COVID-19 Effects on Cleared Contractors
Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.02.20
On March 30, 2020, the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) published COVID-19 NISP Guidance to describe for cleared industry how DCSA will conduct its oversight mission during the pandemic. That guidance includes, among other things:
- DCSA has suspended all enhanced security vulnerability assessments (ESVA) and other on-site activities. DCSA Industrial Security Representatives (ISR) will instead conduct continuous monitoring engagements through virtual outreach.
- Cleared contractors with safeguarding remain responsible for ensuring classified material remains appropriately secured, even in areas implementing mandatory quarantines. DCSA provides guidance regarding handling end-of-day checks of security containers, approved closed areas, and special access program facilities during the pandemic.
- Cleared contractor personnel furloughed or not in pay status should be removed from access in JPAS and need not complete annual refresher training. Overdue training must be completed within 60-days of returning to normal operations.
- DCSA will extend all information systems’ Authorizations to Operate (ATO) expiring before April 18, 2020 for an additional 90 days. Security Control Assessment (SCA) activity will continue, but the on-site portion will be deferred.
- DCSA will continue to process facility clearance (FCL) actions. However, the inquiries telephone line is suspended, and contractors seeking status updates or other assistance may instead leave detailed voicemail messages on the Knowledge Center line at 888-282-7682 or e-mail the Facility Clearance Branch (FCB) at dcsa.fcb@mail.mil.
- The Department of Defense (DoD) Consolidated Adjudication Facility (CAF) call center is temporarily suspended. Inquiries may be e-mailed to whs.meade.dodcaf.mbx.dodcaf-callcenter@mail.mil, and an agent will follow up.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25
Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality
On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.11.25
Director Squires Revamps the Workings of the U.S. Patent Office
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.10.25
Creativity You Can Use: CJEU Clarifies Copyright for Applied Art
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.10.25
Federal Court Strikes Down Interior Order Suspending Wind Energy Development
