EvidenceSheet
CMMC 2.0 · Maintenance

MA.L2-3.7.6 Maintenance Personnel

Supervise maintenance personnel who do not hold the access authorization normally required, for the duration of their work.

Source: CMMC 2.0, MA.L2-3.7.6. The statement above is our statement of the clause, read from the published text and cited so you can check it against the official text, not the instrument verbatim. Open CMMC 2.0 in the compliance library.

3
artefacts
0
held by a system
1
at each review
hard
to go live
Document repository
where the evidence lives
teal = a system already holds it · olive = produced at each review. To go live: easy when half or more of the artefacts are already held by a system, moderate from a quarter to a half, hard below a quarter.

These are the artefacts auditors commonly ask for on this requirement, our guidance rather than text from the standard. Your assessor decides what is sufficient in your context, and asks for samples across the period when a report covers one.

system holds itEvidence a system already holds

none for this control

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

  • Supervision or escort records naming the supervisor · Document repository

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

  • Procedure requiring supervision of unauthorized maintenance personnel · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • Authorization status check performed before work begins · Document repository

First move

No system holds this evidence for you: it is people and documents. Reminders and routing to the owner still save time. Put the document under version control with an owner and review date, and log each review as a record with reviewer and date.

Common gaps auditors find

Do this for your whole sheet

Paste the rows you run your controls from and get this mapping for every control at once, with the periodic-review ones flagged and a first move per row. No account for the first run.

Build my evidence sheet

MA.L2-3.7.5 Nonlocal Maintenance · MP.L2-3.8.1 Media Protection