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. 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.”

HARDI and industry stakeholders have consistently warned that the refrigerant restrictions in Part 494, particularly the prohibition on commonly used refrigerants, are not aligned with current market realities. Supply constraints and limited alternatives have raised significant concerns about businesses’ ability to comply without jeopardizing operations.

Without relief, HARDI warned that the regulation would lead to refrigerant shortages that could disrupt food supply chains, increase costs, and impact consumers statewide.

By granting the Order to Show Cause and temporarily blocking enforcement of the prohibition, the court has preserved market stability and provided time for a determination on the request for a preliminary injunction.

“This decision reinforces what we have been saying all along: the timeline and structure of Part 494 are unworkable,” Ayers added. “We remain committed to pursuing a durable solution that protects the environment, ensures viability of essential refrigeration, and prevents unnecessary cost increases for consumers.”

The case will now proceed as the court considers whether to grant a preliminary injunction. In the meantime, HARDI is urging the New York State Legislature to take action to address the underlying issues with Part 494 and ensure a more practical, coordinated approach that aligns with federal standards and avoids unnecessary harm to consumers and businesses.