ELR Citation: ELR 20211
No(s). 04-75061 (E.D. Mich. Aug 27, 2009)

A district court held that costs related to the construction of a seawall for erosion control are not response costs under CERCLA. The case involves two property owners who filed suit against one another regarding the maintenance of a creek running between their properties. One of the owners claimed she incurred approximately $135,000 in damages and response costs, including $65,309.57 for engineering and construction costs and expenses to erect a seawall for erosion control, including bank stabilization and foundation rehabilitation. These costs were not incurred in response to a threat of human health and the environment. Because the owner failed to show that she incurred necessary response costs consistent with the national contingency plan, the other owner is entitled to summary judgment on this claim.