Year after year, polluted stormwater runoff is one of the top sources of toxic pollution to Puget Sound and surrounding waterways. When it rains, water running over streets and sidewalks, parking lots and pavement, roofs, docks, and wharfs, collects anything deposited there and takes it straight into our waterways – often without treatment. Pollutants in stormwater runoff wreak havoc on our shared waterways and the aquatic species that depend on them.
The rains have picked up and salmon returned home. As 2025 ends, it is the perfect time to reflect on the legal wins Puget Soundkeeper achieved regarding stormwater. We continue making Sound-wide progress mitigating polluted stormwater runoff and improving stormwater management: from ensuring facilities are properly permitted to actively engaging in state stormwater permitting processes and defending the public’s right at the national level to hold polluters accountable for their stormwater pollution.
Puget Soundkeeper prevails at the U.S. Supreme Court in a long-running clean water enforcement case (Puget Soundkeeper v. Port of Tacoma)
In 1972 Congress enacted the CWA with an express public interest enforcement provision that gives affected individuals as well as organizations like Puget Soundkeeper the authority to hold polluters legally accountable. These “citizen suits” (called so in the law itself, though we refer to them as “public interest enforcements”) are a vital and necessary tool used to protect our shared water, public lands, and air. With a federal administration determined to slash funds and programs once designed for environmental protection and enforcement, enshrining the public’s ability to hold polluters legally accountable is more important than ever.
This year, in one such public interest enforcement action, Puget Soundkeeper achieved a national win for the rights of the public to have a role in clean water enforcement.
Back in 2018, Puget Soundkeeper brought an enforcement action against industrial polluters discharging stormwater into Tacoma’s West Sitcum waterway. After years of action in this case, in 2024 Puget Soundkeeper won a favorable ruling at the federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals; that decision was promptly appealed by the permittees – SSA Terminals and Port of Tacoma – to the U.S. Supreme Court. After a year of briefing, an administration change and an unfavorable U.S. Solicitor General’s opinion asking the Court to take the case and block these types of “citizen suits” from being allowed, the United States Supreme Court denied the Port of Tacoma and SSA Marine’s appeal challenging our ability to hold them accountable for stormwater pollution in Commencement Bay.
This denial locked in our win at the Court of Appeals affirming the public’s ability to bring enforcement cases like this under the federal Clean Water Act (CWA). Read more about the long history of this case here.
Clean Water Act enforcement across the Puget Sound
At Puget Soundkeeper, we have successfully taken polluters to court for their industrial stormwater since 1992 when we brought the first Clean Water Act “citizen suit” in Washington state. Over 30 years later, at any given time we have ten or more active CWA cases to bring industrial polluters into compliance with the law. We also frequently find industrial facilities that should have permits but do not.
This year we initiated nine new enforcement actions to add to our docket. Four of those cases were at unpermitted facilities (sites that we allege should have permits, but don’t). In these we demand that a facility obtain permit coverage in order to settle a case. When these facilities become part of the regulated community, they must implement best management practices (e.g., stormwater controls, spill prevention measures) on their site, test their stormwater quarterly and report the data, and make corrections, if necessary.
In all our lawsuits we seek compliance with the terms of the permit terms or laws previously broken, measures that prevent recurrence of any violations, and a payment in lieu of penalty for the benefit of the ecosystems and communities affected by the violations. Any and all agreed-upon payments that take the place of penalties never go to Puget Soundkeeper. These payments instead go straight to a third-party community-based organizations (either directly or indirectly through a grant managing organization called the Rose Foundation) and are used to restore and improve the watershed impacted by the pollution. Five of our lawsuits settled this year, totaling $1,576,000 in payments that will go directly to environmentally beneficial projects, ranging from Skagit County down to the Green River watershed.
For example, we successfully settled a lawsuit with SSA Marine regarding its permit and pollution at Terminal 25/30 along the Duwamish River. This settlement included a $950,000 payment in lieu of penalty that will fund the King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks NE Auburn Creek Restoration project along the Green River.
Ensuring protective stormwater permits
Puget Soundkeeper also monitors and routinely engages in the federal and state clean water permit process. State-issued permits like the Municipal Stormwater (MS4) Permits and Industrial Stormwater General Permit (ISGP) are reviewed and updated every five years. PSK often submits comments on proposed changes to permits when they are renewed, advocating for the strongest possible protections for Puget Sound communities and waterways. If permits are illegal, then Puget Soundkeeper appeals them within the state court system. Permit wins, as summarized below, ensure larger scale changes across the region and state.
This summer, we successfully settled our appeal of the Department of Ecology’s 2024 Municipal Stormwater Permits. We initiated this appeal because of the lack of 6PPD-quinone (6PPD-q) requirements for permittees. 6PPD-q is the oxidation product of a chemical additive in tires that prevents damage to tire rubber from the elements. It is also acutely toxic to coho salmon and other aquatic species when it enters waterways, often through stormwater runoff. As part of this settlement, Ecology will issue new guidance, best practice, education, and outreach on 6PPD-q in the coming months, in addition to other work in the coming years as the agency develops the next iteration of their statewide permit. Stay tuned for more information.
We also successfully defended the 2020 ISGP and Ecology’s decision to expand the scope of the permit to cover the entire footprint of transportation facilities, rather than only certain areas where vehicle maintenance, equipment cleaning, or airport deicing occur. Now that the 2020 appeal is finally over, we continue to move forward trying to make the 2025 ISGP as protective as possible.
Community enforcement is a necessary tool to protect the Puget Sound
These victories send a powerful message: compliance with the Clean Water Act is not optional. Industrial facilities must address and mitigate their impact on Puget Sound. The government must uphold its part in writing strong permits that ensure cleaner water for species, communities, and for generations to come.
A cleaner and healthier Puget Sound is possible when dedicated communities and advocates ensure that environmental laws are upheld. Puget Soundkeeper remains committed to this mission and continues to be out on the water and in court fighting for the Sound.