“The Complaint alleges that Defendants manufactured and illegally imported, sold, offered for sale, and/or introduced or delivered for introduction into United States commerce mobile cranes utilizing engines that were not covered by the certificates of conformity required under the Act, including Sections 203(a)(1) and 213(d), 42 U.S.C. §§ 7522(a)(1) and 7547(d), and 40 C.F.R. § 1068.101, and that did not qualify for an exemption from certification requirements.”

💡 This quote confirms Manitowoc sold engines without EPA approval and without qualifying for any legal exemption, establishing the core violation.

“These alleged violations involved 59 uncertified ‘motor vehicle’ truck cranes that were subject to greenhouse gas (‘GHG’) certification requirements applicable to on-highway vehicles.”

💡 Dozens of cranes violated climate protection standards, contributing directly to greenhouse gas emissions.

“392 ‘nonroad’ truck cranes that were equipped with motor vehicle engines lacking required nonroad certifications.”

💡 Nearly 400 cranes used highway engines without proper off-road approvals, creating widespread air quality violations.

“three uncertified cranes containing nonroad compression-ignition engines that were authorized for export only.”

💡 Manitowoc imported engines certified only for foreign sale and illegally sold them in the U.S., circumventing domestic emissions standards.

“over five hundred cranes containing uncertified nonroad compression-ignition engines that were disqualified from, or in excess of, Defendants’ allowance under the Transition Program for Equipment Manufacturers (‘TPEM’) regulations.”

💡 Manitowoc stockpiled and sold more than 500 non-compliant engines beyond its legal allowance, demonstrating systematic abuse of regulatory flexibility.

“The Complaint also alleges that Defendants failed to meet certain labeling requirements of 40 C.F.R. § 1039.135(e) and 40 C.F.R. § 1068.225(e), in violation of Section 203(a)(4) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7522(a)(4), and 40 C.F.R. § 1068.101(a)(1).”

💡 Missing or incorrect labels prevented purchasers and regulators from identifying non-compliant equipment, compounding the harm.

“Defendants violated reporting requirements, including annual reporting and import declaration form requirements, in violation of Sections 203(a)(2) and 213(d) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7522(a)(2) and 7547(d), 40 C.F.R. §§ 1068.101(a)(2) and 1068.301(d), and 40 C.F.R. § 1039.626(a)(9).”

💡 Manitowoc’s failure to file accurate reports prevented EPA from detecting violations in real time, allowing illegal sales to continue.

“Defendants do not admit any liability to the United States arising out of the transactions or occurrences alleged in the Complaint.”

💡 The settlement allows Manitowoc to pay a fine without acknowledging wrongdoing, preserving its reputation despite documented violations.

“Within 30 Days after the Effective Date, Defendants shall pay, collectively, the total sum of $42,600,000.00 as a civil penalty, together with interest accruing from the date on which the Consent Decree is lodged with the Court.”

💡 The $42.6 million penalty is substantial in absolute terms but may not exceed profits from years of illegal crane sales.

“Defendants are jointly and severally responsible for the payment amount.”

💡 Parent company Manitowoc and subsidiaries Grove U.S. and Manitowoc Crane Group Germany share legal responsibility, preventing finger-pointing among corporate entities.

“Defendants shall mitigate estimated excess NOx and PM emissions from the alleged uncertified engines in Defendants’ mobile cranes (the ‘Subject Engines’) by completing Mitigation Project(s) to reduce NOx and PM emissions by a similar amount from other nonroad vehicles located in reasonable proximity to areas where violations causing the harm occurred.”

💡 The decree acknowledges that money alone cannot undo air pollution damage and requires tangible emissions reductions in affected communities.

“Defendants shall implement a plan to retrofit, with a Tier 4 engine, a locomotive operating in the Sparrows Point, Maryland area and currently powered by a 1750 horsepower Tier 0 engine (the ‘Subject Locomotive’).”

💡 The specific retrofit project targets the Baltimore area where Manitowoc’s violations were concentrated, providing localized environmental justice.

“Following the retrofit, Defendants shall obtain and provide to EPA a certification from the owner and/or operator of the Subject Locomotive demonstrating, with supporting documentation, that the Tier 0 engine has been permanently destroyed.”

💡 Destroying the old engine prevents it from being resold and continuing to pollute, ensuring the mitigation creates genuine emissions reductions.

“Defendants shall not deduct any penalties paid under this Decree pursuant to this Section or Section IX (Stipulated Penalties) in calculating their federal income tax.”

💡 This provision prevents Manitowoc from offsetting the penalty through tax benefits, though shareholders still bear the cost rather than executives.

“The following stipulated penalties shall accrue per violation per Day for each violation of the requirements identified in Section VII (Mitigation): $1,500 1st through 14th Day, $3,000 15th through 30th Day, $5,000 31st Day and beyond.”

💡 Daily penalties for delays are modest relative to Manitowoc’s size, creating weak incentives for timely mitigation.

“That, as of the date of executing this Consent Decree, Defendants are not required to perform or develop the Mitigation Project(s) by any federal, state, or local law or regulation and are not required to perform or develop the Mitigation Project(s) by agreement, grant, or as injunctive relief awarded in any other action in any forum.”

💡 Manitowoc certifies the locomotive retrofit is not otherwise required, ensuring the mitigation provides environmental benefit beyond existing obligations.