IANAL, but in principle would it not be possible for Kodak to assume that liability as part of any transaction? Although it hasn't been paid for yet (or has it? Do we know for a fact that it's not already reflected in Kodak's accounts?), in an economic sense it's like a sunk cost. It's already been incurred and will have to be covered even if the film business vanishes without a trace tomorrow.
Unless continued operation of the facilities is making the problem worse. That would certainly weigh not just on a sale but on any decision by Kodak to stay in the business itself.