FAR 52.223-21—Foams.
Plain-English Summary
FAR 52.223-21, Foams, is an environmental compliance clause that addresses the use of foam blowing agents containing hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), especially high global warming potential HFCs and refrigerant blends containing HFCs. It defines key terms such as global warming potential, high global warming potential hydrofluorocarbons, and hydrofluorocarbons, and it ties compliance to EPA’s Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program at 40 CFR part 82, subpart G, including EPA’s supplemental alternatives tables. In practice, the clause requires contractors to reduce the use, release, and emissions of these substances in foam blowing applications when feasible, unless the contract says otherwise. The feasibility analysis must consider environmental, technical, and economic factors, including in-use emission rates, energy efficiency, safety, performance requirements, and commercial availability at a reasonable cost. The clause matters because it pushes federal procurement toward lower-emission foam technologies and gives contractors a clear reference point for identifying acceptable substitutes. It is primarily a performance-and-compliance requirement: contractors must actively evaluate alternatives and use lower-global-warming-potential options where practical.
Key Rules
Key terms are defined
The clause defines global warming potential, high global warming potential hydrofluorocarbons, and hydrofluorocarbons. These definitions control which substances and alternatives are covered, and they anchor the contractor’s compliance analysis.
Reduce HFC foam use when feasible
Unless the contract says otherwise, the contractor must reduce its use, release, and emissions of high-GWP HFCs and HFC refrigerant blends used as foam blowing agents when feasible. The requirement is not an absolute ban, but it does require active reduction where practical.
Feasibility must be evaluated broadly
When deciding whether an alternative is feasible, the contractor must consider environmental, technical, and economic factors. The clause specifically calls out in-use emission rates, energy efficiency, safety, ability to meet performance requirements, and commercial availability at a reasonable cost.
EPA SNAP is the reference source
Contractors must use EPA’s SNAP program to identify acceptable alternatives. The clause points to 40 CFR part 82, subpart G, and EPA’s supplemental tables, which are the authoritative sources for alternative foam blowing agents.
Contract terms can override default application
The reduction requirement applies unless the contract specifies otherwise. That means the solicitation or contract may narrow, modify, or otherwise address the foam requirement, so contractors must read the specific contract language carefully.
Responsibilities
Contractor
Identify foam blowing agents used under the contract, determine whether they contain high-GWP HFCs or HFC refrigerant blends, and reduce their use, release, and emissions when feasible. The contractor must evaluate alternatives using environmental, technical, and economic factors and consult EPA’s SNAP program to select acceptable substitutes.
Contracting Officer
Include the clause when prescribed by FAR 23.109(d)(4) and ensure the contract language accurately reflects any special requirements or deviations. The contracting officer should also make sure the contractor understands that SNAP is the reference for acceptable alternatives.
Agency
Use procurement policies and specifications that support reduced reliance on high-GWP foam blowing agents and align with EPA SNAP alternatives. The agency should ensure its requirements do not unintentionally conflict with the clause’s reduction objective.
EPA
Maintain the SNAP program and publish the list of acceptable alternatives, including supplemental tables. EPA’s determinations provide the compliance benchmark contractors use to identify lower-global-warming-potential options.
Practical Implications
Contractors should review foam formulations early in performance, not after production starts, because substitution decisions may affect product performance, cost, and schedule.
A common pitfall is assuming any lower-emission alternative is acceptable; the contractor must check EPA SNAP status and confirm the alternative fits the specific end use.
The feasibility test is balanced, not purely environmental: a greener option may still be impractical if it cannot meet performance requirements, is unsafe, or is not commercially available at a reasonable cost.
Contractors working on foam-related deliverables should document their alternative analysis so they can show why a particular HFC-based option was retained or replaced.
Contracting officers should watch for contract-specific language that changes the default rule, and contractors should not rely on general environmental goals if the contract imposes a more specific requirement.
Official Regulatory Text
As prescribed in 23.109 (d)(4) , insert the following clause: Foams (May 2024) (a) Definitions . As used in this clause– Global warming potential means how much a given mass of a chemical contributes to global warming over a given time period compared to the same mass of carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide’s global warming potential is defined as 1.0. High global warming potential hydrofluorocarbons means any hydrofluorocarbons in a particular end use for which EPA’s Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program has identified other acceptable alternatives that have lower global warming potential. The SNAP list of alternatives is found at 40 CFR part 82 subpart G with supplemental tables of alternatives available at ( https://www.epa.gov/snap/ ). Hydrofluorocarbons means compounds that only contain hydrogen, fluorine, and carbon. (b) Unless otherwise specified in the contract, the Contractor shall reduce its use, release, and emissions of high global warming potential hydrofluorocarbons and refrigerant blends containing hydrofluorocarbons, when feasible, from foam blowing agents, under this contract. When determining feasibility of using a particular alternative, the Contractor shall consider environmental, technical, and economic factors such as– (1) In-use emission rates, energy efficiency, and safety; (2) Ability to meet performance requirements; and (3) Commercial availability at a reasonable cost. (c) The Contractor shall refer to EPA’s SNAP program to identify alternatives. The SNAP list of alternatives is found at 40 CFR part 82 subpart G with supplemental tables available at https://www.epa.gov/snap/ . (End of clause)