FAR 46.3—Subpart 46.3

Contractor inspection requirements.

FAR 46.301 tells contracting officers when to include the clause at 52.246-1, Contractor Inspection Requirements, in solicitations and contracts. It applies to supplies or services expected to be at or below the simplified acquisition threshold and focuses on two triggers for using the clause: when the contracting officer needs the clause to make the contractor’s inspection duties explicit, or when agency procedures require it. The section also creates an important limitation: the clause must not be used if the contracting officer has made the determination described in FAR 46.202-2(b). In practice, this provision is about making sure low-dollar acquisitions have the right level of inspection language without overcomplicating the contract or duplicating other inspection arrangements. It helps align the contract’s quality assurance expectations with the acquisition’s size, risk, and agency policy.

Fixed-price supply contracts.

FAR 46.302 tells contracting officers when to include the standard inspection clause for fixed-price supply contracts, and when to use the clause’s alternates. It covers solicitations and contracts for supplies, as well as services that involve furnishing supplies, when a fixed-price contract is contemplated. The section distinguishes between contracts expected to exceed the simplified acquisition threshold and those at or below it, making the clause mandatory in the former case and discretionary in the latter if inclusion is in the Government’s interest. It also directs the contracting officer to use Alternate I for fixed-price incentive contracts and Alternate II for fixed-ceiling-price contracts with retroactive price redetermination. In practice, this section ensures the Government preserves its inspection rights and uses the correct inspection language for the specific pricing arrangement, which affects acceptance, rejection, correction of defects, and risk allocation.

Cost-reimbursement supply contracts.

FAR 46.303 is a narrow but important inspection-clause prescription for cost-reimbursement buying. It tells contracting officers when to include the clause at 52.246-3, Inspection of Supplies—Cost-Reimbursement, in solicitations and contracts for supplies, and also in service contracts that include the furnishing of supplies, whenever the contemplated contract type is cost-reimbursement. The section exists to make sure the Government’s inspection rights are clearly stated in contracts where the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs rather than paid a fixed price, which affects how acceptance, correction of defects, and payment risk are handled. In practice, this means the contracting officer must identify cost-reimbursement arrangements that involve supplies and ensure the proper inspection clause is inserted at the solicitation stage and carried into the contract. The rule matters because inspection terms are not optional boilerplate; they shape the Government’s ability to examine, test, and reject nonconforming supplies and to require correction or replacement under the contract’s quality framework. It also matters for mixed service/supply acquisitions, where the supply component can trigger this clause even though the overall procurement is for services. For contractors, the clause affects quality control planning, delivery obligations, and the risk of having to repair, replace, or otherwise address defective supplies at their own expense or under contract terms.

Fixed-price service contracts.

FAR 46.304 tells contracting officers when to include the Inspection of Services-Fixed-Price clause at 52.246-4 in fixed-price service acquisitions. It applies both to solicitations and to contracts for services, and also to supplies that include the furnishing of services, so it reaches mixed acquisitions where service performance is part of the requirement. The section draws a key line at the simplified acquisition threshold: if a fixed-price contract is contemplated and the expected contract amount will exceed the threshold, the clause must be included. If the expected amount is at or below the threshold, the clause is optional and may be used when the Government’s interest supports it. In practice, this section ensures the Government has an express contractual inspection and acceptance framework for services, while giving contracting officers discretion to use the clause on smaller buys when service quality control is still important.

Cost-reimbursement service contracts.

FAR 46.305 is a narrow but important prescription rule for cost-reimbursement service contracting. It tells contracting officers when to include the clause at 52.246-5, Inspection of Services—Cost-Reimbursement, in solicitations and contracts. The section applies to services contracts, and also to supplies contracts that include the furnishing of services, when the contemplated contract type is cost-reimbursement. Its purpose is to ensure the Government has an inspection mechanism tailored to cost-reimbursement work, where payment is based on allowable costs rather than fixed deliverables alone. In practice, this means the inspection clause must be inserted up front so the parties understand how service performance will be evaluated, accepted, or rejected under a cost-reimbursement arrangement. The rule matters because inspection rights and acceptance procedures are a core part of managing performance risk, documenting compliance, and supporting payment decisions in service-heavy acquisitions.

Time-and-material and labor-hour contracts.

FAR 46.306 is a narrow but important prescription rule for inspection clauses in time-and-material (T&M) and labor-hour contracts. It tells the contracting officer when to include the standard inspection clause at FAR 52.246-6, Inspection—Time-and-Material and Labor-Hour, in solicitations and contracts, and when to use Alternate I to that clause. The section exists to make sure the contract contains the right inspection and acceptance language for these labor-based contract types, where the Government is buying hours of labor and related materials rather than a fixed deliverable at a fixed price. In practice, this matters because inspection and acceptance terms affect how performance is evaluated, when work is considered acceptable, and how disputes over quality or completion are handled. The rule is especially significant when Government inspection and acceptance will occur at the contractor’s plant, because that location triggers use of the alternate clause language. For contracting officers, this is a drafting requirement that must be applied correctly at solicitation and award; for contractors, it signals the inspection framework that will govern performance and acceptance under the contract.

Fixed-price research and development contracts.

FAR 46.307 tells contracting officers when to use the inspection clause for fixed-price research and development work, specifically the clause at 52.246-7, Inspection of Research and Development—Fixed-Price. It addresses three main decision points: whether the contract’s primary objective is delivery of end items rather than designs, drawings, or reports; whether the contract is fixed-price; and whether the expected dollar value is above the simplified acquisition threshold. It also recognizes an exception where use of the clause is impractical and the clause prescribed in FAR 46.309 is more appropriate. For smaller R&D buys at or below the simplified acquisition threshold, the rule gives the contracting officer discretion to include the clause when doing so is in the Government’s interest. In practice, this section helps ensure the Government uses the right inspection and acceptance terms for R&D acquisitions, balancing oversight needs against the unique nature of research work and the type of deliverable being purchased.

Cost-reimbursement research and development contracts.

FAR 46.308 tells contracting officers when to include the Inspection of Research and Development—Cost-Reimbursement clause at 52.246-8 in research and development solicitations and contracts. It applies when the contract’s primary objective is the delivery of end items rather than designs, drawings, or reports, and when the government contemplates a cost-reimbursement arrangement. The section also recognizes an exception: if using 52.246-8 is impractical, the contracting officer may instead consider the clause prescribed by FAR 46.309 if that clause is more appropriate. In addition, if the contract is expected to be awarded on a no-fee basis, the contracting officer must use 52.246-8 with Alternate I. Practically, this provision helps ensure the government has the right inspection framework for R&D work where deliverables are tangible end items and payment structure affects how inspection rights should be written into the contract.

Research and development contracts (short form).

FAR 46.309 is a narrow clause-selection rule for research and development (R&D) acquisitions. It tells the contracting officer when to use the short-form inspection clause at 52.246-9, Inspection of Research and Development (Short Form), namely in solicitations and contracts for R&D when neither the clause prescribed by FAR 46.307 nor the clause prescribed by FAR 46.308 is used. In practice, this section does not set out a full inspection regime; instead, it directs which inspection clause belongs in the contract when the agency is buying R&D and has decided not to use the other R&D inspection clauses. Its purpose is to ensure the contract contains an appropriate inspection and acceptance framework for R&D work, where traditional product inspection methods may not fit well because the effort is experimental, developmental, or otherwise not amenable to standard end-item inspection. For contractors, this means the solicitation and contract should be checked carefully to confirm the correct inspection clause is included, because that clause affects how deliverables are reviewed, accepted, and potentially rejected. For contracting officers, it is a clause-application instruction that helps avoid using the wrong inspection terms in R&D acquisitions.

[Reserved]

Higher-level contract quality requirement.

FAR 46.311 tells contracting officers when and how to use the clause at 52.246-11, Higher-Level Contract Quality Requirement. This section covers two main topics: first, the requirement to include the clause in solicitations and contracts when a higher-level contract quality requirement is needed, and second, the need to identify each applicable higher-level quality standard by title, number, date, and any tailoring. In practice, this means the government must clearly tell offerors and contractors which external or internal quality standard applies to the contract so there is no ambiguity about the required level of quality assurance. The section exists to make quality expectations explicit, support consistent evaluation and performance, and reduce disputes over what standard governs the work. It is especially important where the contract relies on a recognized quality system standard rather than only the basic inspection and acceptance terms in the contract. Proper use of this clause helps ensure the contractor understands the exact quality benchmark it must meet and the government can enforce that benchmark during performance and acceptance.

Construction contracts.

FAR 46.312 addresses when the Government must or may use the Inspection of Construction clause at FAR 52.246-12 in construction solicitations and contracts. It focuses on one specific topic: the clause’s required inclusion in fixed-price construction acquisitions expected to exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, and its optional use in smaller construction buys when the Government decides the clause is in its interest. In practice, this section tells contracting officers which construction contracts need the standard inspection terms that govern how construction work will be examined, accepted, and corrected. It matters because inspection rights and acceptance procedures are central to managing construction quality, resolving defects, and protecting the Government’s interests. For contractors, it signals that construction contracts may include formal inspection obligations even on relatively small projects if the agency chooses to include them. For contracting officers, it is a straightforward but important clause-selection rule that must be applied consistently at solicitation and award.

Contracts for dismantling, demolition, or removal of improvements.

FAR 46.313 is a very short but important prescription rule for contracts involving dismantling, demolition, or removal of improvements. It requires the contracting officer to include the clause at 52.246-13, Inspection—Dismantling, Demolition, or Removal of Improvements, in solicitations and contracts when the work involves taking down, removing, or otherwise disposing of improvements to real property. In practice, this section ensures the Government has an inspection framework tailored to demolition-type work, where the condition of the structure, the sequence of removal, safety, and the final result can all affect contract performance and liability. The rule matters because demolition and removal contracts often involve site hazards, salvage issues, property damage risk, and disputes over whether the contractor left the site in the required condition. By mandating the clause, FAR 46.313 makes inspection rights and expectations explicit from the start, reducing ambiguity for both the Government and the contractor.

Transportation contracts.

FAR 46.314 tells contracting officers when to include the inspection clause at 52.246-14, Inspection of Transportation, in transportation-related solicitations and contracts. It covers freight transportation services by rail, motor carrier (including bus), domestic freight forwarders, and domestic water carriers, including local drayage and inland, coastwise, and intercoastal water service. It also identifies important exclusions: the clause is not used for domestic or international air carriers, international ocean carriers, freight services provided under bills of lading, or transportation negotiated at reduced rates under 49 U.S.C. 10721 or 13712. In practice, this section helps ensure the Government uses the correct inspection and acceptance framework for transportation services and avoids applying the wrong clause to transportation arrangements governed by different statutory or commercial rules. It is a cross-reference point to FAR Part 47, which addresses transportation policy and procedures more broadly.

Certificate of conformance.

FAR 46.315 is a short but important prescription rule that tells contracting officers when to include the Certificate of Conformance clause at 52.246-15 in solicitations and contracts. Its only express subject is the clause-insertion requirement, but it ties directly to the conditions in FAR 46.504, which govern when the Government may accept supplies or services based on a contractor’s certificate rather than a full Government inspection or other acceptance process. In practice, this section matters because it determines whether a contract will allow acceptance by certificate and therefore shifts some acceptance responsibility to the contractor. It is part of the broader quality assurance and acceptance framework in FAR Part 46, so it affects how deliverables are inspected, documented, and accepted. For contractors, it signals that they may be able to certify conformance in lieu of more intensive Government review, but only if the contract and the underlying conditions support that approach. For contracting officers, it is a mandatory clause-selection rule: when the conditions in 46.504 apply, the clause must be inserted in both solicitations and contracts for supplies or services.

Responsibility for supplies.

FAR 46.316 tells contracting officers when to include the clause at FAR 52.246-16, Responsibility for Supplies, in solicitations and contracts. It applies to three broad types of acquisitions: supplies, services that include furnishing supplies, and research and development, but only when a fixed-price contract is contemplated and the expected contract amount exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold. The section also allows, but does not require, use of the clause for smaller acquisitions when agency procedures authorize it. In practice, this rule is about allocating responsibility for the condition, custody, and accountability of supplies under fixed-price arrangements, so the government and contractor understand who bears the risk and what quality/acceptance expectations apply. It matters because clause inclusion affects solicitation drafting, contract administration, and the contractor’s pricing and performance assumptions. Contracting officers must make the clause decision early, based on contract type, dollar value, and agency policy, and contractors should look for the clause because it can materially affect their obligations and risk exposure.

Reporting Nonconforming Items.

FAR 46.317 tells contracting officers when they must include the clause at 52.246-26, Reporting Nonconforming Items, and when they must not. It covers three main acquisition situations where the clause is required: items subject to higher-level quality requirements under 52.246-11, critical items identified by the contracting officer in consultation with the requiring activity, and certain Department of Defense acquisitions of electronic parts or end items, components, parts, or materials containing electronic parts that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. It also extends the clause to service contracts when the contractor will furnish covered items as part of the service. The section then identifies two major exclusions: commercial products and commercial services acquired under FAR part 12 procedures, and medical devices already subject to FDA reporting under 21 CFR 803. Finally, it allows a limited agency-policy-based modification to the clause so the agency, rather than the contractor, submits reports to GIDEP within the required 60 days. In practice, this section is about deciding whether the reporting clause belongs in the solicitation and contract, and about avoiding duplicate or inappropriate reporting regimes while ensuring nonconforming items are reported where the government needs visibility.