Inside the EPA’s 73 lead safety violations against Doerr Siding & Remodeling

Corporate Misconduct Case Study: Doerr Siding & Remodeling, Inc. & Its Impact on Public Health

TL;DR: For years, an Illinois-based remodeling company, Doerr Siding & Remodeling, Inc., performed renovations on dozens of homes, potentially exposing families to the severe risks of lead poisoning. According to a legal settlement with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the firm operated without the required federal certification for nearly a decade, failed to provide homeowners with critical lead hazard information, and did not use properly trained workers for projects that disturbed lead-based paint. This case peels back the veneer of a local business to reveal a disturbing pattern of alleged negligence that prioritized profit over the health and safety of communities.

Read on to uncover the full extent of the allegations and the systemic failures that allowed them to happen.

Introduction: The Poison We Live With

Low-level lead poisoning is a silent epidemic in America, inflicting irreversible damage on the developing brains of children. It can cause diminished IQ, learning disabilities, impaired hearing, and behavioral problems. The most common cause is the ingestion of household dust contaminated with lead from old paint, a danger that federal laws were specifically designed to prevent.

This is not a story about a distant, faceless corporation. It’s about a local remodeling company in East Peoria, Illinois, and its alleged repeated failure to follow basic safety laws designed to protect families from this exact threat. The case of Doerr Siding & Remodeling, Inc. serves as a chilling reminder of how the relentless pursuit of profit within a system of weak regulation can directly endanger public health, turning the American dream of homeownership into a potential nightmare.

Inside the Allegations: A Pattern of Negligence

The charges leveled against Doerr Siding & Remodeling by the EPA are both numerous and severe, painting a picture of a company that systematically disregarded fundamental public health protections. The core of the case revolves around 18 separate renovation projects conducted between 2019 and 2022 on homes built before 1978, the year lead-based paint was banned for residential use. These projects, ranging from siding and window replacements to full kitchen remodels, all disturbed painted surfaces, creating a significant risk of lead dust contamination.

Across these 18 projects, Doerr faced a staggering 73 lead safety violations. The EPA claims that Doerr Siding failed on multiple fronts, demonstrating a consistent disregard for the law. These were foundational failures that dismantled the entire framework of protection intended by the Toxic Substances Control Act.

Timeline of Alleged Violations

Doerr’s first and most significant failure was operating without the necessary credentials. Its EPA firm certification expired on June 4, 2015. For the next nine years, the firm continued to perform, offer, and claim to perform renovations in target housing without seeking or obtaining the required recertification from the EPA. Every one of the 18 renovations identified was conducted while the firm was uncertified.

Furthermore, Doerr failed in its duty to inform homeowners of the risks. Federal law requires firms to provide the owner of a pre-1978 home with an EPA-approved lead hazard information pamphlet before starting work. For all 18 documented renovations, Doerr Siding failed to obtain written acknowledgment from the homeowners that they had received the pamphlet, a critical step in ensuring informed consent.

The violations continued at the worksite. The law mandates that a certified renovator be assigned to each project to ensure lead-safe practices are followed and to train other workers on-site. The EPA alleged that Doerr Siding not only failed to assign a certified renovator to these 18 projects but also failed to ensure that the individuals performing the work had been properly trained.

This created a direct risk of lead dust spreading throughout the homes and contaminating the surrounding properties. Finally, Doerr failed to retain any records necessary to demonstrate that it followed the legally required work practice standards, a violation that makes verifying compliance impossible and suggests a complete breakdown of internal safety protocols.

Regulatory Loopholes and Corporate Impunity

The case of Doerr Siding & Remodeling exposes the inherent weaknesses of a regulatory system that often relies on corporate self-policing and is too understaffed to provide proactive oversight. Doerr’s certification lapsed in 2015, yet it took an EPA inspection nearly eight years later, in 2023, to uncover a long-standing pattern of non-compliance. This significant delay highlights a critical flaw in the system: enforcement is often reactive, not preventative.

Under a neoliberal framework that champions deregulation, government regulatory agencies like the EPA are frequently stripped of the resources needed to effectively monitor the vast number of businesses under their jurisdiction.

This creates an environment where companies can operate outside the law for years, facing consequences only if they are the subject of a random inspection or a specific complaint. The system effectively places the burden of discovery on the public or on stretched-thin regulators, rather than placing the burden of proof on the company to continuously demonstrate its compliance.

The settlement itself reflects another feature of this system. Doerr Siding & Remodeling agreed to a civil penalty of $27,500, a figure determined after the EPA considered Doerr’s “inability to pay.” While the law allows for penalties of up to $48,512 per violation, the final amount is a fraction of the potential maximum fine.

This practice, while intended to prevent a company from going out of business, can be interpreted by other firms as a signal that the financial consequences of non-compliance are manageable—a mere cost of doing business rather than a significant deterrent. Doerr was also allowed to settle the case without admitting to the factual allegations, a common legal maneuver that allows corporations to avoid public accountability and limits their liability in any future civil lawsuits brought by affected homeowners.

Profit-Maximization at All Costs: A Business Model of Negligence

At its core, the corporate misconduct of Doerr Siding & Remodeling illustrates a business model where profit maximization is elevated above public health and ethical responsibility. Each alleged violation corresponds to a cost-saving measure. By not renewing its firm certification, Doerr avoided fees and the administrative burden of compliance. By not employing or assigning certified renovators, who require specialized training, Doerr could reduce labor costs.

Forgoing the distribution of lead hazard pamphlets and the meticulous record-keeping required by law saved time and resources on every single job. When multiplied across 18 projects—and potentially many more that went undocumented—these small cuts accumulate into a significant financial advantage over competitors who follow the law. This creates a perverse incentive structure, a hallmark of late-stage capitalism, where companies that cut corners on safety are rewarded with higher profit margins.

The settlement reveals that these decisions were made over a period of years, suggesting a deliberate and sustained business practice rather than an accidental oversight. The choice to operate without certification and to ignore lead-safe work protocols represents a calculated risk, weighing the likelihood of getting caught against the immediate financial benefits of non-compliance. In this calculus, the health of children and families in the homes being remodeled was treated as an externality—a cost to be borne by others. This case is a microcosm of a larger economic ideology where corporate responsibility is secondary to the relentless drive for revenue.

The Economic Fallout: The Price of Doing Business

The financial penalty imposed on Doerr Siding & Remodeling, Inc. raises critical questions about corporate accountability. Doerr agreed to pay a civil penalty of $27,500. This amount, however, was determined after the EPA conducted a financial analysis based on the company’s claim of an “inability to pay”. The law allows for a maximum penalty of $48,512 for each violation, and with 73 violations alleged, the potential fine could have run into the millions.

This steep reduction creates a troubling precedent. It suggests that financial hardship, whether real or strategically claimed, can shield a company from the full consequences of its actions. For other firms in the industry, such a relatively small penalty might not serve as a powerful deterrent. Instead, it can be viewed as a calculated risk, a potential cost of doing business that is far outweighed by the profits gained from years of cutting corners on safety and compliance. The company was even granted an installment plan to pay the penalty, with a total of $145.83 in interest added for the privilege.

Environmental & Public Health Risks: A Cloud of Poison

The environmental and public health risks at the heart of this case are severe and irreversible. The regulations Doerr Siding allegedly violated were established precisely because of the widespread danger of lead poisoning, especially for children under six. Congress has found that low-level lead exposure causes a host of devastating health issues in children, including intelligence quotient deficiencies, reading and learning disabilities, impaired hearing, reduced attention span, hyperactivity, and behavior problems.

For 18 families, Doerr Siding’s renovation work—which included siding removal, window replacements, and kitchen remodels—disturbed painted surfaces and likely generated hazardous lead dust. By allegedly failing to use certified renovators, implement lead-safe work practices, or even inform homeowners of the risks, Doerr created the potential for this toxic dust to spread throughout the homes. The ingestion of contaminated household dust is the most common cause of lead poisoning in children. Each of the 18 properties became a potential contamination site, endangering not only the families living there but also potentially the surrounding environment as lead dust can migrate outdoors.

Exploitation of Workers: Unsafe and Untrained

Doerr’s total negligence extended not only to its customers but also to its own employees. Federal law requires that all individuals performing renovations be either certified renovators themselves or trained by a certified renovator. This is to ensure that workers understand the dangers of lead dust and know how to perform their jobs safely, protecting both themselves and the residents of the home.

According to the EPA, Doerr Siding failed to meet this fundamental obligation. For 18 separate projects, the firm did not ensure that the individuals performing the renovation activities were properly trained. This failure placed workers in direct contact with hazardous materials without the knowledge or tools to handle them safely. They were put at risk of lead exposure themselves, and without proper training, they were incapable of implementing the containment measures necessary to prevent the spread of dust, making them unwitting vectors of contamination. This reflects a corporate ethos where the well-being of labor is as expendable as the safety of customers.

Community Impact: Local Lives Undermined

The impact of these alleged violations ripples through entire communities. The 18 homes are located in residential neighborhoods across East Peoria, Peoria, Pekin, and Washington, Illinois. These are places where children play, neighbors socialize, and families build their lives. Each act of non-compliant renovation work represented a potential point source of lead contamination for an entire neighborhood.

By failing to contain lead dust, the company’s actions could have allowed toxic particles to settle on lawns, sidewalks, and neighboring properties, creating a broader public health risk. The lack of record-keeping further exacerbates this problem. Because the company allegedly failed to document its work practices, it is impossible for homeowners or public health officials to know the full extent of the potential contamination. This leaves families in a state of uncertainty, forced to wonder if their homes and communities were compromised by a company they trusted.

The PR Machine: Settlement Without Admission

A key component of modern corporate damage control is the ability to resolve legal trouble without ever admitting guilt. Doerr Siding & Remodeling’s settlement with the EPA is a textbook example of this strategy. While the company admitted to the jurisdictional allegations, it neither admitted nor denied the factual allegations detailed in the complaint. This legal maneuver is critically important for corporations.

By avoiding an admission of guilt, the company shields itself from automatic liability in potential future lawsuits from the 18 homeowners or others who may have been affected. It allows the firm to publicly frame the issue as a dispute that was simply settled to avoid costly litigation, rather than as a consequence of proven wrongdoing. This tactic blunts the force of regulatory enforcement and muddies the public narrative, transforming clear allegations of misconduct into a legal gray area.

Wealth Disparity & Corporate Greed

This case offers a clear window into how corporate greed directly impacts working families. The services offered by Doerr Siding—siding, windows, remodeling—are significant investments for most homeowners. Customers pay for a professional service with the expectation that the work will be done safely and according to the law. The EPA’s allegations suggest that Doerr Siding took their money while failing to provide these basic assurances.

The decision to operate for years without proper certification or trained professionals is a classic example of a business prioritizing its own financial accumulation over the well-being of its clients. The money saved on compliance, training, and proper procedures flows upward to the company’s owners, while the risks are pushed downward onto the families living in the homes. This dynamic exacerbates economic inequality, where the health and safety of ordinary people become collateral damage in the pursuit of corporate profit.

Corporate Accountability Fails the Public

The final outcome of this case is a sobering reflection on the limits of corporate accountability in the United States. Despite 73 documented violations over several years that put public health at risk, the company faces a modest, negotiated penalty and walks away without any admission of wrongdoing. The settlement resolves the company’s liability for federal civil penalties, allowing it to continue operating. The document makes no mention of individual liability for the company’s president, Scott Doerr, who signed the settlement agreement.

This outcome is characteristic of a system that is more adept at managing corporate misconduct than stopping it. The lack of a severe penalty, coupled with the absence of an admission of guilt, fails to deliver a strong message of deterrence to the broader industry. For the affected families and the public, it falls short of true justice. The system worked to process a violation, but it failed to impose a consequence that matches the gravity of the alleged harm.

This Is the System Working as Intended

It is a mistake to view the case of Doerr Siding & Remodeling as a failure of the system. Rather, it is the system working exactly as designed under neoliberal capitalism. A regulatory framework weakened by decades of anti-government rhetoric and budget cuts creates an environment where violations are not only possible but probable. Enforcement becomes a game of chance, and penalties are often treated as a negotiable business expense.

The prioritization of profit over everything is not an accidental byproduct of our neoliberal economic system; it is the central organizing principle. In this context, an evil company that spends money on safety measures that don’t directly generate revenue is at a competitive disadvantage against those who cut corners. The case is not an aberration. It is a predictable outcome of a logic that systematically devalues public health and worker safety in favor of private accumulation.

Conclusion: A Cost Paid by the Public

The legal document detailing the case against Doerr Siding & Remodeling, Inc. is more than just an administrative record. It is a story of trust betrayed and a public health framework undermined. For nearly a decade, a company was allegedly allowed to operate in violation of federal laws designed to protect children from the irreversible harm of lead poisoning. It failed to get certified, failed to warn homeowners, failed to train its workers, and failed to keep records, dismantling every pillar of protection afforded by the law.

The resolution—a modest fine with no admission of guilt—highlights a profound imbalance. Corporations are granted the legal right to exist and profit, but when they break the rules, the mechanisms for accountability often prove inadequate.

The true cost is not measured in dollars paid in a settlement, but in the potential health consequences for families and the erosion of public trust. This case is a damning illustration of a deeper failure in how modern economies protect corporate interests, often at the direct expense of the communities they claim to serve.

Frivolous or Serious Lawsuit?

The action taken by the Environmental Protection Agency against Doerr Siding & Remodeling, Inc. was unequivocally serious and legitimate. The government’s case was built upon a multi-year pattern of 73 distinct, documented violations of the Toxic Substances Control Act, a federal law created to address severe public health threats. The corporate misconduct were fundamental failures to comply with safety protocols designed to prevent lead poisoning in children. This was a meaningful legal grievance aimed at addressing a direct and substantial risk to public health and safety.