Heating Air-Conditioning Refrigeration Distributors International v. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

A New York trial court denied a petition challenging amendments to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation’s (DEC’s) regulations addressing hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). The court described the amended regulations as including prohibitions on new HFC products and systems, prohibitions on bulk substances and containers, and a variance process. First, the court rejected industry petitioners’ claims that portions of regulations were arbitrary and capricious. Regarding provisions addressing bulk substances, the court found that the record demonstrated that the regulations aligned with federal law and implemented the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA) scoping plan, and that DEC acknowledged the requirements were technology forcing and provided a variance process to address feasibility concerns. Regarding prohibitions on regulated substances with 20-year global warming potential (GWP20) greater than 10 or greater than 20 (depending on the application), the court found that the regulations were consistent with the scoping plan and that the record showed DEC considered comments, that the regulation did not require specific alternatives, and that a variance provision was included. Regarding the DEC’s decision to include regulations of “other residential HVAC” that the petitioners alleged did not align with federal and other states’ requirements, the court found that the record explained why EPA and other states might not have yet regulated the technologies and that the regulations were intended to address emerging technologies. Second, the court rejected contentions that DEC failed to comply with the State Administrative Procedure Act (SAPA). The court found that DEC substantially complied with SAPA provisions requiring best estimates of the costs of the regulation, consideration of the regulation’s impact on small business, and identification of differences between federal standards and the adopted regulations. Third, the court ruled that DEC acted within its statutory jurisdiction under the CLCPA and other state environmental statutes.