Trump Administration Moves Forward With Rollback Of Sustainable Procurement Language In FAR

Key Takeaways

• The Trump administration is moving to roll back and simplify sustainable procurement requirements in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) through class deviations, targeting the Biden-era sustainability mandates issued less than two years ago.
• Under the Biden administration, a final rule issued on April 22, 2024, required agencies to procure sustainable products and, for the first time, services to the maximum extent practicable.
• The rollback signals a reduced regulatory emphasis on "green" procurement, though uncertainty remains for companies that provide products and services to federal agencies.
• Because the overhaul is proceeding through deviations before formal rulemaking, industry should closely monitor solicitation and contract language. Solicitations may omit or alter sustainability clauses before a final FAR rewrite.
• Contractors may see short-term relief from the sustainability mandate, but risk a later reinstatement of stricter requirements under future administrations. Contractors who made significant investments in sustainable products and services in pursuit of federal contracts may now face new competition due to the relaxation of this market access requirement.

Background

In April 2024, the U.S. Department of Defense, the General Services Administration, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration published a final rule amending the FAR (FAR Case 2022-006) to require agencies to procure "sustainable products and services" to the maximum extent practicable, including services in addition to products. The rule, which was part of an effort to implement Executive Order 14057 ("Catalyzing Clean Energy Industries and Jobs Through Federal Sustainability") and related memoranda directing federal agencies to reduce emissions, promote environmental stewardship, support resilient supply chains, and "drive innovation and incentivize markets for sustainable products and services," went into effect May 22, 2024. That rule included:

• A new definition of "sustainable products and services" in FAR 2.101.
• A new omnibus contract clause at FAR 52.223-23, "Sustainable Products and Services," is applicable to supplies and services, including those delivered by contractors.
• Revisions in FAR subpart 23.1 (and other parts of subpart 23) so that agencies must (among other steps) identify in solicitations the sustainable products/services applicable to acquisitions, including those covered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Recommendations for Specifications, Standards, and Ecolabels.

By extending the sustainable procurement requirement to services, the rule captured cloud service providers, IT services, maintenance services, and other contractors—not just manufacturers of hardware or goods. For example, the rule clarified at FAR 23.103(c) and FAR 52.223-23(b)(2)(iv) that contractors performing services (e.g., management of government-owned contractor-operated facilities) must use sustainable products and services to the same extent the agency would.

The rule also broadened the definition of sustainable products and services to include not only those that met requirements of established statutory purchasing programs (e.g. ENERGY STAR), but also those that meet requirements of non-statutory EPA purchasing programs, including:

1. WaterSense® labeled (water-efficient) products and services.
2. Safer Choice-certified products (products that contain safer chemical ingredients).
3. Products and services that meet EPA Recommendations of Specifications, Standards, and Ecolabels in effect as of October 2023.

That change meant that federal agencies and providers would increasingly need to account for sustainability criteria—such as recovered materials, biobased products, energy- and water-efficient products, ecolabels, and service-related uses of sustainable goods. For example, because EPA recommends the EPEAT ecolabel for various categories of electronic products and cloud services, businesses seeking to fulfill federal product and service contracts would have been obligated to use EPEAT-registered equipment to the maximum extent practicable.

Manufacturers and service providers would therefore need to build out supply-chain and contracting compliance processes aligned with government requests for sustainable goods and services, including expanding catalogs, tracking ecolabels, including sustainability language in bids, and developing performance-monitoring mechanisms.

Agencies were only beginning to implement these changes to the FAR when President Trump was elected and quickly identified FAR reform as an early priority. As part of that broader "Revolutionary FAR Overhaul" (RFO), the Trump administration published changes to the sustainable procurement definitions and provisions in the FAR that roll back the Biden-era expansion and further simplify and consolidate sustainable procurement requirements.

Overview of FAR Sustainable Procurement Rollback

The Trump administration's "Deviation Guide" for Part 2 (Definitions of Words and Terms) and Part 23 (Sustainable Acquisition, Material Safety, and Pollution Prevention) of the FAR eliminated "services" from the previously defined term "sustainable products and services" and narrowed the definition of "sustainable products" to only encompass products that meet the requirements of the following statutory purchasing programs:

1. A product that contains recovered material designated by EPA under the Comprehensive Procurement Guidelines (42 U.S.C. 6962) (40 CFR part 247).
2. An energy-efficient product or low standby power device (including FEMP and ENERGYSTAR products).
3. A biobased product that meets the content requirements of the U.S. Department of Agriculture under the BioPreferred® program 7 U.S.C. 8102) (7 CFR Part 4270).
4. A substance identified in EPA's Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program as a safe alternative to an ozone-depleting substance (42 U.S.C. 76711) (40 CFR part 82, subpart G).

The Administration removed all references to EPA purchasing programs. Thus, industry players—companies that fulfill product and service contracts with federal agencies—face a shifting regulatory landscape: the sustainability-procurement obligations that appeared firmly established are now subject to rollback via deviations and may not be reinstated.

Significance of the Rollback Attempt

The current approach being used by the Administration—issuing class deviations and model deviation texts under the RFO initiative—represents a strategic shift away from amending the FAR via notice-and-comment rulemaking. Under this method, agencies are permitted to adopt less burdensome requirements now, then later engage in notice-and-comment rulemaking to formalize changes. For example, the deviation guidance memo from May 2, 2025 states that agencies "may proceed" with rulemaking under 41 U.S.C. § 1707.

What that Means in Practice

• Solicitations may already begin to omit or soften sustainability-specific procurement language, even though the April 2024 rule remains in effect until changed. For example, while federal agencies previously procured only EPEAT-registered computers, televisions, imaging equipment, servers, and mobile phones because EPA recommended the EPEAT ecolabel for those product categories, federal agencies will not be so limited going forward.
• The sustainability obligations that had seemed settled may now be subject to negotiation, waiver, or substitution at the agency's discretion under the deviation regime.
• Contractors and cloud providers may face uncertainty: some solicitations may still carry the strong April 2024 rule language; others may reflect the deviation approach and reduce the emphasis on sustainability.
• From an industry perspective, the pivot reduces the regulatory burden in the near term (by using less stringent sustainable procurement language) but increases operational risk (because contracting officers may interpret obligations differently and future administrations may seek to restore these sustainable procurement requirements).
• For manufacturers: the market dynamics tied to federal procurement of sustainable goods may slow or stall. For cloud service providers, tying sustainability obligations to services may weaken, reducing the impetus for sustainability-focused hardware or infrastructure investments in service contracts.
• Manufacturers and service providers that have invested heavily in sustainability may now find themselves competing for federal contracts with companies that have not made those investments.

What's Next for Industry

1. Review existing and pending contracts and solicitations: Determine whether the sustainability clause (e.g., FAR 52.223-23) or the broader April 2024 rule language is incorporated. If not, assess whether a deviation has been issued for that solicitation or contract.
2. Monitor deviation announcements and model deviation texts: Agencies are required to post their class deviations and model deviation texts on Acquisition.gov. Industry should track the status of parts 2, 23, and others.
3. Prepare for dual-compliance capability: Because of the transitional nature of the overhaul, manufacturers and cloud providers would be wise to maintain supply chains and documentation systems that could meet the April 2024 sustainability procurement criteria—even if a particular contract omits them. That hedges risk in case solicitations flip back.
4. Engage with contracting officers: In solicitations, ask whether the sustainability clause is required or if an exemption/justification applies (as allowed under the April 2024 rule for cases where sustainable procurement is not practicable). For example, under the April rule, the agency must justify when: (1) the sustainable product or service cannot be acquired competitively within a reasonable schedule; (2) it does not meet reasonable performance requirements; or (3) it cannot be acquired at a reasonable price.
5. Stay alert for formal rulemaking: Even though the deviations are in effect now, the FAR Council anticipates formal notice-and-comment rulemaking under 41 U.S.C. § 1707. When that occurs, new sustainability procurement obligations—or further reductions—could become permanent. Industry should plan for adjustments.
6. Evaluate strategic business implications: For manufacturers, reduced federal emphasis on sustainable procurement could mean fewer preferences or incentives for ecolabel products in federal contracts. For cloud service providers, less emphasis on sustainable goods/services might shift procurement away from green infrastructure investments and may affect how you position sustainability in bids.

Conclusion

While the April 2024 rule under the Biden administration significantly expanded sustainability procurement obligations to include services, the current overhaul of the FAR signals a retreat from mandatory sustainability mandates (and a further erosion of EPEAT's role in federal procurement). For industry—especially manufacturers and service providers engaging with the federal government—it is a moment of transition: the sustainability regime is still in place but may soon be altered via deviations, with formal rulemaking to follow. Firms need to monitor contracting documents closely, maintain compliance readiness for both scenarios, and engage with agencies proactively.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.