EPA v. THE RYLAND GROUP, INC.

Case summary

The Ryland Group Inc., one of the nation�s largest homebuilders, will pay a civil penalty of $625,000 to resolve alleged CWA violations at its construction sites, including sites located in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed, DOJ and EPA announced. Ryland will also invest in compliance programs to improve employee training and increase mgmt oversight at all current and future construction sites. The company is required to inspect its current and future construction sites routinely to minimize stormwater runoff. �This settlement will help protect communities in states across the nation from harmful pollutants in stormwater runoff,� said Ignacia S. Moreno, Asst AG for the Environment and Natural Resources Div of DOJ. �Polluted stormwater runoff can contaminate rivers, lakes and sources of drinking water, and it can be easily prevented with the system-wide mgmt controls and training that this settlement now requires.� �Protecting America�s water resources, like the Chesapeake Bay, by keeping contaminated stormwater from flowing unchecked into our waterways is one of EPA�s top priorities,� said Cynthia Giles, Asst Administrator for EPA�s Ofc of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. �Today�s settlement will improve Ryland�s oversight of stormwater runoff at its construction sites nationwide and protect our nation�s water resources.� EPA estimates the settlement will prevent millions of pounds of sediment from entering U.S. waterways every year, including sediment that would otherwise enter the Chesapeake Bay, North America�s largest and most biologically diverse estuary. The bay and its tidal tributaries are threatened by pollution from a variety of sources and are overburdened with nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment that can be carried by stormwater. The govt complaint, filed with the settlement agmt in the U.S. District Court in Charlotte, N.C., alleges a pattern of violations that was discovered through site inspections and by reviewing documentation submitted by Ryland. The alleged violations include failure to obtain permits until after construction began, failing to obtain permits at all, or failing to comply with permit requirements at sites where Ryland did obtain permits. Alleged permit violations include not developing complete stormwater pollution prevention plans, failure to conduct adequate inspections, and failure to install or implement adequate stormwater controls or practices. The CWA requires permits for the discharge of stormwater runoff. In general, Ryland�s permits require that construction sites have controls in place to prevent pollution from being discharged with stormwater into nearby waterways. These controls include common-sense safeguards such as silt fences, phased site grading and sediment basins to prevent common construction contaminants from entering the nation�s waterways. The settlement requires Ryland to obtain all required permits; develop site-specific pollution prevention plans for each construction site; conduct additional site inspections beyond those required by stormwater regulations; and document and promptly correct any problems detected. The company must properly train construction managers and contractors on stormwater requirements and designate trained staff for each site. Ryland must also submit national compliance summary reports to EPA based on its qtr mgmt oversight inspections and reviews. 7 states have joined the settlement. The states of CO, FL, IL, IN, MD, NV and VA will receive a portion of the $625,000 penalty. The settlement also includes sites in the states of CA, GA, KY, MN, NC, SC and TX.

Defendants (2)

• RYLAND GROUP, INC.Named in complaintNamed in settlement
• RYLAND HOMESNamed in settlement

Facilities (1)

• THE RYLAND GROUP

  40 TECHNOLOGY PKWY, SUITE 300, NORCROSS, GA, 30092

  Registry ID: 110044221179

Statutes cited

• CWA 301/402 — NPDES Permit Violations

Enforcement conclusions (1)

• THE RYLAND GROUP, INC.entered 2012-07-23

  Primary law: CWA

  Federal penalty: $490,108 · State/local: $134,892

Timeline (7 milestones)

• 2004-09-28Referred To Dept Of Justice
• 2004-10-04Enforcement Action Data Entered
• 2011-10-07Final Order Lodged
• 2011-10-07Complaint Filed With Court
• 2012-07-23Concluded
• 2012-07-23Final Order Entered
• 2015-09-14Enforcement Action Closed