Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
pays the costs of the condemnation as required by 21 U.S.C. § 334(e). For example, in United States v. Articles of Drug. . .Penapar VK, 458 F.Supp. 687 (D.Md.1978), the court found that because there was “no longer any dispute [between the government and claimant] concerning condemnation and destruction of the drugs,” the claimant’s motion to withdraw should be granted. Id. at 689. The only remaining dispute in that case was over costs, and the court found that § 334(e) required the claimant to pay them. Id. See also United States v. 302 Cases, of Frozen Shrimp, 25 F.Supp.2d 1352, 1357 (M.D.Fla.1998) (stating that a claimant may withdraw from a case, but withdrawal does not waive liability for costs); United States v. 374/100 Pound Burlap Bags, 1989 WL 36948 (E.D. Pa. April 13, 1989) . Thus, the Court finds that although
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that debtor was liable to the commonwealth for past and future cleanup costs
B. holding that the department of transportation was liable under the mtca but that it was not responsible for any of the cleanup costs
C. holding that investigatory costs are considered costs of response under cercla
D. holding that the issue of whether the plaintiffs claim was barred by an intervening cause was not an affirmative defense but merely an assertion that the plaintiff cannot prove a necessary element of its claim
E. holding that an intervening claimant in a civil forfeiture case may withdraw its claim but is still liable for costs of condemnation
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.