DFARS

DFARS
United States federal government · Public domain · source
Name	DFARS
Abbreviation	DFARS
Jurisdiction	United States Department of Defense
Subject	Federal acquisition regulations for defense procurement
Established	1984 (codification began)
Related	Federal Acquisition Regulation, Defense Acquisition University, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment

DFARS The Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement is a regulatory supplement that governs procurement and acquisition procedures for the United States Department of Defense, guiding contracts, source selection, and subcontracting for major defense programs such as F-35 Lightning II, Zumwalt-class destroyer, and KC-46 Pegasus. It operates alongside the Federal Acquisition Regulation to shape policy for programs under the purview of offices like the Defense Contract Management Agency and the Naval Sea Systems Command. DFARS influences interactions among prime contractors, including Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Northrop Grumman, and affects procurement outcomes for agencies such as the Defense Logistics Agency, U.S. Army Materiel Command, and Air Force Materiel Command.

Overview

DFARS sets specific clauses, standards, and procedures that implement statutory mandates from bodies like the United States Congress, the Armed Services Committee (United States Senate), and the House Committee on Armed Services. It prescribes requirements for acquisition areas including intellectual property, cybersecurity, cost accounting, and supply chain risk management, intersecting with statutes like the Arms Export Control Act and policies from the Office of Management and Budget. The supplement is applied to solicitations and contracts for systems such as Patriot missile, Aegis Combat System, and Ground-based Midcourse Defense through contracting activities at installations like Redstone Arsenal and Naval Air Station Patuxent River.

History and Development

DFARS evolved from DoD policies and statutory directives in response to Cold War procurement needs and post-Cold War transformations involving programs like Strategic Defense Initiative and reorganizations such as the creation of United States Transportation Command. Early regulatory codification was influenced by procurement reforms under presidents including Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton and legislative milestones passed by the United States Congress such as the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act. Subsequent amendments have reflected counterterrorism and cyber priorities after events like the September 11 attacks and initiatives from entities such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the Defense Science Board.

Structure and Key Provisions

DFARS is organized into parts and subparts that supplement the Federal Acquisition Regulation framework used by contracting officers at activities including Naval Air Systems Command and Defense Contract Audit Agency. Key provisions cover areas such as:

- Intellectual property and data rights for efforts tied to programs like Joint Strike Fighter program and M1 Abrams upgrades, with clauses affecting contractors like General Dynamics and Raytheon Technologies. - Cybersecurity requirements influenced by NIST SP 800-171, impacting prime contractors and subcontractors to protect controlled unclassified information for projects at facilities like White Sands Missile Range. - Supply chain risk management and foreign sourcing rules, particularly concerning suppliers from countries referenced in statutes debated by the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. - Cost principles and audit access aligning with Defense Contract Audit Agency procedures and standards used in audits of firms such as Booz Allen Hamilton and SAIC.

Clauses and provisions are tailored for procurement types including fixed-price, cost-reimbursement, and indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity awards used by organizations like U.S. Special Operations Command.

Compliance and Implementation

Implementation of DFARS provisions is administered by contracting officers, legal counsel, and program managers in commands such as United States Space Force acquisition units and the Missile Defense Agency. Compliance mechanisms include contract clauses, flowdowns to subcontractors, and oversight by entities like the Inspector General of the Department of Defense and the Government Accountability Office. Contractors implement compliance through systems like Defense Contract Management Agency reporting, consolidated audit trails, and information system controls mapped to NIST and Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification guidance. Training and education are provided by institutions such as the Defense Acquisition University and professional associations including the National Contract Management Association.

Impact on Defense Contracting

DFARS has materially affected bidding strategies, pricing models, and subcontracting plans for major primes and small businesses registered in programs like the Small Business Administration initiatives. The supplement shapes competition in procurements such as the Next Generation Air Dominance programs and influences partnerships with allied firms in countries participating in agreements like NATO procurements. Compliance burdens and clause requirements can affect program schedules for systems like Virginia-class submarine construction and sustainment of legacy platforms like the C-130 Hercules, while also directing research collaborations involving institutions such as Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and University Affiliated Research Centers.

Legal Challenges and Interpretations

DFARS provisions have been the subject of litigation and bid protests before forums like the United States Court of Federal Claims and the Government Accountability Office tribunal, with disputes involving contractors such as Harris Corporation and Leidos. Interpretive guidance arises from decisions by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and opinions from the Department of Justice and the Office of Management and Budget, especially over issues like data rights, export control compliance under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, and cost allowability under the Truth in Negotiations Act. Precedents set by cases and GAO sustained protests influence subsequent DFARS amendments and contracting officer determinations in program offices such as Air Force Life Cycle Management Center.

Category:United States federal procurement law