DCMA Revises Cyber Supply Chain Review: Updated Guidebook Modifies Audit Standards
Client Alert | 1 min read | 07.16.19
As anticipated, the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) revised its Contractor Purchasing System Review (CPSR) Guidebook as of June 14, 2019, with the most significant updates to Appendix 24, Supply Chain Management Process, to further address supply chain compliance with DFARS 252.204-7012. As we previously noted, the CPSR Guidebook was revised earlier this year to address DoD guidance related to management and oversight of the supply chain in connection with DFARS 252.204-7012.
While much of the CPSR review criteria remain the same, noteworthy revisions include:
- Asking contractors to “show how they have determined” that their subcontractors have an adequate information system that can handle Covered Defense Information, versus the prior guidance to ask contractors to “validate” the adequacy of subcontractor systems.
- Broadening supply chain requirements by applying the Guidebook’s language to “subcontractors,” rather than just “first tier suppliers” as in the prior version.
- Clarifying that the CPSR review is focused only on the protection of “Covered Defense Information” and not “Controlled Unclassified Information” more broadly.
Contacts
Partner and Crowell Global Advisors Senior Director
- Washington, D.C.
- D | +1.202.624.2698
- Washington, D.C. (CGA)
- D | +1 202.624.2500
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.03.26
Important EU Court Judgment Clarifies Rules on Interest Due in Cartel Damages Cases
In a judgment that will have direct and immediate consequences, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has clarified that for all competition damages actions brought after 26 December 2014, interest runs from the date on which the harm occurred. The ruling addressed two important questions: (1) whether national provisions implementing Article 3(2) of the EU Damages Directive — which requires interest to run from the date harm occurred —apply to cases in which the harm preceded the adoption of those provisions; and (2) how the date of harm should be determined in cartel cases involving the purchase of goods at inflated prices.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.02.26
SBA OHA Confirms That the Submission Date for a Proposal with Pricing Controls Size Determination
Client Alert | 5 min read | 06.01.26
California Court Upholds Insurer’s Duty to Defend After Covered Claim Is Dismissed
Client Alert | 2 min read | 05.29.26
California Assembly Passes AB 1776, Sending Major Antitrust Bill to the Senate
