The court heard evidence related to remaining factual issues regarding proofs of claim filed by Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation ("PBGC") against debtor's estate for underfunded ERISA-qualified pension plans sponsored and administered by debtor. The court ruled that the amount of minimum contribution claims representing "normal pension costs" for the 180-day period prior to filing bankruptcy allowed under 11 U.S.C. § 507(a)(4) was $429,232. Under the circumstances in this case, there could not be a distribution under § 507(a)(3). Therefore, no allowed unsecured wage claims existed on the date of filing, and PBGC's claims could not be reduced by a prepetition distribution to employees. Normal pension costs are granted administrative priority pursuant to § 507(a)(1). The court further ruled that, although the burden shifted to PBGC to prove the validity of all aspects of its proofs of claim, PBGC failed to allocate its minimum contribution claims between postpetition interest, post-termination funding requirements, and charges attributable to amounts due in the future. Based on a lack of credible evidence regarding the components of the minimum contribution claims, the court disallowed $69,228,373 of those claims. The court also determined that debtor had failed to establish that the method (prescribed by regulation and substantive non-bankruptcy law) used by PBGC to calculate the discount rate applicable to its claims either disproportionately favored PBGC or unjustifiably inflated the claims. While the court recognized its authority to modify the discount rate in a case of manifest injustice or unreasonableness, it found that the equitable factors unique to this case did not warrant such a modification. Finally, the court ruled that the reiterative process employed by the PBGC to calculate the total amount of its unfunded benefit claims, as reduced by the probable recovery on its minimum contribution claims, eliminated any duplication and produced a total unfunded benefit claim of $212,286,000.