Oregon grocery stores, restaurants, and food processors are caught between dueling federal policies on commercial cooling systems after the Trump administration pushed back a deadline for phasing out potent greenhouse gases used in refrigeration equipment.
Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield, who took office in December 2024, filed a lawsuit Tuesday, July 21, challenging the EPA's decision to delay from 2026 to 2032 a requirement that new refrigeration equipment use lower-impact alternatives to hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs.
Rayfield joined 18 other state attorneys general and the City of New York in the filing, made in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
"Oregonians are already living with hotter summers and more wildfire smoke, and the federal administration's actions will make this crisis even worse," Rayfield said in a statement announcing the lawsuit. "The science is clear – these chemicals are heating up our planet and poisoning our communities."
HFCs are not toxic at ground level but trap heat in the atmosphere at rates hundreds to thousands of times greater than carbon dioxide, making them one of the fastest-growing sources of climate pollution worldwide.
What changed
Congress passed the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act in 2020 with bipartisan support. President Trump signed it during his first term.
The law set a schedule to reduce HFC use by 85% by 2036, and the EPA's 2023 Technology Transitions Rule required new commercial cooling equipment installed starting in 2026 to use lower-impact refrigerants.
On May 21, the EPA finalized a revised rule that raises the allowable global warming potential limit for supermarket refrigeration systems from 150 or 300 to 1,400, effective January 1, 2027, through January 1, 2032.
The relaxed standard takes effect July 27.
The coalition's legal argument: the EPA failed to adequately explain why it reversed course, making the new rule arbitrary and in violation of existing law.
What it means for Oregon businesses
About 75% of all U.S. HFC use occurs in commercial refrigeration and air conditioning, according to the EPA. The coalition argues the delay strands businesses that already invested in compliant systems and creates supply-chain uncertainty that will drive up costs passed to consumers.
Industry research by The Brattle Group, prepared for FMI, the Food Industry Association, illustrates why the mid-stream reversal stings: compliant transcritical CO2 systems cost roughly 25–40% more than traditional HFC equipment, approximately $1.1 million more for an average 50,000-square-foot grocery store. Businesses that already committed to those upgrades now face a market where competitors can keep using cheaper, older technology for six more years.
The grocery industry operates on margins under 2%, according to the same report, and stores pass through at least 50–60% of cost increases to shoppers. Rural areas face steeper impacts because fewer technicians are qualified to service newer systems.
The EPA has framed its rule differently. Administrator Lee Zeldin said when proposing the rollback in September 2025 that the changes would "make American refrigerants affordable, safe, and reliable again."
The agency's May 2026 fact sheet claimed the revised rule would save $976 million through 2050 and safeguard more than 350,000 jobs.
What happens next
The lawsuit asks the D.C. Circuit to strike down the EPA's May 2026 rule. No hearing date has been set. The relaxed HFC standard for supermarkets takes effect July 27, meaning Oregon businesses face an uncertain regulatory landscape while the case moves forward.
