FAR 246.471 was written years ago for signing DD250 as note in (a)(1) when the DD250 could not be signed on the spot by the QAR for whatever reason (normally GBLs.) ARP does not releave the Govermnent from performing GCQA it only allows the contractor to release the shippment and the QAR still has to sign the document stating GCQA was performed. (b)(1)(i)(ii) and (iii) must all be met before ARP can be invoked (notice semicolon at end of (i) which means 'and' a conjunction. Also (2) says the CAO shall withdraw authorization when (b)(1) no longer exists. My Question is why are we using (in some cases told to use) ARP with WAWF? Why right letters to the contractor for ARP since we have to sign anyway seems to be a waste of time which we were trying to save in the first place when it was written... Some believe ARP somehow relieves them of inspection. As long as we are performing IAW our surveillance plan we may not need to do physical inspections so we gain nothing by ARP. Should not 246.471 be removed or at least rewitten to mean what someone wants to mean? Thanks!
Please follow DFARS 201.201-1(d)(i) for recommended changes to the DFARS.
Open full Question Details