Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

DoD Issues Final Rule Addressing Exclusion of Contractors that Present Supply Chain Risk in National Security System Procurements

By Susan B. Cassidy on November 2, 2015
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

On October 30, 2015, the Department of Defense (“DoD” or the “Department”) issued a Final Rule amending the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (“DFARS”) and clarifying the scope of the DoD’s ability to evaluate and exclude contractors that represent “supply chain risks” in solicitations and contracts involving the development or delivery of IT products and services related to National Security Systems (“NSS”). The Final Rule clarifies that the DoD’s exclusion authority is limited to procurement of NSS, explains that decisions apply on a procurement-by-procurement basis, and removes the flow down requirement that was present in the Interim Rule. The Final Rule also encourages contracting officers to consider imposing a Government consent requirement for all subcontracts.  Our in-depth analysis of the Final Rule is available here.

As we previously discussed when the DoD issued its Interim Rule, these amendments are significant because they provide the DoD with authority to undertake a Section 806 Action to exclude IT contractors from contract participation or withhold consent to subcontract if the Department determines that a contractor or subcontractor presents a supply chain risk.  Notably, the DoD may implement this tool without providing pre- or post-exclusion notice to or engaging in dialogue with contractors.  Further, the Final Rule states that Section 806 Actions are not reviewable in a bid protest before the Government Accountability Office or in any Federal court.  The lack of procedural protections led commentators to the Interim Rule to suggest that contractors could be effectively excluded from DoD procurements without advance notice or an opportunity to object.  The DoD attempted to address this de facto debarment concern by clarifying that each Section 806 decision to exclude is done on a procurement-by-procurement basis. Nevertheless, multiple exclusions without an opportunity to object or address the Government’s concerns could effectively result in a blanket exclusion.

In addition to outlining the DoD’s authority under Section 806 Actions, the Final Rule allows the Department to use an evaluation factor to assess supply chain risk when making procurement decisions and imposes on contractors an ongoing obligation to “mitigate supply chain risk.”  However, the DoD declined to provide guidance in the Final Rule regarding the manner in which the evaluation factor will be applied or the appropriate means of mitigating supply chain risk.

In short, under the Final Rule, contractors may be excluded from certain DoD IT procurements without (1) notice or an opportunity to be heard, (2) an impartial review of the DoD’s decision, or (3) an opportunity to take corrective action.  In addition, contractors must address a new supply chain risk evaluation factor and satisfy an ongoing obligation to “mitigate supply chain risk.”  Given the potentially significant impact of the Final Rule, contractors would be well advised to closely monitor the DoD’s implementation of these amendments.

Photo of Susan B. Cassidy Susan B. Cassidy

Susan Cassidy co-chairs Covington’s Aerospace and Defense Industry Group, and has been advising government contractors for more than 35 years on the requirements imposed on companies contracting with the U.S. Government. She is Chambers ranked in both Government Contracts – Cybersecurity (Band 1)…

Susan Cassidy co-chairs Covington’s Aerospace and Defense Industry Group, and has been advising government contractors for more than 35 years on the requirements imposed on companies contracting with the U.S. Government. She is Chambers ranked in both Government Contracts – Cybersecurity (Band 1) and Government Contracts (Band 2).

Susan’s practice focuses on the intersection of cybersecurity, national security, and supply chain risk management for companies that sell products and services to the U.S. Government. Susan advises contractors at all phases of the procurement cycle, and regularly:

advises clients on compliance obligations imposed by the FAR, DFARS, and other agency regulatory requirements;
leads internal and government False Claims Act (FCA) investigations addressing allegations of violations of government cybersecurity, national security, supply chain, quality, and MIL-SPEC requirements; and
advises clients who have suffered a cyber breach where U.S. government information may have been impacted.

In her work with global, national, and start-up contractors, Susan advises companies on all aspects of government supply chain issues including:

Government cybersecurity requirements, including the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC), DFARS 252.204-7012, FedRAMP, controlled unclassified information (CUI), and NIST SP 800-171 requirements;
Evolving sourcing issues such as Section 889, counterfeit part requirements, Section 5949 semiconductor product and service restrictions, and limitations on sourcing a variety of products from China; and
Federal Acquisition Security Council (FASC) regulations and product exclusions.

Susan previously served as senior in-house counsel for two major defense contractors (Northrop Grumman Corporation and Motorola Incorporated). Chambers USA has quoted sources stating that “Susan’s in-house experience coupled with her deep understanding of the regulatory requirements is the perfect balance to navigate legal and commercial matters.”

Susan is a former Public Contract Law Procurement Division Co-Chair, former Co-Chair and current Vice-Chair of the ABA PCL Cybersecurity, Privacy and Emerging Technology Committee.

Susan’s pro-bono work extends to assisting veterans in a variety of matters, as well as providing advice to elderly clients on their wills and other end-of-life planning documents.

Read more about Susan B. CassidyEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Government Contracts
  • Blog:
    Inside Government Contracts
  • Organization:
    Covington & Burling LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo