New York State Finalizes Rules Limiting HFCs
“New York has aligned with, but in a lot of respects, also gone above and beyond California and Washington. It isn’t that New York is necessarily ahead of California, but they moved similar rules forward largely in one fell swoop, given the precedent California set over a longer period of time,” said Tristam Coffin, co-founder and president sustainability, policy, and technical services, êffecterra.
The new requirements are designed to help phase down the use of HFCs and SF6 over time and bolster the use of alternatives that are better for public health and the environment and more cost-effective for impacted businesses, said Sean Mahar, interim commissioner of the DEC.
HFC STANDARDS
The amendment to HFC Standards and Reporting under Part 494 of the New York Codes, Rules, and Regulations introduces stringent prohibitions, usage restrictions, and reporting requirements for HFC refrigerants.
The New York DEC said the amendments are based in part on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s regulations implementing the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act, as well as recommendations in New York State that support establishing a GWP threshold for refrigerants, as well as reducing HFC emissions from equipment leakage.
“The New York state refrigerant regulation is the most complex refrigerant regulation in the country,” said Keilly Witman, department lead of the Refrigerant Management Solutions Group at DC Engineering.
Some aspects of the final rule caught the industry by surprise, including the sales prohibition. “From a language and application perspective, they borrowed from the State of California, including even referencing California Health & Safety Code,” Coffin said.
The final rule issued phaseout schedules based on the type of equipment and substances charged. HFCs with higher global warming potential and systems with larger charge capacities had prohibition dates ranging from “the effective date” of the rule—Dec. 23, 2024—through 2034. The rule also stated that the charging of HFCs and installation of any systems that utilize regulated substances are prohibited as of the prohibition date.
Some of the compliance dates were stricter than expected. Witman said one of the most important things for those in the industry to know is that they already need to be in compliance. “Our industry is used to final regulations coming out six months to a year prior to compliance deadlines. We found out about this regulation on Dec. 23, 2024, and compliance began on Jan. 9, 2025.
Such tight deadlines created concerns within the industry and for end users. “Even the companies that are trying to do the right thing still need access to certain refrigerants to run their business. Potentially not having access to them as a result of a sales prohibition that goes into effect very abruptly creates challenges,” Coffin said, adding that the DEC recently issued an Enforcement Discretion letter effectively pushing the prohibition dates out, which aligns with their overall intent to support the industry with these changes.
The amended regulation does not require the replacement of existing equipment prior to the end of its useful life. However, it does outline leak inspection frequency and methodology, and, as of Dec. 23, 2024, equipment with a charge capacity greater than 1,500 pounds requires monthly leak inspections. It also includes registration and labeling requirements beginning on June 1, 2025.
Witman said some of the requirements in the regulations are already requirements under the federal regulations, so complying with those shouldn’t be an issue. “Other requirements are things that any responsible refrigerant end-user was already trying to do,” she added. “For instance, I don’t know anybody who can afford to just let their appliances leak for any number of days.”
It’s the parts of the regulation that are completely new that will be problematic to accomplish within the time frames of the regulation. “The requirement to label existing equipment by June 1, 2025, or June 1, 2026, depending on the full charge, is going to be very challenging given the technician shortage,” she said. “Also challenging is the fact that retailers will need lists of each appliance’s specified components for the respective registration deadlines.”
Most retailers don’t have lists of their condensing units, condensers, compressors, evaporator units, and evaporators for each appliance, so Witman said technicians will be very busy gathering all of that data. “Unfortunately, all the time that technicians are out there labeling all that existing equipment and creating lists of specified components is time that is not spent on leak repair, inspections, and carrying out best practices,” she added.
To help small businesses comply with the phaseout, DEC is finalizing the development of a new grant program. Grant availability and additional details will be provided later this year. “With these regulations, New York State is sending clear market signals that will drive industries away from these climate super pollutants and towards alternatives that are compatible with a stable climate future,” said Richie Kaur, senior super pollutant reduction advocate at the Natural Resources Defense Council. “These regulations would largely phase out the use of hydrofluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride over the next two decades, in alignment with New York’s ambitious climate targets, making them a prime example of what decisive climate action looks like.”
CONTINUED STATE ACTION
Coffin said there is a general consensus that there is a tremendous opportunity to reduce harmful emissions from refrigerants. In late 2024, êffecterra looked at state-level action, including building codes related to refrigerants. “There has been a ton of movement. Not to the extent New York has moved, but they are moving forward,” Coffin explained.
State-level action may increase if the federal government is paring back its oversight and intent to address climate change. “If the refrigerants are being phased down, and they are, proper management is critical,” Coffin said.
Differing state and federal requirements can make it difficult for end users to know what avenue to pursue. “Creating a patchwork of regulatory action is bad for business but necessary in the absence of federal leadership,” Coffin said.
