Therefore, the Court adopts Magistrate Judge Lovric's recommendation and dismisses Defendants' New York Navigation Law § 176 claims. See ELG Utica Alloys, Inc. v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp., No. 6:16-cv-01523 (BKS/ATB), 2019 WL 5086020, *7 (N.D.N.Y. Oct. 10, 2019); FCA Assocs. v. Texaco, Inc., No. 03-CV-6083T, 2005 WL 735959, *4 (W.D.N.Y. Mar. 31, 2005).
” Here, there are no allegations that Defendants have engaged in any cleanup or incurred any costs. See ELG Utica Alloys, Inc., 2019 WL 5086020, at *7 (dismissing a third-party navigation law contribution claim where there was no indication that the defendant had provided any cleanup or removal of petroleum); FCA Assocs. v. Texaco, Inc., 03-CV-6083T, 2005 WL 735959, at *4 (W.D.N.Y. Mar. 31, 2005) (dismissing navigation law claim where there was no indication that third-party claimant “ha[d] provided any cleanup or removal of petroleum from the Site, ” as required by “the plain language of Section 176(8).”
Here, there are no allegations that National Grid has engaged in any cleanup or incurred any costs. See FCA Assocs. v. Texaco, Inc., No. 03-cv-6083T, 2005 WL 735959, at *4, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6348, at *13 (W.D.N.Y. Mar. 31, 2005) (dismissing navigation law claim where there was no indication that third-party claimant "ha[d] provided any cleanup or removal of petroleum from the Site," as required by "the plain language of Section 176(8)"). Thus, as with National Grid's claim under § 181(5), the Court will dismiss National Grid's Navigation Law claim under § 176(8).