Port of Tacoma sues to recoup $10M for cleanup of ‘toxic legacies’ at 2 parcels
AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
- Port of Tacoma sues PQ LLC over contamination cleanup costs.
- Port says it has spent $8M+ and seeks to recover nearly $10M.
- Lawsuit seeks declaration that PQ is liable for future remediation, fees and expenses.
The Port of Tacoma is seeking to recoup millions of dollars in environmental cleanup costs over previous industrial contamination.
The properties at issue are parcels at 1114 Taylor Way and 1202 Taylor Way, which the port acquired from PQ Corp. in 2008 for more than $8.5 million.
The port is suing PQ LLC of Pennsylvania for cost recovery and a declaratory judgment under Washington’s Model Toxics Control Act.
The port contends the LLC is legally responsible, as successor to earlier Philadelphia Quartz entities, “who left behind toxic legacies that the port must address,” according to the suit.
The lawsuit was filed by the port in February in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington in Tacoma.
The company has not yet filed a response to the lawsuit, and no attorney is yet listed representing the LLC.
PQ Corp did not respond to a request for comment from The News Tribune.
The port’s communication office on Tuesday issued a statement to The News Tribune in response to an inquiry about the suit.
“The Port of Tacoma’s lawsuit against PQ LLC seeks to recover nearly $10 million in public funds spent cleaning up contamination left by decades of PQ’s industrial operations on land now owned by the port,” it stated. “For more than 60 years, PQ manufactured chemicals on the site, leaving behind environmental contamination that includes arsenic, petroleum, carcinogenic compounds and metals.”
The lawsuit noted that PQ LLC “is a privately held multinational chemical company worth hundreds of millions of dollars.”
“These properties present a unique public policy challenge,” the port’s attorneys wrote in the suit. “The costs of remediating them often exceed the value of the land itself. Without the port’s efforts, these properties would never be cleaned up — resulting in ongoing environmental impacts to the Puget Sound and economic blight to the region.
“Without the port, many of these legacy industrial properties on the Tacoma Tideflats would never meet the purpose” of the Model Toxics Control Act, the filing added.
Company’s history at the port
From about 1941 to 2008, the LLC’s predecessors operated a sodium silicate manufacturing plant on the site, with 11 buildings, 20 above‑ground storage tanks, furnaces and more, the suit states.
The port alleges in the lawsuit the operations were “sprawling and careless, typical of the types of chemical manufacturing operations that existed on the Tacoma Tideflats prior to modern environmental laws.”
The lawsuit contends that initial investigations of the property before they were purchased “did not reveal the extent of contamination.”
In 2009, during a project to remove an invasive snail from a nearby ditch, workers discovered sodium silicate deposits in the stormwater ditch.
Further sampling showed sodium silicate deposits on site and soil and groundwater contamination with metals, petroleum and other pollutants above regulatory levels.
The state Department of Ecology in 2011 formally added it to its confirmed or suspected contaminated site list and identified it as a state cleanup site. In 2012 the port enrolled the site in Ecology’s voluntary cleanup program.
In 2016, the port and PQ’s predecessor entered into an interim cost-sharing agreement to split investigation and response costs.
Last year, according to the suit, PQ refused to reimburse several months of port cleanup expenses following a dispute.
“In 2025, under the oversight of the Washington State Department of Ecology, the port voluntarily conducted an extensive cleanup at the former PQ facility,” the port said in its statement to The News Tribune. “Before initiating the work, the port sought PQ’s cooperation in funding the effort, but PQ refused to take responsibility for the contamination it left behind,”
The port contends it has incurred more than $8 million in investigation and remediations expenses and alleges that future monitoring and additional remediation will be “significant” and “likely cost several more millions of dollars.”
In addition to recouping its costs, the port seeks a declaration from the court that PQ is liable for all future remedial action costs incurred by the port to clean up the contamination at the site, as well as attorneys’ fees and expenses under the Model Toxics Control Act.
“As a steward of public resources, the port is now turning to the judicial system to require PQ to reimburse the port for what is equitable and fair: the cost of cleaning up its toxic legacy,” the port said in its statement.
