Laserfiche WebLink
5. It was for the above reasons that the first, second and third cash collateral motions <br /> were filed with and approved by the Court. Under the procedure thus established, Pitkin <br /> performed work for which it was paid. <br /> 6. Following the same procedures, I audited and approved the claim for services <br /> performed and credit advanced by Pitkin the $203,096.21 claim now under consideration and <br /> which is being disputed by the CDMG. <br /> 7. My approval procedures included detailed checking of invoices, review of time <br /> allocations, interviews with personnel performing these services, visits to the sites to verify <br /> performance, cost comparisons to verify reasonableness of charges, verification of arithmetic and <br /> recapitulations, and general oversight. <br /> 8. Under the Debtors' Second Amended Plan of Liquidation, Section 6.2.3, I was <br /> appointed creditors' trustee and currently serve in that capacity. <br /> 9. As trustee, I classified the Pitkin claim for $203,096.21 as an amount due under <br /> Section 5.1 of the Liquidation Plan providing for payment of administrative expenses, including, <br /> " . . . (ii) All amounts due on most-petition accounts and contracts, . . . " <br /> 10. The money to pay this claim has been set aside, but distribution has been withheld <br /> pending decision of the bankruptcy court on objections of CDMG. <br /> 11. The decisions as trustee to approve this claim took into account and was based <br /> upon the following: <br /> (a) The detailed accounting and audit procedure described above and the fact <br /> that the claim follows a pattern of payments to Pitkin for the same type and kind of work <br /> and under the same procedures, all of which have done without objection, and with the <br /> express concurrence of CDMG as is evidenced by their statements to the Office of <br /> Surface Mining contained in letter dated November 15, 1993. <br /> (b) A lack of any credible accounting documentation by CDMG as to the basis <br /> of their objection to payment of the claim, leading to the conclusion that the objection <br /> is frivolous and does not appear to be made in good faith. <br /> (c) A determination that the Class 5 payments under Section 4.3 of the <br /> Liquidation Plan will be paid in full to CDMG and the payment of the Pitkin claim will <br /> not increase or diminish the amounts to be paid under that Class. Although CDMG has <br /> failed and refused to provide requested accountings for expenditures made, the best <br /> information available indicates the CDMG has over $750,000 available for reclamation <br /> in 1996, after payment of the 1995 reclamation costs, and additional sales of property <br /> either under contract or to be contracted will pay the remainder. <br /> 2 <br />