Opinion ID: 573218
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Administrative Priority

Text: 32 BN argues that the bankruptcy court erred in failing to grant BN administrative priority for contamination caused by D & R after it filed for Bankruptcy in November 1982. The parties disagree over whether the bankruptcy court erred in finding insufficient evidence establishing that Dant & Russell added any significant contamination to the site after the filing of Chapter 11. 33 In considering this issue, the district court noted: 34 The record of the portion of this case now under review shows that D & R made improvements in its waste containment system in 1979, that D & R did not operate its plant during most of the post-petition period, and that its post-petition operations were limited to processing and disposing of inventory. 35 Slip op. at 15. Reviewing the record of this case, we agree with the district court that the bankruptcy court's findings were not clearly erroneous. Ragsdale v. Haller, 780 F.2d 794, 795 (9th Cir.1986).