A pair of environmental groups have sued the Port of Stockton and BayoTech Inc., seeking to overturn the approval of a steam methane reforming-based hydrogen production facility
The plaintiffs, Sierra Club and the Center for Biological Diversity, challenge the approval of the BayoTech Hydrogen Production and Dispensing Facility Project at the Port of Stockton, arguing that the Port’s environmental review and approval process violated the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
They assert that the Port improperly relied on an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) instead of conducting a more thorough Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which is required when there is substantial evidence suggesting the project may have significant adverse environmental impacts.
The plaintiffs argue that the project will generate significant emissions, including air pollutants and greenhouse gases, through its steam-methane reforming process. They highlight that the process relies on methane, a fossil fuel, which will result in harmful emissions affecting a community already facing severe pollution burdens.
The project at the center of this case is the BayoTech Hydrogen Production and Dispensing Facility, proposed for the port in San Joaquin County, California. The hydrogen produced would then be stored on-site and distributed throughout the region via trucks, potentially including diesel-powered vehicles. According to BayoTech’s website, the project will produce two tons of hydrogen per day starting in 2025.
The Port of Stockton is an industrial area that has been heavily developed over time, including a former naval facility and various storage facilities for petroleum, coal, and biomass. The area around the Port is in the 96th percentile for asthma in California, indicating high vulnerability to additional pollutants, the complaint reads, citing state health data.
“The community near the project site is a community of color housing mostly Black, Asian, and Latino residents who are exposed to disproportionate environmental burdens,” the complaint reads.
Representatives of BayoTech did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment.
Located immediately adjacent to the proposed hydrogen facility, a site owned by Pelican Renewables includes an ethanol biofuel production plant and a proposed carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) project. The Pelican facility also stores hazardous chemicals, such as sodium hydroxide and sodium bisulfite, which are classified as corrosive substances. The presence of this facility contributes to the existing industrial pollution in the area, according to the complaint.
Meanwhile, a DTE Energy biomass plant is situated less than a mile from the proposed BayoTech project site. The facility relies on both biomass and methane for its operations and is noted as one of the largest sources of air pollution within the city of Stockton, the complaint says.
The Sierra Club argues that the IS/MND failed to properly assess various environmental impacts, including air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and impacts on endangered species like the Swainson’s hawk and giant garter snake. They also allege the Port did not consider the cumulative impact of this project alongside existing pollution sources in the region.
The plaintiffs claim that the Port did not follow CEQA’s requirements, which mandate a detailed environmental review when a project could have significant environmental impacts. They also argue that the mitigation measures proposed in the IS/MND are insufficient and lack evidence of effectiveness. The failure to conduct a full EIR and the deficiencies in the IS/MND form the core of their legal argument.
The lawsuit seeks a court order to overturn the Port’s approval of the project, require the preparation of a full EIR, and halt any project activities until proper CEQA compliance is achieved.
