assignment of claims clause

Enhanced Content - Details

40 U.S.C. 121(c) ; 10 U.S.C. chapter 4 and 10 U.S.C. chapter 137 legacy provisions (see 10 U.S.C. 3016 ); and 51 U.S.C. 20113 .

48 FR 42328 , Sept. 19, 1983, unless otherwise noted.

Enhanced Content - Print

Generate PDF

This content is from the eCFR and may include recent changes applied to the CFR. The official, published CFR, is updated annually and available below under "Published Edition". You can learn more about the process here .

Enhanced Content - Display Options

The eCFR is displayed with paragraphs split and indented to follow the hierarchy of the document. This is an automated process for user convenience only and is not intended to alter agency intent or existing codification.

A separate drafting site is available with paragraph structure matching the official CFR formatting. If you work for a Federal agency, use this drafting site when drafting amendatory language for Federal regulations: switch to eCFR drafting site .

Enhanced Content - Subscribe

Subscribe to: 48 CFR Part 32 Subpart 32.8

Enhanced Content - Timeline

• 5/26/2022 view on this date view change introduced  

Enhanced Content - Go to Date

Enhanced content - compare dates, enhanced content - published edition.

View the most recent official publication:

• View Title 48 on govinfo.gov
• View the PDF for 48 CFR Part 32 Subpart 32.8

These links go to the official, published CFR, which is updated annually. As a result, it may not include the most recent changes applied to the CFR. Learn more .

Enhanced Content - Developer Tools

This document is available in the following developer friendly formats:

• Hierarchy JSON - Title 48
• Content HTML - Subpart 32.8
• Content XML - Subpart 32.8

Information and documentation can be found in our developer resources .

eCFR Content

The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) is the official legal print publication containing the codification of the general and permanent rules published in the Federal Register by the departments and agencies of the Federal Government. The Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR) is a continuously updated online version of the CFR. It is not an official legal edition of the CFR.

Enhanced Content

Subpart 32.8—assignment of claims, 32.800 scope of subpart..

This subpart prescribes policies and procedures for the assignment of claims under the Assignment of Claims Act of 1940, as amended, ( 31 U.S.C. 3727 , 41 U.S.C. 6305 ) (hereafter referred to as the Act ).

[ 48 FR 42328 , Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 51 FR 2665 , Jan. 17, 1986; 79 FR 24212 , Apr. 29, 2014]

32.801 Definitions.

Designated agency, as used in this subpart, means any department or agency of the executive branch of the United States Government (see 32.803(d)).

No-setoff commitment, as used in this subpart, means a contractual undertaking that, to the extent permitted by the Act, payments by the designated agency to the assignee under an assignment of claims will not be reduced to liquidate the indebtedness of the contractor to the Government.

[ 48 FR 42328 , Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 60 FR 49730 , Sept. 26, 1995; 66 FR 2132 , Jan. 10, 2001]

32.802 Conditions.

Under the Assignment of Claims Act, a contractor may assign moneys due or to become due under a contract if all the following conditions are met:

( a ) The contract specifies payments aggregating $1,000 or more.

( b ) The assignment is made to a bank, trust company, or other financing institution, including any Federal lending agency.

( c ) The contract does not prohibit the assignment.

( d ) Unless otherwise expressly permitted in the contract, the assignment—

( 1 ) Covers all unpaid amounts payable under the contract;

( 2 ) Is made only to one party, except that any assignment may be made to one party as agent or trustee for two or more parties participating in the financing of the contract; and

( 3 ) Is not subject to further assignment.

( e ) The assignee sends a written notice of assignment together with a true copy of the assignment instrument to the—

( 1 ) Contracting officer or the agency head;

( 2 ) Surety on any bond applicable to the contract; and

( 3 ) Disbursing officer designated in the contract to make payment.

32.803 Policies.

( a ) Any assignment of claims that has been made under the Act to any type of financing institution listed in 32.802(b) may thereafter be further assigned and reassigned to any such institution if the conditions in 32.802(d) and (e) continue to be met.

( b ) A contract may prohibit the assignment of claims if the agency determines the prohibition to be in the Government's interest.

( c ) Under a requirements or indefinite quantity type contract that authorizes ordering and payment by multiple Government activities, amounts due for individual orders for $1,000 or more may be assigned.

( d ) Any contract of a designated agency (see FAR 32.801), except a contract under which full payment has been made, may include a no-setoff commitment only when a determination of need is made by the head of the agency, in accordance with the Presidential delegation of authority dated October 3, 1995, and after such determination has been published in the Federal Register. The Presidential delegation makes such determinations of need subject to further guidance issued by the Office of Federal Procurement Policy. The following guidance has been provided: Use of the no-setoff provision may be appropriate to facilitate the national defense; in the event of a national emergency or natural disaster; or when the use of the no-setoff provision may facilitate private financing of contract performance. However, in the event an offeror is significantly indebted to the United States, the contracting officer should consider whether the inclusion of the no-setoff commitment in a particular contract is in the best interests of the United States. In such an event, the contracting officer should consult with the Government officer(s) responsible for collecting the debt(s).

( e ) When an assigned contract does not include a no-setoff commitment, the Government may apply against payments to the assignee any liability of the contractor to the Government arising independently of the assigned contract if the liability existed at the time notice of the assignment was received even though that liability had not yet matured so as to be due and payable.

[ 48 FR 42328 , Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 60 FR 49730 , Sept. 26, 1995; 61 FR 18921 , Apr. 29, 1996]

32.804 Extent of assignee's protection.

( a ) No payments made by the Government to the assignee under any contract assigned in accordance with the Act may be recovered on account of any liability of the contractor to the Government. This immunity of the assignee is effective whether the contractor's liability arises from or independently of the assigned contract.

( b ) Except as provided in paragraph (c) below, the inclusion of a no-setoff commitment in an assigned contract entitles the assignee to receive contract payments free of reduction or setoff for—

( 1 ) Any liability of the contractor to the Government arising independently of the contract; and

( 2 ) Any of the following liabilities of the contractor to the Government arising from the assigned contract:

( i ) Renegotiation under any statute or contract clause.

( ii ) Fines.

( iii ) Penalties, exclusive of amounts that may be collected or witheld from the contractor under, or for failure to comply with, the terms of the contract.

( iv ) Taxes or social security contributions.

( v ) Withholding or nonwithholding of taxes or social security contributions.

( c ) In some circumstances, a setoff may be appropriate even though the assigned contract includes a no-setoff commitment, e.g.—

( 1 ) When the assignee has neither made a loan under the assignment nor made a commitment to do so; or

( 2 ) To the extent that the amount due on the contract exceeds the amount of any loans made or expected to be made under a firm commitment for financing.

32.805 Procedure.

( a ) Assignments.

( 1 ) Assignments by corporations shall be—

( i ) Executed by an authorized representative;

( ii ) Attested by the secretary or the assistant secretary of the corporation; and

( iii ) Impressed with the corporate seal or accompanied by a true copy of the resolution of the corporation's board of directors authorizing the signing representative to execute the assignment.

( 2 ) Assignments by a partnership may be signed by one partner, if the assignment is accompanied by adequate evidence that the signer is a general partner of the partnership and is authorized to execute assignments on behalf of the partnership.

( 3 ) Assignments by an individual shall be signed by that individual and the signature acknowledged before a notary public or other person authorized to administer oaths.

( b ) Filing. The assignee shall forward to each party specified in 32.802(e) an original and three copies of the notice of assignment, together with one true copy of the instrument of assignment. The true copy shall be a certified duplicate or photostat copy of the original assignment.

( c ) Format for notice of assignment. The following is a suggested format for use by an assignee in providing the notice of assignment required by 32.802(e).

Notice of Assignment

TO: __________ [ address to one of the parties specified in 32.802(e) ].

This has reference to Contract No. ______ dated ______, entered into between ________ [ contractor's name and address ] and ________ [ government agency, name of office, and address ], for ________ [ describe nature of the contract ].

Moneys due or to become due under the contract described above have been assigned to the undersigned under the provisions of the Assignment of Claims Act of 1940, as amended, ( 31 U.S.C. 3727 , 41 U.S.C. 6305 ).

A true copy of the instrument of assignment executed by the Contractor on ________ [ date ], is attached to the original notice.

Payments due or to become due under this contract should be made to the undersigned assignee.

Please return to the undersigned the three enclosed copies of this notice with appropriate notations showing the date and hour of receipt, and signed by the person acknowledging receipt on behalf of the addressee.

Very truly yours,

[ name of assignee ]

[ signature of signing officer

[ title of signing officer ]

[ address of assignee ]

Acknowledgement

Receipt is acknowledged of the above notice and of a copy of the instrument of assignment. They were received at ____ (a.m.) (p.m.) on ________, 20____.

[ signature ]

On behalf of

[ name of addressee of this notice ]

( d ) Examination by the Government. In examining and processing notices of assignment and before acknowleging their receipt, contracting officers should assure that the following conditions and any additional conditions specified in agency regulations, have been met:

( 1 ) The contract has been properly approved and executed.

( 2 ) The contract is one under which claims may be assigned.

( 3 ) The assignment covers only money due or to become due under the contract.

( 4 ) The assignee is registered separately in the System for Award Management unless one of the exceptions in 4.1102 applies.

( e ) Release of assignment.

( 1 ) A release of an assignment is required whenever—

( i ) There has been a further assignment or reassignment under the Act; or

( ii ) The contractor wishes to reestablish its right to receive further payments after the contractor's obligations to the assignee have been satisfied and a balance remains due under the contract.

( 2 ) The assignee, under a further assignment or reassignment, in order to establish a right to receive payment from the Government, must file with the addressees listed in 32.802(e) a—

( i ) Written notice of release of the contractor by the assigning financing institution;

( ii ) Copy of the release instrument;

( iii ) Written notice of the further assignment or reassignment; and

( iv ) Copy of the further assignment or reassignment instrument.

( 3 ) If the assignee releases the contractor from an assignment of claims under a contract, the contractor, in order to establish a right to receive payment of the balance due under the contract, must file a written notice of release together with a true copy of the release of assignment instrument with the addressees noted in 32.802(e).

( 4 ) The addressee of a notice of release of assignment or the official acting on behalf of that addressee shall acknowledge receipt of the notice.

[ 48 FR 42328 , Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 51 FR 2665 , Jan. 17, 1986; 52 FR 9039 , Mar. 20, 1987; 62 FR 237 , Jan. 2, 1997; 64 FR 10533 , Mar. 4, 1999; 65 FR 24325 , Apr. 25, 2000; 68 FR 56673 , Oct. 1, 2003; 78 FR 37679 , June 21, 2013; 79 FR 24212 , Apr. 29, 2014]

32.806 Contract clauses.

( 1 ) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.232-23, Assignment of Claims, in solicitations and contracts expected to exceed the micro-purchase threshold, unless the contract will prohibit the assignment of claims (see 32.803(b)). The use of the clause is not required for purchase orders. However, the clause may be used in purchase orders expected to exceed the micro-purchase threshold, that are accepted in writing by the contractor, if such use is consistent with agency policies and regulations.

( 2 ) If a no-setoff commitment has been authorized (see FAR 32.803(d)), the contracting officer shall use the clause with its Alternate I.

( b ) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.232-24, Prohibition of Assignment of Claims, in solicitations and contracts for which a determination has been made under agency regulations that the prohibition of assignment of claims is in the Government's interest.

[ 48 FR 42328 , Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 51 FR 2665 , Jan. 17, 1986; 60 FR 49730 , Sept. 26, 1995; 61 FR 18921 , Apr. 29, 1996]

Reader Aids

Information.

• About This Site
• Legal Status
• Accessibility
• No Fear Act
• Continuity Information

• MyNewMarkets.com
• Claims Journal
• Insurance Journal TV
• Academy of Insurance
• Carrier Management

Featured Stories

• US P/C Industry Posts H1 Underwriting Profit
• Georgia Court Says Lyft Can Sue State Farm

Current Magazine

• Read Online

Post-Loss Assignments of Claims Under Insurance Policies

In the settlement of lawsuits involving insured claims, it is not uncommon that one condition of the settlement is that the defendant assign his or her claims under all applicable insurance policies to the party that filed suit.

Indeed, it is frequently the case that the defendant, particularly when the defendant is an individual, has a limited ability to pay a judgment and insurance coverage offers the best opportunity for a recovery by the suing party. Usually, such settlements are made without any serious thought being given to whether the defendant’s claim against its insurer is assignable; the assumption being that it is assignable.

However, insurance policies generally have anti-assignment clauses which prohibit the assignment of the policy, or an interest in the policy, without the insurer’s consent. These clauses come into play in determining the validity or enforceability of the assignment of a claim under an insurance policy and should be considered when such an assignment is part of a settlement.

When considering the enforceability of anti-assignment clauses in insurance policies, the courts generally draw a distinction between an assignment made prior to the occurrence of a covered loss (a “pre-loss” assignment) and an assignment made after the occurrence of a covered loss (a “post-loss” assignment).

In analyzing pre-loss assignments, the courts recognize that requiring an insurer to provide coverage to an assignee of its policy prior to the occurrence of a covered loss would place the insurer in the position of covering a party with whom it had not contracted nor been allowed to properly underwrite to assess the risks posed by that potential insured, and, accordingly, determine the appropriate premium to charge for the risks being undertaken or choose to decline coverage.

Post-loss assignments, on the other hand, take place after the insurer’s obligations under its policy have become fixed by the occurrence of a covered loss, thus the risk factors applicable to the assignee are irrelevant with regard to the covered loss in question. For these reasons, the majority of the courts enforce anti-assignment clauses to prohibit or restrict pre-loss assignments, but refuse to enforce anti-assignment clauses to prohibit or restrict post-loss assignments.

Katrina Cases

The Louisiana Supreme Court, which had not previously addressed the enforceability of anti-assignment clauses for post-loss assignments, was recently confronted with this issue in the In re: Katrina Canal Breaches Litigation, litigation involving consolidated cases arising out of Hurricane Katrina. The issue arose as a result of a lawsuit brought by the State of Louisiana as the assignee of claims under numerous insurance policies as part of the “Road Home” Program. The Road Home Program was set up following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita to distribute federal funds to homeowners suffering damage from the hurricanes. In return for receiving a grant of up to $150,000, homeowners were required to execute a Limited Subrogation/Assignment agreement, which provided in pertinent part:

Pursuant to these Limited Subrogation/Assignments, the State of Louisiana brought suit against more than 200 insurance companies to recover funds dispensed under the Road Home Program. The suit was removed to Federal Court under the Class Action Fairness Act and the insurers filed motions to dismiss, arguing that the assignments to the State of Louisiana were invalid under the anti-assignment clauses in the homeowner policies at issue.

On appeal, the United States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals certified the following question to the Louisiana Supreme Court: “Does an anti-assignment clause in a homeowner’s insurance policy, which by its plain terms purports to bar any assignment of the policy or an interest therein without the insurer’s consent, bar an insured’s post-loss assignment of the insured’s claims under the policy when such an assignment transfers contractual obligations, not just the right to money due?”

In answering this question, the Louisiana Supreme Court began by noting that, as a general matter, contractual rights are assignable unless the law, the contract terms or the nature of the contract preclude assignment. Specific to the certified question, Louisiana Civil Code article 2653 provides that a right “cannot be assigned when the contract from which it arises prohibits the assignment of that right.” The Louisiana Supreme Court observed that the language of article 2653 is broad and, on its face, applies to all assignments, including post-loss assignments of insurance claims. The Court, therefore, construed the issue confronting it as whether Louisiana public policy would enforce an anti-assignment clause to preclude post-loss assignments of claims under insurance policies.

In addressing the public policy question, the Louisiana Supreme Court recognized the distinction between pre-loss assignments and post-loss assignments discussed by courts from other states and noted that the prevailing view was that anti-assignment clauses were invalid and/or unenforceable when applied to post-loss assignments. Notwithstanding this weight of authority, the Louisiana Supreme Court stated:

“[W]hile the Louisiana legislature has clearly indicated an intent to allow parties freedom to assign contractual rights, by enacting La. C.C. art. 2653, it has also clearly indicated an intent to allow parties freedom to contractually prohibit assignment of rights. We recognize the vast amount of national jurisprudence distinguishing between pre-loss and post-loss assignments and rejecting restrictions on post-loss assignments, however we find no public policy in Louisiana favoring assignability of claims over freedom of contract.”

Thus, Court refused to invalidate the enforceability of the anti-assignment clauses to the post-loss assignments before it based on public policy, adding that public policy determinations are better suited to the legislature.

Nonetheless, after having recognized the general enforceability of anti-assignment clauses to post-loss assignments, the Court immediately placed limits on when those clauses would be applicable, stating that to be applicable, they “must clearly and unambiguously express that the non-assignment clause applies to post-loss assignments.” The Court refused “to formulate a test consisting of specific terms or words,” which would satisfy this condition and remanded the case to the federal courts to determine whether the individual anti-assignment clauses in the various policies were sufficiently clear and explicit to be enforced with respect to post-loss assignments at issue.

A Broad Application

It should be noted that the Court’s opinion appears to apply broadly to all post-loss assignments irrespective of what specific rights are being assigned, despite the fact that the certified question was narrower and asked only about the applicability of a post-loss assignment where the assignment “transfers contractual obligations, not just the right to money due.”

In a footnote at the beginning of its opinion, the Louisiana Supreme Court observed that in certifying the question to it, the Fifth Circuit “disclaimed any intent” that the Court “confine its reply to the precise form or scope of the legal questions certified.” The footnote indicates that the Court’s opinion was not intended to be limited to only those post-loss assignments involving the assignment of contractual obligations.

Louisiana has departed from the majority view in holding that as a matter of general law, anti-assignment clauses are not inherently void with regard to post-loss assignments. However, it may be that in practical application, the results of individual cases may well be consistent with the majority rule of not enforcing anti-assignment clauses with regard to post-loss assignments because Louisiana courts may be reluctant to find that the anti-assignment clauses are sufficiently “clear and explicit” unless they specifically state that they apply to post-loss assignments, notwithstanding the Louisiana Supreme Court’s unwillingness to “formulate a test consisting of specific terms or words.”

Topics Lawsuits Carriers Profit Loss Claims Louisiana Hurricane Homeowners

Was this article valuable?

Thank you! Please tell us what we can do to improve this article.

Thank you! % of people found this article valuable. Please tell us what you liked about it.

Here are more articles you may enjoy.

Written By Robert Redfearn, Jr.

From this issue.

Excess, Surplus & Specialty Markets Directory Vol. II – The Industry’s Leading Coverage Placement Directory

Interested in carriers .

Get automatic alerts for this topic.

• Categories: Legal Beat
• Have a hot lead? Email us at [email protected]

Insurance Jobs

• P&C Actuary Analyst (New Grad) - Florida, FL
• Property Adjuster – Catastrophe Virtual Estimating - Remote?, IL
• Associate, HR Operations Contact Center - Saint Paul, MN
• Health & Benefits Director - Houston, TX
• Business Center Account Executive/Underwriter Excess Casualty - Centennial, CO

• Youth Sports Liability Market in 'Armageddon Mode'
• Condos: A Difficult Market to Navigate
• Inflation, the Economy and Workers’ Comp: A Positive Outlook
• Umbrella Liability: The Triple Upsell Possibility for Personal Lines Clients
• Where the AI Risks Are: Swiss Re's Top 10 Ranking by Industry

• Sedgwick: U.S. Product Recalls Dropped in Q2 in 5 Key Industries
• Western States Top Wildfire Risk Scores in New Analysis
• Climate Change Intensified Typhoon Shanshan, Study Says
• Court Rules Lyft is a Motor Carrier and State Farm Can Be Sued Directly
• Main Street America Insurance Exits Personal Lines

• August 22 HO-14: More Than a Mature HO-4

31 U.S. Code § 3727 - Assignments of claims

In subsection (a)(1), the words “or share thereof” and “whether absolute or conditional, and whatever may be the consideration therefor” are omitted as surplus. In clause (2), the word “authorization” is substituted for “powers of attorney, orders, or other authorities” to eliminate unnecessary words.

In subsections (b) and (c), the word “official” is substituted for “officer” for consistency in the revised title and with other titles of the United States Code.

In subsection (b), the words “Except as hereinafter provided” are omitted as unnecessary. The words “read and” are omitted as surplus. The words “to the person acknowledging the same” are omitted as unnecessary. The text of 31:203(1st par. last sentence) is omitted as superseded by 39:410. The words “Notwithstanding any law to the contrary governing the validity of assignments ” and the text of 31:203(last par.) are omitted as unnecessary.

In subsection (c), before clause (1), the words “bank, trust company, or other . . . including any Federal lending agency” are omitted as surplus. The words “of money due or to become due under a contract providing for payments totaling at least $1,000” are substituted for “in any case in which the moneys due or to become due from the United States or from any agency or department thereof, under a contract providing for payments aggregating $1,000 or more” to eliminate unnecessary words. The text of 31:203(2d par. proviso cl. 1) is omitted as executed. In clause (1), the words “in the case of any contract entered into after October 9, 1940 ” are omitted as executed. In clause (2)(A), the words “payable under such contract” are omitted as surplus. In clause (3), the words “true” and “instrument of” are omitted as surplus. The words “department or” are omitted because of the restatement. The words “if any” and “to make payment” are omitted as surplus.

In subsection (d), before clause (1), the words “During a war or national emergency proclaimed by the President or declared by law and ended by proclamation or law” are substituted for “in time of war or national emergency proclaimed by the President (including the national emergency proclaimed December 16, 1950 ) or by Act or joint resolution of the Congress and until such war or national emergency has been terminated in such manner” to eliminate unnecessary words. The words “ Department of Energy (when carrying out duties and powers formerly carried out by the Atomic Energy Commission)” are substituted for “Atomic Energy Commission” (which was reconstituted as the Energy Research and Development Administration by 42:5813 and 5814) because of 42:7151(a) and 7293. The words “other department or . . . of the United States . . . except any such contract under which full payment has been made” and “of any moneys due or to become due under such contract” before “shall not be subject” are omitted as surplus. The words “A payment subsequently due under the contract (even after the war or emergency is ended) shall be paid to the assignee without” are substituted for “and if such provision or one to the same general effect has been at any time heretofore or is hereafter included or inserted in any such contract, payments to be made thereafter to an assignee of any moneys due or to become due under such contract, whether during or after such war or emergency . . . hereafter” to eliminate unnecessary words. The words “of any nature” are omitted as surplus. In clause (1), the words “or any department or agency thereof” are omitted as unnecessary. In clause (2), the words “under any renegotiation statute or under any statutory renegotiation article in the contract” are omitted as surplus.

Subsection (e)(1) is substituted for 31:203(4th par.) to eliminate unnecessary words.

In subsection (e)(2), the words “person receiving an amount under an assignment or allotment” are substituted for “assignees, transferees, or allottees” for clarity and consistency. The words “or to others for them” and “with respect to such assignments , transfers, or allotments or the use of such moneys” are omitted as surplus. The words “person making the assignment or allotment” are substituted for “assignors, transferors, or allotters” for clarity and consistency.

• Clause Library

52.232-23 / Alt I

Far 52.232-23 assignment of claims. alt i (apr 1984) (current).

As prescribed in  32.806 (a), (1) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.232-23, Assignment of Claims, in solicitations and contracts expected to exceed the micro-purchase threshold, unless the contract will prohibit the assignment of claims (see  32.803 (b)). The use of the clause is not required for purchase orders. However, the clause may be used in purchase orders expected to exceed the micro-purchase threshold, that are accepted in writing by the contractor, if such use is consistent with agency policies and regulations.

(2) If a no-setoff commitment has been authorized (see  32.803 (d)), the contracting officer shall use the clause with its Alternate I.

Assignment of Claims Alternate I (Apr 1984) (a) The Contractor, under the Assignment of Claims Act, as amended,  31 U.S.C. 3727 ,  41 U.S.C. 6305  (hereafter referred to as “the Act”), may assign its rights to be paid amounts due or to become due as a result of the performance of this contract to a bank, trust company, or other financing institution, including any Federal lending agency. The assignee under such an assignment may thereafter further assign or reassign its right under the original assignment to any type of financing institution described in the preceding sentence.  Unless otherwise stated in this contract, payments to an assignee of any amounts due or to become due under this contract shall not, to the extent specified in the Act, be subject to reduction or setoff. (b) Any assignment or reassignment authorized under the Act and this clause shall cover all unpaid amounts payable under this contract, and shall not be made to more than one party, except that an assignment or reassignment may be made to one party as agent or trustee for two or more parties participating in the financing of this contract. (c) The Contractor shall not furnish or disclose to any assignee under this contract any classified document (including this contract) or information related to work under this contract until the Contracting Officer authorizes such action in writing. (End of clause)