TL;DR:
Federal inspectors walked into Siegwerk USA Inc.’s Des Moines facility and found hazardous waste handled without basic safeguards.
Siegwerk ran a hazardous secondary materials operation without notifying regulators, left hazardous waste sitting in an unlabeled container with no hazard warning, and held universal waste lamps past the legal one-year limit. Regulators issued a single civil penalty of $5,500, which the company agreed to pay while neither admitting nor denying the facts. These violations increase risk for workers, first responders, and the surrounding community, and the small penalty exposes how neoliberal capitalism treats environmental protection as a low-cost line item.
Keep reading for how this happened, what the federal order actually says, and what it reveals about corporate ethics, corporate accountability, and the way the system favors profit over public health. EPA
Table of Contents
- Introduction: Hazardous Waste, Hidden from View
- Corporate Misconduct at Siegwerk USA Inc.
- Timeline of Key Events
- Regulatory Loopholes and Self-Reporting Under Neoliberal Capitalism
- Profit-Maximization vs. Corporate Social Responsibility
- Environmental and Public Health Risks of Hazardous Waste Mismanagement
- Legal Minimalism and the Carefully Worded Deal
- How Capitalism Uses Delay and Complexity
- This Is the System Working as Intended
- Frivolous or Serious Case? Why These Violations Matter
Introduction: Hazardous Waste, Hidden from View
At an industrial facility on the southwest side of Des Moines, Siegwerk USA Inc. handled hazardous waste in ways that federal law forbids. When U.S. Environmental Protection Agency staff inspected the site, they found that the company ran part of its hazardous materials program off the books, failed to label a hazardous waste container, and kept universal waste lamps beyond the legal time limit.
These violations sit at the heart of modern corporate ethics. They show how a company benefits from deregulation and weak oversight, and how public health and worker safety depend on rules that corporations treat as paperwork chores. Under neoliberal capitalism, that paperwork becomes optional until an inspector arrives.
Corporate Misconduct at Siegwerk USA Inc.
EPA Region 7 inspected the Siegwerk USA Inc. facility at 3535 SW 56th Street in Des Moines, Iowa, on February 19, 2025. The facility operates as the owner or operator of a site that manages hazardous secondary materials and hazardous waste.
After the inspection and follow-up investigation, EPA alleged four separate violations of federal hazardous waste management rules:
1. Running a Hazardous Materials Program Outside the Regulated System
Federal rules require any facility that manages certain hazardous secondary materials to tell EPA about that activity in advance and then update that notice every two years using a formal notification form. Siegwerk did not submit this notification before managing hazardous secondary materials.
This omission means the facility ran a hazardous materials operation without the basic oversight that comes from being officially on the regulator’s radar. The system assumes honest self-reporting. Siegwerk stepped outside that system until an inspector discovered the problem.
2. Unlabeled Hazardous Waste Container
Federal law requires generators to label hazardous waste containers clearly with the words “Hazardous Waste.” Inspectors found one satellite container that held hazardous waste with no such label.
Without that label, a worker, contractor, or first responder may treat the container as benign. Emergency crews rely on these markings to decide how to respond to spills, fires, or accidents. Removing that information removes a layer of protection for both people and the environment.
3. No Hazard Warning on the Container
The same rule requires an indication of the hazards of the contents on the container. That can include words like “ignitable,” “corrosive,” “toxic,” or symbols such as a flame or skull and crossbones. Siegwerk left one satellite container without any indication of the hazard.
This omission strips away another safeguard. The rule exists because a simple hazard warning can prevent someone from opening, moving, or mishandling dangerous material.
4. Universal Waste Lamps Stored Beyond the Legal Limit
EPA treats items like spent fluorescent lamps as “universal waste.” Even under this streamlined system, a small quantity handler may only accumulate universal waste for one year from the date of generation unless it meets specific exceptions. Siegwerk did not send off universal waste lamps within that one-year period.
Keeping these lamps longer than legally allowed increases the chance of damage, breakage, or misplacement. Universal waste lamps often contain toxic substances that threaten workers and the environment when glass breaks or containers fail.
Penalty and Corporate Response
After considering the statutory penalty factors, EPA and Siegwerk agreed to resolve the violations for a civil penalty of $5,500. Siegwerk agreed to pay the penalty within 30 days of the final order’s effective date.
In the agreement, the company admits it is subject to hazardous waste law and that EPA has jurisdiction. It neither admits nor denies the specific factual allegations. It certifies that the alleged violations have been corrected and that it is now in compliance with all applicable hazardous waste requirements.
The company waives its right to a trial, waives any right to a jury, and waives the right to challenge the legality of the final order. The agreement states that the penalty is a civil penalty and will not be deductible for federal, state, or local tax purposes.
The signature page on page 4 shows Siegwerk’s Regional HSE Manager, Gary Klukow, signing the agreement on November 3, 2025, indicating corporate acceptance at a management level.
Timeline of Key Events
| Date / Period | Event at Siegwerk USA Inc. | What It Reveals |
|---|---|---|
| Before Feb. 19, 2025 | The facility manages hazardous secondary materials without having sent the required notification form to EPA. | Siegwerk operates a hazardous materials program outside the formal oversight channel that depends on advance notice. |
| Before Feb. 19, 2025 | The facility accumulates universal waste lamps beyond the one-year limit from the date of generation. | Hazardous universal waste sits on-site longer than allowed, increasing the window of risk. |
| Before Feb. 19, 2025 | One satellite container of hazardous waste lacks the words “Hazardous Waste” and any hazard indication. | Workers and responders lose critical information about the contents and danger of at least one waste container. |
| Feb. 19, 2025 | EPA inspectors conduct an on-site inspection at the Des Moines facility. | Regulators, rather than corporate disclosure, uncover the hazardous waste management failures. |
| After Feb. 19, 2025 | EPA issues an expedited settlement agreement alleging four violations and proposing a civil penalty of $5,500. | The case moves into a streamlined enforcement track with a modest penalty amount. |
| Nov. 3, 2025 | Siegwerk’s Regional HSE Manager signs the expedited settlement agreement. | The company accepts the penalty and related terms, including waivers and certifications of compliance. |
| Date of filing with Regional Hearing Clerk | EPA’s Regional Judicial Officer signs a final order that incorporates the agreement and makes it effective upon filing. | The settlement becomes a binding order and closes federal civil penalty exposure for these specific violations. |
Regulatory Loopholes and Self-Reporting Under Neoliberal Capitalism
This case shows how environmental protection in the United States relies heavily on corporate self-reporting. The rules that Siegwerk violated start with a simple premise: if you are going to manage hazardous secondary materials, you must voluntarily tell EPA about it before you begin. If you generate hazardous waste, you must label and track it honestly.
Siegwerk failed to send the required notification, and the government only learned of the problem through an inspection. That pattern is common in a system shaped by neoliberal capitalism. Regulators expect facilities to declare their own activities, follow their own plans, and stay honest until an inspector drops in. Corporations gain flexibility and lower administrative costs. Communities bear the risk if that trust breaks.
The laughingly modest $5,500 penalty confirms how enforcement often works.
A company that mishandles hazardous waste faces a financial consequence that may sit far below the cost of installing stronger internal controls.
The settlement process moves quickly to closure through an expedited track. Corporate social responsibility becomes a slogan while the formal system accepts minimal financial accountability.
Profit-Maximization vs. Corporate Social Responsibility
Every violation in this case carries a cost-saving temptation.
- Skipping the advance notification avoids administrative work and regulatory scrutiny.
- Leaving a container unlabeled avoids the effort of updating signs and training.
- Holding universal waste lamps longer than allowed delays shipping and disposal costs.
The enforcement file does not describe internal motives. It does show that the company failed to do low-cost tasks that protect workers and neighbors. These tasks exist to support corporate ethics and corporate social responsibility in practice.
Under profit-driven incentives, management faces a steady push to lower overhead and streamline operations. Environmental safeguards look like bureaucracy crowded into already thin margins. That mindset shapes decisions long before an inspector arrives.
The EPA order lands as one more expense in the cost of doing business, rather than a turning point in corporate accountability.
Environmental and Public Health Risks of Hazardous Waste Mismanagement
Hazardous waste rules exist because industrial byproducts can poison air, soil, and water and can injure workers on contact. Universal waste lamps can release toxic substances if they break. Containers with flammable, corrosive, or toxic contents become far more dangerous when their identity stays hidden.
The order does not describe a spill, explosion, or release at Siegwerk’s Des Moines facility. It does describe conditions that increase risk:
- Hazardous materials handled under a regulatory provision without the required prior notification.
- A satellite container lacking the “Hazardous Waste” label and any hazard indication.
- Universal waste lamps retained past the one-year limit.
These details show how corporate pollution and public health impact take shape in everyday operations. The danger grows from routine shortcuts, delayed shipments, and missing labels. People who live or work near facilities like this rely on strict compliance with those “small” rules because they form the first line of defense against larger environmental disasters.
Legal Minimalism and the Carefully Worded Deal
The EPA’s expedited settlement uses careful language to frame the harm and the response. Siegwerk:
- Admits that it is subject to hazardous waste law and that EPA has jurisdiction over its conduct.
- Neither admits nor denies the factual allegations.
- Consents to pay the civil penalty and to follow the agreement’s terms.
- Certifies that the violations have been corrected and that it is now in full compliance with all hazardous waste requirements.
The agreement also states that paying the $5,500 penalty resolves only federal civil penalties for the specified violations. EPA explicitly reserves the right to act on any other past, present, or future violations of hazardous waste law or any other law.
This is legal minimalism in action. The company gives up very little beyond money and some formal promises. It gains closure, avoids a public trial, and avoids any formal admission of wrongdoing. Compliance becomes a matter of signed forms and internal assurances.
Under late-stage capitalism, this strategy aligns with a broader pattern in which corporations treat compliance as a branding exercise, a way to manage risk and reputation through controlled language and limited concessions.
How Capitalism Uses Delay and Complexity
Time works in favor of corporations in environmental enforcement. In this case:
- The violations occurred before February 19, 2025.
- The inspection happened on that date.
- The company signed the agreement on November 3, 2025.
- The order becomes effective only when filed by the Regional Hearing Clerk.
During that period, the company continues operating while lawyers and regulators negotiate a resolution. The facility has already corrected the violations by the time the agreement is signed, according to its own certification. The corporate risk takes the form of a low five-figure penalty months after the fact.
The process itself requires technical understanding of hazardous waste laws, regulatory citations, and settlement procedures. Ordinary residents of Des Moines and line workers at the facility play no formal role. Complexity and delay reduce public pressure and keep decision-making inside a narrow circle of experts. That pattern reflects a broader feature of neoliberal capitalism: legal and technical complexity shields corporate misconduct from direct democratic oversight.
This Is the System Working as Intended
The final order states that the expedited settlement is ratified and incorporated and orders the company to comply with its terms. It marks the agreement as effective upon filing. The system has processed a violation and produced a result.
The outcome looks limited compared to the stakes. Siegwerk mishandled hazardous secondary materials and hazardous waste. Yet the evil company only pays a small civil penalty, waives trial rights, certifies compliance, and moves on. EPA reserves its enforcement authority for other violations, which maintains the appearance of strict oversight.
Under neoliberal capitalism, this pattern is routine. Environmental law operates inside a framework that prioritizes ongoing industrial production.
Corporate accountability narrows to small penalties and confidential compliance certainties. Communities near hazardous facilities live with the long-term risk while corporations fold enforcement actions into their cost calculations. This case does not break that pattern. It illustrates it.
Frivolous or Serious Case? Why These Violations Matter
The EPA’s record shows a real and important set of violations:
- Failure to notify EPA before managing hazardous secondary materials.
- Failure to label a hazardous waste container with the required words and hazard information.
- Failure to send universal waste lamps off-site within the one-year legal limit.
- A federal inspection that identified these problems and led to an enforcement action.
These regulatory and ethical violations reach the core of hazardous waste management and environmental safety. They affect the ability of workers and emergency responders to recognize danger. They affect how long toxic materials remain on-site. They affect whether regulators know what is happening inside industrial facilities.
The dollar amount of the penalty may look small, yet the underlying corporate misconduct reflects a meaningful breakdown in corporate social responsibility and corporate ethics.
The EPA’s expedited settlement agreement with Siegwerk can be found at this following link if you want to fact check me: https://yosemite.epa.gov/OA/RHC/EPAAdmin.nsf/Filings/E6D2B072638164A085258D45006DF8D0/$File/Siegwerk%20Expedited%20Settlement%20Agreement%20and%20Final%20Order.pdf
💡 Explore Corporate Misconduct by Category
Corporations harm people every day — from wage theft to pollution. Learn more by exploring key areas of injustice.
- 💀 Product Safety Violations — When companies risk lives for profit.
- 🌿 Environmental Violations — Pollution, ecological collapse, and unchecked greed.
- 💼 Labor Exploitation — Wage theft, worker abuse, and unsafe conditions.
- 🛡️ Data Breaches & Privacy Abuses — Misuse and mishandling of personal information.
- 💵 Financial Fraud & Corruption — Lies, scams, and executive impunity.
NOTE:
This website is facing massive amounts of headwind trying to procure the lawsuits relating to corporate misconduct. We are being pimp-slapped by a quadruple whammy:
- The Trump regime's reversal of the laws & regulations meant to protect us is making it so victims are no longer filing lawsuits for shit which was previously illegal.
- Donald Trump's defunding of regulatory agencies led to the frequency of enforcement actions severely decreasing. What's more, the quality of the enforcement actions has also plummeted.
- The GOP's insistence on cutting the healthcare funding for millions of Americans in order to give their billionaire donors additional tax cuts has recently shut the government down. This government shut down has also impacted the aforementioned defunded agencies capabilities to crack down on evil-doers. Donald Trump has since threatened to make these agency shutdowns permanent on account of them being "democrat agencies".
- My access to the LexisNexis legal research platform got revoked. This isn't related to Trump or anything, but it still hurt as I'm being forced to scrounge around public sources to find legal documents now. Sadge.
All four of these factors are severely limiting my ability to access stories of corporate misconduct.
Due to this, I have temporarily decreased the amount of articles published everyday from 5 down to 3, and I will also be publishing articles from previous years as I was fortunate enough to download a butt load of EPA documents back in 2022 and 2023 to make YouTube videos with.... This also means that you'll be seeing many more environmental violation stories going forward :3
Thank you for your attention to this matter,
Aleeia (owner and publisher of www.evilcorporations.com)
Also, can we talk about how ICE has a $170 billion annual budget, while the EPA-- which protects the air we breathe and water we drink-- barely clocks $4 billion? Just something to think about....
