In an action claiming that defendant-insurers were obligated under commercial general liability policies to cover certain property damage, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed in part where the district court correctly held the insurers were not obligated to reimburse plaintiff for its reconstruction of its collapsed silo. However, the judgment is reversed in part where it was foreseeable that faulty subcontractor work would damage the silo, but not foreseeable that faulty subcontractor work would cause millions of dollars in collateral damage.