ALBANY, NY — The Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court, Third Department, has issued a ruling that temporarily prevents the New York State Department of Environmental …
Stay informed about your community and support local independent journalism.
Subscribe to The River Reporter today. click here
This item is available in full to subscribers.
Please log in to continue |
ALBANY, NY — The Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court, Third Department, has issued a ruling that temporarily prevents the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) from enforcing a ban on two refrigerants utilized in the maintenance of commercial refrigeration systems employed by numerous businesses throughout the state. The court has granted an Order to Show Cause in the ongoing legal challenge to the state’s refrigerant regulations brought by Heating, Air-conditioning, & Refrigeration Distributors International (HARDI).
As part of the court’s decision, the existing enforcement discretion pertaining to R-404A and R-507A set to expire on March 31, 2026, is extended, and the NYSDEC is enjoined and restrained from enforcing the prohibition contained in Part 494-1.4(f)(1) pending a determination on HARDI’s request for a preliminary injunction.
This action provides immediate and critical relief to businesses across New York that rely on refrigerants to maintain safe and reliable food storage, distribution, and retail operations, according to HARDI. A recent study by HARDI found that an estimated 18,130 refrigeration systems rely on the refrigerants protected by this court order, and that if the prohibition ultimately is allowed to take effect, it will cost the state $106.2 million in economic output. The court’s decision ensures that the current supply of refrigerants can continue to be used while the request for a preliminary injunction is decided.
“HARDI thanks the court for recognizing there is a critical issue with the refrigerant prohibition in Part 494,” said Alex Ayers, Vice President of Government Affairs. “The court recognized the urgency of the situation and the need to prevent disruption while these serious legal and practical concerns are fully considered.”
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here