FAR 9.303—Use.
Plain-English Summary
FAR 9.303 explains when the Government may use testing and approval—especially first article testing and approval—as a quality-control tool before accepting production items. It identifies the situations in which this extra scrutiny is appropriate: when the contractor has not previously supplied the product to the Government, when a previously supplied product has changed because of process or specification changes, when production has been stopped for a long time, when a prior item had a life-cycle problem, when the requirement is written as a performance specification, or when an approved first article is needed as the manufacturing standard. In practice, this section helps contracting officers decide whether early sample testing is justified to reduce technical risk, verify that the contractor can meet requirements, and establish a reliable baseline for future production. It also signals to contractors that first article approval may be required even if they have produced similar items before, depending on changes, gaps in production, or prior performance issues. The section is about when testing and approval are appropriate; it does not itself prescribe the detailed procedures for conducting first article testing, which are addressed elsewhere in the FAR and contract clauses.
Key Rules
New supplier, higher risk
Testing and approval may be appropriate when the contractor has not previously furnished the product to the Government. A first-time source may need to prove that its product meets the Government’s requirements before full production or acceptance.
Changed processes or specs
If the contractor previously furnished the product but there have been subsequent changes in processes or specifications, testing and approval may be appropriate. Changes can affect form, fit, function, or reliability, so the Government may require a fresh approval.
Long production gap
Testing and approval may be appropriate when production has been discontinued for an extended period of time. A long pause can mean tooling, workforce, suppliers, or methods have changed enough that prior approval is no longer a reliable indicator of current performance.
Prior life-cycle problem
If a product acquired under a previous contract developed a problem during its life, testing and approval may be appropriate. This allows the Government to verify that the issue has been corrected and that the revised item is suitable for use.
Performance specification use
Testing and approval may be appropriate when the product is described by a performance specification. Because performance specs state what the item must do rather than exactly how to make it, first article approval can help confirm the contractor’s design and manufacturing approach will satisfy the requirement.
Manufacturing standard needed
Testing and approval may be appropriate when it is essential to have an approved first article serve as a manufacturing standard. In that case, the approved sample becomes the benchmark for later production and helps control consistency across the contract.
Responsibilities
Contracting Officer
Determine whether the circumstances justify testing and approval, and include the appropriate requirement in the solicitation and contract when needed. The contracting officer should use this tool to manage technical risk and establish a reliable production baseline.
Contractor
Provide the required first article or other test item for evaluation when the contract calls for testing and approval. The contractor must ensure the item reflects current processes, specifications, and production methods so the Government can assess compliance.
Technical/Quality Personnel
Evaluate whether the product, process, or prior performance history creates enough risk to warrant testing and approval, and assess the submitted article against the applicable requirements. They help determine whether the item is suitable to serve as a manufacturing standard or whether corrective action is needed.
Agency/Program Office
Identify operational needs that make early verification important, such as safety, reliability, or mission-critical performance concerns. The program office should communicate known risks, prior defects, or specification changes that may support requiring approval.
Practical Implications
This section is a decision guide for when first article testing is worth the time and cost. It is commonly used to reduce risk on new buys, after design changes, or when the Government needs confidence that production will be repeatable.
Contractors should not assume prior delivery means no further testing will be required. A change in process, a long break in production, or a past failure can trigger a new approval requirement.
A performance specification often increases the likelihood of first article testing because the Government is buying results, not a detailed design. Contractors should be prepared to demonstrate that their design solution meets the stated performance needs.
A common pitfall is treating first article approval as a formality. In reality, it can become the controlling manufacturing standard, so errors in the approved sample can carry forward into production if not caught early.
Contracting officers should document why testing and approval is appropriate, especially when relying on prior problems, production gaps, or specification changes. Clear rationale helps support the requirement and reduces disputes later.
Official Regulatory Text
Testing and approval may be appropriate when- (a) The contractor has not previously furnished the product to the Government; (b) The contractor previously furnished the product to the Government, but- (1) There have been subsequent changes in processes or specifications; (2) Production has been discontinued for an extended period of time; or (3) The product acquired under a previous contract developed a problem during its life; (c) The product is described by a performance specification; or (d) It is essential to have an approved first article to serve as a manufacturing standard.