices, cybersecurity requirements
will not be fully implemented, leaving
DoD and the DIB unprotected and
vulnerable to malicious cyber activity.
To this end, section 1648 of the NDAA
for FY 2020 (Pub. L. 116–92) directed
the Secretary of Defense to develop a
consistent, comprehensive framework to
enhance cybersecurity for the U.S.
defense industrial base no later than
February 1, 2020. In the Senate Armed
1 Aerospace Industries Association. ‘‘Complying
with NIST 800–171.’’ Fall 2017.
2 National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA).
‘‘Implementing Cybersecurity in DoD Supply
Chains.’’ White Paper. July 2018.
3 NDIA. ‘‘Beyond Obfuscation: The Defense
Industry’s Position within Federal Cybersecurity
Policy.’’ A Report of the NDIA Policy Department.
October 2018. Page 20 and page 24.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Services Committee Report to
accompany the NDAA for FY 2020, the
Committee expressed concern that DIB
contractors are an inviting target for our
adversaries, who have been conducting
cyberattacks to steal critical military
technologies.
Developing a framework to enhance
the cybersecurity of the defense
industrial base will serve as an
important first step toward securing the
supply chain. Pursuant to section 1648,
DoD has developed the CMMC
Framework, which gives the Department
a mechanism to certify the cyber posture
of its largest defense contractors to the
smallest firms in our supply chain, who
have become primary targets of
malicious cyber activity.
This rule is an important part of the
cybersecurity framework,4 and builds
on the existing FAR and DFARS clause
cybersecurity requirements by (1)
adding a mechanism to immediately
begin assessing the current status of
contractor implementation of NIST SP
800–171 on their information systems
that process CUI; and (2) to require
contractors and subcontractors to take
steps to fully implement existing
cybersecurity requirements, plus
additional processes and practices, to
protect FCI and CUI on their
information systems in preparation for
verification under the CMMC
Framework. There is an urgent need for
DoD to immediately begin assessing
where vulnerabilities in its supply chain
exist and take steps to correct such
deficiencies, which can be
accomplished by requiring contractors
and subcontractors that handle DoD CUI
on their information systems to
complete a NIST SP 800–171 Basic
Assessment. In fact, while this rule
includes a delayed effective date,
contractors and subcontractors that are
required to implement NIST SP 800–171
pursuant to DFARS clause 252.204–
7012, are encouraged to immediately
conduct and submit a self-assessment as
described in this rule to facilitate the
Department’s assessment.
It is equally urgent for the Department
to ensure DIB contractors that have not
fully implemented the basic
safeguarding requirements under FAR
clause 52.204–21 or the NIST SP 800–
171 security requirements pursuant to
DFARS 252.204–7012 begin correcting
these deficiencies immediately. These
are cybersecurity requirements
contractors and subcontractors should
have already implemented (or in the
4 Section 1648 of the NDAA for FY 2020
mandates the formulation of ‘‘unified cybersecurity
. . . regulations . . . to be imposed on the defense
industrial base for the purpose of assessing the
cybersecurity of individual contractors,’’
E:\FR\FM\29SER3.SGM
29SER3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 29, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
case of implementation of NIST SP 800–
171, have plans of action to correct
deficiencies) on information systems
that handle CUI. Under the CMMC
Framework, a contractor is able to
achieve CMMC Level 1 Certification if
they can demonstrate implementation of
the basic safeguarding requirements in
the FAR clause. Similarly, a contractor
is able to achieve CMMC Level 3 if they
can demonstrate implementation of the
NIST SP 800–171 security requirements,
plus some additional processes and
practices. This rule ensures contractors
and subcontractors focus on full
implementation of existing
cybersecurity requirements on their
information systems and expedites the
Department’s ability to secure its supply
chain.
For the foregoing reasons, pursuant to
41 U.S.C. 1707(d), DoD finds that urgent
and compelling circumstances make
compliance with the notice and
comment requirements of 41 U.S.C.
1707(a) impracticable, and invokes the
exception to those requirements under
41 U.S.C. 1707(d) and FAR 1.501–3(b).5
While a public comment process will
not be completed prior to the rule’s
effective date, DoD has incorporated
feedback solicited through extensive
outreach already undertaken pursuant
to section 1648(d) of the NDAA for FY
2020, including through public
meetings and extensive industry
outreach conducted over the past year.
However, pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 1707
and FAR 1.501–3(b), DoD will consider
public comments received in response
to this interim rule in the formation of
the final rule.
List of Subjects in 204, 212, 217, and
252
Government procurement.
Jennifer D. Johnson,
Regulatory Control Officer, Defense
Acquisition Regulations System.
1. The authority citation for 48 CFR
parts 204, 212, 217, and 252 continues
to read as follows:
■
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES3
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR
chapter 1.
5 FAR 1.501–3(b) states that ‘‘[a]dvance comments
need not be solicited when urgent and compelling
circumstances make solicitation of comments
impracticable prior to the effective date of the
coverage, such as when a new statute must be
implemented in a relatively short period of time. In
such case, the coverage shall be issued on a
temporary basis and shall provide for at least a 30
day public comment period.’’
20:45 Sep 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
2. Amend section 204.7302 by
revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
■
204.7302
Policy.
(a)(1) Contractors and subcontractors
are required to provide adequate
security on all covered contractor
information systems.
(2) Contractors required to implement
NIST SP 800–171, in accordance with
the clause at 252.204–7012,
Safeguarding Covered Defense
Information and Cyber incident
Reporting, are required at time of award
to have at least a Basic NIST SP 800–
171 DoD Assessment that is current (i.e.,
not more than 3 years old unless a lesser
time is specified in the solicitation) (see
252.204–7019).
(3) The NIST SP 800–171 DoD
Assessment Methodology is located at
https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/pdi/
cyber/strategically_assessing_
contractor_implementation_of_NIST_
SP_800-171.html.
(4) High NIST SP 800–171 DoD
Assessments will be conducted by
Government personnel using NIST SP
800–171A, ‘‘Assessing Security
Requirements for Controlled
Unclassified Information.’’
(5) The NIST SP 800–171 DoD
Assessment will not duplicate efforts
from any other DoD assessment or the
Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification (CMMC) (see subpart
204.75), except for rare circumstances
when a re-assessment may be necessary,
such as, but not limited to, when
cybersecurity risks, threats, or
awareness have changed, requiring a reassessment to ensure current
compliance.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Revise section 204.7303 to read as
follows:
204.7303
Therefore, 48 CFR parts 204, 212, 217,
and 252 are amended as follows:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
PART 204—ADMINISTRATIVE
MATTERS
(a) Follow the procedures relating to
safeguarding covered defense
information at PGI 204.7303.
(b) The contracting officer shall verify
that the summary level score of a
current NIST SP 800–171 DoD
Assessment (i.e., not more than 3 years
old, unless a lesser time is specified in
the solicitation) (see 252.204–7019) for
each covered contractor information
system that is relevant to an offer,
contract, task order, or delivery order
are posted in Supplier Performance Risk
System (SPRS) (https://
www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/), prior to—
(1) Awarding a contract, task order, or
delivery order to an offeror or contractor
that is required to implement NIST SP
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
800–171 in accordance with the clause
at 252.204–7012; or
(2) Exercising an option period or
extending the period of performance on
a contract, task order, or delivery order
with a contractor that is that is required
to implement the NIST SP 800–171 in
accordance with the clause at 252.204–
7012.
■ 4. Amend section 204.7304 by
revising the section heading and adding
paragraphs (d) and (e) to read as follows:
204.7304 Solicitation provisions and
contract clauses.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Use the provision at 252.204–
7019, Notice of NIST SP 800–171 DoD
Assessment Requirements, in all
solicitations, including solicitations
using FAR part 12 procedures for the
acquisition of commercial items, except
for solicitations solely for the
acquisition of commercially available
off-the-shelf (COTS) items.
(e) Use the clause at 252.204–7020,
NIST SP 800–171 DoD Assessment
Requirements, in all solicitations and
contracts, task orders, or delivery
orders, including those using FAR part
12 procedures for the acquisition of
commercial items, except for those that
are solely for the acquisition of COTS
items.
■ 5. Add subpart 204.75, consisting of
204.7500 through 204.7503, to read as
follows:
Subpart 204.75—Cybersecurity
Maturity Model Certification
Sec.
204.7500
204.7501
204.7502
204.7503
Sfmt 4700
Scope of subpart.
Policy.
Procedures.
Contract clause.
Subpart 204.75—Cybersecurity
Maturity Model Certification
204.7500
Procedures.
61519
Scope of subpart.
(a) This subpart prescribes policies
and procedures for including the
Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification (CMMC) level
requirements in DoD contracts. CMMC
is a framework that measures a
contractor’s cybersecurity maturity to
include the implementation of
cybersecurity practices and
institutionalization of processes (see
https://www.acq.osd.mil/cmmc/
index.html).
(b) This subpart does not abrogate any
other requirements regarding contractor
physical, personnel, information,
technical, or general administrative
security operations governing the
protection of unclassified information,
E:\FR\FM\29SER3.SGM
29SER3
61520
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 29, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
nor does it affect requirements of the
National Industrial Security Program.
204.7501
Policy.
(a) The contracting officer shall
include in the solicitation the required
CMMC level, if provided by the
requiring activity. Contracting officers
shall not award a contract, task order, or
delivery order to an offeror that does not
have a current (i.e., not more than 3
years old) CMMC certificate at the level
required by the solicitation.
(b) Contractors are required to
achieve, at time of award, a CMMC
certificate at the level specified in the
solicitation. Contractors are required to
maintain a current (i.e., not more than
3 years old) CMMC certificate at the
specified level, if required by the
statement of work or requirement
document, throughout the life of the
contract, task order, or delivery order.
Contracting officers shall not exercise an
option period or extend the period of
performance on a contract, task order, or
delivery order, unless the contract has a
current (i.e., not more than 3 years old)
CMMC certificate at the level required
by the contract, task order, or delivery
order.
(c) The CMMC Assessments shall not
duplicate efforts from any other
comparable DoD assessment, except for
rare circumstances when a reassessment may be necessary such as,
but not limited to when there are
indications of issues with cybersecurity
and/or compliance with CMMC
requirements.
204.7502
Procedures.
(a) When a requiring activity
identifies a requirement for a contract,
task order, or delivery order to include
a specific CMMC level, the contracting
officer shall not—
(1) Award to an offeror that does not
have a CMMC certificate at the level
required by the solicitation; or
(2) Exercise an option or extend any
period of performance on a contract,
task order, or delivery order unless the
contractor has a CMMC certificate at the
level required by the contract.
(b) Contracting officers shall use
Supplier Performance Risk System
(SPRS) (https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/)
to verify an offeror or contractor’s
CMMC level.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES3
204.7503
Contract clause.
Use the clause at 252.204–7021,
Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification Requirements, as follows:
(a) Until September 30, 2025, in
solicitations and contracts or task orders
or delivery orders, including those using
FAR part 12 procedures for the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:45 Sep 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
acquisition of commercial items, except
for solicitations and contracts or orders
solely for the acquisition of
commercially available off-the-shelf
(COTS) items, if the requirement
document or statement of work requires
a contractor to have a specific CMMC
level. In order to implement a phased
rollout of CMMC, inclusion of a CMMC
requirement in a solicitation during this
time period must be approved by
OUSD(A&S).
(b) On or after October 1, 2025, in all
solicitations and contracts or task orders
or delivery orders, including those using
FAR part 12 procedures for the
acquisition of commercial items, except
for solicitations and contracts or orders
solely for the acquisition of COTS items.
(2) Verifying in the Supplier
Performance Risk System (SPRS)
(https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/) that—
(i) The summary level score of a
current NIST SP 800–171 DoD
Assessment (i.e., not more than 3 years
old, unless a lesser time is specified in
the solicitation) for each covered
contractor information system that is
relevant to an offer, contract, task order,
or delivery order are posted (see
204.7303).
(ii) The contractor has a CMMC
certificate at the level required by the
contract, and that it is current (i.e., not
more than 3 years old) (see 204.7502).
PART 252—SOLICITATION
PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT
CLAUSES
PART 212—ACQUISITION OF
COMMERCIAL ITEMS
■
6. Amend section 212.301, by adding
paragraphs (f)(ii)(K), (L), and (M) to read
as follows:
Sec.
■
212.301 Solicitation provisions and
contract clauses for acquisition of
commercial items.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) * * *
(ii) * * *
(K) Use the provision at 252.204–
7019, Notice of NIST SP 800–171 DoD
Assessment Requirements, as prescribed
in 204.7304(d).
(L) Use the clause at 252.204–7020,
NIST SP 800–171 DoD Assessment
Requirements, as prescribed in
204.7304(e).
(M) Use the clause at 252.204–7021,
Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification Requirements, as
prescribed in 204.7503(a) and (b).
*
*
*
*
*
PART 217—SPECIAL CONTRACTING
METHODS
7. Amend section 217.207 by revising
paragraph (c) to read as follows:
■
217.207
Exercise of options.
(c) In addition to the requirements at
FAR 17.207(c), exercise an option only
after:
(1) Determining that the contractor’s
record in the System for Award
Management database is active and the
contractor’s Data Universal Numbering
System (DUNS) number, Commercial
and Government Entity (CAGE) code,
name, and physical address are
accurately reflected in the contract
document. See PGI 217.207 for the
requirement to perform cost or price
analysis of spare parts prior to
exercising any option for firm-fixedprice contracts containing spare parts.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
8. Add sections 252.204–7019,
252.204–7020, and 252.204–7021 to
read as follows:
*
*
*
*
*
252.204–7019 Notice of NIST SP 800–171
DoD Assessment Requirements.
252.204–7020 NIST SP 800–171 DoD
Assessment Requirements.
252.204–7021 Contractor Compliance with
the Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification Level Requirement.
*
*
*
*
*
252.204–7019 Notice of NIST SP 800–171
DoD Assessment Requirements.
As prescribed in 204.7304(d), use the
following provision:
NOTICE OF NIST SP 800–171 DOD
ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS (NOV
2020)
(a) Definitions.
Basic Assessment, Medium Assessment,
and High Assessment have the meaning given
in the clause 252.204–7020, NIST SP 800–
171 DoD Assessments.
Covered contractor information system has
the meaning given in the clause 252.204–
7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense
Information and Cyber Incident Reporting, of
this solicitation.
(b) Requirement. In order to be considered
for award, if the Offeror is required to
implement NIST SP 800–171, the Offeror
shall have a current assessment (i.e., not
more than 3 years old unless a lesser time is
specified in the solicitation) (see 252.204–
7020) for each covered contractor
information system that is relevant to the
offer, contract, task order, or delivery order.
The Basic, Medium, and High NIST SP 800–
171 DoD Assessments are described in the
NIST SP 800–171 DoD Assessment
Methodology located at https://
www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/pdi/cyber/
strategically_assessing_contractor_
implementation_of_NIST_SP_800-171.html.
(c) Procedures. (1) The Offeror shall verify
that summary level scores of a current NIST
SP 800–171 DoD Assessment (i.e., not more
than 3 years old unless a lesser time is
E:\FR\FM\29SER3.SGM
29SER3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 29, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
specified in the solicitation) are posted in the
Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS)
(https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/) for all
covered contractor information systems
relevant to the offer.
(2) If the Offeror does not have summary
level scores of a current NIST SP 800–171
DoD Assessment (i.e., not more than 3 years
old unless a lesser time is specified in the
solicitation) posted in SPRS, the Offeror may
conduct and submit a Basic Assessment to
webptsmh@navy.mil for posting to SPRS in
the format identified in paragraph (d) of this
provision.
(d) Summary level scores. Summary level
scores for all assessments will be posted 30
days post-assessment in SPRS to provide
DoD Components visibility into the summary
level scores of strategic assessments.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES3
System security plan
CAGE codes supported
by this plan
(2) Medium and High Assessments. DoD
will post the following Medium and/or High
Assessment summary level scores to SPRS
for each system assessed:
(i) The standard assessed (e.g., NIST SP
800–171 Rev 1).
(ii) Organization conducting the
assessment, e.g., DCMA, or a specific
organization (identified by Department of
Defense Activity Address Code (DoDAAC)).
(iii) All industry CAGE code(s) associated
with the information system(s) addressed by
the system security plan.
(iv) A brief description of the system
security plan architecture, if more than one
system security plan exists.
(v) Date and level of the assessment, i.e.,
medium or high.
(vi) Summary level score (e.g., 105 out of
110, not the individual value assigned for
each requirement).
(vii) Date that all requirements are
expected to be implemented (i.e., a score of
110 is expected to be achieved) based on
information gathered from associated plan(s)
of action developed in accordance with NIST
SP 800–171.
(3) Accessibility. (i) Assessment summary
level scores posted in SPRS are available to
DoD personnel, and are protected, in
accordance with the standards set forth in
DoD Instruction 5000.79, Defense-wide
Sharing and Use of Supplier and Product
Performance Information (PI).
(ii) Authorized representatives of the
Offeror for which the assessment was
conducted may access SPRS to view their
own summary level scores, in accordance
with the SPRS Software User’s Guide for
Awardees/Contractors available at https://
www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/pdf/SPRS_
Awardee.pdf.
(iii) A High NIST SP 800–171 DoD
Assessment may result in documentation in
addition to that listed in this section. DoD
will retain and protect any such
VerDate Sep<11>2014
(1) Basic Assessments. An Offeror may
follow the procedures in paragraph (c)(2) of
this provision for posting Basic Assessments
to SPRS.
(i) The email shall include the following
information:
(A) Cybersecurity standard assessed (e.g.,
NIST SP 800–171 Rev 1).
(B) Organization conducting the
assessment (e.g., Contractor self-assessment).
(C) For each system security plan (security
requirement 3.12.4) supporting the
performance of a DoD contract—
(1) All industry Commercial and
Government Entity (CAGE) code(s) associated
with the information system(s) addressed by
the system security plan; and
20:45 Sep 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
Brief description of the
plan architecture
(End of provision)
252.204–7020 NIST SP 800–171 DoD
Assessment Requirements.
As prescribed in 204.7304(e), use the
following clause:
NIST SP 800–171 DOD ASSESSMENT
REQUIREMENTS (NOV 2020)
(a) Definitions.
Basic Assessment means a contractor’s selfassessment of the contractor’s
implementation of NIST SP 800–171 that—
(1) Is based on the Contractor’s review of
their system security plan(s) associated with
covered contractor information system(s);
(2) Is conducted in accordance with the
NIST SP 800–171 DoD Assessment
Methodology; and
(3) Results in a confidence level of ‘‘Low’’
in the resulting score, because it is a selfgenerated score.
Covered contractor information system has
the meaning given in the clause 252.204–
7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense
Information and Cyber Incident Reporting, of
this contract.
High Assessment means an assessment that
is conducted by Government personnel using
NIST SP 800–171A, Assessing Security
Requirements for Controlled Unclassified
Information that—
(1) Consists of—
(i) A review of a contractor’s Basic
Assessment;
(ii) A thorough document review;
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(2) A brief description of the system
security plan architecture, if more than one
plan exists.
(D) Date the assessment was completed.
(E) Summary level score (e.g., 95 out of
110, NOT the individual value for each
requirement).
(F) Date that all requirements are expected
to be implemented (i.e., a score of 110 is
expected to be achieved) based on
information gathered from associated plan(s)
of action developed in accordance with NIST
SP 800–171.
(ii) If multiple system security plans are
addressed in the email described at
paragraph (d)(1)(i) of this section, the Offeror
shall use the following format for the report:
Date of
assessment
documentation as ‘‘Controlled Unclassified
Information (CUI)’’ and intended for internal
DoD use only. The information will be
protected against unauthorized use and
release, including through the exercise of
applicable exemptions under the Freedom of
Information Act (e.g., Exemption 4 covers
trade secrets and commercial or financial
information obtained from a contractor that
is privileged or confidential).
61521
Total score
Date score of 110 will
achieved
(iii) Verification, examination, and
demonstration of a Contractor’s system
security plan to validate that NIST SP 800–
171 security requirements have been
implemented as described in the contractor’s
system security plan; and
(iv) Discussions with the contractor to
obtain additional information or clarification,
as needed; and
(2) Results in a confidence level of ‘‘High’’
in the resulting score.
Medium Assessment means an assessment
conducted by the Government that—
(1) Consists of—
(i) A review of a contractor’s Basic
Assessment;
(ii) A thorough document review; and
(iii) Discussions with the contractor to
obtain additional information or clarification,
as needed; and
(2) Results in a confidence level of
‘‘Medium’’ in the resulting score.
(b) Applicability. This clause applies to
covered contractor information systems that
are required to comply with the National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
Special Publication (SP) 800–171, in
accordance with Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation System (DFARS) clause at
252.204–7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense
Information and Cyber Incident Reporting, of
this contract.
(c) Requirements. The Contractor shall
provide access to its facilities, systems, and
personnel necessary for the Government to
conduct a Medium or High NIST SP 800–171
DoD Assessment, as described in NIST SP
800–171 DoD Assessment Methodology at
https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/pdi/cyber/
strategically_assessing_contractor_
implementation_of_NIST_SP_800-171.html,
if necessary.
(d) Procedures. Summary level scores for
all assessments will be posted in the Supplier
Performance Risk System (SPRS) (https://
www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/) to provide DoD
E:\FR\FM\29SER3.SGM
29SER3
61522
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 29, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Components visibility into the summary
level scores of strategic assessments.
(1) Basic Assessments. A contractor may
submit, via encrypted email, summary level
scores of Basic Assessments conducted in
accordance with the NIST SP 800–171 DoD
Assessment Methodology to webptsmh@
navy.mil for posting to SPRS.
(i) The email shall include the following
information:
(A) Version of NIST SP 800–171 against
which the assessment was conducted.
(B) Organization conducting the
assessment (e.g., Contractor self-assessment).
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES3
System security plan
CAGE codes supported
by this plan
(2) Medium and High Assessments. DoD
will post the following Medium and/or High
Assessment summary level scores to SPRS
for each system security plan assessed:
(i) The standard assessed (e.g., NIST SP
800–171 Rev 1).
(ii) Organization conducting the
assessment, e.g., DCMA, or a specific
organization (identified by Department of
Defense Activity Address Code (DoDAAC)).
(iii) All industry CAGE code(s) associated
with the information system(s) addressed by
the system security plan.
(iv) A brief description of the system
security plan architecture, if more than one
system security plan exists.
(v) Date and level of the assessment, i.e.,
medium or high.
(vi) Summary level score (e.g., 105 out of
110, not the individual value assigned for
each requirement).
(vii) Date that all requirements are
expected to be implemented (i.e., a score of
110 is expected to be achieved) based on
information gathered from associated plan(s)
of action developed in accordance with NIST
SP 800–171.
(e) Rebuttals. (1) DoD will provide Medium
and High Assessment summary level scores
to the Contractor and offer the opportunity
for rebuttal and adjudication of assessment
summary level scores prior to posting the
summary level scores to SPRS (see SPRS
User’s Guide https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/
pdf/SPRS_Awardee.pdf).
(2) Upon completion of each assessment,
the contractor has 14 business days to
provide additional information to
demonstrate that they meet any security
requirements not observed by the assessment
team or to rebut the findings that may be of
question.
(f) Accessibility. (1) Assessment summary
level scores posted in SPRS are available to
DoD personnel, and are protected, in
accordance with the standards set forth in
DoD Instruction 5000.79, Defense-wide
Sharing and Use of Supplier and Product
Performance Information (PI).
(2) Authorized representatives of the
Contractor for which the assessment was
VerDate Sep<11>2014
(C) For each system security plan (security
requirement 3.12.4) supporting the
performance of a DoD contract—
(1) All industry Commercial and
Government Entity (CAGE) code(s) associated
with the information system(s) addressed by
the system security plan; and
(2) A brief description of the system
security plan architecture, if more than one
plan exists.
(D) Date the assessment was completed.
(E) Summary level score (e.g., 95 out of
110, NOT the individual value for each
requirement).
20:45 Sep 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
Brief description of the
plan architecture
Date of
assessment
conducted may access SPRS to view their
own summary level scores, in accordance
with the SPRS Software User’s Guide for
Awardees/Contractors available at https://
www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/pdf/SPRS_
Awardee.pdf.
(3) A High NIST SP 800–171 DoD
Assessment may result in documentation in
addition to that listed in this clause. DoD will
retain and protect any such documentation as
‘‘Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)’’
and intended for internal DoD use only. The
information will be protected against
unauthorized use and release, including
through the exercise of applicable
exemptions under the Freedom of
Information Act (e.g., Exemption 4 covers
trade secrets and commercial or financial
information obtained from a contractor that
is privileged or confidential).
(g) Subcontracts. (1) The Contractor shall
insert the substance of this clause, including
this paragraph (g), in all subcontracts and
other contractual instruments, including
subcontracts for the acquisition of
commercial items (excluding COTS items).
(2) The Contractor shall not award a
subcontract or other contractual instrument,
that is subject to the implementation of NIST
SP 800–171 security requirements, in
accordance with DFARS clause 252.204–
7012 of this contract, unless the
subcontractor has completed, within the last
3 years, at least a Basic NIST SP 800–171
DoD Assessment, as described in https://
www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/pdi/cyber/
strategically_assessing_contractor_
implementation_of_NIST_SP_800-171.html,
for all covered contractor information
systems relevant to its offer that are not part
of an information technology service or
system operated on behalf of the
Government.
(3) If a subcontractor does not have
summary level scores of a current NIST SP
800–171 DoD Assessment (i.e., not more than
3 years old unless a lesser time is specified
in the solicitation) posted in SPRS, the
subcontractor may conduct and submit a
Basic Assessment, in accordance with the
NIST SP 800–171 DoD Assessment
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
(F) Date that all requirements are expected
to be implemented (i.e., a score of 110 is
expected to be achieved) based on
information gathered from associated plan(s)
of action developed in accordance with NIST
SP 800–171.
(ii) If multiple system security plans are
addressed in the email described at
paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section, the
Contractor shall use the following format for
the report:
Total score
Date score of 110 will
achieved
Methodology, to webptsmh@navy.mil for
posting to SPRS along with the information
required by paragraph (d) of this clause.
(End of clause)
252.204–7021 Contractor Compliance with
the Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification Level Requirement.
As prescribed in 204.7503(a) and (b),
insert the following clause:
CONTRACTOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE
CYBERSECURITY MATURITY MODEL
CERTIFICATION LEVEL REQUIREMENT
(NOV 2020)
(a) Scope. The Cybersecurity Maturity
Model Certification (CMMC) CMMC is a
framework that measures a contractor’s
cybersecurity maturity to include the
implementation of cybersecurity practices
and institutionalization of processes (see
https://www.acq.osd.mil/cmmc/).
(b) Requirements. The Contractor shall
have a current (i.e. not older than 3 years)
CMMC certificate at the CMMC level
required by this contract and maintain the
CMMC certificate at the required level for the
duration of the contract.
(c) Subcontracts. The Contractor shall—
(1) Insert the substance of this clause,
including this paragraph (c), in all
subcontracts and other contractual
instruments, including subcontracts for the
acquisition of commercial items, excluding
commercially available off-the-shelf items;
and
(2) Prior to awarding to a subcontractor,
ensure that the subcontractor has a current
(i.e., not older than 3 years) CMMC certificate
at the CMMC level that is appropriate for the
information that is being flowed down to the
subcontractor.
(End of clause)
[FR Doc. 2020–21123 Filed 9–28–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
E:\FR\FM\29SER3.SGM
29SER3
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 189 (Tuesday, September 29, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 61505-61522]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-21123]
[[Page 61505]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations System
48 CFR Parts 204, 212, 217, and 252
[Docket DARS-2020-0034]
RIN 0750-AJ81
Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Assessing
Contractor Implementation of Cybersecurity Requirements (DFARS Case
2019-D041)
AGENCY: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense
(DoD).
ACTION: Interim rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: DoD is issuing an interim rule to amend the Defense Federal
Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to implement a DoD Assessment
Methodology and Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification framework in
order to assess contractor implementation of cybersecurity requirements
and enhance the protection of unclassified information within the DoD
supply chain.
DATES: Effective November 30, 2020.
Comments on the interim rule should be submitted in writing to the
address shown below on or before November 30, 2020, to be considered in
the formation of a final rule.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments identified by DFARS Case 2019-D041, using
any of the following methods:
[cir] Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Search for ``DFARS Case 2019-D041''. Select ``Comment Now'' and follow
the instructions provided to submit a comment. Please include ``DFARS
Case 2019-D041'' on any attached documents.
[cir] Email: [email protected]. Include DFARS Case 2019-D041 in
the subject line of the message.
Comments received generally will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. To
confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check www.regulations.gov,
approximately two to three days after submission to verify posting.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Heather Kitchens, telephone 571-
372-6104.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The theft of intellectual property and sensitive information from
all U.S. industrial sectors due to malicious cyber activity threatens
economic security and national security. The Council of Economic
Advisors estimates that malicious cyber activity cost the U.S. economy
between $57 billion and $109 billion in 2016. Over a ten-year period,
that burden would equate to an estimated $570 billion to $1.09 trillion
dollars in costs. As part of multiple lines of effort focused on the
security and resiliency of the Defense Industrial Base (DIB) sector,
the Department is working with industry to enhance the protection of
unclassified information within the supply chain. Toward this end, DoD
has developed the following assessment methodology and framework to
assess contractor implementation of cybersecurity requirements, both of
which are being implemented by this rule: the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication (SP) 800-171 DoD
Assessment Methodology and the Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification (CMMC) Framework. The NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment and
CMMC assessments will not duplicate efforts from each assessment, or
any other DoD assessment, except for rare circumstances when a re-
assessment may be necessary, such as, but not limited to, when
cybersecurity risks, threats, or awareness have changed, requiring a
re-assessment to ensure current compliance.
A. NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Methodology
DFARS clause 252.204-7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense Information
and Cyber Incident Reporting, is included in all solicitations and
contracts, including those using Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)
part 12 commercial item procedures, except for acquisitions solely for
commercially available off- the-shelf (COTS) items. The clause requires
contractors to apply the security requirements of NIST SP 800-171 to
``covered contractor information systems,'' as defined in the clause,
that are not part of an IT service or system operated on behalf of the
Government. The NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Methodology provides for
the assessment of a contractor's implementation of NIST SP 800-171
security requirements, as required by DFARS clause 252.204-7012. More
information on the NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Methodology is
available at https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/pdi/cyber/strategically_assessing_contractor_implementation_of_NIST_SP_800-171.html.
The Assessment uses a standard scoring methodology, which reflects
the net effect of NIST SP 800-171 security requirements not yet
implemented by a contractor, and three assessment levels (Basic,
Medium, and High), which reflect the depth of the assessment performed
and the associated level of confidence in the score resulting from the
assessment. A Basic Assessment is a self-assessment completed by the
contractor, while Medium or High Assessments are completed by the
Government. The Assessments are completed for each covered contractor
information system that is relevant to the offer, contract, task order,
or delivery order.
The results of Assessments are documented in the Supplier
Performance Risk System (SPRS) at https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/ to
provide DoD Components with visibility into the scores of Assessments
already completed; and verify that an offeror has a current (i.e., not
more than three years old, unless a lesser time is specified in the
solicitation) Assessment, at any level, on record prior to contract
award.
B. Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification Framework
Building upon the NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Methodology, the
CMMC framework adds a comprehensive and scalable certification element
to verify the implementation of processes and practices associated with
the achievement of a cybersecurity maturity level. CMMC is designed to
provide increased assurance to the Department that a DIB contractor can
adequately protect sensitive unclassified information such as Federal
Contract Information (FCI) and Controlled Unclassified Information
(CUI) at a level commensurate with the risk, accounting for information
flow down to its subcontractors in a multi-tier supply chain. A DIB
contractor can achieve a specific CMMC level for its entire enterprise
network or particular segment(s) or enclave(s), depending upon where
the information to be protected is processed, stored, or transmitted.
The CMMC model consists of maturity processes and cybersecurity
best practices from multiple cybersecurity standards, frameworks, and
other references, as well as inputs from the broader community. The
CMMC levels and the associated sets of processes and practices are
cumulative. The CMMC model encompasses the basic safeguarding
requirements for FCI specified in FAR clause 52.204-21, Basic
Safeguarding of Covered
[[Page 61506]]
Contractor Information Systems, and the security requirements for CUI
specified in NIST SP 800-171 per DFARS clause 252.204-7012.
Furthermore, the CMMC model includes an additional five processes and
61 practices across Levels 2-5 that demonstrate a progression of
cybersecurity maturity.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................ Consists of the 15 basic safeguarding
requirements from FAR clause 52.204-21.
2............................ Consists of 65 security requirements from
NIST SP 800-171 implemented via DFARS
clause 252.204-7012, 7 CMMC practices,
and 2 CMMC processes. Intended as an
optional intermediary step for
contractors as part of their progression
to Level 3.
3............................ Consists of all 110 security requirements
from NIST SP 800-171, 20 CMMC practices,
and 3 CMMC processes.
4............................ Consists of all 110 security requirements
from NIST SP 800-171, 46 CMMC practices,
and 4 CMMC processes.
5............................ Consists of all 110 security requirements
from NIST SP 800-171, 61 CMMC practices,
and 5 CMMC processes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In order to achieve a specific CMMC level, a DIB company must
demonstrate both process institutionalization or maturity and the
implementation of practices commensurate with that level. CMMC
assessments will be conducted by accredited CMMC Third Party Assessment
Organizations (C3PAOs). Upon completion of a CMMC assessment, a company
is awarded a certification by an independent CMMC Accreditation Body
(AB) at the appropriate CMMC level (as described in the CMMC model).
The certification level is documented in SPRS to enable the
verification of an offeror's certification level and currency (i.e. not
more than three years old) prior to contract award. Additional
information on CMMC and a copy of the CMMC model can be found at
https://www.acq.osd.mil/cmmc/.
DoD is implementing a phased rollout of CMMC. Until September 30,
2025, the clause at 252.204-7021, Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification Requirements, is prescribed for use in solicitations and
contracts, including solicitations and contracts using FAR part 12
procedures for the acquisition of commercial items, excluding
acquisitions exclusively for COTS items, if the requirement document or
statement of work requires a contractor to have a specific CMMC level.
In order to implement the phased rollout of CMMC, inclusion of a CMMC
requirement in a solicitation during this time period must be approved
by the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment.
CMMC will apply to all DoD solicitations and contracts, including
those for the acquisition of commercial items (except those exclusively
COTS items) valued at greater than the micro-purchase threshold,
starting on or after October 1, 2025. Contracting officers will not
make award, or exercise an option on a contract, if the offeror or
contractor does not have current (i.e. not older than three years)
certification for the required CMMC level. Furthermore, CMMC
certification requirements are required to be flowed down to
subcontractors at all tiers, based on the sensitivity of the
unclassified information flowed down to each subcontractor.
II. Discussion and Analysis
A. NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Methodology
This rule amends DFARS subpart 204.73, Safeguarding Covered Defense
Information and Cyber Incident Reporting, to implement the NIST SP 800-
171 DoD Assessment Methodology. The new coverage in the subpart directs
contracting officers to verify in SPRS that an offeror has a current
NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment on record, prior to contract award, if
the offeror is required to implement NIST SP 800-171 pursuant to DFARS
clause 252.204-7012. The contracting officer is also directed to
include a new DFARS provision 252.204-7019, Notice of NIST SP 800-171
DoD Assessment Requirements, and a new DFARS clause 252.204-7020, NIST
SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Requirements, in solicitations and contracts
including solicitations using FAR part 12 procedures for the
acquisition of commercial items, except for solicitations solely for
the acquisition of COTS items.
The new DFARS provision 252.204-7019 advises offerors required to
implement the NIST SP 800-171 standards of the requirement to have a
current (not older than three years) NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment on
record in order to be considered for award. The provision requires
offerors to ensure the results of any applicable current Assessments
are posted in SPRS and provides offerors with additional information on
conducting and submitting an Assessment when a current one is not
posted in SPRS.
The new DFARS clause 252.204-7020 requires a contractor to provide
the Government with access to its facilities, systems, and personnel
when it is necessary for DoD to conduct or renew a higher-level
Assessment. The clause also requires the contractor to ensure that
applicable subcontractors also have the results of a current Assessment
posted in SPRS prior to awarding a subcontract or other contractual
instruments. The clause also provides additional information on how a
subcontractor can conduct and submit an Assessment when one is not
posted in SPRS, and requires the contractor to include the requirements
of the clause in all applicable subcontracts or other contractual
instruments.
B. Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification
This rule adds a new DFARS subpart, Subpart 204.75, Cybersecurity
Maturity Model Certification (CMMC), to specify the policy and
procedures for awarding a contract, or exercising an option on a
contract, that includes the requirement for a CMMC certification.
Specifically, this subpart directs contracting officers to verify in
SPRS that the apparently successful offeror's or contractor's CMMC
certification is current and meets the required level prior to making
the award.
A new DFARS clause 252.204-7021, Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification Requirements, is prescribed for use in all solicitations
and contracts or task orders or delivery orders, excluding those
exclusively for the acquisition of COTS items. This DFARS clause
requires a contractor to: Maintain the requisite CMMC level for the
duration of the contract; ensure that its subcontractors also have the
appropriate CMMC level prior to awarding a subcontract or other
contractual instruments; and include the requirements of the clause in
all subcontracts or other contractual instruments.
The Department took into consideration the timing of the
requirement to achieve a CMMC level certification in the development of
this rule, weighing the benefits and risks associated with requiring
CMMC level certification: (1) At time of proposal or offer submission;
(2) at time of award;
[[Page 61507]]
or (3) after contract award. The Department ultimately adopted
alternative 2 to require certification at the time of award. The
drawback of alternative 1 (at time of proposal or offer submission) is
the increased risk for contractors since they may not have sufficient
time to achieve the required CMMC certification after the release of
the Request for Information (RFI). The drawback of alternative 3 (after
contract award) is the increased risk to the Department with respect to
the schedule and uncertainty with respect to the case where the
contractor is unable to achieve the required CMMC level in a reasonable
amount of time given their current cybersecurity posture. This
potential delay would apply to the entire supply chain and prevent the
appropriate flow of CUI and FCI. The Department seeks public comment on
the timing of contract award, to include the effect of requiring
certification at time of award on small businesses.
C. Conforming Changes
This rule also amends the following DFARS sections to make
conforming changes:
Amends the list in DFARS section 212.301 of solicitation
provisions and contract clauses that are applicable for the acquisition
of commercial items to include the provisions and clauses included in
this rule.
Amends DFARS 217.207, Exercise of Options, to advise
contracting officers that an option may only be exercised after
verifying the contractor's CMMC level, when CMMC is required in the
contract.
III. Applicability to Contracts at or Below the Simplified Acquisition
Threshold and for Commercial Items, Including Commercially Available
Off-the-Shelf Items
This rule creates the following new solicitation provision and
contract clauses:
DFARS 252.204-7019, Notice of NIST SP 800-171 DoD
Assessment Requirements;
DFARS clause 252.204-7020, NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment
Requirements; and
DFARS clause 252.204-7021, Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification Requirements.
The objective of this rule is provide the Department with: (1) The
ability to assess contractor implementation of NIST SP 800-171 security
requirements, as required by DFARS clause 252.204-7012, Safeguarding
Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting; and (2)
assurances that DIB contractors can adequately protect sensitive
unclassified information at a level commensurate with the risk,
accounting for information flowed down to subcontractors in a multi-
tier supply chain. Flowdown of the requirements is necessary to respond
to threats that reach even the lowest tiers in the supply chain.
Therefore, to achieve the desired policy outcome, DoD intends to apply
the new provision and clauses to contracts and subcontracts for the
acquisition of commercial items and to acquisitions valued at or below
the simplified acquisition threshold, but greater than the micro-
purchase threshold. The provision and clauses will not be applicable to
contracts or subcontracts exclusively for the acquisition of
commercially available off-the-shelf items.
IV. Expected Cost Impact and Benefits
A. Benefits
The theft of intellectual property and sensitive information from
all U.S. industrial sectors due to malicious cyber activity threatens
U.S. economic and national security. The aggregate loss of intellectual
property and certain unclassified information from the DoD supply chain
can undercut U.S. technical advantages and innovation, as well as
significantly increase risk to national security. This rule is expected
to enhance the protection of FCI and CUI within the DIB sector.
B. Costs
A Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) that includes a detailed
discussion and explanation about the assumptions and methodology used
to estimate the cost of this regulatory action is available at
www.regulations.gov (search for ``DFARS Case 2019-D041'' click ``Open
Docket,'' and view ``Supporting Documents''). The total estimated
public and Government costs (in millions) associated with this rule,
calculated in perpetuity in 2016 dollars at a 7 percent discount rate,
is provided as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total cost (in millions) Public Govt Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized Costs................................................ $6,500.5 $0.3 $6,500.7
Present Value Costs............................................. 92,863.6 3.7 92,867.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following is a breakdown of the public and Government costs and
savings associated with each component of the rule:
1. NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessments
The following is a summary of the estimated public and Government
costs (in millions) associated with the NIST SP DoD Assessments,
calculated in perpetuity in 2016 dollars at a 7 percent discount rate:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DoD assessments Public Government Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized Costs................................................ $6.7 $9.5 $16.3
Present Value Costs............................................. 96.1 136.2 232.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. CMMC Requirements
The following is a summary of the estimated public and Government
costs (in millions) associated with the CMMC requirements, calculated
in perpetuity in 2016 dollars at a 7 percent discount rate:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CMMC requirements Public Government Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized Costs................................................ $6,525.0 $8.9 $6,533.9
Present Value Costs............................................. 93,213.6 127.3 93,340.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 61508]]
3. Elimination of Duplicate Assessments
The following is a summary of the estimated public and Government
savings (in millions) associated with the elimination of duplicate
assessments, calculated in perpetuity in 2016 dollars at a 7 percent
discount rate:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eliminate duplication Public Government Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized Savings.............................................. -$31.2 -$18.2 -$49.4
Present Value Savings........................................... -446.1 -259.8 -705.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess
all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). E.O.
13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits,
of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility.
This is an economically significant regulatory action and, therefore,
was subject to review under section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is a major
rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.
VI. Executive Order 13771
The rule is not subject to the requirements if E.O. 13771, because
this rule is being issued with respect to a national security function
of the United States.
VII. Regulatory Flexibility Act
DoD expects this rule to have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. Therefore, an initial
regulatory flexibility analysis has been performed and is summarized as
follows:
A. Reasons for the Action
This rule is necessary to address threats to the U.S. economy and
national security from ongoing malicious cyber activities, which
includes the theft of hundreds of billions of dollars of U.S.
intellectual property. Currently, the FAR and DFARS prescribe contract
clauses intended to protect FCI and CUI within the DoD supply chain.
Specifically, the clause at FAR 52.204-21, Basic Safeguarding of
Covered Contractor Information Systems, is prescribed at FAR 4.1903 for
use in Government solicitations and contracts and requires contractors
and subcontractors to apply basic safeguarding requirements when
processing, storing, or transmitting FCI in or from covered contractor
information systems. The clause focuses on ensuring a basic level of
cybersecurity hygiene and is reflective of actions that a prudent
business person would employ.
In addition, DFARS clause 252.204-7012, Safeguarding Covered
Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting, requires defense
contractors and subcontractors to provide ``adequate security'' to
store, process, or transmit CUI on information systems or networks, and
to report cyber incidents that affect these systems or networks. The
clause states that to provide adequate security, the Contractor shall
implement, at a minimum, the security requirements in ``National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication (SP)
800-171, Protecting Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) in
Nonfederal Systems and Organizations.'' Contractors are also required
to flow down DFARS Clause 252.204-7012 to all subcontracts, which
involve CUI.
However, neither the FAR clause, nor the DFARS clause, provide for
DoD verification of a contractor's implementation of basic safeguarding
requirements or the security requirements specified in NIST SP 800-171
prior to contract award.
Under DFARS clause 252.204-7012, DIB companies self-attest that
they will implement the requirements in NIST SP 800-171 upon submission
of their offer. A contractor can document implementation of the
security requirements in NIST SP 800-171 by having a system security
plan in place to describe how the security requirements are
implemented, in addition to associated plans of action to describe how
and when any unimplemented security requirements will be met. As a
result, the current regulation enables contractors and subcontractors
to process, store, or transmit CUI without having implemented all of
the 110 security requirements and without establishing enforceable
timelines for addressing shortfalls and gaps.
Findings from DoD Inspector General report (DODIG-2019-105 ``Audit
of Protection of DoD Controlled Unclassified Information on Contractor-
Owned Networks and Systems'') indicate that DoD contractors did not
consistently implement mandated system security requirements for
safeguarding CUI and recommended that DoD take steps to assess a
contractor's ability to protect this information. The report emphasizes
that malicious actors can exploit the vulnerabilities of contractors'
networks and systems and exfiltrate information related to some of the
Nation's most valuable advanced defense technologies.
Although DoD contractors must include DFARS clause 252.204-7012 in
subcontracts for which subcontract performance will involve covered
defense information (DoD CUI), this does not provide the Department
with sufficient insights with respect to the cybersecurity posture of
DIB companies throughout the multi-tier supply chain for any given
program or technology development effort.
Furthermore, given the size and scale of the DIB sector, the
Department cannot scale its organic cybersecurity assessment capability
to conduct on-site assessments of approximately 220,000 DoD contractors
every three years. As a result, the Department's organic assessment
capability is best suited for conducting targeted assessments for a
subset of DoD contractors.
Finally, the current security requirements specified in NIST SP
800-171 per DFARS clause 252.204-7012, do not sufficiently address
additional threats to include Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs).
Because of these issues and shortcomings and the associated risks
to national security, the Department determined that the status quo was
not acceptable and developed a two-pronged approach to assess and
verify the DIB's ability to protect the FCI and CUI on its information
systems or networks, which is being implemented by this rule:
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
Special Publication (SP) 800-171 DoD Assessment Methodology. A standard
methodology to assess contractor implementation of the cybersecurity
requirements in NIST SP 800-171,
[[Page 61509]]
``Protecting Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) In Nonfederal
Systems and Organizations.''
The Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC)
Framework. A DoD certification process that measures a company's
institutionalization of processes and implementation of cybersecurity
practices.
B. Objectives of, and Legal Basis for, the Rule
This rule establishes a requirement for contractors to have a
current NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment and the appropriate CMMC level
certification prior to contract award and during contract performance.
The objective of the rule is to provide the Department with: (1) The
ability to assess at a corporate-level a contractor's implementation of
NIST SP 800-171 security requirements, as required by DFARS clause
252.204-7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber
Incident Reporting; and (2) assurances that a DIB contractor can
adequately protect sensitive unclassified information at a level
commensurate with the risk, accounting for information flow down to its
subcontractors in a multi-tier supply chain.
1. NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Methodology
In February 2019, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition
and Sustainment directed the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA)
to develop a standard methodology to assess contractor implementation
of the cybersecurity requirements in NIST SP 800-171 at the corporate
or entity level. The DCMA Defense Industrial Base Cybersecurity
Assessment Center's NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Methodology is the
Department's initial strategic DoD/corporate-wide assessment of
contractor implementation of the mandatory cybersecurity requirements
established in the contracting regulations. Results of a NIST SP 800-
171 DoD Assessment reflect the net effect of NIST SP 800-171 security
requirements not yet implemented by a contractor, and may be conducted
at one of three assessment levels. The DoD Assessment Methodology
provides the following benefits:
Enables Strategic Assessments at the Entity-level. The
NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Methodology enables DoD to strategically
assess a contractor's implementation of NIST SP 800-171 on existing
contracts that include DFARS clause 252.204-7012, and to provide an
objective assessment of a contractor's NIST SP 800-171 implementation
status.
Reduces Duplicative or Repetitive Assessments of our
Industry Partners. Assessment results will be posted in the Supplier
Performance Risk System (SPRS), DoD's authoritative source for supplier
and product performance information. This will provide DoD Components
with visibility to summary level scores, rather than addressing
implementation of NIST SP 800-171 on a contract-by-contract approach.
Conducting such assessments at a corporate- or entity-level,
significantly reduces the need to conduct assessments at the program or
contract level, thereby reducing the cost to both DoD and industry.
Provides a Standard Methodology for Contractors to Self-
assess Their Implementation of NIST SP 800-171. The Basic Assessment
provides a consistent means for contractors to review their system
security plans prior to and in preparation for either a DoD or CMMC
assessment.
The NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Methodology provides a means for
the Department to assess contractor implementation of these
requirements as the Department transitions to full implementation of
the CMMC, and a means for companies to self-assess their implementation
of the NIST SP 800-171 requirements prior to either a DoD or CMMC
assessment.
2. The CMMC Framework
Section 1648 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year (FY) 2020 (Pub. L. 116-92) directs the Secretary of Defense to
develop a risk-based cybersecurity framework for the DIB sector, such
as CMMC, as the basis for a mandatory DoD standard. Building upon the
NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Methodology, the CMMC framework adds a
comprehensive and scalable certification element to verify the
implementation of processes and practices associated with the
achievement of a cybersecurity maturity level. CMMC is designed to
provide increased assurance to the Department that a DIB contractor can
adequately protect sensitive unclassified information (i.e. FCI and
CUI) at a level commensurate with the risk, accounting for information
flow down to its subcontractors in a multi-tier supply chain.
Implementation of the CMMC Framework is intended to solve the following
policy problems:
Verification of a contractor's cybersecurity posture.
DFARS clause 252.204-7012 does not provide for the DoD verification of
a DIB contractor's implementation of the security requirements
specified in NIST SP 800-171 prior to contract award. DIB companies
self-attest that they will implement the requirements in NIST SP 800-
171 upon submission of their offer. Findings from DoD Inspector General
report (DODIG-2019-105 ``Audit of Protection of DoD Controlled
Unclassified Information on Contractor-Owned Networks and Systems'')
indicate that DoD contractors did not consistently implement mandated
system security requirements for safeguarding CUI and recommended that
DoD take steps to assess a contractor's ability to protect this
information. CMMC adds the element of verification of a DIB
contractor's cybersecurity posture through the use of accredited
C3PAOs. The company must achieve the CMMC level certification required
as a condition of contract award.
Comprehensive implementation of cybersecurity
requirements. Under DFARS clause 252.204-7012, a contractor can
document implementation of the security requirements in NIST SP 800-171
by having a system security plan in place to describe how the security
requirements are implemented, in addition to associated plans of action
to describe how and when any unimplemented security requirements will
be met. The CMMC framework does not allow a DoD contractor or
subcontractor to achieve compliance status through the use of plans of
action. In general, CMMC takes a risk-based approach to addressing
cyber threats. Based on the type and sensitivity of the information to
be protected, a DIB company must achieve the appropriate CMMC level and
demonstrate implementation of the requisite set of processes and
practices. Although the security requirements in NIST SP 800-171
addresses a range of threats, additional requirements are needed to
further reduce the risk of Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs). An APT
is an adversary that possesses sophisticated levels of expertise and
significant resources, which allow it to create opportunities to
achieve its objectives by using multiple attack vectors (e.g. cyber,
physical, and deception). The CMMC model includes additional processes
and practices in Levels 4 and 5 that are focused on further reducing
the risk of APT threats. The CMMC implementation will provide the
Department with an ability to illuminate the supply chain, for the
first time, at scale across the entire DIB sector. The CMMC framework
requires contractors to flow down the appropriate CMMC
[[Page 61510]]
certification requirement to subcontractors throughout the entire
supply chain. DIB companies that do not process, store, or transmit
CUI, must obtain a CMMC level 1 certification. DIB companies that
process, store, or transmit CUI must achieve a CMMC level 3 or higher,
depending on the sensitivity of the information associated with a
program or technology being developed.
Scale and Depth. DoD contractors must include DFARS clause
252.204-7012 in subcontracts for which subcontract performance will
involve covered defense information (DoD CUI), but this does not
provide the Department with sufficient insights with respect to the
cybersecurity posture of DIB companies throughout the multi-tier supply
chain for any given program or technology development effort. Given the
size and scale of the DIB sector, the Department cannot scale its
organic cybersecurity assessment capability to conduct on-site
assessments of approximately 220,000 DoD contractors every three years.
As a result, the Department's organic assessment capability is best
suited for conducting targeted assessments for a subset of DoD
contractors that support prioritized programs and/or technology
development efforts. CMMC addresses the challenges of the Department
scaling its organic assessment capability by partnering with an
independent, non-profit CMMC-AB that will accredit and oversee multiple
third party assessment organizations (C3PAOs) which in turn, will
conduct on-site assessments of DoD contractors throughout the multi-
tier supply chain. DIB companies will be able to directly schedule
assessments with an accredited C3PAO for a specific CMMC level. The
cost of these CMMC assessments will be driven by multiple factors
including market forces, the size and complexity of the network or
enclaves under assessment, and the CMMC level.
Reduces Duplicate or Repetitive Assessments of our
Industry Partners. Assessment results will be posted in the Supplier
Performance Risk System (SPRS), DoD's authoritative source for supplier
and product performance information. This will provide DoD Components
with visibility to CMMC certifications for DIB contractor networks and
an alternative to addressing implementation of NIST SP 800-171 on a
contract-by-contract approach--significantly reducing the need to
conduct assessments at the program level, thereby reducing the cost to
both DoD and industry.
C. Description of and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which
the Rule Will Apply
This rule will impact all small businesses that do business with
Department of Defense, except those competing on contracts or orders
that are exclusively for COTS items or receiving contracts or orders
valued at or below the micro-purchase threshold.
1. The NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Methodology
According to data available in the Electronic Data Access system
for fiscal years (FYs) 2016, 2017, and 2018, on an annual basis DoD
awards on average 485,859 contracts and orders that contain DFARS
clause 252.204-7012 to 39,204 unique awardees, of which 262,509 awards
(54 percent) are made to 26,468 small entities (68 percent). While
there may be some entities that have contracts that contain the clause
at 252.204-7012, but never process CUI and, therefore, do not have to
implement NIST SP 800-171, it is not possible for DoD to estimate what
fraction of unique entities fall into this category. Assuming all of
these small entities have covered contractor information systems that
are required to be in compliance with NIST SP 800-171, then all of
these entities would be required to have, at minimum, a Basic
Assessment in order to be considered for award.
The requirement for the Basic Assessment would be imposed through
incorporation of the new solicitation provision and contract clause in
new contracts and orders. As such, the requirement to have completed a
Basic Assessment is expected to phase-in over a three-year period, thus
impacting an estimated 8,823 small entities each year. It is expected
that the Medium and High Assessments, on the other hand, will be
conducted on a finite number of awardees each year based on the
capacity of the Government to conduct these assessments. DoD estimates
that 200 unique entities will undergo a Medium Assessment each year, of
which 148 are expected to be small entities. High Assessments are
expected to be conducted on approximately 110 unique entities each
year, of which 81 are expected to be small entities. DoD Assessments
are valid for three years, so small entities will be required to renew,
at minimum, their basic assessment every three years in order to
continue to receive DoD awards or to continue performance on contracts
and orders with options. The following is a summary of the number of
small entities that will be required to undergo NIST SP 800-171 DoD
Assessments over a three-year period:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basic........................................................... 8,823 8,823 8,823
Medium.......................................................... 148 148 148
High............................................................ 81 81 81
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The top five NAICS code industries expected to be impacted by this
rule are as follows: 541712, Research and Development in the Physical,
Engineering, and Life Sciences (Except Biotechnology); 541330,
Engineering Services; 236220, Commercial and Institutional Building
Construction; 541519, Other Computer Related Services; and 561210,
Facilities Support Services. These NAICS codes were selected based on a
review of NAICS codes associated with awards that include the clause at
DFARS 252.204-7012.
2. The CMMC Framework
Given the enterprise-wide implementation of CMMC, the Department
developed a five-year phased rollout strategy. The rollout is intended
to minimize the financial impacts to the industrial base, especially
small entities, and disruption to the existing DoD supply chain. The
Office of the Secretary of Defense staff is coordinating with the
Military Services and Department Agencies to identify candidate
contracts during the first five years of implementation that will
include the CMMC requirement in the statement of work.
Prior to October 1, 2025, this rule impacts certain large and small
businesses that are competing on acquisitions that specify a
requirement for CMMC in the statement of work. These businesses will be
required to have the stated CMMC certification level at the time of
contract award. Inclusion of a CMMC requirement in a
[[Page 61511]]
solicitation during this time period must be approved by the USD(A&S).
It is estimated that 129,810 unique entities will pursue their initial
CMMC certification during the initial five-year period. By October 1,
2025, all entities receiving DoD contracts and orders, other than
contracts or orders exclusively for commercially available off-the-
shelf items or those valued at or below the micro-purchase threshold,
will be required to have the CMMC Level identified in the solicitation,
but which at minimum will be a CMMC Level 1 certification. CMMC
certifications are valid for three years; therefore, large and small
businesses will be required to renew their certification every three
years.
Based on information from the Federal Procurement Data System
(FPDS), the number of unique prime contractors is 212,657 and the
number of known unique subcontractors is 8,309. Therefore, the total
number of known unique prime contractors and subcontractors is 220,966,
of which approximately 163,391 (74 percent) are estimated to be unique
small businesses. According to FPDS, the average number of new
contracts for unique contractors is 47,905 for any given year. The
timeline required to implement CMMC across the DoD contractor
population will be approximately 7 years. The phased rollout plan for
years 1-7 for small entities is detailed below with the total number of
unique DoD contractors and subcontractors specified. The rollout
assumes that for every unique prime contractor there are approximately
100 unique subcontractors. Each small business represented in the table
would be required to pursue recertification every three years in order
to continue to do business with DoD.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1....................................................... 665 110 335 0 0 1,110
2....................................................... 3,323 555 1,661 2 2 5,543
3....................................................... 11,086 1,848 5,543 4 4 18,485
4....................................................... 21,248 3,542 10,624 6 6 35,426
5....................................................... 21,245 3,541 10,623 7 7 35,423
6....................................................... 21,245 3,541 10,623 7 7 35,423
7....................................................... 19,180 3,197 9,590 7 7 31,981
1-7................................................. 97,992 16,334 48,999 33 33 163,391
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The top five NAICS code industries expected to be impacted by this
rule are as follows: 541712, Research and Development in the Physical,
Engineering, and Life Sciences (Except Biotechnology); 541330,
Engineering Services; 236220, Commercial and Institutional Building
Construction; 541519, Other Computer Related Services; and 561210,
Facilities Support Services. These NAICS codes are the same as the DoD
Assessment NAICS codes and were selected based on a review of NAICS
codes associated with awards that include the clause at FAR 52.204-21
or DFARS 252.204-7012.
D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements of the Rule
Details on the compliance requirements and associated costs,
savings, and benefits of this rule are provided in the Regulatory
Impact Analysis referenced in section IV of this preamble. The
following is a summary of the compliance requirements and the estimated
costs for small entities to undergo a DoD NIST SP 800-171 Assessment or
obtain a CMMC certification. For both the DoD Assessment Methodology
and the CMMC Framework, the estimated public costs are based on the
cost for an entity to pursue each type of assessment: The Basic,
Medium, or High Assessment under the DoD Assessment Methodology; or the
CMMC Level 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 certifications. The estimated costs
attributed to this rule do not include the costs associated with
compliance with the existing cybersecurity requirements under the
clause at FAR 52.204-21 or associated with implementing NIST SP 800-171
in accordance with the clause at DFARS 252.204-7012, Safeguarding
Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting. Contractors
who have been awarded a DoD contract that include these existing
contract clauses should have already implemented these cybersecurity
requirements and incurred the associated costs; therefore, those costs
are not attributed to this rule.
1. DoD Assessment Methodology
To comply with NIST SP 800-171 a company must (1) implement 110
security requirements on their covered contractor information systems;
or (2) document in a ``system security plan'' and ``plans of action''
those requirements that are not yet implemented and when the
requirements will be implemented. All offerors that are required to
implement NIST SP 800-171 on covered contractor information systems
pursuant to DFARS clause 252.204-7012, will be required to complete a
Basic Assessment and upload the resulting score to the Supplier Risk
Management System (SPRS), DoD's authoritative source for supplier and
product performance information. The Basic Assessment is a self-
assessment done by the contractor using a specific scoring methodology
that tells the Department how many security requirements have not yet
been implemented and is valid for three years. A company that has fully
implemented all 110 NIST SP 800-171 security requirements, would have a
score of 110 to report in SPRS for their Basic Assessment. A company
that has unimplemented requirements will use the scoring methodology to
assign a value to each unimplemented requirement, add up those values,
and subcontract the total value from 110 to determine their score.
In accordance with NIST SP 800-171, a contractor should already be
aware of the security requirements they have not yet implemented and
have documented plans of action for those requirements; therefore, the
burden associated with conducting a self-assessment is the time burden
associated with calculating the score. DoD estimates that the burden to
calculate the Basic Assessment score is thirty minutes per entity at a
journeyman-level-2 rate of pay (0.50 hour * $99.08/hour = $49.54/
assessment)).
To submit the Basic Assessment, the contractor is required to
complete 6 fields: System security plan name (if more than one system
is involved); CAGE code associated with the plan; a brief description
of the plan architecture; date of the assessment; total score; and the
date a score of 110 will be achieved. All of this data is available
from the Basic Assessment itself, the existing system security plan,
and the plans of action. The contractor selects the date when the last
plan of
[[Page 61512]]
action will be complete as the date when a score of 110 will be
achieved. The burden to submit a Basic Assessment for posting in SPRS
is estimated to be 15 minutes per entity at a journeyman-level-2 rate
of pay (0.25 hour * $99.08/hour = $24.77/assessment)). Therefore, the
total cost per assessment per entity is approximately $74.31 ($49.54 +
$24.77).
The estimate for the rate of pay for both preparation and
submission of the Basic Assessment is journeyman-level-2, which is an
employee who has the equivalent skills, responsibilities, and
experience as a General Schedule (GS) 13 Federal Government employee.
While these are rather simple tasks that can reasonably be completed by
a GS-11 equivalent employee, or even a GS-9 clerk, the GS-13 (or
perhaps GS-11) is the most likely grade for several reasons. First, in
a small company, the number of IT personnel are very limited. The
employee that is available to complete this task would also have
significant responsibilities for operation and maintenance of the IT
system and, therefore, be at a higher grade than would otherwise be
required if the only job was to prepare and submit the assessment.
Second, while the calculation of the assessment is simple, the
personnel who would typically have access to and understand the system
security plan and plans of action in order to complete the Basic
Assessment would be at the higher grade. Third, while the actual
submission is a simple task, the person who would complete the
assessment and submit the data in SPRS would be the person with SPRS
access/responsibilities, and therefore at the higher grade. Fourth,
given that proper calculation of the score and its submission may well
determine whether or not the company is awarded the contract, the
persons preparing and submitting the report are likely to be at a
higher grade than is actually required to ensure this is done properly.
After a contract is awarded, DoD may choose to conduct a Medium or
High Assessment of an offer based on the criticality of the program or
the sensitivity of information being handled by the contractor. Under
both the Medium and High Assessment DoD assessors will be reviewing the
contractor's system security plan description of how each NIST SP 800-
171 requirement is met and will identify any descriptions that may not
properly address the security requirements. The contractor provides DoD
access to its facilities and personnel, if necessary, and prepares for/
participates in the assessment conducted by the DoD. Under a High
Assessment a contractor will be asked to demonstrate their system
security plan. DoD will post the results in SPRS.
For the Medium Assessment, DoD estimates that the burden for a
small entity to make the system security plan and supporting
documentation available for review by the DoD assessor is one hour per
entity at a journeyman-level-2 rate of pay, a cost of $99.08/assessment
(1 hour * $99.08/hour). It is estimated that the burden for a small
entity to participate in the review and discussion of the system
security plan and supporting documents with the DoD assessor is three
hours, with one journeyman-level-2 and one senior-level-2 contractor
employee participating in the assessment, a cost of $710.40/assessment
((3 hours * $99.08/hour = $297.24) + (3 hours * $137.72/hour =
$413.16)). Assuming issues are identified by the DoD Assessor, DoD
estimates that the burden for a small entity to determine and provide
to DoD the date by which the issues will be resolved is one hour per
entity at a journeyman-level rate of pay, a cost of $99.08/assessment
(1 hour * $99.08/hour). Therefore, total estimated cost for a small
entity that undergoes a Medium Assessment is $908.56/assessment ($99.08
+ $710.40 + $99.08).
For the High Assessment, DoD estimates that the burden for a small
entity to participate in the review and discussion of the system
security plan and supporting documents to the DoD assessors is 116
hours per entity at a cost of $14,542.24/assessment. The cost estimate
is based on 2 senior-level-2 employees dedicating 32 hours each, 8
senior-level-1 employees dedicating 4 hours each, and 10 journeyman-
level employees dedicating 2 hours each ((2 * 32 hours * $137.72/hour =
$8,814.08) + (8 * 4 hours * 117.08/hour = $3,746.56) + (10 * 2 hours *
$99.08/hour = 1,981.60)). It is estimated that the burden to make the
system security plan and supporting documentation available for review
by the DoD assessors, prepare for demonstration of requirements
implementation, and to conduct post review activities is 304 hours per
entity, at a cost of $36,133.76/assessment. The cost estimate is based
on 2 senior-level-2 employees dedicating 48 hours each, 8 senior-level-
1 employees dedicating 16 hours each, and 10 journeyman-level employees
dedicating 8 hours each ((2 * 48 hours * $137.72/hour = $13,221.12) +
(8 * 16 hours * 117.08/hour = $14,986.24) + (10 * 8 hours * $99.08/hour
= $7,926.40)). Therefore, total estimated cost for a small entity that
undergoes a High Assessment is $50,676/assessment ($14,542.24 +
$36,133.76). DoD considers this to be the upper estimate of the cost,
as it assumes a very robust information technology workforce. For many
smaller companies, which may not have a complex information system to
manage, the information system staff will be a much more limited, and
labor that can be devoted (or is necessary) to prepare for and
participate in the assessment is likely to be significantly less than
estimated.
The following table provides the estimated annual costs for small
entities to comply with the DoD Assessment requirements of this rule.
Since assessments are valid for three years, the cost per assessment
has been divided by three to estimate the annual cost per entity:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost/ Annual cost/ Total unique Annual cost
Assessment assessment entity entities all entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basic........................................... $75 $25 26,469 $655,637
Medium.......................................... 909 303 444 134,467
High............................................ 50,676 16,892 243 4,104,756
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................................... .............. .............. 27,156 4,894,860
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following table presents the average annual cost per small
entity for each DoD Assessment as a percentage of the annual revenue
for a small entity for four of the top five NAICS codes. The low-end of
the range of annual revenues presented in the table includes the
average annual revenue for smaller sized firms. The high-end of the
range includes the maximum annual revenue allowed by the Small Business
Administration (SBA) for a small
[[Page 61513]]
business, per the SBA's small business size standards published at 13
CFR 121.201. NAICS code 541712 is excluded, because it is no longer an
active NAICS code and the prior size standard was based on number of
employees.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Range of annual
revenues for small Basic assessment Medium assessment High assessment
NAICS code businesses (in annual cost as % annual cost as % annual cost as %
millions) of annual revenue of annual revenue of annual revenue
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
541330.......................... $5-16.5........... 0.0005-0.0002..... 0.0061-0.0018..... 0.3378-0.1024
236220.......................... $10-$39.5......... 0.0002-0.0001..... 0.0030-0.0008..... 0.1689-0.0428
541519.......................... $10-$30.0......... 0.0002-0.0001..... 0.0030-0.0010..... 0.1689-0.0563
561210.......................... $10-$41.5......... 0.0002-0.0001..... 0.0030-0.0007..... 0.1689-0.0407
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. CMMC Framework
This rule adds DFARS clause 252.204-7021, Cybersecurity Maturity
Model Certification Requirement, which requires the contractor to have
the CMMC certification at the level required in the solicitation by
contract award and maintain the required CMMC level for the duration of
the contract. In order to achieve a specific CMMC level, a DIB company
must demonstrate both process institutionalization or maturity and the
implementation of practices commensurate with that level. A DIB
contractor can achieve a specific CMMC level for its entire enterprise
network or particular segment(s) or enclave(s), depending upon where
the information to be protected is processed, stored, or transmitted.
The following table provides a high-level description of the
processes and practices evaluated during a CMMC assessment at each
level; however, more specific information on the processes and
practices associated with each CMMC Level is available at https://www.acq.osd.mil/cmmc/.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................ Consists of the 15 basic safeguarding
requirements from FAR clause 52.204-21.
2............................ Consists of 65 security requirements from
NIST SP 800-171 implemented via DFARS
clause 252.204-7012, 7 CMMC practices,
and 2 CMMC processes. Intended as an
optional intermediary step for
contractors as part of their progression
to Level 3.
3............................ Consists of all 110 security requirements
from NIST SP 800-171, 20 CMMC practices,
and 3 CMMC processes.
4............................ Consists of all 110 security requirements
from NIST SP 800-171, 46 CMMC practices,
and 4 CMMC processes.
5............................ Consists of all 110 security requirements
from NIST SP 800-171, 61 CMMC practices,
and 5 CMMC processes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CMMC Assessments will be conducted by C3PAOs, which are accredited
by the CMMC-AB. C3PAOs will provide CMMC Assessment reports to the
CMMC-AB who will then maintain and store these reports in appropriate
database(s). The CMMC-AB will issue CMMC certificates upon the
resolution of any disputes or anomalies during the conduct of the
assessment. These CMMC certificates will be distributed to the DIB
contractor and the requisite information will be posted in SPRS.
If a contractor disputes the outcome of a C3PAO assessment, the
contractor may submit a dispute adjudication request to the CMMC-AB
along with supporting information related to claimed errors,
malfeasance, or ethical lapses by the C3PAO. The CMMC-AB will follow a
formal process to review the adjudication request and provide a
preliminary evaluation to the contractor and C3PAO. If the contractor
does not accept the CMMC-AB preliminary finding, the contractor may
request an additional assessment by the CMMC-AB staff.
The costs associated with the preparation and the conduct of CMMC
Assessments assumes that a small DIB company, in general, possesses a
less complex and less expansive IT and cybersecurity infrastructure and
operations relative to a larger DIB company. In estimating the cost for
a small DIB company to obtain a CMMC certification, DoD took into
account non-recurring engineering costs, recurring engineering costs,
the cost to participate in the assessment, and re-certification costs:
Nonrecurring engineering costs consist of hardware,
software, and the associated labor. The costs are incurred only in the
year of the initial assessment.
Recurring engineering costs consist of any recurring fees
and associated labor for technology refresh. The recurring engineering
costs associated with technology refresh have been spread uniformly
over a 5-year period (i.e., 20% each year as recurring engineering
costs).
Assessment costs consist of contractor support for pre-
assessment preparations, the actual assessment, and any post-assessment
work. These costs also include an estimate of the potential C3PAO costs
for conducting CMMC Assessment, which are comprised of labor for
supporting pre-assessment preparations, actual assessment, and post-
assessment work, plus travel cost.
Re-certification costs are the same as the initial
certification cost.
The following is a summary of the estimated costs for a small
entity to achieve certification at each CMMC Level.
i. Level 1 Certification
Contractors pursuing a Level 1 Certification should have already
implemented the 15 existing basic safeguarding requirements under FAR
clause 52.204-21. Therefore, there are no estimated nonrecurring or
recurring engineering costs associated with CMMC Level 1.
DoD estimates that the cost for a small entity to support a CMMC
Level 1 Assessment or recertification is $2,999.56:
Contractor Support. It is estimated that one journeyman-
level-1 employee will dedicate 14 hours to support the assessment (8
hours for pre- and post-assessment support + 6 hours for the
assessment). The estimated cost is $1,166.48 (1 journeyman * $83.32/
hour * 14 hours).
C3PAO Assessment. It is estimated that one journeyman-
level-1 employee will dedicate 19 hours to conduct the assessment (8
hours for pre- and post-assessment support + 6 hours for the assessment
+ 5 hours for travel). Each employee is estimated to have 1 day of per
diem for travel. The estimated cost
[[Page 61514]]
is $1,833.08 ((1 journeyman * $83.32/hour * 19 hours = $1,583.08) + (1
employees * 1 day * $250/day = $250 travel costs)).
ii. Level 2 Certification
Contractors pursuing a Level 2 Certification should have already
implemented the 65 existing NIST SP 800-171 security requirements.
Therefore, the estimated engineering costs per small entity is
associated with implementation of 9 new requirements (7 CMMC practices
and 2 CMMC processes). The estimated nonrecurring engineering cost per
entity per assessment/recertification is $8,135. The estimated
recurring engineering cost per entity per year is $20,154.
DoD estimates that the cost for a small entity to support a CMMC
Level 2 Assessment or recertification is $22,466.88.
Contractor Support. It is estimated that two senior-level-
1 employees will dedicate 48 hours each to support the assessment (24
hours for pre- and post-assessment support + 24 hours for the
assessment). The estimated cost is $11,239.68 (2 senior * $117.08/hour
* 48 hours).
C3PAO Assessment. It is estimated that one journeyman-
level-2 employee and one senior-level-1 employee will dedicate 45 hours
each to conduct the assessment (16 hours for pre- and post-assessment
support + 24 hours for the assessment + 5 hours for travel). Each
employee is estimated to have 3 days of per diem for travel. The
estimated cost is $11,227.20 ((1 senior * $117.08/hour * 45 hours =
$5,268.60) + (1 journeyman * $99.08/hour * 45 hours = $4,458.60) + (2
employees * 3 days * $250/day = $1,500 travel costs)).
iii. Level 3 Certification
Contractors pursuing a Level 3 Certification should have already
implemented the 110 existing NIST SP 800-171 security requirements.
Therefore, the estimated engineering costs per small entity is
associated with implementation 23 new requirements (20 CMMC practices
and 3 CMMC processes). The estimated nonrecurring engineering cost per
entity per assessment/recertification is $26,214. The estimated
recurring engineering cost per entity per year is $41,666.
DoD estimates that the cost for a small entity to support a CMMC
Level 3 assessment or recertification is $51,095.60.
Contractor Support. It is estimated that three senior-
level-1 employees will dedicate 64 hours each to support the assessment
(32 hours for pre- and post-assessment support + 32 hours for the
assessment). The estimated cost is $22,479.36 (3 seniors * $117.08/hour
* 64 hours).
C3PAO Assessment. It is estimated that one senior-level-1
employee and three journeyman-level-2 employees will dedicate 57 hours
each to conduct the assessment (24 hours for pre- and post-assessment
support + 32 hours for the assessment + 5 hours for travel). Each
employee is estimated to have 5 days of per diem for travel. The
estimated cost is $28,616.24 ((1 senior * $117.08/hour * 57 hours =
$6,673.56) + (3 journeyman * $99.08/hour * 57 hours = $16,942.68) + (4
employees * 5 days * $250/day = $5,000 travel costs)).
iv. Level 4 Certification
Contractors pursuing a Level 4 Certification should have already
implemented the 110 existing NIST SP 800-171 security requirements.
Therefore, the estimated engineering costs per small entity is
associated with implementation 50 new requirements (46 CMMC practices
and 4 CMMC processes). The estimated nonrecurring engineering cost per
entity per assessment/recertification is $938,336. The estimated
recurring engineering cost per entity per year is $301,514.
DoD estimates that the cost for a small entity to support a CMMC
Level 4 Assessment or recertification is $70,065.04.
Contractor Support. It is estimated that three senior-
level-2 employees will dedicate 80 hours each to support the assessment
(40 hours for pre- and post-assessment support + 40 hours for the
assessment). The estimated cost is $33,052.80 (3 seniors * $137.72/hour
* 80 hours)
C3PAO Assessment. It is estimated that one senior-level-2
employee and three journeyman-level-2 employees will dedicate 69 hours
each to conduct the assessment (32 hours for pre- and post-assessment
support + 48 hours for the assessment + 5 hours for travel). Each
employee is estimated to have 5 days of per diem for travel, plus
airfare. The estimated cost is $37,012.24 ((1 senior * $137.72/hour *
69 hours = $9502.68) + (3 journeyman * $99.08/hour * 69 hours =
$20,509.56) + (4 employees * 5 days * $250/day = $5,000 travel costs) +
(4 employees * $500 = $2,000 airfare)).
v. Level 5 Certification
Contractors pursuing a Level 5 Certification should have already
implemented the 110 existing NIST SP 800-171 security requirements.
Therefore, the estimated engineering costs per small entity is
associated with implementation 66 new requirements (61 CMMC practices
and 5 CMMC processes). The estimated nonrecurring engineering cost per
entity per assessment/recertification is $1,230,214. The estimated
recurring engineering cost per entity per year is $384,666.
DoD estimates that the cost for a small entity to support a CMMC
Level 5 Assessment or recertification is $110,090.80.
Contractor Support. It is estimated that four senior-
level-2 employees will dedicate 104 hours each to support the
assessment (48 hours for pre- and post-assessment support + 56 hours
for the assessment). The estimated cost is $57,291.52 (4 senior *
$137.72/hour * 104 hours).
C3PAO Assessment. It is estimated that one senior-level-2
employee, two senior-level-1 employees, and one journeyman-level-2
employee will dedicate 93 hours each to conduct the assessment (32
hours for pre- and post-assessment support + 56 hours for the
assessment + 5 hours for travel). Each employee is estimated to have 7
days of per diem for travel. The estimated cost is $52,799.28 ((1
senior * $137.72/hour * 93 hours = $12,807.96) + (2 senior * $117.08/
hour * 93 hours = $21,776.88) + (1 journeyman * $99.08/hour * 93 hours
= $9,214.44) + (4 employees * 7 days * $250/day = $7,000 travel costs)
+ (4 employees * $500 = $2,000 airfare)).
vi. Total Estimated Annual Costs
The following table provides a summary of the total estimated
annual costs for an individual small entity to obtain each CMMC
certification level. Nonrecurring engineering costs are spread over a
20-year period to determine the average annual cost per entity.
Assessment costs have been spread over a 3-year period, since entities
will participate in a reassessment every 3 years.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average
nonrecurring Recurring Average Total annual
CMMC cert engineering engineering assessment assessment
costs costs costs cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 1......................................... $0 $0 $1,000 $1,000
[[Page 61515]]
Level 2......................................... 407 20,154 7,489 28,050
Level 3......................................... 1,311 41,666 17,032 60,009
Level 4......................................... 46,917 301,514 23,355 371,786
Level 5......................................... 61,511 384,666 36,697 482,874
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following table presents the average annual cost per small
entity for CMMC certifications at levels 1 through 3 as a percentage of
the annual revenue for a small entity for four of the top five NAICS
codes. The low-end of the range of annual revenues presented in the
table includes the average annual revenue for smaller sized firms. The
high-end of the range includes the maximum annual revenue allowed by
the SBA for a small business, per the SBA's small business size
standards published at 13 CFR 121.201. NAICS code 541712 is excluded,
because it is no longer an active NAICS code and the prior size
standard was based on number of employees.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Range of annual
revenues for small CMMC level 1 CMMC level 2 CMMC level 3
NAICS code businesses (in annual cost as % annual cost as % annual cost as %
millions) of annual revenue of annual revenue of annual revenue
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
541330.......................... $5-$16.5.......... 0.0200-0.0061..... 0.5610-0.1700..... 1.2002-0.3637
236220.......................... $10-$39.5......... 0.0100-0.0025..... 0.2805-0.0710..... 0.6001-0.1519
541519.......................... $10-$30.0......... 0.0100-0.0033..... 0.2805-0.0935..... 0.6001-0.2000
561210.......................... $10-$41.5......... 0.0100-0.0024..... 0.2805-0.0676..... 0.6001-0.1446
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For CMMC certification at levels 4 and 5, the following table
presents the annual cost per small entity for CMMC certification at
levels 4 and 5 as a percentage of the low, average, and high annual
revenues for entities that have represented themselves as small in the
System for Award Management (SAM) for their primary NAICS code and are
performing on contracts that could be subject to a CMMC level 4 or 5
certification requirements. The values of the low, average, and high
annual revenues are based on an average of the annual receipt reported
in SAM by such entities for FY16 through FY20.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level 4 Level 5
Annual revenue of entities certification certification
FY16 thru FY20 represented as small for primary cost as % of cost as % of
NAICS annual revenue annual revenue
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low........................................... $6.5 million.................... 5.67 7.36
Average....................................... $22.9 million................... 1.62 2.11
High.......................................... $85 million..................... 0.43 0.56
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following is a summary of the estimated annual costs in
millions for all 163,391 small entities to achieve their initial CMMC
certifications (and recertifications every three years) over a 10-year
period:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................... $1.99 $5.58 $39.86 $0.00 $0.00
2............................... 9.97 30.39 211.58 2.62 3.45
3............................... 33.25 107.20 742.65 5.84 7.67
4............................... 65.73 232.90 1,595.23 9.67 12.66
5............................... 73.69 314.23 2,105.53 12.93 16.91
6............................... 96.98 414.64 2,746.50 15.18 19.82
7............................... 123.26 509.08 3,342.95 17.43 22.74
8............................... 73.69 421.22 2,669.25 10.58 13.68
9............................... 96.98 450.27 2,867.60 10.72 13.90
10.............................. 123.26 483.07 3,091.56 10.86 14.13
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Relevant Federal Rules, Which May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict
With the Rule
The rule does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any other
Federal rules. Rather this rule validates and verifies contractor
compliance with the existing cybersecurity requirements in FAR clause
52.204-21 and DFARS clause 252.204-7012, and ensures that the entire
DIB sector has the appropriate cybersecurity processes and practices in
place to properly protect FCI and CUI during performance of DoD
contracts.
F. Description of Any Significant Alternatives to the Rule Which
Accomplish the Stated Objectives of Applicable Statutes and Which
Minimize Any Significant Economic Impact of the Rule on Small Entities
DoD considered and adopted several alternatives during the
development of
[[Page 61516]]
this rule that reduce the burden on small entities and still meet the
objectives of the rule. These alternatives include: (1) Exempting
contracts and orders exclusively for the acquisition of commercially
available off-the-shelf items; and (2) implementing a phased rollout
for the CMMC portion of the rule and stipulating that the inclusion a
CMMC requirement in new contracts until that time be approved by the
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment. Additional alternatives were considered, however, it was
determined that these other alternatives did not achieve the intended
policy outcome.
1. CMMC Model and Implementation
The Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) referenced in section IV of
this preamble estimates that the total number of unique DoD contractors
and subcontractors is 220,966, with approximately 163,391 or 74% being
small entities. The RIA also specifies the estimates for the percentage
of all contractors and subcontractors associated with each CMMC level.
These estimates indicate that the vast majority of small entities
(i.e., 163,325 of 163,391 or 99.96%) will be required to achieve CMMC
Level 1-3 certificates during the initial rollout. The Department
looked at Levels 1 through 5 to determine if there were alternatives
and whether these alternatives met the intended policy outcome.
For CMMC Level 1, the practices map directly to the basic
safeguarding requirements specified in the clause at FAR 52.204-21. The
phased rollout estimates that the majority of small entities (i.e.,
97,992 of the 163,325 or 60%) will be required to achieve CMMC Level 1.
The planned implementation of CMMC Level 1 adds a verification
component to the existing FAR clause by including an on-site assessment
by a credentialed assessor from an accredited C3PAO. The on-site
assessment verifies the implementation of the required cybersecurity
practices and further supports the physical identification of
contractors and subcontractors in the DoD supply chain. In the
aggregate, the estimated cost associated with supporting this on-site
assessment and approximated C3PAO fees does not represent a cost-driver
with respect to CMMC costs to small entities across levels. An
alternative to an on-site assessment is for contractors to provide
documentation and supporting evidence of the proper implementation of
the required cybersecurity practices through a secure online portal.
These artifacts would then be reviewed and checked virtually by an
accredited assessor prior to the CMMC-AB issuing a CMMC Level 1
certificate. The drawback of this alternative is the inability of the
contractor to interact with the C3PAO assessor in person and provide
evidence directly without transmitting proprietary information. Small
entities will not receive as much meaningful and interactive feedback
that would be part of a Level 1 on-site assessment.
For CMMC Level 2, the practices encompass only 48 of the 110
security requirements of NIST SP 800-171, as specified in DFARS clause
252.204-7012, and 7 additional cybersecurity requirements. In addition,
CMMC Level 2 includes two process maturity requirements. The phased
rollout estimates that approximately 10% of small entities may choose
to use Level 2 as a transition step from Level 1 to Level 3. Small
entities that achieve Level 1 can seek to achieve Level 3 (without
first achieving a Level 2 certification) if the necessary cybersecurity
practices and processes have been implemented. The Department does not
anticipate releasing new contracts that require contractors to achieve
CMMC Level 2. As a result, the Department did not consider alternatives
with respect to CMMC Level 2.
For CMMC Level 3, the practices encompass all the 110 security
requirements of NIST SP 800-171, as specified in DFARS clause 252.204-
7012, as well as 13 additional cybersecurity requirements above Level
2. In addition, CMMC Level 3 includes three process maturity
requirements. These additional cybersecurity practices were
incorporated based upon several considerations that included public
comments from September to December 2019 on draft versions of the
model, inputs from the DIB Sector Coordinating Council (SCC),
cybersecurity threats, the progression of cybersecurity capabilities
from Level 3 to Levels 4, and other factors. The CMMC phased rollout
estimates that 48,999 of the 163,325 small entities or 30% will be
required to achieve CMMC Level 3. The alternatives considered include
removing a subset or all of the 20 additional practices at Level 3 or
moving a subset or all of the 20 additional practices from Level 3 to
Level 4. The primary drawback of these alternatives is that the
cybersecurity capability gaps associated with protecting CUI will not
be addressed until Level 4, which will apply to a relatively small
percentage of non-small and small entities. Furthermore, the
progression of cybersecurity capabilities from Level 3 to Level 4
becomes more abrupt.
For CMMC Level 4, the practices encompass the 110 security
requirements of NIST SP 800-171 as specified in DFARS clause 252.204-
7012 and 46 additional cybersecurity requirements. More specifically,
CMMC Level 4 adds 26 enhanced security requirements above CMMC Level 3,
of which 13 are derived from Draft NIST SP 800-171B. In addition, CMMC
Level 4 includes four process maturity requirements. The DIB SCC and
the public contributed to the specification of the other 13 enhanced
security requirements. For CMMC Level 4, an alternative considered is
to define a threshold for contractors to meet 15 out of the 26 enhanced
security requirements. In addition, contractors will be required to
meet 6 out of the 11 remaining non-threshold enhanced security
requirements. This alternative implies that a contractor will have to
implement 21 of the 26 enhanced security requirements as well as the
associated maturity processes. A drawback of this alternative is that
contractors implement a different subset of the 11 non-threshold
requirements which in turn, leads to a non-uniform set of cybersecurity
capabilities across those certified at Level 4.
For CMMC Level 5, the practices encompass the 110 security
requirements of NIST SP 800-171 as specified in DFARS clause 252.204-
7012 and 61 additional cybersecurity requirements. More specifically,
CMMC Level 5 adds 15 enhanced security requirements above CMMC Level 4,
of which 4 are derived from Draft NIST SP 800-171B. In addition, CMMC
Level 5 includes five process maturity requirements. The DIB SCC and
the public contributed to the specification of the other 11 enhanced
security requirements. For CMMC Level 5, the alternative considered is
to define a threshold for contractors to meet 6 out of the 15 enhanced
security requirements. In addition, contractors will be required to
meet 5 out of the 9 remaining non-threshold enhanced security
requirements. This alternative implies that a contractor will have
implemented 11 of the 15 enhanced security requirements as well as the
associated maturity processes. A drawback of this alternative is that
contractors implement a different subset of the 9 non-threshold
requirements which in turn, leads to a non-uniform set of cybersecurity
capabilities across those certified at Level 5.
2. Timing of CMMC Level Certification Requirement
In addition to evaluating the make-up of the CMMC levels, the
Department
[[Page 61517]]
took into consideration the timing of the requirement to achieve a CMMC
level certification: (1) At time of proposal or offer submission, (2)
in order to receive award, or (3) post contract award. The Department
ultimately adopted alternative 2 to require certification at the time
of award. The drawback of alternative 1 (at time of proposal or offer
submission) is the increased risk for contractors since they may not
have sufficient time to achieve the required CMMC certification after
the release of the Request for Information (RFI). The drawback of
alternative 3 (after contract award) is the increased risk to the
Department with respect to the schedule and uncertainty with respect to
the case where the contractor is unable to achieve the required CMMC
level in a reasonable amount of time given their current cybersecurity
posture. This potential delay would apply to the entire supply chain
and prevent the appropriate flow of CUI and FCI. The Department seeks
public comment on the timing of contract award, to include the effect
of requiring certification at time of award on small businesses.
DoD invites comments from small business concerns and other
interested parties on the expected impact of this rule on small
entities. DoD will also consider comments from small entities
concerning the existing regulations in subparts affected by this rule
in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 610. Interested parties must submit such
comments separately and should cite 5 U.S.C. 610 (DFARS Case 2019-
D041), in correspondence.
VIII. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (PRA)
provides that an agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a
collection of information, and no person is required to respond to nor
be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a collection of
information, unless that collection has obtained OMB approval and
displays a currently valid OMB Control Number.
DoD requested, and OMB authorized, emergency processing of the
collection of information tied to this rule, as OMB Control Number
0750-0004, Assessing Contractor Implementation of Cybersecurity
Requirements, consistent with 5 CFR 1320.13.
DoD has determined the following conditions have been met:
a. The collection of information is needed prior to the expiration
of time periods normally associated with a routine submission for
review under the provisions of the PRA, to enable the Department to
immediately begin assessing the current status of contractor
implementation of NIST SP 800-171 on their information systems that
process CUI.
b. The collection of information is essential to DoD's mission. The
collection of information is essential to DoD's mission. The National
Defense Strategy (NDS) and DoD Cyber Strategy highlight the importance
of protecting the Defense Industrial Base (DIB) to maintain national
and economic security. To this end, DoD requires defense contractors
and subcontractors to implement the NIST SP 800-171 security
requirements on information systems that handle CUI, pursuant to DFARS
clause 252.204-7012. This DoD Assessment Methodology enables the
Department to assess strategically, at a corporate-level, contractor
implementation of the NIST SP 800-171 security requirements. Results of
a NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment reflect the net effect of NIST SP 800-
171 security requirements not yet implemented by a contractor.
c. Moreover, DoD cannot comply with the normal clearance
procedures, because public harm is reasonably likely to result if
current clearance procedures are followed. Authorizing collection of
this information on the effective date will motivate defense
contractors and subcontractors who have not yet implemented existing
NIST SP 800-171 security requirements, to take action to implement the
security requirements on covered information systems that process CUI,
in order to protect our national and economic security interests. The
aggregate loss of sensitive controlled unclassified information and
intellectual property from the DIB sector could undermine U.S.
technological advantages and increase risk to DoD missions.
Upon publication of this rule, DoD intends to provide a separate
60-day notice in the Federal Register requesting public comment for OMB
Control Number 0750-0004, Assessing Contractor Implementation of
Cybersecurity Requirements.
DOD estimates the annual public reporting burden for the
information collection as follows:
a. Basic Assessment
Respondents: 13,068.
Responses per respondent: 1.
Total annual responses: 13,068.
Hours per response: .75.
Total burden hours: 9,801.
b. Medium Assessment
Respondents: 200.
Responses per respondent: 1.
Total annual responses: 200.
Hours per response: 8.
Total burden hours: 1,600.
c. High Assessment
Respondents: 110.
Responses per respondent: 1.
Total annual responses: 110.
Hours per response: 420.
Total burden hours: 46,200.
d. Total Public Burden (All Entities)
Respondents: 13,068.
Total annual responses: 13,378.
Total burden hours: 57,601.
e. Total Public Burden (Small Entities)
Respondents: 8,823.
Total annual responses: 9,023.
Total burden hours: 41,821.
The requirement to collect information from offerors and
contractors regarding the status of their implementation of NIST SP
800-171 on their information systems that process CUI, is being imposed
via a new solicitation provision and contract clause. Per the new
provision, if an offeror is required to have implemented the NIST SP
800-171 security requirements on their information systems pursuant to
DFARS clause 252.204-7012, then the offeror must have, at minimum, a
current self-assessment (or Basic Assessment) uploaded to DoD's
Supplier Performance Risk System, in order to be considered for award.
Depending on the criticality of the acquisition program, after contract
award, certain contractors may be required to participate in a Medium
or High assessment to be conducted by DoD assessor. During these post-
award assessments, contractors will be required to demonstrate their
implementation of NIST SP 800-171 security requirements. Results of a
NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment reflect the net effect of NIST SP 800-
171 security requirements not yet implemented by a contractor.
IX. Determination To Issue an Interim Rule
A determination has been made under the authority of the Secretary
of Defense that urgent and compelling reasons exist to promulgate this
interim rule without prior opportunity for public comment pursuant to
41 U.S.C. 1707(d) and FAR 1.501-3(b).
Malicious cyber actors have targeted, and continue to target, the
DIB sector, which consists of over 200,000 small-to-large sized
entities that support the warfighter. In particular, actors ranging
from cyber criminals to nation-states continue to attack companies and
organizations that comprise the Department's multi-tier supply chain
including smaller entities at the lower
[[Page 61518]]
tiers. These actors seek to steal DoD's intellectual property to
undercut the United States' strategic and technological advantage and
to benefit their own military and economic development.
The Department has been focused on improving the cyber resiliency
and security of the DIB sector for over a decade as evidenced by the
development of minimum cybersecurity standards and the implementation
of those standards in the National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST) Special Publications (SP) and implementation of those
standards in the FAR and DFARS. In 2013, DoD issued a final DFARS rule
(78 FR 69273) that required contractors to implement a select number of
security measures from NIST SP 800-53, Recommended Security Controls
for Federal Information Systems and Organizations, to facilitate
safeguarding unclassified DoD information within contractor information
systems from unauthorized access and disclosure. In 2015, DoD issued an
interim DFARS rule (80 FR 81472) requiring contractors that handle
Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) on their information systems
to transition by December 31, 2017, from NIST SP 800-53 to NIST SP 800-
171, Protecting Controlled Unclassified Information in Nonfederal
Information Systems and Organizations. NIST SP 800-171 was not only
easier to use, but also provided security requirements that greatly
increases the protections of Government information in contractor
information systems once implemented. And, in 2016, the FAR Council
mandated the use of FAR clause 52.204-21, Basic Safeguarding of Covered
Contractor Information Systems, to require all Government contractors
to implement, at minimum, some basic policies and practices to
safeguard Federal Contract Information (FCI) within their information
systems. Since then, the Department has been engaging with industry on
improving their compliance with these exiting cybersecurity
requirements and developing a framework to institutionalize
cybersecurity process and practices throughout the DIB sector.
Notwithstanding the fact that these minimum cybersecurity standards
have been in effect on DoD contracts since as early as 2013, several
surveys and questionnaires by defense industrial associations have
highlighted the DIB sector's continued challenges in achieving broad
implementation of these security requirements. In a 2017 questionnaire,
contractors and subcontractors that responded acknowledged
implementation rates of 38% to 54% for at least 10 of the 110 security
requirements of NIST SP 800-171.\1\ In a separate 2018 survey, 36% of
contractors who responded indicated a lack of awareness of DFARS clause
252.204-7012 and 45% of contractors acknowledged not having read NIST
SP 800-171.\2\ In a 2019 survey, contractors that responded rated their
level of preparedness for a Defense Contract Management Agency standard
assessment of contractor implementation of NIST SP 800-171 at 56%.\3\
Furthermore, for the High Assessments conducted on-site by DoD to date,
only 36% of contractors demonstrated implementation of all 110 of the
NIST SP 800-171 security requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Aerospace Industries Association. ``Complying with NIST 800-
171.'' Fall 2017.
\2\ National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA).
``Implementing Cybersecurity in DoD Supply Chains.'' White Paper.
July 2018.
\3\ NDIA. ``Beyond Obfuscation: The Defense Industry's Position
within Federal Cybersecurity Policy.'' A Report of the NDIA Policy
Department. October 2018. Page 20 and page 24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although these industry surveys represent a small sample of the DIB
sector, the results were reinforced by the findings from DoD Inspector
General report in 2019 (DODIG-2019-105 ``Audit of Protection of DoD
Controlled Unclassified Information on Contractor-Owned Networks and
Systems'') indicate that DoD contractors did not consistently implement
mandated system security requirements for safeguarding CUI and
recommended that DoD take immediate steps to assess a contractor's
ability to protect this information. The report emphasizes that
malicious actors can exploit the vulnerabilities of contractors'
networks and systems and exfiltrate information related to some of the
Nation's most valuable advanced defense technologies.
Defense contractors must begin viewing cybersecurity as a part of
doing business, in order to protect themselves and to protect national
security. The various industry surveys and Government assessments
conducted to date illustrate the following: Absent a requirement for
defense contractors to demonstrate implementation of standard
cybersecurity processes and practices, cybersecurity requirements will
not be fully implemented, leaving DoD and the DIB unprotected and
vulnerable to malicious cyber activity. To this end, section 1648 of
the NDAA for FY 2020 (Pub. L. 116-92) directed the Secretary of Defense
to develop a consistent, comprehensive framework to enhance
cybersecurity for the U.S. defense industrial base no later than
February 1, 2020. In the Senate Armed Services Committee Report to
accompany the NDAA for FY 2020, the Committee expressed concern that
DIB contractors are an inviting target for our adversaries, who have
been conducting cyberattacks to steal critical military technologies.
Developing a framework to enhance the cybersecurity of the defense
industrial base will serve as an important first step toward securing
the supply chain. Pursuant to section 1648, DoD has developed the CMMC
Framework, which gives the Department a mechanism to certify the cyber
posture of its largest defense contractors to the smallest firms in our
supply chain, who have become primary targets of malicious cyber
activity.
This rule is an important part of the cybersecurity framework,\4\
and builds on the existing FAR and DFARS clause cybersecurity
requirements by (1) adding a mechanism to immediately begin assessing
the current status of contractor implementation of NIST SP 800-171 on
their information systems that process CUI; and (2) to require
contractors and subcontractors to take steps to fully implement
existing cybersecurity requirements, plus additional processes and
practices, to protect FCI and CUI on their information systems in
preparation for verification under the CMMC Framework. There is an
urgent need for DoD to immediately begin assessing where
vulnerabilities in its supply chain exist and take steps to correct
such deficiencies, which can be accomplished by requiring contractors
and subcontractors that handle DoD CUI on their information systems to
complete a NIST SP 800-171 Basic Assessment. In fact, while this rule
includes a delayed effective date, contractors and subcontractors that
are required to implement NIST SP 800-171 pursuant to DFARS clause
252.204-7012, are encouraged to immediately conduct and submit a self-
assessment as described in this rule to facilitate the Department's
assessment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Section 1648 of the NDAA for FY 2020 mandates the
formulation of ``unified cybersecurity . . . regulations . . . to be
imposed on the defense industrial base for the purpose of assessing
the cybersecurity of individual contractors,''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is equally urgent for the Department to ensure DIB contractors
that have not fully implemented the basic safeguarding requirements
under FAR clause 52.204-21 or the NIST SP 800-171 security requirements
pursuant to DFARS 252.204-7012 begin correcting these deficiencies
immediately. These are cybersecurity requirements contractors and
subcontractors should have already implemented (or in the
[[Page 61519]]
case of implementation of NIST SP 800-171, have plans of action to
correct deficiencies) on information systems that handle CUI. Under the
CMMC Framework, a contractor is able to achieve CMMC Level 1
Certification if they can demonstrate implementation of the basic
safeguarding requirements in the FAR clause. Similarly, a contractor is
able to achieve CMMC Level 3 if they can demonstrate implementation of
the NIST SP 800-171 security requirements, plus some additional
processes and practices. This rule ensures contractors and
subcontractors focus on full implementation of existing cybersecurity
requirements on their information systems and expedites the
Department's ability to secure its supply chain.
For the foregoing reasons, pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 1707(d), DoD finds
that urgent and compelling circumstances make compliance with the
notice and comment requirements of 41 U.S.C. 1707(a) impracticable, and
invokes the exception to those requirements under 41 U.S.C. 1707(d) and
FAR 1.501-3(b).\5\ While a public comment process will not be completed
prior to the rule's effective date, DoD has incorporated feedback
solicited through extensive outreach already undertaken pursuant to
section 1648(d) of the NDAA for FY 2020, including through public
meetings and extensive industry outreach conducted over the past year.
However, pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 1707 and FAR 1.501-3(b), DoD will
consider public comments received in response to this interim rule in
the formation of the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ FAR 1.501-3(b) states that ``[a]dvance comments need not be
solicited when urgent and compelling circumstances make solicitation
of comments impracticable prior to the effective date of the
coverage, such as when a new statute must be implemented in a
relatively short period of time. In such case, the coverage shall be
issued on a temporary basis and shall provide for at least a 30 day
public comment period.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
List of Subjects in 204, 212, 217, and 252
Government procurement.
Jennifer D. Johnson,
Regulatory Control Officer, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.
Therefore, 48 CFR parts 204, 212, 217, and 252 are amended as
follows:
0
1. The authority citation for 48 CFR parts 204, 212, 217, and 252
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.
PART 204--ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
0
2. Amend section 204.7302 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
204.7302 Policy.
(a)(1) Contractors and subcontractors are required to provide
adequate security on all covered contractor information systems.
(2) Contractors required to implement NIST SP 800-171, in
accordance with the clause at 252.204-7012, Safeguarding Covered
Defense Information and Cyber incident Reporting, are required at time
of award to have at least a Basic NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment that
is current (i.e., not more than 3 years old unless a lesser time is
specified in the solicitation) (see 252.204-7019).
(3) The NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Methodology is located at
https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/pdi/cyber/strategically_assessing_contractor_implementation_of_NIST_SP_800-171.html.
(4) High NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessments will be conducted by
Government personnel using NIST SP 800-171A, ``Assessing Security
Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information.''
(5) The NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment will not duplicate efforts
from any other DoD assessment or the Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification (CMMC) (see subpart 204.75), except for rare
circumstances when a re-assessment may be necessary, such as, but not
limited to, when cybersecurity risks, threats, or awareness have
changed, requiring a re-assessment to ensure current compliance.
* * * * *
0
3. Revise section 204.7303 to read as follows:
204.7303 Procedures.
(a) Follow the procedures relating to safeguarding covered defense
information at PGI 204.7303.
(b) The contracting officer shall verify that the summary level
score of a current NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment (i.e., not more than
3 years old, unless a lesser time is specified in the solicitation)
(see 252.204-7019) for each covered contractor information system that
is relevant to an offer, contract, task order, or delivery order are
posted in Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS) (https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/), prior to--
(1) Awarding a contract, task order, or delivery order to an
offeror or contractor that is required to implement NIST SP 800-171 in
accordance with the clause at 252.204-7012; or
(2) Exercising an option period or extending the period of
performance on a contract, task order, or delivery order with a
contractor that is that is required to implement the NIST SP 800-171 in
accordance with the clause at 252.204-7012.
0
4. Amend section 204.7304 by revising the section heading and adding
paragraphs (d) and (e) to read as follows:
204.7304 Solicitation provisions and contract clauses.
* * * * *
(d) Use the provision at 252.204-7019, Notice of NIST SP 800-171
DoD Assessment Requirements, in all solicitations, including
solicitations using FAR part 12 procedures for the acquisition of
commercial items, except for solicitations solely for the acquisition
of commercially available off-the-shelf (COTS) items.
(e) Use the clause at 252.204-7020, NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment
Requirements, in all solicitations and contracts, task orders, or
delivery orders, including those using FAR part 12 procedures for the
acquisition of commercial items, except for those that are solely for
the acquisition of COTS items.
0
5. Add subpart 204.75, consisting of 204.7500 through 204.7503, to read
as follows:
Subpart 204.75--Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification
Sec.
204.7500 Scope of subpart.
204.7501 Policy.
204.7502 Procedures.
204.7503 Contract clause.
Subpart 204.75--Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification
204.7500 Scope of subpart.
(a) This subpart prescribes policies and procedures for including
the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) level
requirements in DoD contracts. CMMC is a framework that measures a
contractor's cybersecurity maturity to include the implementation of
cybersecurity practices and institutionalization of processes (see
https://www.acq.osd.mil/cmmc/).
(b) This subpart does not abrogate any other requirements regarding
contractor physical, personnel, information, technical, or general
administrative security operations governing the protection of
unclassified information,
[[Page 61520]]
nor does it affect requirements of the National Industrial Security
Program.
204.7501 Policy.
(a) The contracting officer shall include in the solicitation the
required CMMC level, if provided by the requiring activity. Contracting
officers shall not award a contract, task order, or delivery order to
an offeror that does not have a current (i.e., not more than 3 years
old) CMMC certificate at the level required by the solicitation.
(b) Contractors are required to achieve, at time of award, a CMMC
certificate at the level specified in the solicitation. Contractors are
required to maintain a current (i.e., not more than 3 years old) CMMC
certificate at the specified level, if required by the statement of
work or requirement document, throughout the life of the contract, task
order, or delivery order. Contracting officers shall not exercise an
option period or extend the period of performance on a contract, task
order, or delivery order, unless the contract has a current (i.e., not
more than 3 years old) CMMC certificate at the level required by the
contract, task order, or delivery order.
(c) The CMMC Assessments shall not duplicate efforts from any other
comparable DoD assessment, except for rare circumstances when a re-
assessment may be necessary such as, but not limited to when there are
indications of issues with cybersecurity and/or compliance with CMMC
requirements.
204.7502 Procedures.
(a) When a requiring activity identifies a requirement for a
contract, task order, or delivery order to include a specific CMMC
level, the contracting officer shall not--
(1) Award to an offeror that does not have a CMMC certificate at
the level required by the solicitation; or
(2) Exercise an option or extend any period of performance on a
contract, task order, or delivery order unless the contractor has a
CMMC certificate at the level required by the contract.
(b) Contracting officers shall use Supplier Performance Risk System
(SPRS) (https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/) to verify an offeror or
contractor's CMMC level.
204.7503 Contract clause.
Use the clause at 252.204-7021, Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification Requirements, as follows:
(a) Until September 30, 2025, in solicitations and contracts or
task orders or delivery orders, including those using FAR part 12
procedures for the acquisition of commercial items, except for
solicitations and contracts or orders solely for the acquisition of
commercially available off-the-shelf (COTS) items, if the requirement
document or statement of work requires a contractor to have a specific
CMMC level. In order to implement a phased rollout of CMMC, inclusion
of a CMMC requirement in a solicitation during this time period must be
approved by OUSD(A&S).
(b) On or after October 1, 2025, in all solicitations and contracts
or task orders or delivery orders, including those using FAR part 12
procedures for the acquisition of commercial items, except for
solicitations and contracts or orders solely for the acquisition of
COTS items.
PART 212--ACQUISITION OF COMMERCIAL ITEMS
0
6. Amend section 212.301, by adding paragraphs (f)(ii)(K), (L), and (M)
to read as follows:
212.301 Solicitation provisions and contract clauses for acquisition
of commercial items.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(ii) * * *
(K) Use the provision at 252.204-7019, Notice of NIST SP 800-171
DoD Assessment Requirements, as prescribed in 204.7304(d).
(L) Use the clause at 252.204-7020, NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment
Requirements, as prescribed in 204.7304(e).
(M) Use the clause at 252.204-7021, Cybersecurity Maturity Model
Certification Requirements, as prescribed in 204.7503(a) and (b).
* * * * *
PART 217--SPECIAL CONTRACTING METHODS
0
7. Amend section 217.207 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
217.207 Exercise of options.
(c) In addition to the requirements at FAR 17.207(c), exercise an
option only after:
(1) Determining that the contractor's record in the System for
Award Management database is active and the contractor's Data Universal
Numbering System (DUNS) number, Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE)
code, name, and physical address are accurately reflected in the
contract document. See PGI 217.207 for the requirement to perform cost
or price analysis of spare parts prior to exercising any option for
firm-fixed-price contracts containing spare parts.
(2) Verifying in the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS)
(https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/) that--
(i) The summary level score of a current NIST SP 800-171 DoD
Assessment (i.e., not more than 3 years old, unless a lesser time is
specified in the solicitation) for each covered contractor information
system that is relevant to an offer, contract, task order, or delivery
order are posted (see 204.7303).
(ii) The contractor has a CMMC certificate at the level required by
the contract, and that it is current (i.e., not more than 3 years old)
(see 204.7502).
PART 252--SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES
0
8. Add sections 252.204-7019, 252.204-7020, and 252.204-7021 to read as
follows:
Sec.
* * * * *
252.204-7019 Notice of NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Requirements.
252.204-7020 NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Requirements.
252.204-7021 Contractor Compliance with the Cybersecurity Maturity
Model Certification Level Requirement.
* * * * *
252.204-7019 Notice of NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Requirements.
As prescribed in 204.7304(d), use the following provision:
NOTICE OF NIST SP 800-171 DOD ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS (NOV 2020)
(a) Definitions.
Basic Assessment, Medium Assessment, and High Assessment have
the meaning given in the clause 252.204-7020, NIST SP 800-171 DoD
Assessments.
Covered contractor information system has the meaning given in
the clause 252.204-7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense Information
and Cyber Incident Reporting, of this solicitation.
(b) Requirement. In order to be considered for award, if the
Offeror is required to implement NIST SP 800-171, the Offeror shall
have a current assessment (i.e., not more than 3 years old unless a
lesser time is specified in the solicitation) (see 252.204-7020) for
each covered contractor information system that is relevant to the
offer, contract, task order, or delivery order. The Basic, Medium,
and High NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessments are described in the NIST
SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Methodology located at https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/pdi/cyber/strategically_assessing_contractor_implementation_of_NIST_SP_800-171.html.
(c) Procedures. (1) The Offeror shall verify that summary level
scores of a current NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment (i.e., not more
than 3 years old unless a lesser time is
[[Page 61521]]
specified in the solicitation) are posted in the Supplier
Performance Risk System (SPRS) (https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/) for
all covered contractor information systems relevant to the offer.
(2) If the Offeror does not have summary level scores of a
current NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment (i.e., not more than 3 years
old unless a lesser time is specified in the solicitation) posted in
SPRS, the Offeror may conduct and submit a Basic Assessment to
[email protected] for posting to SPRS in the format identified in
paragraph (d) of this provision.
(d) Summary level scores. Summary level scores for all
assessments will be posted 30 days post-assessment in SPRS to
provide DoD Components visibility into the summary level scores of
strategic assessments.
(1) Basic Assessments. An Offeror may follow the procedures in
paragraph (c)(2) of this provision for posting Basic Assessments to
SPRS.
(i) The email shall include the following information:
(A) Cybersecurity standard assessed (e.g., NIST SP 800-171 Rev
1).
(B) Organization conducting the assessment (e.g., Contractor
self-assessment).
(C) For each system security plan (security requirement 3.12.4)
supporting the performance of a DoD contract--
(1) All industry Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code(s)
associated with the information system(s) addressed by the system
security plan; and
(2) A brief description of the system security plan
architecture, if more than one plan exists.
(D) Date the assessment was completed.
(E) Summary level score (e.g., 95 out of 110, NOT the individual
value for each requirement).
(F) Date that all requirements are expected to be implemented
(i.e., a score of 110 is expected to be achieved) based on
information gathered from associated plan(s) of action developed in
accordance with NIST SP 800-171.
(ii) If multiple system security plans are addressed in the
email described at paragraph (d)(1)(i) of this section, the Offeror
shall use the following format for the report:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brief
CAGE codes description of Date of Total Date score of
System security plan supported by this the plan assessment score 110 will
plan architecture achieved
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
................. ................ ................ ........ ................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
................. ................ ................ ........ ................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
................. ................ ................ ........ ................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Medium and High Assessments. DoD will post the following
Medium and/or High Assessment summary level scores to SPRS for each
system assessed:
(i) The standard assessed (e.g., NIST SP 800-171 Rev 1).
(ii) Organization conducting the assessment, e.g., DCMA, or a
specific organization (identified by Department of Defense Activity
Address Code (DoDAAC)).
(iii) All industry CAGE code(s) associated with the information
system(s) addressed by the system security plan.
(iv) A brief description of the system security plan
architecture, if more than one system security plan exists.
(v) Date and level of the assessment, i.e., medium or high.
(vi) Summary level score (e.g., 105 out of 110, not the
individual value assigned for each requirement).
(vii) Date that all requirements are expected to be implemented
(i.e., a score of 110 is expected to be achieved) based on
information gathered from associated plan(s) of action developed in
accordance with NIST SP 800-171.
(3) Accessibility. (i) Assessment summary level scores posted in
SPRS are available to DoD personnel, and are protected, in
accordance with the standards set forth in DoD Instruction 5000.79,
Defense-wide Sharing and Use of Supplier and Product Performance
Information (PI).
(ii) Authorized representatives of the Offeror for which the
assessment was conducted may access SPRS to view their own summary
level scores, in accordance with the SPRS Software User's Guide for
Awardees/Contractors available at https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/pdf/SPRS_Awardee.pdf.
(iii) A High NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment may result in
documentation in addition to that listed in this section. DoD will
retain and protect any such documentation as ``Controlled
Unclassified Information (CUI)'' and intended for internal DoD use
only. The information will be protected against unauthorized use and
release, including through the exercise of applicable exemptions
under the Freedom of Information Act (e.g., Exemption 4 covers trade
secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a
contractor that is privileged or confidential).
(End of provision)
252.204-7020 NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Requirements.
As prescribed in 204.7304(e), use the following clause:
NIST SP 800-171 DOD ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS (NOV 2020)
(a) Definitions.
Basic Assessment means a contractor's self-assessment of the
contractor's implementation of NIST SP 800-171 that--
(1) Is based on the Contractor's review of their system security
plan(s) associated with covered contractor information system(s);
(2) Is conducted in accordance with the NIST SP 800-171 DoD
Assessment Methodology; and
(3) Results in a confidence level of ``Low'' in the resulting
score, because it is a self-generated score.
Covered contractor information system has the meaning given in
the clause 252.204-7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense Information
and Cyber Incident Reporting, of this contract.
High Assessment means an assessment that is conducted by
Government personnel using NIST SP 800-171A, Assessing Security
Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information that--
(1) Consists of--
(i) A review of a contractor's Basic Assessment;
(ii) A thorough document review;
(iii) Verification, examination, and demonstration of a
Contractor's system security plan to validate that NIST SP 800-171
security requirements have been implemented as described in the
contractor's system security plan; and
(iv) Discussions with the contractor to obtain additional
information or clarification, as needed; and
(2) Results in a confidence level of ``High'' in the resulting
score.
Medium Assessment means an assessment conducted by the
Government that--
(1) Consists of--
(i) A review of a contractor's Basic Assessment;
(ii) A thorough document review; and
(iii) Discussions with the contractor to obtain additional
information or clarification, as needed; and
(2) Results in a confidence level of ``Medium'' in the resulting
score.
(b) Applicability. This clause applies to covered contractor
information systems that are required to comply with the National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication
(SP) 800-171, in accordance with Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation System (DFARS) clause at 252.204-7012, Safeguarding
Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting, of this
contract.
(c) Requirements. The Contractor shall provide access to its
facilities, systems, and personnel necessary for the Government to
conduct a Medium or High NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment, as
described in NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Methodology at https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/pdi/cyber/strategically_assessing_contractor_implementation_of_NIST_SP_800-171.html, if necessary.
(d) Procedures. Summary level scores for all assessments will be
posted in the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS) (https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/) to provide DoD
[[Page 61522]]
Components visibility into the summary level scores of strategic
assessments.
(1) Basic Assessments. A contractor may submit, via encrypted
email, summary level scores of Basic Assessments conducted in
accordance with the NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Methodology to
[email protected] for posting to SPRS.
(i) The email shall include the following information:
(A) Version of NIST SP 800-171 against which the assessment was
conducted.
(B) Organization conducting the assessment (e.g., Contractor
self-assessment).
(C) For each system security plan (security requirement 3.12.4)
supporting the performance of a DoD contract--
(1) All industry Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code(s)
associated with the information system(s) addressed by the system
security plan; and
(2) A brief description of the system security plan
architecture, if more than one plan exists.
(D) Date the assessment was completed.
(E) Summary level score (e.g., 95 out of 110, NOT the individual
value for each requirement).
(F) Date that all requirements are expected to be implemented
(i.e., a score of 110 is expected to be achieved) based on
information gathered from associated plan(s) of action developed in
accordance with NIST SP 800-171.
(ii) If multiple system security plans are addressed in the
email described at paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section, the
Contractor shall use the following format for the report:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brief
CAGE codes description of Date of Total Date score of
System security plan supported by this the plan assessment score 110 will
plan architecture achieved
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
................. ................ ................ ........ ................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
................. ................ ................ ........ ................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
................. ................ ................ ........ ................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Medium and High Assessments. DoD will post the following
Medium and/or High Assessment summary level scores to SPRS for each
system security plan assessed:
(i) The standard assessed (e.g., NIST SP 800-171 Rev 1).
(ii) Organization conducting the assessment, e.g., DCMA, or a
specific organization (identified by Department of Defense Activity
Address Code (DoDAAC)).
(iii) All industry CAGE code(s) associated with the information
system(s) addressed by the system security plan.
(iv) A brief description of the system security plan
architecture, if more than one system security plan exists.
(v) Date and level of the assessment, i.e., medium or high.
(vi) Summary level score (e.g., 105 out of 110, not the
individual value assigned for each requirement).
(vii) Date that all requirements are expected to be implemented
(i.e., a score of 110 is expected to be achieved) based on
information gathered from associated plan(s) of action developed in
accordance with NIST SP 800-171.
(e) Rebuttals. (1) DoD will provide Medium and High Assessment
summary level scores to the Contractor and offer the opportunity for
rebuttal and adjudication of assessment summary level scores prior
to posting the summary level scores to SPRS (see SPRS User's Guide
https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/pdf/SPRS_Awardee.pdf).
(2) Upon completion of each assessment, the contractor has 14
business days to provide additional information to demonstrate that
they meet any security requirements not observed by the assessment
team or to rebut the findings that may be of question.
(f) Accessibility. (1) Assessment summary level scores posted in
SPRS are available to DoD personnel, and are protected, in
accordance with the standards set forth in DoD Instruction 5000.79,
Defense-wide Sharing and Use of Supplier and Product Performance
Information (PI).
(2) Authorized representatives of the Contractor for which the
assessment was conducted may access SPRS to view their own summary
level scores, in accordance with the SPRS Software User's Guide for
Awardees/Contractors available at https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/pdf/SPRS_Awardee.pdf.
(3) A High NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment may result in
documentation in addition to that listed in this clause. DoD will
retain and protect any such documentation as ``Controlled
Unclassified Information (CUI)'' and intended for internal DoD use
only. The information will be protected against unauthorized use and
release, including through the exercise of applicable exemptions
under the Freedom of Information Act (e.g., Exemption 4 covers trade
secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a
contractor that is privileged or confidential).
(g) Subcontracts. (1) The Contractor shall insert the substance
of this clause, including this paragraph (g), in all subcontracts
and other contractual instruments, including subcontracts for the
acquisition of commercial items (excluding COTS items).
(2) The Contractor shall not award a subcontract or other
contractual instrument, that is subject to the implementation of
NIST SP 800-171 security requirements, in accordance with DFARS
clause 252.204-7012 of this contract, unless the subcontractor has
completed, within the last 3 years, at least a Basic NIST SP 800-171
DoD Assessment, as described in https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/pdi/cyber/strategically_assessing_contractor_implementation_of_NIST_SP_800-171.html, for all covered contractor information systems relevant to
its offer that are not part of an information technology service or
system operated on behalf of the Government.
(3) If a subcontractor does not have summary level scores of a
current NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment (i.e., not more than 3 years
old unless a lesser time is specified in the solicitation) posted in
SPRS, the subcontractor may conduct and submit a Basic Assessment,
in accordance with the NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Methodology,
to [email protected] for posting to SPRS along with the information
required by paragraph (d) of this clause.
(End of clause)
252.204-7021 Contractor Compliance with the Cybersecurity Maturity
Model Certification Level Requirement.
As prescribed in 204.7503(a) and (b), insert the following clause:
CONTRACTOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE CYBERSECURITY MATURITY MODEL
CERTIFICATION LEVEL REQUIREMENT (NOV 2020)
(a) Scope. The Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC)
CMMC is a framework that measures a contractor's cybersecurity
maturity to include the implementation of cybersecurity practices
and institutionalization of processes (see https://www.acq.osd.mil/cmmc/).
(b) Requirements. The Contractor shall have a current (i.e. not
older than 3 years) CMMC certificate at the CMMC level required by
this contract and maintain the CMMC certificate at the required
level for the duration of the contract.
(c) Subcontracts. The Contractor shall--
(1) Insert the substance of this clause, including this
paragraph (c), in all subcontracts and other contractual
instruments, including subcontracts for the acquisition of
commercial items, excluding commercially available off-the-shelf
items; and
(2) Prior to awarding to a subcontractor, ensure that the
subcontractor has a current (i.e., not older than 3 years) CMMC
certificate at the CMMC level that is appropriate for the
information that is being flowed down to the subcontractor.
(End of clause)
[FR Doc. 2020-21123 Filed 9-28-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P