Laserfiche WebLink
abandonment, does not possess significant funds available for reclamation and is not capable <br />of any remedy that may be necessary to protect the public. The court approves CF&I's <br />motion to abandon under § 554(a). <br />COLORADO'S MOTION TO AMEND ITS PROOF OF CLAIM <br />AND FOR LIFT OF AUTOMATIC STAY <br />Colorado moved for permission to change the priority of its claimed bond <br />shortfall from general unsecured to a status of administrative priority. Colorado's motion <br />to amend its claim against CF&I attempts to convert what is clearly apre-petition unsecured <br />claim to apost-petition, administrative claim. United States v. Chateaugay Corp. (In re <br />Chateaugay Corp.), 112 B.R. 513, 520 (S.D.N.Y. 1990}(a claim arises under the Bankruptcy <br />Code at the time when the acu giving rise to the aIIeged liability were performed), citing In <br />re Chateaugay Corp., 87 B.R. 779, 796 (S.D.N.Y. 1988). <br />Colorado's motion for leave to amend iu proof of claim in order to assert a <br />claim for an administrative expense for reclamation costs in excess of CF&I's financial <br />warranties is denied. A party will only receive priority for an administrative expense where <br />it has provided a service that is actual and necessary for the preservation of the estate, or <br />that arises in the context of administering the estate. § 503(b)(1)(A). If Colorado reclaims <br />the Quarry, it is not reclaiming property of the estate, but rather property which has been <br />properly abandoned by CF&I. Colorado's claim for reclamation costs arose before the <br />commencement of the case, since all the mining activities that created a need for <br />reclamation occurred prior to the commencement of the case. Chateaugay, 112 B.R. at 520. <br /> <br />