Grant of Individual Exemptions; Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P. (the Applicant), 14005-14012 [E6-3821]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 53 / Monday, March 20, 2006 / Notices
In addition to increasing access to
education and eliminating exploitive
child labor through direct withdrawal
and prevention services to children, the
Child Labor Education Initiative has the
following four strategic goals:
1. Raise awareness of the importance
of education for all children and
mobilize a wide array of actors to
improve and expand education
infrastructures;
2. Strengthen formal and transitional
education systems that encourage
working children and those at risk of
working to attend school;
3. Strengthen national institutions
and policies on education and child
labor; and
4. Ensure the long-term sustainability
of these efforts.
When working to increase access to
quality basic education, USDOL strives
to complement existing efforts to
eradicate the worst forms of child labor,
to build on the achievements of and
lessons learned from these efforts, to
expand impact and build synergies
among actors, and to avoid duplication
of resources and efforts.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 13th day of
March, 2006.
Eric Vogt,
Grant Officer.
[FR Doc. E6–3968 Filed 3–17–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–28–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employee Benefits Security
Administration
[Prohibited Transaction Exemption 2006–
01; Exemption Application No. D–11216 et
al.]
complete statement of the facts and
representations. The application has
been available for public inspection at
the Department in Washington, DC. The
notice also invited interested persons to
submit comments on the requested
exemption to the Department. In
addition the notice stated that any
interested person might submit a
written request that a public hearing be
held (where appropriate). The applicant
has represented that it has complied
with the requirements of the notification
to interested persons. No requests for a
hearing were received by the
Department. Public comments were
received by the Department as described
in the granted exemption.
The notice of proposed exemption
was issued and the exemption is being
granted solely by the Department
because, effective December 31, 1978,
section 102 of Reorganization Plan No.
4 of 1978, 5 U.S.C. App. 1 (1996),
transferred the authority of the Secretary
of the Treasury to issue exemptions of
the type proposed to the Secretary of
Labor.
Statutory Findings
In accordance with section 408(a) of
the Act and/or section 4975(c)(2) of the
Code and the procedures set forth in 29
CFR part 2570, subpart B (55 FR 32836,
32847, August 10, 1990) and based upon
the entire record, the Department makes
the following findings:
(a) The exemption is administratively
feasible;
(b) The exemption is in the interests
of the plan and its participants and
beneficiaries; and
(c) The exemption is protective of the
rights of the participants and
beneficiaries of the plan.
Grant of Individual Exemptions;
Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P. (the
Applicant)
Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P. (the
Applicant) Located in St. Louis,
Missouri
Employee Benefits Security
Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Grant of individual exemptions.
[Prohibited Transaction Exemption No.
2006–01; Application No. D–11216]
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document contains
exemptions issued by the Department of
Labor (the Department) from certain of
the prohibited transaction restrictions of
the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act of 1974 (the Act) and/or
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the
Code).
A notice was published in the Federal
Register of the pendency before the
Department of a proposal to grant such
exemption. The notice set forth a
summary of facts and representations
contained in the application for
exemption and referred interested
persons to the application for a
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:35 Mar 17, 2006
Jkt 208001
Exemption
The restrictions of sections
406(a)(1)(A) through (D) of the Act and
the sanctions resulting from the
application of section 4975 of the Code,
by reason of section 4975(c)(1)(A)
through (D) of the Code, shall not apply
to the extension of credit to the
Applicant, by certain IRAs whose assets
are held in custodian accounts by the
Applicant, a party in interest and a
disqualified person with respect to the
IRAs, in connection with the
Applicant’s use of uninvested IRA cash
balances (Free Credit Balance(s)) in such
accounts. This exemption is
conditioned upon the adherence to the
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14005
material facts and representations
described herein and upon the
satisfaction of the following
requirements:
(a) Neither the Applicant nor any
affiliate has any discretionary authority
or control with respect to the
investment of the cash balances of the
IRA that are held in the Free Credit
Balance or provides investment advice
(within the meaning of 29 CFR 2510.3–
21(c)) with respect to those assets;
(b) Edward Jones credits the IRA with
monthly interest on its Free Credit
Balance at an annual rate no less than
the bank national index rate for interest
checking, as reported in the Bank Rate
Monitor. This rate will be subject to a
minimum rate level of 10 basis points
(0.10%);
(c) The interest rate will be no less
than the rate paid by Edward Jones on
non-IRA Free Credit Balances;
(d) The IRA independent fiduciary
has the ability to withdraw the Free
Credit Balance at any time without
restriction;
(e) The Applicant provides in writing,
to the IRA independent fiduciary, prior
to any transfer of the IRA’s available
cash into a Free Credit Balance account,
an explanation (i) that funds invested in
a Free Credit Balance are not segregated
and may be used in the operation of the
business of the Applicant; (ii) of the
method to be used for crediting interest
to the Free Credit Balance; and (iii) that
the funds are payable to the IRA on
demand;
(f) On the basis of the information
disclosed pursuant to paragraph (e)
above, the IRA independent fiduciary
approves the transfer of the IRA’s
available cash into a Free Credit Balance
account. If the disclosure includes a
specified date before which the
independent fiduciary must object to
the transfer of the IRA’s existing cash
balances into a Free Credit Balance
account, failure of the IRA independent
fiduciary to object to the transfer by that
date will be deemed an approval by the
IRA independent fiduciary of the
transfer to and holding of the IRA’s
available cash in the Free Credit Balance
account.
The Applicant provides, with or as
part of the customer’s statement of
account, no less frequently than once
every three months, notification that the
IRA independent fiduciary may, at any
time and without penalty, direct the
Applicant in writing to withdraw the
IRA’s available cash from the Free
Credit Balance account. Failure of the
IRA independent fiduciary to provide
such written direction will be deemed
an approval by the IRA independent
fiduciary of the transfer to and holding
E:\FR\FM\20MRN1.SGM
20MRN1
14006
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 53 / Monday, March 20, 2006 / Notices
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
of the IRA’s available cash in the Free
Credit Balance account; and
(g) The Applicant periodically
provides a written statement subsequent
to the proposed transaction informing
the IRA independent fiduciary that (i)
such funds are not segregated and may
be used in the operation of the business
of such broker or dealer, and (ii) such
funds are payable on demand.
For a more complete statement of the
facts and representations supporting the
Department’s decision to grant this
exemption, refer to the Notice of
Proposed Exemption (the Notice)
published on June 29, 2005 at 70 FR
37437.
Written Comments
The Department received 107 written
comments from interested persons in
response to the Notice. The Department
forwarded copies of the comments to
the Applicant and requested that the
Applicant address in writing the various
concerns raised by the commentators.
Many of the comments fell into broad
categories to which the Applicant
responded collectively. Where a single
commentator raised a unique issue,
such issue was responded to
individually. The comments and the
Applicant’s responses are summarized
below.
Four commenters favored granting the
exemption, and one expressed no
objection. Six posed questions regarding
the exemption without taking a
position. The remaining 96 commenters
objected to granting the exemption. Of
those, 22 did not describe the reasons
for their objections, leaving 74 that
made substantive comments on the
proposed exemption.
The principal objection to the
exemption (reflected in 36 of the
comments) was that transferring IRA
cash to Free Credit Balances in place of
the currently-used money market fund
would negatively affect the annual rate
of return earned by the IRAs, providing
a lower checking account interest rate
instead of a money market rate. While
the money market rates were low at one
time, the commenters pointed out that
money market rates have risen to a level
that is considerably higher than the 10
basis points described as the current
rate in the Notice. Related to this
concern was the view that the Applicant
should not impose a $3/month low
balance fee on the Retirement Shares
class of its money market fund, with
some pointing out that the Applicant
already charges an IRA custody fee.
(One commenter, by contrast, saw the
Notice as unnecessary because the
Applicant already has the option to
impose a minimum account balance
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:35 Mar 17, 2006
Jkt 208001
requirement, which the person thought
would encourage IRA contributions—
like some others, apparently viewing the
low balance fee as being imposed on
IRAs themselves rather than limited to
the money market fund.)
The Applicant represents that these
comments reflect a misunderstanding of
the context in which the Free Credit
Balance arrangement is to be made
available. The large number of small
accounts in the Retirement Shares class
has resulted in increased administrative
expense to the money market fund,
depressing investment return. The
Applicant has determined to impose a
minimum balance fee on the Retirement
Shares, as is already the case for the
other class of fund shares, to discourage
small accounts and thereby restore
returns to the level of other money
market funds. However, it was
concerned that this would leave IRAs
without a convenient investment for
their available cash generated through
interest and dividends. It therefore
postponed imposing the minimum
balance fee until it could make Free
Credit Balances available to the IRAs.
Several of these commenters, along
with two others, noted that the
minimum balance fee would represent
additional income to the Applicant, to
which they objected, and some added
that this additional income was
unnecessary since the Applicant already
charges an IRA custody fee. The
Applicant represents that three points
are relevant here. First, the Applicant
does not retain the entire low balance
fee; it is in part retained by the money
market fund. Second, it is contemplated
that only a minimal number of
customers would pay the fee instead of
moving their balance to the cash interest
option. Third, as an offset to any fees
that the Applicant might collect, if the
fund has fewer accounts as a result of
the minimum balance fee—as would
likely be the case—the Applicant’s
income would decrease, as the fund
would pay to the Applicant lower
transfer and dividend disbursing agent
fees (which are based on the number of
shareholder accounts). For these
reasons, the Applicant represents that
the minimum balance fee is not
expected to increase the Applicant’s
bottom line, as one commenter
suggested, or otherwise benefit the
Applicant at the fund’s expense, as
several others alleged.
The other principal objection,
reflected in 17 of the comments, was
that the change to using Free Credit
Balances of the broker-dealer as the
IRAs’ cash vehicle would place the
IRAs’ assets at higher risk, because the
money would no longer be ‘‘protected’’
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
or safe and/or would be used for the
Applicant’s general business operations.
The Applicant’s response states that
several of the commenters do not appear
to understand the nature of the current
cash vehicle. While a money market
fund attempts to maintain stability of
principal, its assets are not insured,
either by the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation (as one commenter
believed) or otherwise, and its
investments are subject to risk of loss.
As stated in the fund prospectus, the
fund shares are not guaranteed or
insured by any bank, the U.S.
government or any government agency.
The Applicant represents that in fact,
the Free Credit Balances would be
subject to reduced risk in this regard,
assuming that they are intended for the
purpose of purchasing securities (as
would normally be the case for an IRA
account), because they would be
covered by SIPC insurance. SIPC
insurance would protect the IRA
holders against loss in the event the
Applicant was to file for bankruptcy (a
concern expressed in at least four of the
comments). In addition, Free Credit
Balances are subject to reserve
requirements. These provide further
protection to customers against a brokerdealer’s misuse of the funds or
insolvency by requiring the brokerdealer to deposit the amount of its
liabilities to customers in excess of
amounts owed to it by customers in a
specially designated bank account. The
effect of the reserve requirements is to
restrict the use of the money to the
financing of the broker-dealer’s
customer-related business, not
permitting the money to be used beyond
that for the broker-dealer’s general
business operations.
The Applicant represents that some of
these comments reflected
misperceptions about the nature of the
Free Credit Balances. Two commenters
assumed that the cash placed in the Free
Credit Balances would no longer be part
of their IRAs. One was concerned that
the cash would therefore be at increased
risk because it would lose the protection
that IRA funds have from creditors in
the event of his personal bankruptcy.
The Applicant represents that that is not
the case. The money in the Free Credit
Balances would still be part of the IRAs,
and as such would be protected from
bankruptcy and exempt from income tax
to the same extent as any other assets of
the IRAs.
Several of these commenters were
concerned that the cash in the Free
Credit Balances would not be
immediately available on demand, or
otherwise that the change would mean
that they would lose control over their
E:\FR\FM\20MRN1.SGM
20MRN1
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 53 / Monday, March 20, 2006 / Notices
funds. The Applicant represents, by
law, Free Credit Balances are liabilities
of the broker-dealer subject to
immediate cash payment to customers
on demand. These liabilities are backed
by special reserve requirements, which
further assure that the cash will be
available as needed. Therefore, the IRA
holders will continue to control these
funds, having the ability to withdraw
the cash on demand and to use it to
purchase other investments of their
choosing.
Similarly, there were comments about
the benefits that the Applicant would
receive as a result of the change in the
cash sweep vehicle, reflected in several
of the comments concerned about
greater risk and reduced return. Four
commenters specifically objected to
letting the Applicant keep the interest
spread from taking in IRA funds and
investing those funds at a higher rate.
The Applicant represents that it is true
that, in the ordinary conduct of its
business, the Applicant is permitted to
use customer Free Credit Balances for
the purpose of making customer loans,
and that these loans would be at a
higher interest rate than the Applicant
would pay on the Free Credit Balances.
Importantly, however, the IRAs would
still be receiving market interest rates
for small balance demand accounts—at
the same or higher rate that the
Applicant pays to non-IRA Free Credit
Balances—so that they will be treated in
a fair and reasonable manner.
Furthermore, the Applicant represents
that the Applicant will be sacrificing
other fees on the money market fund
assets as a result of the reduction in the
number of shareholder accounts, so that
any additional income it may earn may
not result in additional profit. One of
these commenters added that offering a
money market fund, even if not
profitable, should be a cost of doing
business. However, the Applicant
represents that the issue is not one of
profitability—it is whether the money
market fund is able to achieve market
returns for its investors.
Six commenters expressed a
preference to continue to place their
cash in the money market fund. The
Applicant represents that under the
terms of the Notice as it would be
implemented by the Applicant, they
will be able to do so. A current IRA
customer will be notified of the
Applicant’s intention to transfer the
IRA’s cash to a Free Credit Balance at
least 30 days in advance of the effective
date of such a change, and will have the
ability to request to continue to use the
money market fund. New customers
will be able to make this request when
they enter into the IRA account
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:35 Mar 17, 2006
Jkt 208001
agreement. Furthermore, customers will
be able at any time to request not to
have their cash placed in Free Credit
Balances. Therefore, IRA holders will
not be forced to use Free Credit
Balances as their cash sweep vehicle if
they object to doing so.
Eight commenters said that there
would be no advantage to the IRA
holders from switching to Free Credit
Balances. However, the Applicant
represents that once the minimum
balance fee is imposed on the
Retirement Shares, the income on the
Free Credit Balances would exceed the
income in the money market fund for
amounts in the Retirement Shares below
the minimum balance. For such
accounts, there will be an advantage to
switching over to Free Credit Balances.
Two commenters appeared to view
the Notice as imposing additional
burdens specifically on small IRAs,
indicating that it would be unfair for
that reason. The Applicant represents
that these commenters should
understand that the minimum balance
fee will be imposed on small
investments in the Retirement Shares,
without regard to the overall size of the
IRAs.
One commenter complained that the
Notice would permit the Applicant to
‘‘arbitrarily’’ transfer IRA cash balances
into Free Credit Balances, with the
investor only finding out after the fact.
The Applicant represents under the
approval requirements under condition
(f) above, the Applicant could make the
transfer only after advance notice to the
IRA holder.
Two commenters complained that
making the change to Free Credit
Balances would not be consistent with
their existing agreements with the
Applicant. The Applicant represents
that there is nothing in the Applicant’s
standard form of IRA agreement that
would prohibit the use of Free Credit
Balances as an IRA’s cash sweep
vehicle. Furthermore, the change would
be disclosed to the IRA holders, and
they would have the opportunity to
object to the change.
Five commenters indicated that they
prefer to permit their cash to
accumulate to a certain level, such as
$5,000, before investing it, and that the
lower interest rate paid by the Free
Credit Balances would pressure them to
monitor their accounts more closely and
either take more frequent distributions
or make more frequent investments. If
they are forced to make more frequent
investments, they said, they would have
to pay higher commissions to the
Applicant. The Applicant represents
that the majority of the Applicant’s IRA
customers find it prudent to invest cash
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14007
as it becomes available, as evidenced by
the large number of zero-balance
accounts in the Retirement share class
of the money market fund. Should a
customer wish to accumulate cash as
described, the accumulation could take
place in a Free Credit Balance until the
amount reaches the level at which the
money market low-balance fee is
avoided, and then the cash could be
transferred without any commission
charge to the money market fund and
credited to the customer’s account on
the next business day. This would not
create undue pressure to monitor one’s
account.
One commenter objected for the
reason that there are no alternative ways
of handling any funds not immediately
invested. The Applicant represents that
the Retirement Shares of the money
market fund would still be available if
the IRA holder decides not to use a Free
Credit Balance.
Another commenter did not think
there was a problem because interest
rates would rise. The Applicant
represents that while the problem with
low returns on the Retirement Shares is
not as serious as it was in 2003 when
the Applicant filed its exemption
application, due to rising interest rates,
there still is an issue of administrative
fees for carrying small accounts
decreasing returns for the Retirement
Shares as compared to the Investment
Shares. Furthermore, the problem may
recur in the future should interest rates
again fall. The Applicant believes it is
in the interest of all of its customers to
find a more efficient way to handle cash
so that those who seek large cash
investments can earn competitive rates
in the money market fund, while those
who keep very small cash amounts can
make use of Free Credits Balances as
their cash sweep vehicles.
Some of the commenters complained
about having lost money from their
investments with the Applicant (and in
one case, also A.G. Edwards). The
Applicant represents that these
comments are not relevant to this Notice
proceeding.
Four of the commenters requested a
hearing, but did not specify any
particular issues to be addressed at such
a hearing. The Applicant represents that
as the issues described above either
represent a misunderstanding of the
transaction or can be addressed by
opting out of use of the Free Credit
Balance as the cash sweep vehicle for a
particular IRA, there is no need for a
hearing. The Department concurs.
The Department also received a
written comment submitted by the
Applicant. This comment sought
E:\FR\FM\20MRN1.SGM
20MRN1
14008
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 53 / Monday, March 20, 2006 / Notices
changes to a condition in the Notice,
which is discussed below.
The Applicant seeks changes to
condition (f) of the Notice. Condition (f)
of the Notice reads as follows:
The IRA independent fiduciary approves
the transfer of the IRA’s available cash into
a Free Credit Balance account no less
frequently than once every three months, or
once every month if there is account activity
for the particular month other than the
crediting of interest, together with or as a part
of the customer’s statement of account;
The Applicant raises two issues
regarding condition (f). First, the
condition does not adequately address
the initial approval by the IRA
independent fiduciary of the use of free
credit balances. Second, it does not
permit the approval to take the form of
‘‘negative consent.’’
The Department concurs with the
Applicant and has modified condition
(f) of the Notice to read as follows:
On the basis of the information disclosed
pursuant to paragraph (e) above, the IRA
independent fiduciary approves the transfer
of the IRA’s available cash into a Free Credit
Balance account. If the disclosure includes a
specified date before which the independent
fiduciary must object to the transfer of the
IRA’s existing cash balances into a Free
Credit Balance account, failure of the IRA
independent fiduciary to object to the
transfer by that date will be deemed an
approval by the IRA independent fiduciary of
the transfer to and holding of the IRA’s
available cash in the Free Credit Balance
account.
The Applicant provides, with or as part of
the customer’s statement of account, no less
frequently than once every three months,
notification that the IRA independent
fiduciary may, at any time and without
penalty, direct the Applicant in writing to
withdraw the IRA’s available cash from the
Free Credit Balance account. Failure of the
IRA independent fiduciary to provide such
written direction will be deemed an approval
by the IRA independent fiduciary of the
transfer to and holding of the IRA’s available
cash in the Free Credit Balance account.
The Department has considered the
entire record and has determined to
grant the exemption with the revisions
noted herein.
For Further Information Contact:
Khalif I. Ford of the Department,
telephone (202) 693–8540. (This is not
a toll-free number.)
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Pennsylvania Institute of Neurological
Disorders, Inc. Profit Sharing Plan (the
Plan) Located in Sunbury,
Pennsylvania
[Prohibited Transaction Exemption 2006–02;
Application No. D–11306]
Exemption
Based on the facts and representations
set forth in the application, the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:35 Mar 17, 2006
Jkt 208001
Department is granting an exemption
under the authority of section 408(a) of
the Act and section 4975(c)(2) of the
Code, and in accordance with the
procedures set forth in 29 CFR part
2570, subpart B (55 FR 32836, 32847,
August 10, 1990). The restrictions of
sections 406(a), 406(b)(1) and (b)(2) of
the Act and the sanctions resulting from
the application of section 4975 of the
Code, by reason of section 4975(c)(1)(A)
through (E) of the Code, shall not apply
to the sale (the Sale) by the Plan of a
parcel of unimproved real property
known as Lot 20, Section ‘‘F’’, Monroe
Manor, Inc., (Lot #20 Kingswood Drive,
Selinsgrove, PA 17870) (the Property) to
Mahmood Nasir, M.D. (Dr. Nasir), a
party in interest with respect to the
Plan, provided that the following
conditions are satisfied:
(a) All terms and conditions of the
Sale are at least as favorable to the Plan
as those that the Plan could obtain in an
arm’s-length transaction with an
unrelated party;
(b) The Sales price is the greater of
$81,000 or the fair market value of the
Property as of the date of the Sale;
(c) The fair market value of the
Property has been determined by a
qualified independent appraiser;
(d) The Sale is a one-time transaction
for cash;
(e) The Plan does not pay any
commissions, costs, or other expenses in
connection with the Sale; and
(f) The Plan fiduciaries will
determine, among other things, whether
it is in the interest of the Plan to go
forward with the Sale of the Property,
will review and approve the
methodology used in the appraisal that
is being relied upon, and will ensure
that such methodology is applied by a
qualified independent appraiser in
determining the fair market value of the
Property as of the date of the Sale.
For a more complete statement of the
facts and representations supporting the
Department’s decision to grant this
exemption, refer to the notice of
proposed exemption published on
December 28, 2005 at 70 FR 76870.
For Further Information Contact: Ms.
Blessed Chuksorji of the Department,
telephone (202) 693–8567 (this is not a
toll-free number).
The Zieger Health Care Corporation
Retirement Fund (the Plan) Located in
Farmington, Michigan
[Prohibited Transaction Exemption 2006–03
Exemption Application No. D–11313]
Exemption
I. Transactions
The restrictions of sections 406(a),
406(b)(1), 406(b)(2), and 407(a) of the
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Employee Retirement Income Security
Act (the Act) and the sanctions resulting
from the application of section 4975, by
reason of sections 4975(c)(1)(A) through
(E) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
(the Code),1 shall not apply to:
(a) The in-kind contribution and
transfer to the Plan (the In-Kind
Contribution) by Zieger Health Care
Corporation (ZHCC), acting through its
wholly-owned subsidiary, Botsford
General Hospital (the Hospital), both of
which are parties in interest with
respect to the Plan, of the Hospital’s
right, title, and interest in five (5)
limited liability corporations,
(collectively, the LLCs or individually,
an LLC) where the sole asset of each
such LLC is one of five (5) parcels of
improved real property situated in
southeastern Michigan (individually, an
Underlying Property, collectively, the
Properties).
(b) The holding by the Plan of
ownership interests in the LLCs that
own the Properties.
(c) The leaseback by the Plan to the
Hospital of the Underlying Property
held by each of the LLCs, (individually,
a Lease or collectively, the Leases).
(d) The sale of an Underlying Property
(or ownership interest in an LLC, as the
case may be) by the Plan to ZHCC or its
affiliates, pursuant to the right of first
offer (the RFO), as described in each
Lease, at any time during the term of
such Lease.
(e) Any payment or payments to the
Plan by the Hospital, pursuant to
contingent rent payment(s) (the
Contingent Rent Payment(s)), as
described in each Lease, during the term
of such Lease.2
II. Conditions
The exemption is conditioned upon
adherence to the material facts and
representations described herein and
upon satisfaction of the following
requirements:
(a) ZHCC contributes to the Plan no
less than:
(1) Cash in the amount of $3.3 million
in the year 2005;
(2) Cash in the amount of $2 million
in each of the years 2006, 2007, and
2008; and
(3) cash in the amount of $3 million
in the year 2009.
(b) A qualified, independent
fiduciary, as defined in section III(c),
below, (the Independent Fiduciary),
1 For purposes of this exemption, references to
specific provisions of Title I of the Act, unless
otherwise specified, refer also to the corresponding
provisions of the Code.
2 The transactions described in section I(a)–(e),
above, collectively, are referred to herein as the
Transactions.
E:\FR\FM\20MRN1.SGM
20MRN1
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 53 / Monday, March 20, 2006 / Notices
acting on behalf of the Plan, determines
in accordance with the fiduciary
provisions of the Act, whether and on
what terms to enter into each of the
Transactions.
(c) The Independent Fiduciary
represents the Plan’s interests for all
purposes with respect to each of the
Transactions and determines, prior to
entering into any of the Transactions,
that each such transaction is feasible, in
the interest of the Plan, and protective
of the Plan and its participants and
beneficiaries.
(d) The Independent Fiduciary
reviews, negotiates, and approves the
specific terms of each of the
Transactions.
(e) The Independent Fiduciary
monitors compliance by ZHCC and its
affiliates, as defined in section III(a),
below, with the terms of each of the
Transactions and with the conditions of
this exemption to ensure that such
terms and conditions are at all times
satisfied.
(f) The Independent Fiduciary
manages the acquisition, holding,
leasing, and disposition of the Plan’s
ownership interests in the LLCs that
own the Properties and takes whatever
actions are necessary to protect the
rights of the Plan with respect the Plan’s
ownership interests in such LLCs.
(g) The terms and conditions of each
of the Transactions are no less favorable
to the Plan than terms negotiated at
arm’s length under similar
circumstances between unrelated third
parties.
(h) The Independent Fiduciary
determines the fair market value of the
In-Kind Contribution, as of the date
such contribution is made. In
determining the fair market value of the
In-Kind Contribution, the Independent
Fiduciary obtains an updated appraisal
from an independent, qualified
appraiser selected by the Independent
Fiduciary and ensures that the appraisal
is consistent with sound principles of
valuation.
(i) Each Lease has a term of years,
commencing on the closing date of the
In-Kind Contribution and ending ten
(10) years thereafter. Each Lease is a
triple net ‘‘bondable’’ lease in which the
Hospital’s obligation to pay rent to the
Plan is absolute and unconditional. The
rental payment under each Lease is no
less than the fair market rental value of
the leased premises, as determined by
the Independent Fiduciary, and is net of
all costs related to the leased premises,
including costs of capital improvements
and all other costs to operate, maintain,
repair and replace in good condition,
and repair the systems and structural
and non-structural components of the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:35 Mar 17, 2006
Jkt 208001
buildings on the leased premises,
including without limitation, the roof,
foundation, landscaping, storm water
management, utilities, and all other
capital and non-capital repairs and
replacements, all in a manner befitting
office buildings comparable to the
buildings on the leased premises and in
accordance with all applicable laws.
Each Lease contains a commercially
reasonable standard for determining
whether repair or replacement is
necessitated. All such maintenance,
repair, and replacement work is the
responsibility of the Hospital. As
discussed in paragraph number 6 in the
Summary of Facts and Representations
in the Notice of Proposed Exemption,
and except as otherwise provided in
each Lease, the Hospital is required to
restore the leased premises in the event
of casualty or condemnation, regardless
of any lack or insufficiency of insurance
proceeds or condemnation awards
therefore (but subject to all applicable
laws);
(j) ZHCC and the Hospital agree to
make one or more Contingent Rent
Payment(s) to the Plan, if the Plan does
not earn an annual return on each of the
Properties equal to a fixed interest rate
of 8 percent (8%) in any year (the
Minimum Funding Rate). Each
Contingent Rent Payment is due on the
earliest of: (1) The end of the ten (10)
year term of the Leases, (2) the
termination of any of the Leases
(including a termination due to default,
destruction, or condemnation), or (3) the
sale by the Plan of any parcel included
in the Properties (or the sale by the Plan
of the entity that owns any parcel) (each
a Minimum Return Date). If the actual
return to the Plan (the Actual Return),
as defined in section III(d), below, is
less than the sum of the contribution
value of the Properties, plus a return on
such contribution value equal to the
Minimum Funding Rate (the Minimum
Return), then ZHCC and the Hospital
shall pay to the Plan a Contingent
Rental Payment equal to the amount of
any such difference. ZHCC and the
Hospital shall pay each Contingent Rent
Payment to the Plan in cash within 180
days after each Minimum Return Date.
(k) If the Plan desires to sell or convey
any of the Properties (or any of the
LLCs, as the case may be), during the
term of a Lease, the Plan shall first offer
the Hospital the right to purchase or
otherwise acquire such property or LLC,
pursuant to the RFO: (1) On such terms
and conditions as the Plan proposes to
market such property or such LLC for
sale (Soliciting Offer), which terms and
conditions shall reflect the Plan’s good
faith determination of market conditions
and the fair market value for such
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14009
property or LLC, or (2) on such terms
and conditions as are contained within
an unsolicited bona fide offer from an
unaffiliated third party that the Plan
desires to accept (Unsolicited Offer).
The parties shall negotiate in good faith
the terms and conditions of any
purchase based on a Soliciting Offer for
a period of thirty (30) days following the
Plan’s notice to the Hospital. In all
events, the Hospital shall exercise such
right to purchase, if at all, upon notice
to the Plan within the thirty (30) day
period described above with respect to
a Soliciting Offer or within thirty (30)
days after notice to the Hospital of an
Unsolicited Offer. If the Hospital fails to
exercise such right to purchase, the Plan
is free to sell such property or LLC (i.e.,
close on the transfer) to a third party on
such terms for the next 360 days.
However, the Plan shall not have the
right to sell to a third party at a lower
effective purchase price or on any other
materially more favorable term than the
effective purchase price and terms
proposed by the Plan to the Hospital
without first re-offering such property or
LLC to the Hospital at such lower
effective purchase price or other more
favorable term, nor to sell on any terms
following the expiration of such 360-day
period, without in either event first reoffering such property or LLC to the
Hospital. The RFO shall terminate upon
the commencement of the exercise by
the Plan of its remedies under the
Leases as the result of a monetary event
of default by the Hospital that continues
uncured following notice and the
expiration of applicable cure periods
(and a second notice and cure period
provided fifteen (15) days before the
loss of such right on account of such
default).
(l) Subject to the Hospital’s RFO, the
Plan retains the right to sell or assign,
in whole or in part, any of its interests
in the Properties (or any of its interests
in the LLCs, as the case may be) to any
third party purchaser.
(m) ZHCC indemnifies the Plan with
respect to any liability for hazardous
materials released on the Properties,
whether such release occurs prior to or
after the execution of the Leases or the
In-Kind Contribution;
(n) The In-Kind Contribution is
conditioned on the Independent
Fiduciary’s receipt of favorable
engineering and environmental reports
prior to closing.
(o) The Plan incurs no fees,
commissions, or other charges or
expenses as a result of its participation
in any of the Transactions.
III. Definitions
(a) The term, ‘‘affiliate,’’ means:
E:\FR\FM\20MRN1.SGM
20MRN1
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
14010
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 53 / Monday, March 20, 2006 / Notices
(1) Any person directly or indirectly
through one or more intermediaries,
controlling, controlled by, or under
common control with the person;
(2) Any officer, director, employee,
relative, or partner of any such person;
and
(3) Any corporation or partnership of
which such person is an officer,
director, partner, or employee.
(b) The term, ‘‘control,’’ means the
power to exercise a controlling
influence over the management or
policies of a person other than an
individual.
(c) The term, ‘‘Independent
Fiduciary,’’ means a fiduciary that:
(1) Has a minimum of five (5) years of
experience acting on behalf of employee
benefit plans covered by the Act and/or
the Code;
(2) Can demonstrate, through
experience and/or education,
proficiency in matters involving the
acquisition, management, leasing, and
disposition of real property;
(3) Is an expert with respect to the
valuation of real property or has the
ability to access (itself or through
persons engaged by it) appropriate data
regarding the purchase, sale, and leasing
of real property located in the relevant
market;
(4) Has not engaged in any criminal
activity involving fraud, fiduciary
standards, or securities law violations;
(5) Is appointed to act on behalf of the
Plan for all purposes related to, but not
limited to (i) the In-Kind Contribution,
(ii) the Leases, (iii) the RFO, (iv) the
Contingent Rent Payment(s), and (v) any
other transactions between the Plan and
ZHCC and its affiliates related to the
LLCs and Properties; and
(6) Is independent of and unrelated to
ZHCC or its affiliates. For purposes of
this exemption, a fiduciary will not be
deemed to be independent of and
unrelated to ZHCC and its affiliates if:
(i) Such fiduciary directly or
indirectly controls, is controlled by, or
is under common control with ZHCC,
(ii) Such fiduciary directly or
indirectly receives any compensation or
other consideration in connection with
any Transactions described in this
exemption; except that an Independent
Fiduciary may receive compensation
from ZHCC for acting as an Independent
Fiduciary in connection with the
Transactions contemplated herein if the
amount or payment of such
compensation is not contingent upon or
in any way affected by the Independent
Fiduciary’s ultimate decisions, and
(iii) The annual gross revenue
received by such fiduciary, during any
year of its engagement, from ZHCC and
its affiliates exceeds five percent (5%) of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:35 Mar 17, 2006
Jkt 208001
the fiduciary’s annual gross revenue
from all sources for its prior tax year.
(d) The definition of Actual Return to
be used in calculating the amount of
each Contingent Rent Payment is the
sum of: (1) The sales price of any parcel
sold, net of selling costs, (2) any net
insurance proceeds or net
condemnation awards received by the
Plan (if any Lease is terminated due to
destruction or condemnation), (3) the
fair market value of any parcel(s) that
the Plan continues to hold, as
determined by a three appraiser method
(if the parties are unable to otherwise
agree), plus (4) the rental income
received by the Plan under the Leases
prior to the Minimum Return Date, less
expenses incurred by the Plan with
respect to the Properties and the Leases
up to the Minimum Return Date. The
liabilities and obligations of the
Hospital and ZHCC survive the
expiration date of a Lease, or a
termination of a Lease, and continue
until such liabilities and obligations
have been fully paid and fulfilled.
Temporary Nature of Exemption
This exemption is temporary and
becomes effective on the date of
publication of the grant of the final
exemption in the Federal Register. The
exemption will expire on the date
which is ten (10) years from the date of
the grant of the exemption. If the
Hospital wishes to renew the Leases on
the Properties between the Hospital and
the LLCs (or between the Hospital and
the Plan, as the case may be), the
Department would encourage the
applicant to submit another application
prior to the expiration of this
exemption, provided that the
Independent Fiduciary determines that
the conditions of the renewal are
feasible, in the interest and protective of
the Plan and the Hospital can
demonstrate that it can satisfy the terms
of such renewal.
Written Comments
In the Notice of Proposed Exemption
(the Notice), the Department of Labor
(the Department) invited all interested
persons to submit written comments
and requests for a hearing on the
proposed exemption within thirty-seven
(37) days of the date of the publication
of the Notice in the Federal Register on
December 28, 2005. All comments and
requests for a hearing were due by
February 3, 2006.
During the comment period, the
Department received no requests for a
hearing. However, the Department did
receive one comment letter from a
commentator and a comment letter from
the applicant.
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
In a facsimile dated February 9, 2006,
the commentator provided the
Department with a list of six (6)
historical events concerning the
operations of the Hospital and ZHCC
during the 1980’s and the early 1990’s.
In addition to this list, the commentator
also expressed concern for the safety of
the funding of the Plan. In this regard,
the commentator suggested that, if the
exemption were granted, the
Department ‘‘strictly monitor and
enforce the financial activities’’ of the
Hospital to ensure the safety of the Plan.
In response, to the concern expressed
by the commentator, the applicant
submitted a letter dated February 15,
2006, to the Department. In this letter,
ZHCC expressed its opinion that
adequate measures to protect the Plan
and the interests of its participants and
beneficiaries already exist under the
terms and conditions of the exemption.
Specifically, as set forth in the Notice in
subsections (b) through (f) and (h) of
section II, it is represented that the
Retirement Committee for the Plan
appointed Fiduciary Counselors, Inc.
(FCI) as the Independent Fiduciary, as
defined in section III(c) of the Notice, to
act on behalf of the Plan with regard to
the subject Transactions and to serve as
investment manager with authority and
discretion over the LLCs and the
Properties.
Further, the applicant points out that
other safeguards to protect the Plan and
its participants and beneficiaries are set
forth in the Notice in subsections (g)
and (i) through (o) of section II. In this
regard, section II(g) requires that the
terms and conditions of the
Transactions ‘‘are no less favorable to
the Plan than terms negotiated at arm’s
length under similar circumstances
between unrelated third parties.’’
Participating in the Transactions will
not subject the Plan to fees, commission,
or other charges or expenses. Fair
market value rental payments, as
determined by the Independent
Fiduciary are required. The Leases are
triple net ‘‘bondable’’ leases having a
term of ten (10) years. Under the terms
of these Leases, the Hospital bears not
only the ordinary maintenance, tax, and
insurance expenses, but also is
responsible for all capital expenses
associated with the Properties. The Plan
retains the right to sell or assign the
Properties to any third party purchaser,
subject to the Hospital’s RFO. The Plan
and its participants and beneficiaries are
further protected by ZHCC’s
indemnification with respect to any
liability for hazardous materials
released on the Properties.
The In-Kind Contribution is
conditioned on the Independent
E:\FR\FM\20MRN1.SGM
20MRN1
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 53 / Monday, March 20, 2006 / Notices
Fiduciary receiving favorable
engineering and environmental reports
on the Properties before closing. Finally,
if the Plan does not earn an annual
return on each of the Properties equal to
a fixed interest rate of 8 percent (8%) in
any year, ZHCC and the Hospital have
agreed to make one or more Contingent
Rent Payment(s), as described in each of
the Leases. Accordingly, the applicant
believes that adequate safeguards to
protect the Plan and its participants and
beneficiaries are already in place under
the terms of the exemption. In the
opinion of the applicant, no additional
safeguards are necessary.
In addition to the letter from the
commentator, the applicant, in a letter
dated February 2, 2006, informed the
Department that although the
representations in the Notice were
accurate, certain representations were
made in anticipation of the final
exemption for the In-Kind Contribution
being granted in calendar year 2005.
Accordingly, the applicant updated the
following statements to reflect an actual
cash contribution in 2005 and the
anticipated In-Kind Contribution in
calendar year 2006.
The applicant’s comments are
discussed in the numbered paragraphs
below.
1. Section II(a)(1), as set forth in the
Notice, at 70 FR 76872, column 2, lines
16–19, requires that ZHCC contribute to
the Plan no less than cash in the amount
of $3.3 million in the year 2005. In its
comment letter, the applicant confirms
that in September 2005, ZHCC
contributed in cash $4,057,000 to the
Plan—$3.3 million of which constituted
the contribution negotiated by FCI, the
Plan’s Independent Fiduciary and
which is also required under section
II(a)(1), as set forth in the Notice. In this
regard, the applicant informed the
Department that the entire $4,057,000
cash contribution was in excess of the
minimum funding obligations of ZHCC
under section 302 of the Act and section
412 of the Code. The applicant also
represents that the contribution enabled
ZHCC to avoid making a variable rate
premium payment to the Pension
Benefit Guaranty Corporation.
2. In section 17(q), as set forth in the
Notice, at 70 FR 76882, column 2, lines
51–55, it is represented that the In-Kind
Contribution plus the additional
voluntary cash contributions will
exceed the minimum funding
requirement for the year 2005. It is
anticipated that the In-Kind
Contribution will be contributed to the
Plan during 2006, once the exemption is
finalized. The applicant represents that
if the exemption is finalized in time for
the In-Kind Contribution to be made to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:35 Mar 17, 2006
Jkt 208001
the Plan by September 15, 2006, then
the In-Kind Contribution will be applied
to the 2005 Plan year for the purpose of
the funding rules under section 302 of
the Act and section 412 of the Code.
Accordingly, the applicant represents
that all contributions credited to the
Plan for Plan year 2005 will exceed the
minimum funding requirement for Plan
year 2005.
3. The applicant notified the
Department that the name of the Plan
Trustee, as set forth in the Notice in
paragraph 6 of the Summary of Facts
and Representations (the SFR), at 70 FR
76874, column 2, lines 44–60, has
changed to LaSalle Bank N.A.—Global
Securities and Trust Services. It is
represented that this name change is
pursuant to the acquisition by LaSalle
Bank of Standard Federal Bank. In
addition, the applicant clarified that the
discretion to invest the assets of the
Plan generally resides with the Zieger
Health Care Corporation Finance
Committee (the Committee) and any
investment managers appointed by it. It
is further represented that the
Committee has granted the Trustee the
discretion to manage Plan assets that are
invested in funds sponsored by the
Trustee.
4. Paragraph 6 of the SFR in the
Notice, at 70 FR 76877, column 2, lines
1–4, reads as follows, ‘‘Currently,
portions of the Kidney Center, the SPO
Building and the Medical Center are
leased to unrelated third parties.’’ The
applicant notes that, as previously
stated in the SFR in the Notice, at 70 FR
76874, column 3, lines 48–58, the
Botsford Kidney Center building is
leased to two (2) parties—a tenant
owned by the Hospital and Botsford
Kidney Center, Inc. (BKCI). BKCI is a
Michigan business corporation owned
80 percent (80%) by individual
physicians and 20 percent (20%) by the
Hospital.
After giving full consideration to the
entire record, including the written
comments from the commentator and
the applicant, the Department has
decided to grant the exemption, as
described and clarified, above. In this
regard, the comment letters submitted
by the commentator and the applicant to
the Department have been included as
part of the public record of the
exemption application. The complete
application file, including all
supplemental submissions received by
the Department, is made available for
public inspection in the Public
Documents Room of the Employee
Benefit Security Administration, Room
N–1513, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20210.
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14011
For a more complete statement of the
facts and representations supporting the
Department’s decision to grant this
exemption refer to the Notice published
on December 28, 2005, at 70 FR 76872.
For Further Information Contact:
Angelena C. Le Blanc of the Department,
telephone (202) 693–8540. (This is not
a toll-free number.)
The Donlar Corporation Profit Sharing
Plan (the Plan) Located in Roseville,
MN
[Prohibited Transaction Exemption 2006–04
Exemption Application No. D–11325]
Exemption
The restrictions of sections
406(a)(1)(A) through (D), 406(b)(1), and
406(b)(2) of the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act (the Act), and the
sanctions resulting from the application
of section 4975, by reason of section
4975(c)(1)(A) through (E) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 (the Code), 3
shall not apply, in connection with the
termination of the Plan, to the cash sale
of a parcel of improved real property
(the Property) owned by the Plan to Mr.
Donald A. Kainz (Mr. Kainz), a party in
interest with respect to the Plan;
provided that:
(a) The Plan receives a price for the
sale of the Property to Mr. Kainz equal
to the greater of:
(1) $418,000; or
(2) The fair market value of the
Property, plus the ‘‘assemblage value’’
to Mr. Kainz, as determined by an
independent, qualified appraiser, as of
the date of such sale; or
(3) The cost to the Plan to acquire and
hold the Property;
(b) The Plan incurs no fees,
commissions, or other charges or
expenses as a result of its participation
in the sale of the Property to Mr. Kainz;
(c) Prior to entering into the subject
transaction:
(1) With respect to the past use and/
or leasing of the Property by the Donlar
Corporation (the Employer), the
Employer files a Form 5330 with the
Internal Revenue Service (IRS);
(2) With respect to the entire period
of such use and/or leasing, the
Employer pays all appropriate excise
taxes, plus interest on such taxes to the
IRS; and
(3) With respect to the past use and/
or leasing of the Property by the
Employer, the Employer pays to the
Plan the present value of the fair market
rent, including interest, due to the Plan
from the Employer in the form of a lump
3 For purposes of this exemption, references to
specific provisions of Title I of the Act, unless
otherwise specified, refer also to the corresponding
provisions of the Code.
E:\FR\FM\20MRN1.SGM
20MRN1
14012
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 53 / Monday, March 20, 2006 / Notices
sum total rent payment in arrears with
respect to the past use and/or leasing of
the Property by the Employer, as
determined by Mike Amo (Mr. Amo) an
independent, qualified appraiser, for the
entire period of such use and/or leasing
of the Property by the Employer;
(d) The termination of the Plan and
the distribution of its assets is in
accordance with the provisions of the
Plan and all applicable statutes and
regulations, including section 4044 of
the Act, relating to the allocation of
assets; and
(e) Upon termination of the Plan, each
participant in the Plan receives 100
percent (100%) of the balance of his or
her account in the Plan in cash,
including each participant’s pro rata
share of the value of the Property, as of
the date of the sale of the Property to
Mr. Kainz.
After giving full consideration to the
entire record, the Department has
decided to grant the exemption, as
described above. The complete
application file, including all
supplemental submissions received by
the Department, is made available for
public inspection in the Public
Documents Room of the Employee
Benefit Security Administration, Room
N–1513, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20210.
For a more complete statement of the
facts and representations supporting the
Department’s decision to grant this
exemption refer to the Notice of
Proposed Exemption published on
December 28, 2005, at 70 FR 76882.
For Further Information Contact: Ms.
Angelena C. Le Blanc of the Department,
telephone (202) 693–8540. (This is not
a toll-free number.)
with respect to this transaction, except
certain specified third party closing
costs;
(b) An independent, qualified
fiduciary (the I/F), after analyzing the
terms of the Loan, determines that such
Loan is in the best interests of the Plan
and its participants and beneficiaries;
(c) In determining the fair market
value of the Training Facility, the I/F
obtains a current written appraisal
report (the Appraisal) from an
independent, qualified appraiser, as of
the date of the transaction, and ensures
that such Appraisal is consistent with
sound principles of valuation;
(d) The Loan is for the duration of 15
years at the prime rate, as listed in the
Wall Street Journal;
(e) Under the terms of the Loan
agreement, the Loan is secured by the
Training Facility and, in the event of
default by the Plan, Local No. 367 has
recourse only against such facility and
not the general assets of the Plan;
(f) The terms and conditions of the
Loan are at least as favorable to the Plan
as those that the Plan could have
obtained in an arm’s length transaction
with an unrelated third party; and
(g) The Loan is repaid by the Plan
with the funds that the Plan retains after
paying all of its operational expenses.
For a more complete statement of the
facts and representations supporting the
Department’s decision to grant this
exemption, refer to the notice of
proposed exemption published on
November 3, 2005 at 70 FR 66856.
For Further Information Contact: Ms.
Karin Weng of the Department at (202)
693–8540. (This is not a toll-free
number.)
Anchorage Area Pipe Trades 367 Joint
Apprenticeship Committee (the Plan)
Located in Anchorage, Alaska
The attention of interested persons is
directed to the following:
(1) The fact that a transaction is the
subject of an exemption under section
408(a) of the Act and/or section
4975(c)(2) of the Code does not relieve
a fiduciary or other party in interest or
disqualified person from certain other
provisions to which the exemption does
not apply and the general fiduciary
responsibility provisions of section 404
of the Act, which among other things
require a fiduciary to discharge his
duties respecting the plan solely in the
interest of the participants and
beneficiaries of the plan and in a
prudent fashion in accordance with
section 404(a)(1)(B) of the Act; nor does
it affect the requirement of section
401(a) of the Code that the plan must
operate for the exclusive benefit of the
employees of the employer maintaining
the plan and their beneficiaries;
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
[Prohibited Transaction Exemption 2006–05;
Exemption Application No. L–11293]
Exemption
The restrictions of sections 406(a) and
406(b)(2) of the Act shall not apply to
a loan (the Loan), in the amount of
$750,000, to the Plan, to serve as
permanent financing for a training
facility (the Training Facility)
constructed by the Plan, by the Local
No. 367 of the United Association of
Journeymen and Apprentices of the
Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the
United States and Canada (Local No.
367), a party in interest with respect to
the Plan. This exemption is subject to
the following conditions:
(a) The Plan does not pay any
commissions, fees, or other expenses
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:35 Mar 17, 2006
Jkt 208001
General Information
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
(2) This exemption is supplemental to
and not in derogation of, any other
provisions of the Act and/or the Code,
including statutory or administrative
exemptions and transactional rules.
Furthermore, the fact that a transaction
is subject to an administrative or
statutory exemption is not dispositive of
whether the transaction is in fact a
prohibited transaction; and
(3) The availability of this exemption
is subject to the express condition that
the material facts and representations
contained in the application accurately
describes all material terms of the
transaction which is the subject of the
exemption.
Ivan Strasfeld,
Director of Exemption Determinations,
Employee Benefits Security Administration,
U.S. Department of Labor.
[FR Doc. E6–3821 Filed 3–17–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–29–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
Proposed Information Collection
Submitted for Public Comment and
Recommendations: Evaluation of the
Trade Adjustment Assistance Program
ACTION:
Notice.
SUMMARY: The Department of Labor, as
part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent burden,
conducts a pre-clearance consultation
program to provide the general public
and Federal agencies with an
opportunity to comment on proposed
collections of information in accordance
with the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506)(c)(2)(A). This
program helps to ensure that requested
data can be provided in the desired
format, reporting burden (time and
financial resources) is minimized,
collection instruments are clearly
understood, and the impact of the
collection requirements on respondents
can be properly assessed.
Submit comments on or before
May 19, 2006.
DATES:
Send comments to Ms.
Charlotte Schifferes, Employment and
Training Administration, U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Room N–5637,
Washington, DC 20210; (202) 693–3655
(this is not a toll-free number); e-mail:
schifferes.charlotte@dol.gov; and fax:
(202) 693–2766 (this is not a toll-free
number).
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\20MRN1.SGM
20MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 53 (Monday, March 20, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14005-14012]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-3821]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employee Benefits Security Administration
[Prohibited Transaction Exemption 2006-01; Exemption Application No. D-
11216 et al.]
Grant of Individual Exemptions; Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P. (the
Applicant)
AGENCY: Employee Benefits Security Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Grant of individual exemptions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document contains exemptions issued by the Department of
Labor (the Department) from certain of the prohibited transaction
restrictions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
(the Act) and/or the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the Code).
A notice was published in the Federal Register of the pendency
before the Department of a proposal to grant such exemption. The notice
set forth a summary of facts and representations contained in the
application for exemption and referred interested persons to the
application for a complete statement of the facts and representations.
The application has been available for public inspection at the
Department in Washington, DC. The notice also invited interested
persons to submit comments on the requested exemption to the
Department. In addition the notice stated that any interested person
might submit a written request that a public hearing be held (where
appropriate). The applicant has represented that it has complied with
the requirements of the notification to interested persons. No requests
for a hearing were received by the Department. Public comments were
received by the Department as described in the granted exemption.
The notice of proposed exemption was issued and the exemption is
being granted solely by the Department because, effective December 31,
1978, section 102 of Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1978, 5 U.S.C. App. 1
(1996), transferred the authority of the Secretary of the Treasury to
issue exemptions of the type proposed to the Secretary of Labor.
Statutory Findings
In accordance with section 408(a) of the Act and/or section
4975(c)(2) of the Code and the procedures set forth in 29 CFR part
2570, subpart B (55 FR 32836, 32847, August 10, 1990) and based upon
the entire record, the Department makes the following findings:
(a) The exemption is administratively feasible;
(b) The exemption is in the interests of the plan and its
participants and beneficiaries; and
(c) The exemption is protective of the rights of the participants
and beneficiaries of the plan.
Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P. (the Applicant) Located in St. Louis,
Missouri
[Prohibited Transaction Exemption No. 2006-01; Application No. D-11216]
Exemption
The restrictions of sections 406(a)(1)(A) through (D) of the Act
and the sanctions resulting from the application of section 4975 of the
Code, by reason of section 4975(c)(1)(A) through (D) of the Code, shall
not apply to the extension of credit to the Applicant, by certain IRAs
whose assets are held in custodian accounts by the Applicant, a party
in interest and a disqualified person with respect to the IRAs, in
connection with the Applicant's use of uninvested IRA cash balances
(Free Credit Balance(s)) in such accounts. This exemption is
conditioned upon the adherence to the material facts and
representations described herein and upon the satisfaction of the
following requirements:
(a) Neither the Applicant nor any affiliate has any discretionary
authority or control with respect to the investment of the cash
balances of the IRA that are held in the Free Credit Balance or
provides investment advice (within the meaning of 29 CFR 2510.3-21(c))
with respect to those assets;
(b) Edward Jones credits the IRA with monthly interest on its Free
Credit Balance at an annual rate no less than the bank national index
rate for interest checking, as reported in the Bank Rate Monitor. This
rate will be subject to a minimum rate level of 10 basis points
(0.10%);
(c) The interest rate will be no less than the rate paid by Edward
Jones on non-IRA Free Credit Balances;
(d) The IRA independent fiduciary has the ability to withdraw the
Free Credit Balance at any time without restriction;
(e) The Applicant provides in writing, to the IRA independent
fiduciary, prior to any transfer of the IRA's available cash into a
Free Credit Balance account, an explanation (i) that funds invested in
a Free Credit Balance are not segregated and may be used in the
operation of the business of the Applicant; (ii) of the method to be
used for crediting interest to the Free Credit Balance; and (iii) that
the funds are payable to the IRA on demand;
(f) On the basis of the information disclosed pursuant to paragraph
(e) above, the IRA independent fiduciary approves the transfer of the
IRA's available cash into a Free Credit Balance account. If the
disclosure includes a specified date before which the independent
fiduciary must object to the transfer of the IRA's existing cash
balances into a Free Credit Balance account, failure of the IRA
independent fiduciary to object to the transfer by that date will be
deemed an approval by the IRA independent fiduciary of the transfer to
and holding of the IRA's available cash in the Free Credit Balance
account.
The Applicant provides, with or as part of the customer's statement
of account, no less frequently than once every three months,
notification that the IRA independent fiduciary may, at any time and
without penalty, direct the Applicant in writing to withdraw the IRA's
available cash from the Free Credit Balance account. Failure of the IRA
independent fiduciary to provide such written direction will be deemed
an approval by the IRA independent fiduciary of the transfer to and
holding
[[Page 14006]]
of the IRA's available cash in the Free Credit Balance account; and
(g) The Applicant periodically provides a written statement
subsequent to the proposed transaction informing the IRA independent
fiduciary that (i) such funds are not segregated and may be used in the
operation of the business of such broker or dealer, and (ii) such funds
are payable on demand.
For a more complete statement of the facts and representations
supporting the Department's decision to grant this exemption, refer to
the Notice of Proposed Exemption (the Notice) published on June 29,
2005 at 70 FR 37437.
Written Comments
The Department received 107 written comments from interested
persons in response to the Notice. The Department forwarded copies of
the comments to the Applicant and requested that the Applicant address
in writing the various concerns raised by the commentators. Many of the
comments fell into broad categories to which the Applicant responded
collectively. Where a single commentator raised a unique issue, such
issue was responded to individually. The comments and the Applicant's
responses are summarized below.
Four commenters favored granting the exemption, and one expressed
no objection. Six posed questions regarding the exemption without
taking a position. The remaining 96 commenters objected to granting the
exemption. Of those, 22 did not describe the reasons for their
objections, leaving 74 that made substantive comments on the proposed
exemption.
The principal objection to the exemption (reflected in 36 of the
comments) was that transferring IRA cash to Free Credit Balances in
place of the currently-used money market fund would negatively affect
the annual rate of return earned by the IRAs, providing a lower
checking account interest rate instead of a money market rate. While
the money market rates were low at one time, the commenters pointed out
that money market rates have risen to a level that is considerably
higher than the 10 basis points described as the current rate in the
Notice. Related to this concern was the view that the Applicant should
not impose a $3/month low balance fee on the Retirement Shares class of
its money market fund, with some pointing out that the Applicant
already charges an IRA custody fee. (One commenter, by contrast, saw
the Notice as unnecessary because the Applicant already has the option
to impose a minimum account balance requirement, which the person
thought would encourage IRA contributions--like some others, apparently
viewing the low balance fee as being imposed on IRAs themselves rather
than limited to the money market fund.)
The Applicant represents that these comments reflect a
misunderstanding of the context in which the Free Credit Balance
arrangement is to be made available. The large number of small accounts
in the Retirement Shares class has resulted in increased administrative
expense to the money market fund, depressing investment return. The
Applicant has determined to impose a minimum balance fee on the
Retirement Shares, as is already the case for the other class of fund
shares, to discourage small accounts and thereby restore returns to the
level of other money market funds. However, it was concerned that this
would leave IRAs without a convenient investment for their available
cash generated through interest and dividends. It therefore postponed
imposing the minimum balance fee until it could make Free Credit
Balances available to the IRAs.
Several of these commenters, along with two others, noted that the
minimum balance fee would represent additional income to the Applicant,
to which they objected, and some added that this additional income was
unnecessary since the Applicant already charges an IRA custody fee. The
Applicant represents that three points are relevant here. First, the
Applicant does not retain the entire low balance fee; it is in part
retained by the money market fund. Second, it is contemplated that only
a minimal number of customers would pay the fee instead of moving their
balance to the cash interest option. Third, as an offset to any fees
that the Applicant might collect, if the fund has fewer accounts as a
result of the minimum balance fee--as would likely be the case--the
Applicant's income would decrease, as the fund would pay to the
Applicant lower transfer and dividend disbursing agent fees (which are
based on the number of shareholder accounts). For these reasons, the
Applicant represents that the minimum balance fee is not expected to
increase the Applicant's bottom line, as one commenter suggested, or
otherwise benefit the Applicant at the fund's expense, as several
others alleged.
The other principal objection, reflected in 17 of the comments, was
that the change to using Free Credit Balances of the broker-dealer as
the IRAs' cash vehicle would place the IRAs' assets at higher risk,
because the money would no longer be ``protected'' or safe and/or would
be used for the Applicant's general business operations. The
Applicant's response states that several of the commenters do not
appear to understand the nature of the current cash vehicle. While a
money market fund attempts to maintain stability of principal, its
assets are not insured, either by the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation (as one commenter believed) or otherwise, and its
investments are subject to risk of loss. As stated in the fund
prospectus, the fund shares are not guaranteed or insured by any bank,
the U.S. government or any government agency. The Applicant represents
that in fact, the Free Credit Balances would be subject to reduced risk
in this regard, assuming that they are intended for the purpose of
purchasing securities (as would normally be the case for an IRA
account), because they would be covered by SIPC insurance. SIPC
insurance would protect the IRA holders against loss in the event the
Applicant was to file for bankruptcy (a concern expressed in at least
four of the comments). In addition, Free Credit Balances are subject to
reserve requirements. These provide further protection to customers
against a broker-dealer's misuse of the funds or insolvency by
requiring the broker-dealer to deposit the amount of its liabilities to
customers in excess of amounts owed to it by customers in a specially
designated bank account. The effect of the reserve requirements is to
restrict the use of the money to the financing of the broker-dealer's
customer-related business, not permitting the money to be used beyond
that for the broker-dealer's general business operations.
The Applicant represents that some of these comments reflected
misperceptions about the nature of the Free Credit Balances. Two
commenters assumed that the cash placed in the Free Credit Balances
would no longer be part of their IRAs. One was concerned that the cash
would therefore be at increased risk because it would lose the
protection that IRA funds have from creditors in the event of his
personal bankruptcy. The Applicant represents that that is not the
case. The money in the Free Credit Balances would still be part of the
IRAs, and as such would be protected from bankruptcy and exempt from
income tax to the same extent as any other assets of the IRAs.
Several of these commenters were concerned that the cash in the
Free Credit Balances would not be immediately available on demand, or
otherwise that the change would mean that they would lose control over
their
[[Page 14007]]
funds. The Applicant represents, by law, Free Credit Balances are
liabilities of the broker-dealer subject to immediate cash payment to
customers on demand. These liabilities are backed by special reserve
requirements, which further assure that the cash will be available as
needed. Therefore, the IRA holders will continue to control these
funds, having the ability to withdraw the cash on demand and to use it
to purchase other investments of their choosing.
Similarly, there were comments about the benefits that the
Applicant would receive as a result of the change in the cash sweep
vehicle, reflected in several of the comments concerned about greater
risk and reduced return. Four commenters specifically objected to
letting the Applicant keep the interest spread from taking in IRA funds
and investing those funds at a higher rate. The Applicant represents
that it is true that, in the ordinary conduct of its business, the
Applicant is permitted to use customer Free Credit Balances for the
purpose of making customer loans, and that these loans would be at a
higher interest rate than the Applicant would pay on the Free Credit
Balances. Importantly, however, the IRAs would still be receiving
market interest rates for small balance demand accounts--at the same or
higher rate that the Applicant pays to non-IRA Free Credit Balances--so
that they will be treated in a fair and reasonable manner. Furthermore,
the Applicant represents that the Applicant will be sacrificing other
fees on the money market fund assets as a result of the reduction in
the number of shareholder accounts, so that any additional income it
may earn may not result in additional profit. One of these commenters
added that offering a money market fund, even if not profitable, should
be a cost of doing business. However, the Applicant represents that the
issue is not one of profitability--it is whether the money market fund
is able to achieve market returns for its investors.
Six commenters expressed a preference to continue to place their
cash in the money market fund. The Applicant represents that under the
terms of the Notice as it would be implemented by the Applicant, they
will be able to do so. A current IRA customer will be notified of the
Applicant's intention to transfer the IRA's cash to a Free Credit
Balance at least 30 days in advance of the effective date of such a
change, and will have the ability to request to continue to use the
money market fund. New customers will be able to make this request when
they enter into the IRA account agreement. Furthermore, customers will
be able at any time to request not to have their cash placed in Free
Credit Balances. Therefore, IRA holders will not be forced to use Free
Credit Balances as their cash sweep vehicle if they object to doing so.
Eight commenters said that there would be no advantage to the IRA
holders from switching to Free Credit Balances. However, the Applicant
represents that once the minimum balance fee is imposed on the
Retirement Shares, the income on the Free Credit Balances would exceed
the income in the money market fund for amounts in the Retirement
Shares below the minimum balance. For such accounts, there will be an
advantage to switching over to Free Credit Balances.
Two commenters appeared to view the Notice as imposing additional
burdens specifically on small IRAs, indicating that it would be unfair
for that reason. The Applicant represents that these commenters should
understand that the minimum balance fee will be imposed on small
investments in the Retirement Shares, without regard to the overall
size of the IRAs.
One commenter complained that the Notice would permit the Applicant
to ``arbitrarily'' transfer IRA cash balances into Free Credit
Balances, with the investor only finding out after the fact. The
Applicant represents under the approval requirements under condition
(f) above, the Applicant could make the transfer only after advance
notice to the IRA holder.
Two commenters complained that making the change to Free Credit
Balances would not be consistent with their existing agreements with
the Applicant. The Applicant represents that there is nothing in the
Applicant's standard form of IRA agreement that would prohibit the use
of Free Credit Balances as an IRA's cash sweep vehicle. Furthermore,
the change would be disclosed to the IRA holders, and they would have
the opportunity to object to the change.
Five commenters indicated that they prefer to permit their cash to
accumulate to a certain level, such as $5,000, before investing it, and
that the lower interest rate paid by the Free Credit Balances would
pressure them to monitor their accounts more closely and either take
more frequent distributions or make more frequent investments. If they
are forced to make more frequent investments, they said, they would
have to pay higher commissions to the Applicant. The Applicant
represents that the majority of the Applicant's IRA customers find it
prudent to invest cash as it becomes available, as evidenced by the
large number of zero-balance accounts in the Retirement share class of
the money market fund. Should a customer wish to accumulate cash as
described, the accumulation could take place in a Free Credit Balance
until the amount reaches the level at which the money market low-
balance fee is avoided, and then the cash could be transferred without
any commission charge to the money market fund and credited to the
customer's account on the next business day. This would not create
undue pressure to monitor one's account.
One commenter objected for the reason that there are no alternative
ways of handling any funds not immediately invested. The Applicant
represents that the Retirement Shares of the money market fund would
still be available if the IRA holder decides not to use a Free Credit
Balance.
Another commenter did not think there was a problem because
interest rates would rise. The Applicant represents that while the
problem with low returns on the Retirement Shares is not as serious as
it was in 2003 when the Applicant filed its exemption application, due
to rising interest rates, there still is an issue of administrative
fees for carrying small accounts decreasing returns for the Retirement
Shares as compared to the Investment Shares. Furthermore, the problem
may recur in the future should interest rates again fall. The Applicant
believes it is in the interest of all of its customers to find a more
efficient way to handle cash so that those who seek large cash
investments can earn competitive rates in the money market fund, while
those who keep very small cash amounts can make use of Free Credits
Balances as their cash sweep vehicles.
Some of the commenters complained about having lost money from
their investments with the Applicant (and in one case, also A.G.
Edwards). The Applicant represents that these comments are not relevant
to this Notice proceeding.
Four of the commenters requested a hearing, but did not specify any
particular issues to be addressed at such a hearing. The Applicant
represents that as the issues described above either represent a
misunderstanding of the transaction or can be addressed by opting out
of use of the Free Credit Balance as the cash sweep vehicle for a
particular IRA, there is no need for a hearing. The Department concurs.
The Department also received a written comment submitted by the
Applicant. This comment sought
[[Page 14008]]
changes to a condition in the Notice, which is discussed below.
The Applicant seeks changes to condition (f) of the Notice.
Condition (f) of the Notice reads as follows:
The IRA independent fiduciary approves the transfer of the IRA's
available cash into a Free Credit Balance account no less frequently
than once every three months, or once every month if there is
account activity for the particular month other than the crediting
of interest, together with or as a part of the customer's statement
of account;
The Applicant raises two issues regarding condition (f). First, the
condition does not adequately address the initial approval by the IRA
independent fiduciary of the use of free credit balances. Second, it
does not permit the approval to take the form of ``negative consent.''
The Department concurs with the Applicant and has modified
condition (f) of the Notice to read as follows:
On the basis of the information disclosed pursuant to paragraph
(e) above, the IRA independent fiduciary approves the transfer of
the IRA's available cash into a Free Credit Balance account. If the
disclosure includes a specified date before which the independent
fiduciary must object to the transfer of the IRA's existing cash
balances into a Free Credit Balance account, failure of the IRA
independent fiduciary to object to the transfer by that date will be
deemed an approval by the IRA independent fiduciary of the transfer
to and holding of the IRA's available cash in the Free Credit
Balance account.
The Applicant provides, with or as part of the customer's
statement of account, no less frequently than once every three
months, notification that the IRA independent fiduciary may, at any
time and without penalty, direct the Applicant in writing to
withdraw the IRA's available cash from the Free Credit Balance
account. Failure of the IRA independent fiduciary to provide such
written direction will be deemed an approval by the IRA independent
fiduciary of the transfer to and holding of the IRA's available cash
in the Free Credit Balance account.
The Department has considered the entire record and has determined
to grant the exemption with the revisions noted herein.
For Further Information Contact: Khalif I. Ford of the Department,
telephone (202) 693-8540. (This is not a toll-free number.)
Pennsylvania Institute of Neurological Disorders, Inc. Profit Sharing
Plan (the Plan) Located in Sunbury, Pennsylvania
[Prohibited Transaction Exemption 2006-02; Application No. D-11306]
Exemption
Based on the facts and representations set forth in the
application, the Department is granting an exemption under the
authority of section 408(a) of the Act and section 4975(c)(2) of the
Code, and in accordance with the procedures set forth in 29 CFR part
2570, subpart B (55 FR 32836, 32847, August 10, 1990). The restrictions
of sections 406(a), 406(b)(1) and (b)(2) of the Act and the sanctions
resulting from the application of section 4975 of the Code, by reason
of section 4975(c)(1)(A) through (E) of the Code, shall not apply to
the sale (the Sale) by the Plan of a parcel of unimproved real property
known as Lot 20, Section ``F'', Monroe Manor, Inc., (Lot 20
Kingswood Drive, Selinsgrove, PA 17870) (the Property) to Mahmood
Nasir, M.D. (Dr. Nasir), a party in interest with respect to the Plan,
provided that the following conditions are satisfied:
(a) All terms and conditions of the Sale are at least as favorable
to the Plan as those that the Plan could obtain in an arm's-length
transaction with an unrelated party;
(b) The Sales price is the greater of $81,000 or the fair market
value of the Property as of the date of the Sale;
(c) The fair market value of the Property has been determined by a
qualified independent appraiser;
(d) The Sale is a one-time transaction for cash;
(e) The Plan does not pay any commissions, costs, or other expenses
in connection with the Sale; and
(f) The Plan fiduciaries will determine, among other things,
whether it is in the interest of the Plan to go forward with the Sale
of the Property, will review and approve the methodology used in the
appraisal that is being relied upon, and will ensure that such
methodology is applied by a qualified independent appraiser in
determining the fair market value of the Property as of the date of the
Sale.
For a more complete statement of the facts and representations
supporting the Department's decision to grant this exemption, refer to
the notice of proposed exemption published on December 28, 2005 at 70
FR 76870.
For Further Information Contact: Ms. Blessed Chuksorji of the
Department, telephone (202) 693-8567 (this is not a toll-free number).
The Zieger Health Care Corporation Retirement Fund (the Plan) Located
in Farmington, Michigan
[Prohibited Transaction Exemption 2006-03 Exemption Application No. D-
11313]
Exemption
I. Transactions
The restrictions of sections 406(a), 406(b)(1), 406(b)(2), and
407(a) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (the Act) and the
sanctions resulting from the application of section 4975, by reason of
sections 4975(c)(1)(A) through (E) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
(the Code),\1\ shall not apply to:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For purposes of this exemption, references to specific
provisions of Title I of the Act, unless otherwise specified, refer
also to the corresponding provisions of the Code.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) The in-kind contribution and transfer to the Plan (the In-Kind
Contribution) by Zieger Health Care Corporation (ZHCC), acting through
its wholly-owned subsidiary, Botsford General Hospital (the Hospital),
both of which are parties in interest with respect to the Plan, of the
Hospital's right, title, and interest in five (5) limited liability
corporations, (collectively, the LLCs or individually, an LLC) where
the sole asset of each such LLC is one of five (5) parcels of improved
real property situated in southeastern Michigan (individually, an
Underlying Property, collectively, the Properties).
(b) The holding by the Plan of ownership interests in the LLCs that
own the Properties.
(c) The leaseback by the Plan to the Hospital of the Underlying
Property held by each of the LLCs, (individually, a Lease or
collectively, the Leases).
(d) The sale of an Underlying Property (or ownership interest in an
LLC, as the case may be) by the Plan to ZHCC or its affiliates,
pursuant to the right of first offer (the RFO), as described in each
Lease, at any time during the term of such Lease.
(e) Any payment or payments to the Plan by the Hospital, pursuant
to contingent rent payment(s) (the Contingent Rent Payment(s)), as
described in each Lease, during the term of such Lease.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The transactions described in section I(a)-(e), above,
collectively, are referred to herein as the Transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Conditions
The exemption is conditioned upon adherence to the material facts
and representations described herein and upon satisfaction of the
following requirements:
(a) ZHCC contributes to the Plan no less than:
(1) Cash in the amount of $3.3 million in the year 2005;
(2) Cash in the amount of $2 million in each of the years 2006,
2007, and 2008; and
(3) cash in the amount of $3 million in the year 2009.
(b) A qualified, independent fiduciary, as defined in section
III(c), below, (the Independent Fiduciary),
[[Page 14009]]
acting on behalf of the Plan, determines in accordance with the
fiduciary provisions of the Act, whether and on what terms to enter
into each of the Transactions.
(c) The Independent Fiduciary represents the Plan's interests for
all purposes with respect to each of the Transactions and determines,
prior to entering into any of the Transactions, that each such
transaction is feasible, in the interest of the Plan, and protective of
the Plan and its participants and beneficiaries.
(d) The Independent Fiduciary reviews, negotiates, and approves the
specific terms of each of the Transactions.
(e) The Independent Fiduciary monitors compliance by ZHCC and its
affiliates, as defined in section III(a), below, with the terms of each
of the Transactions and with the conditions of this exemption to ensure
that such terms and conditions are at all times satisfied.
(f) The Independent Fiduciary manages the acquisition, holding,
leasing, and disposition of the Plan's ownership interests in the LLCs
that own the Properties and takes whatever actions are necessary to
protect the rights of the Plan with respect the Plan's ownership
interests in such LLCs.
(g) The terms and conditions of each of the Transactions are no
less favorable to the Plan than terms negotiated at arm's length under
similar circumstances between unrelated third parties.
(h) The Independent Fiduciary determines the fair market value of
the In-Kind Contribution, as of the date such contribution is made. In
determining the fair market value of the In-Kind Contribution, the
Independent Fiduciary obtains an updated appraisal from an independent,
qualified appraiser selected by the Independent Fiduciary and ensures
that the appraisal is consistent with sound principles of valuation.
(i) Each Lease has a term of years, commencing on the closing date
of the In-Kind Contribution and ending ten (10) years thereafter. Each
Lease is a triple net ``bondable'' lease in which the Hospital's
obligation to pay rent to the Plan is absolute and unconditional. The
rental payment under each Lease is no less than the fair market rental
value of the leased premises, as determined by the Independent
Fiduciary, and is net of all costs related to the leased premises,
including costs of capital improvements and all other costs to operate,
maintain, repair and replace in good condition, and repair the systems
and structural and non-structural components of the buildings on the
leased premises, including without limitation, the roof, foundation,
landscaping, storm water management, utilities, and all other capital
and non-capital repairs and replacements, all in a manner befitting
office buildings comparable to the buildings on the leased premises and
in accordance with all applicable laws. Each Lease contains a
commercially reasonable standard for determining whether repair or
replacement is necessitated. All such maintenance, repair, and
replacement work is the responsibility of the Hospital. As discussed in
paragraph number 6 in the Summary of Facts and Representations in the
Notice of Proposed Exemption, and except as otherwise provided in each
Lease, the Hospital is required to restore the leased premises in the
event of casualty or condemnation, regardless of any lack or
insufficiency of insurance proceeds or condemnation awards therefore
(but subject to all applicable laws);
(j) ZHCC and the Hospital agree to make one or more Contingent Rent
Payment(s) to the Plan, if the Plan does not earn an annual return on
each of the Properties equal to a fixed interest rate of 8 percent (8%)
in any year (the Minimum Funding Rate). Each Contingent Rent Payment is
due on the earliest of: (1) The end of the ten (10) year term of the
Leases, (2) the termination of any of the Leases (including a
termination due to default, destruction, or condemnation), or (3) the
sale by the Plan of any parcel included in the Properties (or the sale
by the Plan of the entity that owns any parcel) (each a Minimum Return
Date). If the actual return to the Plan (the Actual Return), as defined
in section III(d), below, is less than the sum of the contribution
value of the Properties, plus a return on such contribution value equal
to the Minimum Funding Rate (the Minimum Return), then ZHCC and the
Hospital shall pay to the Plan a Contingent Rental Payment equal to the
amount of any such difference. ZHCC and the Hospital shall pay each
Contingent Rent Payment to the Plan in cash within 180 days after each
Minimum Return Date.
(k) If the Plan desires to sell or convey any of the Properties (or
any of the LLCs, as the case may be), during the term of a Lease, the
Plan shall first offer the Hospital the right to purchase or otherwise
acquire such property or LLC, pursuant to the RFO: (1) On such terms
and conditions as the Plan proposes to market such property or such LLC
for sale (Soliciting Offer), which terms and conditions shall reflect
the Plan's good faith determination of market conditions and the fair
market value for such property or LLC, or (2) on such terms and
conditions as are contained within an unsolicited bona fide offer from
an unaffiliated third party that the Plan desires to accept
(Unsolicited Offer). The parties shall negotiate in good faith the
terms and conditions of any purchase based on a Soliciting Offer for a
period of thirty (30) days following the Plan's notice to the Hospital.
In all events, the Hospital shall exercise such right to purchase, if
at all, upon notice to the Plan within the thirty (30) day period
described above with respect to a Soliciting Offer or within thirty
(30) days after notice to the Hospital of an Unsolicited Offer. If the
Hospital fails to exercise such right to purchase, the Plan is free to
sell such property or LLC (i.e., close on the transfer) to a third
party on such terms for the next 360 days. However, the Plan shall not
have the right to sell to a third party at a lower effective purchase
price or on any other materially more favorable term than the effective
purchase price and terms proposed by the Plan to the Hospital without
first re-offering such property or LLC to the Hospital at such lower
effective purchase price or other more favorable term, nor to sell on
any terms following the expiration of such 360-day period, without in
either event first re-offering such property or LLC to the Hospital.
The RFO shall terminate upon the commencement of the exercise by the
Plan of its remedies under the Leases as the result of a monetary event
of default by the Hospital that continues uncured following notice and
the expiration of applicable cure periods (and a second notice and cure
period provided fifteen (15) days before the loss of such right on
account of such default).
(l) Subject to the Hospital's RFO, the Plan retains the right to
sell or assign, in whole or in part, any of its interests in the
Properties (or any of its interests in the LLCs, as the case may be) to
any third party purchaser.
(m) ZHCC indemnifies the Plan with respect to any liability for
hazardous materials released on the Properties, whether such release
occurs prior to or after the execution of the Leases or the In-Kind
Contribution;
(n) The In-Kind Contribution is conditioned on the Independent
Fiduciary's receipt of favorable engineering and environmental reports
prior to closing.
(o) The Plan incurs no fees, commissions, or other charges or
expenses as a result of its participation in any of the Transactions.
III. Definitions
(a) The term, ``affiliate,'' means:
[[Page 14010]]
(1) Any person directly or indirectly through one or more
intermediaries, controlling, controlled by, or under common control
with the person;
(2) Any officer, director, employee, relative, or partner of any
such person; and
(3) Any corporation or partnership of which such person is an
officer, director, partner, or employee.
(b) The term, ``control,'' means the power to exercise a
controlling influence over the management or policies of a person other
than an individual.
(c) The term, ``Independent Fiduciary,'' means a fiduciary that:
(1) Has a minimum of five (5) years of experience acting on behalf
of employee benefit plans covered by the Act and/or the Code;
(2) Can demonstrate, through experience and/or education,
proficiency in matters involving the acquisition, management, leasing,
and disposition of real property;
(3) Is an expert with respect to the valuation of real property or
has the ability to access (itself or through persons engaged by it)
appropriate data regarding the purchase, sale, and leasing of real
property located in the relevant market;
(4) Has not engaged in any criminal activity involving fraud,
fiduciary standards, or securities law violations;
(5) Is appointed to act on behalf of the Plan for all purposes
related to, but not limited to (i) the In-Kind Contribution, (ii) the
Leases, (iii) the RFO, (iv) the Contingent Rent Payment(s), and (v) any
other transactions between the Plan and ZHCC and its affiliates related
to the LLCs and Properties; and
(6) Is independent of and unrelated to ZHCC or its affiliates. For
purposes of this exemption, a fiduciary will not be deemed to be
independent of and unrelated to ZHCC and its affiliates if:
(i) Such fiduciary directly or indirectly controls, is controlled
by, or is under common control with ZHCC,
(ii) Such fiduciary directly or indirectly receives any
compensation or other consideration in connection with any Transactions
described in this exemption; except that an Independent Fiduciary may
receive compensation from ZHCC for acting as an Independent Fiduciary
in connection with the Transactions contemplated herein if the amount
or payment of such compensation is not contingent upon or in any way
affected by the Independent Fiduciary's ultimate decisions, and
(iii) The annual gross revenue received by such fiduciary, during
any year of its engagement, from ZHCC and its affiliates exceeds five
percent (5%) of the fiduciary's annual gross revenue from all sources
for its prior tax year.
(d) The definition of Actual Return to be used in calculating the
amount of each Contingent Rent Payment is the sum of: (1) The sales
price of any parcel sold, net of selling costs, (2) any net insurance
proceeds or net condemnation awards received by the Plan (if any Lease
is terminated due to destruction or condemnation), (3) the fair market
value of any parcel(s) that the Plan continues to hold, as determined
by a three appraiser method (if the parties are unable to otherwise
agree), plus (4) the rental income received by the Plan under the
Leases prior to the Minimum Return Date, less expenses incurred by the
Plan with respect to the Properties and the Leases up to the Minimum
Return Date. The liabilities and obligations of the Hospital and ZHCC
survive the expiration date of a Lease, or a termination of a Lease,
and continue until such liabilities and obligations have been fully
paid and fulfilled.
Temporary Nature of Exemption
This exemption is temporary and becomes effective on the date of
publication of the grant of the final exemption in the Federal
Register. The exemption will expire on the date which is ten (10) years
from the date of the grant of the exemption. If the Hospital wishes to
renew the Leases on the Properties between the Hospital and the LLCs
(or between the Hospital and the Plan, as the case may be), the
Department would encourage the applicant to submit another application
prior to the expiration of this exemption, provided that the
Independent Fiduciary determines that the conditions of the renewal are
feasible, in the interest and protective of the Plan and the Hospital
can demonstrate that it can satisfy the terms of such renewal.
Written Comments
In the Notice of Proposed Exemption (the Notice), the Department of
Labor (the Department) invited all interested persons to submit written
comments and requests for a hearing on the proposed exemption within
thirty-seven (37) days of the date of the publication of the Notice in
the Federal Register on December 28, 2005. All comments and requests
for a hearing were due by February 3, 2006.
During the comment period, the Department received no requests for
a hearing. However, the Department did receive one comment letter from
a commentator and a comment letter from the applicant.
In a facsimile dated February 9, 2006, the commentator provided the
Department with a list of six (6) historical events concerning the
operations of the Hospital and ZHCC during the 1980's and the early
1990's. In addition to this list, the commentator also expressed
concern for the safety of the funding of the Plan. In this regard, the
commentator suggested that, if the exemption were granted, the
Department ``strictly monitor and enforce the financial activities'' of
the Hospital to ensure the safety of the Plan.
In response, to the concern expressed by the commentator, the
applicant submitted a letter dated February 15, 2006, to the
Department. In this letter, ZHCC expressed its opinion that adequate
measures to protect the Plan and the interests of its participants and
beneficiaries already exist under the terms and conditions of the
exemption. Specifically, as set forth in the Notice in subsections (b)
through (f) and (h) of section II, it is represented that the
Retirement Committee for the Plan appointed Fiduciary Counselors, Inc.
(FCI) as the Independent Fiduciary, as defined in section III(c) of the
Notice, to act on behalf of the Plan with regard to the subject
Transactions and to serve as investment manager with authority and
discretion over the LLCs and the Properties.
Further, the applicant points out that other safeguards to protect
the Plan and its participants and beneficiaries are set forth in the
Notice in subsections (g) and (i) through (o) of section II. In this
regard, section II(g) requires that the terms and conditions of the
Transactions ``are no less favorable to the Plan than terms negotiated
at arm's length under similar circumstances between unrelated third
parties.'' Participating in the Transactions will not subject the Plan
to fees, commission, or other charges or expenses. Fair market value
rental payments, as determined by the Independent Fiduciary are
required. The Leases are triple net ``bondable'' leases having a term
of ten (10) years. Under the terms of these Leases, the Hospital bears
not only the ordinary maintenance, tax, and insurance expenses, but
also is responsible for all capital expenses associated with the
Properties. The Plan retains the right to sell or assign the Properties
to any third party purchaser, subject to the Hospital's RFO. The Plan
and its participants and beneficiaries are further protected by ZHCC's
indemnification with respect to any liability for hazardous materials
released on the Properties.
The In-Kind Contribution is conditioned on the Independent
[[Page 14011]]
Fiduciary receiving favorable engineering and environmental reports on
the Properties before closing. Finally, if the Plan does not earn an
annual return on each of the Properties equal to a fixed interest rate
of 8 percent (8%) in any year, ZHCC and the Hospital have agreed to
make one or more Contingent Rent Payment(s), as described in each of
the Leases. Accordingly, the applicant believes that adequate
safeguards to protect the Plan and its participants and beneficiaries
are already in place under the terms of the exemption. In the opinion
of the applicant, no additional safeguards are necessary.
In addition to the letter from the commentator, the applicant, in a
letter dated February 2, 2006, informed the Department that although
the representations in the Notice were accurate, certain
representations were made in anticipation of the final exemption for
the In-Kind Contribution being granted in calendar year 2005.
Accordingly, the applicant updated the following statements to reflect
an actual cash contribution in 2005 and the anticipated In-Kind
Contribution in calendar year 2006.
The applicant's comments are discussed in the numbered paragraphs
below.
1. Section II(a)(1), as set forth in the Notice, at 70 FR 76872,
column 2, lines 16-19, requires that ZHCC contribute to the Plan no
less than cash in the amount of $3.3 million in the year 2005. In its
comment letter, the applicant confirms that in September 2005, ZHCC
contributed in cash $4,057,000 to the Plan--$3.3 million of which
constituted the contribution negotiated by FCI, the Plan's Independent
Fiduciary and which is also required under section II(a)(1), as set
forth in the Notice. In this regard, the applicant informed the
Department that the entire $4,057,000 cash contribution was in excess
of the minimum funding obligations of ZHCC under section 302 of the Act
and section 412 of the Code. The applicant also represents that the
contribution enabled ZHCC to avoid making a variable rate premium
payment to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.
2. In section 17(q), as set forth in the Notice, at 70 FR 76882,
column 2, lines 51-55, it is represented that the In-Kind Contribution
plus the additional voluntary cash contributions will exceed the
minimum funding requirement for the year 2005. It is anticipated that
the In-Kind Contribution will be contributed to the Plan during 2006,
once the exemption is finalized. The applicant represents that if the
exemption is finalized in time for the In-Kind Contribution to be made
to the Plan by September 15, 2006, then the In-Kind Contribution will
be applied to the 2005 Plan year for the purpose of the funding rules
under section 302 of the Act and section 412 of the Code. Accordingly,
the applicant represents that all contributions credited to the Plan
for Plan year 2005 will exceed the minimum funding requirement for Plan
year 2005.
3. The applicant notified the Department that the name of the Plan
Trustee, as set forth in the Notice in paragraph 6 of the Summary of
Facts and Representations (the SFR), at 70 FR 76874, column 2, lines
44-60, has changed to LaSalle Bank N.A.--Global Securities and Trust
Services. It is represented that this name change is pursuant to the
acquisition by LaSalle Bank of Standard Federal Bank. In addition, the
applicant clarified that the discretion to invest the assets of the
Plan generally resides with the Zieger Health Care Corporation Finance
Committee (the Committee) and any investment managers appointed by it.
It is further represented that the Committee has granted the Trustee
the discretion to manage Plan assets that are invested in funds
sponsored by the Trustee.
4. Paragraph 6 of the SFR in the Notice, at 70 FR 76877, column 2,
lines 1-4, reads as follows, ``Currently, portions of the Kidney
Center, the SPO Building and the Medical Center are leased to unrelated
third parties.'' The applicant notes that, as previously stated in the
SFR in the Notice, at 70 FR 76874, column 3, lines 48-58, the Botsford
Kidney Center building is leased to two (2) parties--a tenant owned by
the Hospital and Botsford Kidney Center, Inc. (BKCI). BKCI is a
Michigan business corporation owned 80 percent (80%) by individual
physicians and 20 percent (20%) by the Hospital.
After giving full consideration to the entire record, including the
written comments from the commentator and the applicant, the Department
has decided to grant the exemption, as described and clarified, above.
In this regard, the comment letters submitted by the commentator and
the applicant to the Department have been included as part of the
public record of the exemption application. The complete application
file, including all supplemental submissions received by the
Department, is made available for public inspection in the Public
Documents Room of the Employee Benefit Security Administration, Room N-
1513, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20210.
For a more complete statement of the facts and representations
supporting the Department's decision to grant this exemption refer to
the Notice published on December 28, 2005, at 70 FR 76872.
For Further Information Contact: Angelena C. Le Blanc of the
Department, telephone (202) 693-8540. (This is not a toll-free number.)
The Donlar Corporation Profit Sharing Plan (the Plan) Located in
Roseville, MN
[Prohibited Transaction Exemption 2006-04 Exemption Application No. D-
11325]
Exemption
The restrictions of sections 406(a)(1)(A) through (D), 406(b)(1),
and 406(b)(2) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (the Act),
and the sanctions resulting from the application of section 4975, by
reason of section 4975(c)(1)(A) through (E) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 (the Code), \3\ shall not apply, in connection with the
termination of the Plan, to the cash sale of a parcel of improved real
property (the Property) owned by the Plan to Mr. Donald A. Kainz (Mr.
Kainz), a party in interest with respect to the Plan; provided that:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ For purposes of this exemption, references to specific
provisions of Title I of the Act, unless otherwise specified, refer
also to the corresponding provisions of the Code.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) The Plan receives a price for the sale of the Property to Mr.
Kainz equal to the greater of:
(1) $418,000; or
(2) The fair market value of the Property, plus the ``assemblage
value'' to Mr. Kainz, as determined by an independent, qualified
appraiser, as of the date of such sale; or
(3) The cost to the Plan to acquire and hold the Property;
(b) The Plan incurs no fees, commissions, or other charges or
expenses as a result of its participation in the sale of the Property
to Mr. Kainz;
(c) Prior to entering into the subject transaction:
(1) With respect to the past use and/or leasing of the Property by
the Donlar Corporation (the Employer), the Employer files a Form 5330
with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS);
(2) With respect to the entire period of such use and/or leasing,
the Employer pays all appropriate excise taxes, plus interest on such
taxes to the IRS; and
(3) With respect to the past use and/or leasing of the Property by
the Employer, the Employer pays to the Plan the present value of the
fair market rent, including interest, due to the Plan from the Employer
in the form of a lump
[[Page 14012]]
sum total rent payment in arrears with respect to the past use and/or
leasing of the Property by the Employer, as determined by Mike Amo (Mr.
Amo) an independent, qualified appraiser, for the entire period of such
use and/or leasing of the Property by the Employer;
(d) The termination of the Plan and the distribution of its assets
is in accordance with the provisions of the Plan and all applicable
statutes and regulations, including section 4044 of the Act, relating
to the allocation of assets; and
(e) Upon termination of the Plan, each participant in the Plan
receives 100 percent (100%) of the balance of his or her account in the
Plan in cash, including each participant's pro rata share of the value
of the Property, as of the date of the sale of the Property to Mr.
Kainz.
After giving full consideration to the entire record, the
Department has decided to grant the exemption, as described above. The
complete application file, including all supplemental submissions
received by the Department, is made available for public inspection in
the Public Documents Room of the Employee Benefit Security
Administration, Room N-1513, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210.
For a more complete statement of the facts and representations
supporting the Department's decision to grant this exemption refer to
the Notice of Proposed Exemption published on December 28, 2005, at 70
FR 76882.
For Further Information Contact: Ms. Angelena C. Le Blanc of the
Department, telephone (202) 693-8540. (This is not a toll-free number.)
Anchorage Area Pipe Trades 367 Joint Apprenticeship Committee (the
Plan) Located in Anchorage, Alaska
[Prohibited Transaction Exemption 2006-05; Exemption Application No. L-
11293]
Exemption
The restrictions of sections 406(a) and 406(b)(2) of the Act shall
not apply to a loan (the Loan), in the amount of $750,000, to the Plan,
to serve as permanent financing for a training facility (the Training
Facility) constructed by the Plan, by the Local No. 367 of the United
Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and
Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada (Local No. 367), a
party in interest with respect to the Plan. This exemption is subject
to the following conditions:
(a) The Plan does not pay any commissions, fees, or other expenses
with respect to this transaction, except certain specified third party
closing costs;
(b) An independent, qualified fiduciary (the I/F), after analyzing
the terms of the Loan, determines that such Loan is in the best
interests of the Plan and its participants and beneficiaries;
(c) In determining the fair market value of the Training Facility,
the I/F obtains a current written appraisal report (the Appraisal) from
an independent, qualified appraiser, as of the date of the transaction,
and ensures that such Appraisal is consistent with sound principles of
valuation;
(d) The Loan is for the duration of 15 years at the prime rate, as
listed in the Wall Street Journal;
(e) Under the terms of the Loan agreement, the Loan is secured by
the Training Facility and, in the event of default by the Plan, Local
No. 367 has recourse only against such facility and not the general
assets of the Plan;
(f) The terms and conditions of the Loan are at least as favorable
to the Plan as those that the Plan could have obtained in an arm's
length transaction with an unrelated third party; and
(g) The Loan is repaid by the Plan with the funds that the Plan
retains after paying all of its operational expenses.
For a more complete statement of the facts and representations
supporting the Department's decision to grant this exemption, refer to
the notice of proposed exemption published on November 3, 2005 at 70 FR
66856.
For Further Information Contact: Ms. Karin Weng of the Department
at (202) 693-8540. (This is not a toll-free number.)
General Information
The attention of interested persons is directed to the following:
(1) The fact that a transaction is the subject of an exemption
under section 408(a) of the Act and/or section 4975(c)(2) of the Code
does not relieve a fiduciary or other party in interest or disqualified
person from certain other provisions to which the exemption does not
apply and the general fiduciary responsibility provisions of section
404 of the Act, which among other things require a fiduciary to
discharge his duties respecting the plan solely in the interest of the
participants and beneficiaries of the plan and in a prudent fashion in
accordance with section 404(a)(1)(B) of the Act; nor does it affect the
requirement of section 401(a) of the Code that the plan must operate
for the exclusive benefit of the employees of the employer maintaining
the plan and their beneficiaries;
(2) This exemption is supplemental to and not in derogation of, any
other provisions of the Act and/or the Code, including statutory or
administrative exemptions and transactional rules. Furthermore, the
fact that a transaction is subject to an administrative or statutory
exemption is not dispositive of whether the transaction is in fact a
prohibited transaction; and
(3) The availability of this exemption is subject to the express
condition that the material facts and representations contained in the
application accurately describes all material terms of the transaction
which is the subject of the exemption.
Ivan Strasfeld,
Director of Exemption Determinations, Employee Benefits Security
Administration, U.S. Department of Labor.
[FR Doc. E6-3821 Filed 3-17-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-29-P