Honestly, my recommendation at this point I think would be to wait and see what the CITT does. We've only had two decisions where they've accepted jurisdiction and looked at this. They have two paths here that they're going to go down, and it's going to happen as bidders bring cases.
Either they're either going to say that they're going to look at this very lightly, and that as long as there's a reason, they won't look at whether it's a legitimate reason or not. They'll say that as long as you've provided a reason, they'll accept that as true, and based on that reason, then, yes, limiting the fairness requirements is appropriate. In that case, I think I would suggest that something else happen: that either there's more oversight internally or the CITT's mandate is expanded so it's clear that they have a chance to look at the actual concern.
Or the CITT may go down the other road, which means diving into the depths and taking a look at the rationale as to whether or not there's a legitimate national security interest at play in invoking the national security exception.