Grant of Individual Exemptions and Prohibited Transaction Exemptions Involving: PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. (PNC Financial), PTE 2009-22; Verizon Investment Management Corporation, PTE 2009-23; United States Steel and Carnegie Pension Fund (the Applicant), PTE 2009-24; and Barclays Global Investors, N.A. and Its Affiliates and Successors (BGI) and Barclays Capital Inc. and Its Affiliates and Successors (BarCap) (Collectively the Applicants), PTE 2009-25, 45284-45304 [E9-20724]
Download as PDF
45284
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2009 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employee Benefits Security
Administration
Grant of Individual Exemptions and
Prohibited Transaction Exemptions
Involving: PNC Financial Services
Group, Inc. (PNC Financial), PTE 2009–
22; Verizon Investment Management
Corporation, PTE 2009–23; United
States Steel and Carnegie Pension
Fund (the Applicant), PTE 2009–24;
and Barclays Global Investors, N.A.
and Its Affiliates and Successors (BGI)
and Barclays Capital Inc. and Its
Affiliates and Successors (BarCap)
(Collectively the Applicants), PTE
2009–25
AGENCY: Employee Benefits Security
Administration, Labor.
ACTION:
Grant of Individual Exemptions.
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 (ERISA or 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.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES2
SUMMARY:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:37 Aug 31, 2009
Jkt 217001
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.
PNC Financial Services Group, Inc.
(PNC Financial), Located in
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
[Prohibited Transaction Exemption
2009–22 Application No. D–11397.]
Exemption
Section I—Exemption for Receipt of
Fees
In connection with the investment in
an open-end investment company (a
Fund or Funds), as defined, below, in
Section IV(e), by certain employee
benefit plans (Client Plan or Client
Plans) for which PNC, as defined,
below, in Section IV(a), serves as a
fiduciary and is a party in interest with
respect to such Client Plan(s), the
restrictions of sections 406(a) and 406(b)
of the Act and the sanctions resulting
from the application of section 4975 of
the Code, by reason of sections
4975(c)(1)(A) through (F) 1 of the Code,
shall not apply, effective September 29,
2006, to:
(a) The receipt of fees by PNC from a
Fund where BlackRock, as defined,
below, in Section IV(b), acts as the
investment adviser for such Fund, and
the receipt of fees by BlackRock for the
provision of investment advisory
services, or similar services, to such
Fund;
(b) The receipt of fees by PNC from a
Fund for providing certain service(s)
(Secondary Service(s)), as defined,
below, in Section IV(i), to such Fund;
and
(c) The receipt of fees by PNC from
BlackRock in connection with
administrative service(s) (Mutual Fund
Administration Service(s)), as defined,
below, in Section IV(l), provided to a
Fund in which a Client Plan invests;
provided that the conditions, as set forth
in Section II and Section III, below,
were satisfied, as of the effective date of
this exemption and thereafter.
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
Section II—Specific Conditions
(a) PNC, serving as a fiduciary for a
Client Plan, satisfies any one (but not
all) of the following:
(1) A Client Plan invested in a Fund
does not pay any plan-level investment
management fee, investment advisory
fee, or similar fee (Plan-Level Fee(s)) to
PNC with respect to any of the assets of
such Client Plan which are invested in
shares of such Fund for the entire
period of such investment (the Offset
Fee Method). This condition does not
preclude the payment of investment
advisory fees or similar fees (Fund-Level
Fee(s)) by a Fund to BlackRock under
the terms of an investment advisory
agreement adopted in accordance with
section 15 of the Investment Company
Act of 1940 (the Investment Company
Act);
(2) A Client Plan invested in a Fund
pays an investment management fee or
similar fee based on total assets of such
Client Plan from which a credit has
been subtracted representing such
Client Plan’s pro rata share of
investment advisory fees or similar fees
paid by such Fund to BlackRock (the
Subtraction Fee Method). If, during any
fee period for which a Client Plan has
prepaid its investment management or
similar fee, such Client Plan purchases
shares of such Fund, the requirement of
this Section II(a)(2) shall be deemed met
with respect to such prepaid fee if, by
a method reasonably designed to
accomplish the same, the amount of the
prepaid fee that constitutes the fee with
respect to the assets of such Client Plan
invested in shares of such Fund: (i) Is
anticipated and subtracted from the
prepaid fee at the time of payment of
such fee, (ii) is returned to such Client
Plan no later than during the
immediately following fee period, or
(iii) is offset against the prepaid fee for
the immediately following fee period or
for the fee period immediately following
thereafter. For purposes of this Section
II(a)(2), a fee shall be deemed to be
prepaid for any fee period, if the amount
of such fee is calculated as of a date not
later than the first day of such period;
or
(3) A Client Plan invested in a Fund
receives a ‘‘a credit’’ 2 (the Credit Fee
Method) of such Client Plan’s
proportionate share of all fees charged
to such Fund by BlackRock for
2 PNC Financial represents that it would be
accurate to describe ‘‘the credit’’ as a ‘‘credited
dollar amount’’ to cover situations in which the
credited amount is used to acquire additional
shares of a Fund, rather than being held by a Client
Plan in the form of cash. It is represented that the
standard practice is to reinvest the ‘‘credited dollar
amount’’ in additional shares of the same Fund
with respect to which the fees were credited.
E:\FR\FM\01SEN2.SGM
01SEN2
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2009 / Notices
investment advisory services or similar
services for a particular month: (1)
Effective for the period, September 29,
2006, through December 31, 2008, on
the earlier of either: (a) The same day as
PNC receives a fee from BlackRock for
Mutual Fund Administration Services
provided for that month to such Fund
by PNC, or (b) the fifth business day
before the end of the month following
the month in which fees for investment
advisory services, or similar services,
accrued, or (2) effective for the period
beginning, January 1, 2009, and
continuing thereafter, on a date which is
no later than one business day after
BlackRock receives fees from the Fund
for investment advisory services, or
similar services, provided for that
month to such Fund by BlackRock. The
crediting of all such fees to such Client
Plan by PNC is audited by an
independent accounting firm (the
Auditor) on at least an annual basis to
verify the proper crediting of such fees
to such Client Plan.
(b) The price paid or received by a
Client Plan for shares in a Fund is the
net asset value per share, as defined,
below, in Section IV(f), at the time of the
transaction, and is the same price which
would have been paid or received for
such shares by any other investor in
such Fund at that time;
(c) PNC, including any officer or
director of PNC, does not purchase
shares of a Fund from any Client Plan
or sell shares of a Fund to any Client
Plan;
(d) A Client Plan does not pay sales
commissions in connection with any
purchase or sale of shares of a Fund,
and a Client Plan does not pay
redemption fees in connection with any
sale of shares to a Fund, unless
(1) Such redemption fee is paid only
to a Fund, and
(2) The existence of such redemption
fee is disclosed in the prospectus for
such Fund in effect both at the time of
any purchase of such shares and at the
time of such sale;
(e) The combined total of all fees
received by PNC for services provided
by PNC:
(1) To Client Plans, and
(2) To Funds in which Client Plans
invest is not in excess of reasonable
compensation within the meaning of
section 408(b)(2) of the Act;
(f) PNC does not receive any fees
payable pursuant to Rule 12b–1 under
the Investment Company Act in
connection with the subject
transactions;
(g) A Client Plan is not an employee
benefit plan sponsored or maintained by
PNC;
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:37 Aug 31, 2009
Jkt 217001
(h) A second fiduciary (Second
Fiduciary), as defined, below, in Section
IV(h), who is acting on behalf of a Client
Plan receives, in advance of any initial
investment by a Client Plan in a Fund,
full and detailed written disclosure of
information concerning such Fund,
including but not limited to:
(1) A current prospectus for each
Fund in which such Client Plan is
considering investing;
(2) A statement describing the fees,
including the nature and extent of any
differential between the rates of such
fees for:
(i) Any investment advisory or similar
services to be paid by such Fund to
BlackRock,
(ii) Any Secondary Services to be paid
by such Fund to PNC,
(iii) Any Mutual Fund Administration
Services to be paid by BlackRock to
PNC, and
(iv) All other fees to be charged to or
paid by a Client Plan and by such Fund;
(3) The reasons why PNC, acting as
fiduciary for such Client Plan, may
consider investment in such Fund to be
appropriate for such Client Plan;
(4) A statement describing whether
there are any limitations applicable to
PNC with respect to which assets of a
Client Plan that may be invested in such
Fund, and if so, the nature of such
limitations; and
(5) Upon the request of the Second
Fiduciary, acting on behalf of a Client
Plan, a copy of the proposed exemption
and a copy of the final exemption, once
such documents are published in the
Federal Register.
(i) On the basis of the information
described, above, in Section II(h), a
Second Fiduciary, acting on behalf of a
Client Plan, authorizes in writing: (1)
The investment of the assets of such
Client Plan in shares of each particular
Fund; and (2) the fees received by PNC
and by BlackRock in connection with
services provided by PNC and by
BlackRock to such Fund. Such
authorization by a Second Fiduciary
must be consistent with the
responsibilities, obligations, and duties
imposed on fiduciaries by Part 4 of Title
I of the Act.
(j)(1) All authorizations, described,
above, in Section II(i), made by a
Second Fiduciary, regarding: (i)
Investments by a Client Plan in a Fund,
(ii) fees paid for investment advisory
services or similar services provided by
BlackRock to such Fund, (iii) fees paid
for Secondary Services provided by PNC
to such Fund, and (iv) fees paid by
BlackRock to PNC for Mutual Fund
Administration Services provided by
PNC to such Fund, shall be terminable
at will by the Second Fiduciary, acting
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
45285
on behalf of such Client Plan, without
penalty to such Client Plan, upon
receipt by PNC of a written notice of
termination. A form (the Termination
Form), as defined, below, in Section
IV(j), expressly providing an election to
terminate the authorizations, described,
above, in Section II(i), with instructions
on the use of such Termination Form
must be provided to such Second
Fiduciary at least annually. However, if
a Termination Form has been provided
to such Second Fiduciary, pursuant to
Section II(k) and (l), below, then a
Termination Form need not be provided
again, pursuant to this Section II(j),
unless at least six (6) months but no
more than twelve (12) months have
elapsed, since a Termination Form was
provided, pursuant to Section II(k) and
(l), below.
(2) The instructions for the
Termination Form must include the
following statements:
(i) The authorization, described,
above, in Section II(i), is terminable at
will by the Second Fiduciary, acting on
behalf of a Client Plan, without penalty
to such Client Plan, upon receipt by
PNC of written notice from such Second
Fiduciary.
(ii) Failure by such Second Fiduciary
to return the Termination Form on
behalf of such Client Plan will be
deemed to be an approval by the Second
Fiduciary and will result in the
continuation of the authorization, as
described, above, in Section II(i), of PNC
to engage in the transactions which are
the subject of this exemption.
(k) For a Client Plan invested in a
Fund which uses one of the fee methods
described, above, in Section II(a)(1),
(a)(2), or (a)(3), in the event of a
proposed change from one of the fee
methods to another or in the event of a
proposed increase in the rate of any fee
paid by a Fund to BlackRock for any
investment advisory service, or similar
service that BlackRock provides to such
Fund over an existing rate for such
services or method of determining the
fee for such services, which had been
authorized, in accordance with Section
II(i), above, by the Second Fiduciary for
such Client Plan, at least thirty (30) days
in advance of the implementation of
such change from one of the fee
methods to another or such increase in
a fee, PNC will provide a written notice
(which may take the form of a proxy
statement, letter, or similar
communication that is separate from the
prospectus of such Fund and which
explains the nature and amount of such
change from one of the fee methods to
another or increase in fee) to the Second
Fiduciary of each Client Plan affected by
such change from one of the fee
E:\FR\FM\01SEN2.SGM
01SEN2
45286
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2009 / Notices
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES2
methods to another or increased fee.
Such notice shall be accompanied by a
Termination Form, with instructions on
the use of such Termination Form, as
described, above, in Section II(j).3
(l) In the event of:
(i) A proposed addition of a
Secondary Service for which an
additional fee is charged; or
(ii) A proposed addition of a Mutual
Fund Administration Service provided
by PNC to a Fund in which a Client Plan
invests and for which an additional fee
is charged; or
(iii) A proposed increase in the rate of
any fee paid by a Fund to PNC for any
Secondary Service, or
(iv) A proposed increase in the rate of
any fee paid by BlackRock to PNC for
Mutual Fund Administration Services
provided to such Fund, or
(v) A proposed increase in the rate of
any fee paid for Secondary Services or
for Mutual Fund Administration
Services that results from the decrease
in the number or kind of services
performed by PNC for such fee over an
existing rate for services which had
been authorized, in accordance with
Section II(i), by the Second Fiduciary
for a Client Plan invested in such Fund,
PNC, at least thirty (30) days in advance
of the implementation of such fee
increase or additional service for which
an additional fee is charged, will
provide a written notice (which may
take the form of a proxy statement,
letter, or similar communication that is
separate from the prospectus of such
Fund and which explains the nature
and amount of the additional service for
which an additional fee is charged or
the nature and amount of the increase
in fees) to the Second Fiduciary of each
Client Plan invested in such Fund
which is proposing to increase fees or
add services for which an additional fee
is charged. Such notice shall be
accompanied by a Termination Form,
with instructions on the use of such
Termination Form, as described, above
in Section II(j).
(m) On an annual basis, PNC, serving
as fiduciary to a Client Plan, provides
the Second Fiduciary of such Client
Plan invested in a Fund with:
3 It is represented that PNC furnished only
disclosure, not advanced notice, of a mid-2007
advisory fee change to the Second Fiduciaries of
Client Plans invested in Funds using the Credit Fee
Method. The change, which resulted in increased
fees to BlackRock of 0.5 basis points, (which it is
represented was credited back to the Client Plans)
occurred effective June 1, 2007, with the disclosure
being provided in October 2007, after the effective
date of such change. As the Second Fiduciaries of
the Client Plans did not receive notification of such
increase at least thirty (30) days in advance of the
implementation of such increase, the Department,
herein, is not providing relief for the receipt of such
fee increase by BlackRock.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:37 Aug 31, 2009
Jkt 217001
(1) A copy of the current prospectus
for such Fund in which such Client Plan
invests;
(2) Upon the request of such Second
Fiduciary, a copy of the Statement of
Additional Information for such Fund
which contains a description of all fees
paid by such Fund to PNC and all fees
paid by BlackRock to PNC for Mutual
Fund Administration Services;
(3) A copy of the annual financial
disclosure report which includes
information about Fund portfolios,
within sixty (60) days of the preparation
of such report;
(4) Oral or written responses to
inquiries of the Second Fiduciary of
such Client Plan, as such inquiries arise;
and
(5) A copy of the audit findings
prepared by the independent Auditor,
as required by Section II(a)(3), is
provided by PNC at least annually
within sixty (60) days of the completion
of the report of such audit findings, to
the Second Fiduciary of those Client
Plans using the Credit Fee Method, as
described in Section II(a)(3).
(n) All dealings between a Client Plan
and a Fund are on a basis no less
favorable to such Client Plan than
dealings between such Fund and other
shareholders invested in such Fund.
Section III—General Conditions
(a) PNC maintains for a period of six
(6) years the records necessary to enable
the persons described, below, in Section
III(b) to determine whether the
conditions of this exemption have been
met, except that:
(1) A prohibited transaction will not
be considered to have occurred, if solely
because of circumstances beyond the
control of PNC, the records are lost or
destroyed prior to the end of the sixyear period, and
(2) No party in interest other than
PNC shall be subject to the civil penalty
that may be assessed under section
502(i) of the Act or to the taxes imposed
by section 4975(a) and (b) of the Code
if the records are not maintained or are
not available for examination as
required by Section III(b), below.
(b)(1) Except as provided in Section
III(b)(2) and notwithstanding any
provisions of section 504(a)(2) of the
Act, the records referred to in Section
III(a) are unconditionally available at
their customary location for
examination during normal business
hours by—
(i) Any duly authorized employee or
representative of the Department of
Labor (the Department) or the Internal
Revenue Service,
(ii) Any fiduciary of a Client Plan who
has authority to acquire or dispose of
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
shares of a Fund owned by such Client
Plan, or any duly authorized employee
or representative of such fiduciary, and
(iii) Any participant or beneficiary of
a Client Plan or duly authorized
employee or representative of such
participant or beneficiary.
(2) None of the persons described in
Section III(b)(1)(ii) and (iii) shall be
authorized to examine trade secrets of
PNC, or commercial or financial
information which is privileged or
confidential.
Section IV—Definitions
For purposes of this exemption:
(a) The term, ‘‘PNC,’’ means PNC
Financial, and any affiliate thereof, as
defined, below in Section IV(c).
(b) The term, ‘‘BlackRock,’’ means
BlackRock, Inc., and any affiliate
thereof, as defined, below in Section
IV(c).
(c) An ‘‘affiliate’’ of a person includes:
(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 in any such person;
and
(3) Any corporation or partnership of
which such person is an officer,
director, partner, or employee.
(d) The term, ‘‘control,’’ means the
power to exercise a controlling
influence over the management or
policies of a person other than an
individual.
(e) The term, ‘‘Fund(s),’’ shall mean
any diversified open-end investment
company or companies registered with
the Securities and Exchange
Commission under the Investment
Company Act, as amended, for which
BlackRock serves as an investment
adviser (but not sub-adviser).
(f) The term, ‘‘net asset value,’’ means
the amount for purposes of pricing all
purchases and sales of shares of a Fund
calculated by dividing the value of all
securities, determined by a method as
set forth in the prospectus for such
Fund and in the statement of additional
information, and other assets belonging
to the Fund or portfolio of the Fund,
less the liabilities charged to each such
portfolio or Fund, by the number of
outstanding shares.
(g) The term, ‘‘relative,’’ means a
relative as that term is defined in
section 3(15) of the Act (or a member of
the family as that term is defined in
section 4975(e)(6) of the Code), or a
brother, a sister, or a spouse of a brother
or a sister.
(h) The term, ‘‘Second Fiduciary,’’
means a fiduciary of a Client Plan who
is independent of and unrelated to PNC
E:\FR\FM\01SEN2.SGM
01SEN2
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2009 / Notices
and BlackRock. For purposes of this
exemption, the Second Fiduciary will
not be deemed to be independent of and
unrelated to PNC and BlackRock if:
(1) Such fiduciary, directly or
indirectly controls, through one or more
intermediaries, is controlled by, or is
under common control with PNC or
with BlackRock;
(2) Such fiduciary, or any officer,
director, partner, employee, or relative
of the fiduciary, is an officer, director,
partner, or employee of PNC or of
BlackRock (or is a relative of such
persons); or
(3) Such fiduciary, directly or
indirectly, receives any compensation or
other consideration for his or her
personal account in connection with
any transaction described in this
exemption.
If an officer, director, partner, or
employee of PNC or of BlackRock (or
relative of such persons) is a director of
such Second Fiduciary, and if he or she
abstains from participation in:
(i) The choice of such Client Plan’s
investment adviser,
(ii) The approval of any such
purchase or sale between such Client
Plan and a Fund, and
(iii) The approval of any change in
fees or fee method, as described, above,
in Section II (k) or (l), charged to or paid
by such Client Plan in connection with
any of the transactions described in
Section I above, then Section IV(h)(2),
above, shall not apply.
(i) The term, ‘‘Secondary Service(s),’’
means a service or services which is/are
provided by PNC to a Fund, including
but not limited to custodial, accounting,
or administrative services. The fees for
providing Secondary Services to a Fund
are paid to PNC by such Fund.
(j) The term, ‘‘Termination Form,’’
means the form supplied to a Second
Fiduciary which expressly provides an
election to such Second Fiduciary to
terminate on behalf of a Client Plan the
authorization described, above, in
Section II(i).
(k) The term, ‘‘business day,’’ means
any day that
(i) PNC Financial is open for
conducting all or substantially all of its
banking functions, and
(ii) the New York Stock Exchange (or
any successor exchange) is open for
trading.
(l) The term, ‘‘Mutual Fund
Administration Services,’’ means a
service or services which is/are
provided by PNC to, or on behalf of, a
Fund, including PNC’s maintaining
records of investments by Client Plans
in such Fund, processing Fund
transactions for Client Plans,
transmitting account statements and
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:37 Aug 31, 2009
Jkt 217001
shareholder communications,
responding to inquiries from Client
Plans regarding account balances and
dividends, and providing information to
such Fund on sales and assisting in
monitoring possible market timing. The
fees for providing Mutual Fund
Administration Services to a Fund are
paid to PNC by BlackRock, rather than
by such Fund.
DATES: Effective Date: This exemption is
effective as of September 29, 2006.
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 forty-five
(45) days of the date of the publication
of the Notice in the Federal Register on
March 26, 2009. The deadline for
providing notice to all interested
persons was April 10, 2009. All
comments and requests for a hearing
from interested persons were due by
May 11, 2009. The Department received
no requests for a hearing. However,
three (3) commentators informed the
Department that the mailing to them
was not complete.
In this regard, the first commentator
did not receive a copy of the Notice. In
response, the applicant indicated that
the Notice had been inadvertently
omitted from the initial mailing, dated
April 3, 2009, to one group of interested
persons, and that the mailing was resent
to that group, including the Notice,
before the deadline on April 10, 2009,
for providing notice to interest persons.
The second commentator indicated that
certain enclosures were not included. In
response, the applicant indicated that
this commentator was part of the group
that had received the mailing without
the Notice, and that he should have
subsequently received the second
mailing, before the deadline on April
10, 2009, for providing notice to interest
persons.
The third commentator indicated that
he had received only the Notice and no
cover letters. The applicant was unable
to explain how this error could have
occurred, because this part of the
mailing was assembled by a machine
designed to confirm that the inserts in
each envelope were of the correct
thickness. Accordingly, the applicant
confirmed through a sampling of other
packages that were part of this group
that there were no other apparent
instances of this error. In any event, the
applicant mailed a complete package to
the third commentator.
During the comment period, the
Department received 24 telephone
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
45287
inquiries from commentators seeking an
explanation of the contents of the
Notice. In response, the staff of the
Office of Exemption Determinations
spoke to each commentator and
provided an explanation ‘‘in plain
English’’ of the proposed exemption.
In addition, eight (8) commentators
wrote to the Department requesting a
further explanation of the proposed
exemption. In response to these
commentators, the applicant states that
the notice to interested persons
provided by PNC contained all the
information required by the
Department’s exemption procedures,
and also included an additional cover
page that was intended to help the
recipients understand the contents of
the Notice. The applicant maintains that
no further written explanation on PNC’s
part was either required or permitted.
Further, the applicant maintains that in
any event, these comments do not raise
any substantive issues on the proposed
exemption itself.
The Department concurs.
During the comment period, the
Department also received via e-mail,
facsimile, and mail comments from
three (3) commentators who raised
substantive issues. Copies of these
letters were posted on the Web site
regulations.gov. At the close of the
comment period, the Department
forwarded a copy of these comments to
the applicant for response. The
comments and the applicant’s response
thereto are summarized in the
numbered paragraphs below.
1. One commentator, identified as an
IRA trustee, in an e-mail, dated April
20, 2009, took the view that the
requested exemption ‘‘appears to be an
effort to modify the existing ERISA law
to allow a corporate ‘sweetheart deal’ of
two interlocked corporations (PNC and
BLACKROCK),’’ and says that a change
to the existing law ‘‘would be a step
backward.’’ The commentator further
characterizes the described arrangement
as appearing ‘‘to have an intended
benefit for the two corporations at the
likely eventual expense of perhaps
thousands of individuals with IRAs.’’ In
addition, the commentator expresses
concern that the costs of implementing
the proposed exemption would be paid
by either taxpayers or ‘‘The IRA owner
who gets clobbered with higher and
higher fees to pay the costs.’’
In response to this comment, the
applicant maintains that the proposed
exemption is not a modification to
existing law, but rather an exception to
certain provisions under existing law
pursuant to a procedure contemplated
by the statute. The applicant represents
that PNC’s goal in requesting the relief
E:\FR\FM\01SEN2.SGM
01SEN2
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES2
45288
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2009 / Notices
is not to favor BlackRock, but rather to
preserve existing investments in plan
and IRA accounts that may no longer be
permitted after the changes in the
ownership of BlackRock, and also to
ensure that BlackRock Funds continue
to be available as investments to
accounts managed by PNC to the extent
that investment in those funds is
prudent and meets an account’s
investment needs. Investments in
BlackRock Funds under the exemption
are not expected to increase IRA fees, as
the structure for complying with the
exemption is already in place.
Furthermore, the applicant points out
that to the extent the commentator
objects to her IRA investing in
BlackRock Funds, she can exercise her
right under the proposed exemption to
withhold her authorization of such
investments or, if BlackRock Fund
investments have previously been
authorized, to terminate that
authorization.
Therefore, the applicant concludes
that the commentator’s comment does
not provide any reason why the
exemption should not be granted.
The Department concurs.
2. One commentator, in an e-mail,
dated April 28, 2009, argued that
granting the exemption would be wrong
because there is an inherent conflict of
interest, giving the following reasons:
(a) No amount of explanation,
adjustment/manipulation of fees or
documentation of facts can cancel out
that conflict.
(b) The very fact that PNC is
requesting the exemption shows it is in
their interest.
(c) A massive mailing and
disgorgement of data does not show this
is good for investors. The commentator
further argues that it must clearly be
convenient and remunerative for PNC to
utilize an ‘‘in-house organization’’ to
control, invest and report on client
money, but there is no claim or promise
that BlackRock is or would be the best
option. The commentator says that
because of the bank being placed in
conflict with its clients, a PNC manager,
when faced with a choice, will opt for
BlackRock. Therefore, the commentator
concludes, the proposal should be
withdrawn.
In response, the applicant represents
that the conditions of the exemption are
designed to address the potential
conflict, namely by requiring fee offsets
or credits, disclosures and independent
approvals. In the opinion of the
applicant, the potential conflict in this
case is attenuated in that PNC is a
minority owner in BlackRock as a result
of the transaction with Merrill Lynch,
currently holding only a 33% interest
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:37 Aug 31, 2009
Jkt 217001
(down slightly from the 34% interest
described in the application). Any
decisions by PNC portfolio managers to
invest in the BlackRock Funds for plans
are subject to fiduciary obligations
imposed by section 404(a)(1) of the Act,
including the duty to act solely in the
interest of the plan and its participants
and beneficiaries and to act in a prudent
manner, and any investment decisions
for IRA accounts are subject to similar
obligations under State law. PNC’s
objective is to have BlackRock Funds
available in the event it would be
prudent to use them, and PNC portfolio
managers commonly use other fund
families as well.
Further, the applicant points out that
if the commentator is concerned about
these conflicts, he has the right under
the proposed exemption to either
withhold his authorization of PNC
investing his account in BlackRock
Funds or, if he has previously given his
authorization, he can exercise his right
to terminate that authorization at any
time without penalty.
Therefore, the applicant maintains
that this comment by the commentator
has not provided any reason why the
proposed exemption should not be
granted.
The Department concurs.
3. One commentator indicated her
opposition to any exemption that would
authorize additional fees to be charged
by PNC Bank. The commentator did not
give any further reason.
In response, the applicant notes that
the proposed exemption contains a
series of protections to deal with the
potential for PNC receiving additional
fees, including fee offsets and credits.
Furthermore, if the commentator
continues to be concerned about PNC
Bank charging additional fees, she
would have the right under the
exemption to withhold or terminate
authorization of the investment of her
account in BlackRock Funds. Therefore,
the applicant maintains that the
commentator has not provided any
reason why the proposed exemption
should not be granted.
The Department concurs.
In addition to the comments
described above, the Department
received, on May 8, 2009, an e-mail
from the applicant, requesting certain
changes to the operating language of the
exemption. The applicant’s comment
was also posted on the Web site
regulation.gov. The applicant’s
comments are summarized in the
numbered paragraphs, below.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
1. Fee Disclosure and Differential
Language—Section II(h)(2)
Section II(h)(2)(iv), as set forth in the
Notice on page 13243, column 2, line
67, requires disclosure of, ‘‘All other
fees to be charged to or paid by a Client
Plan and by such Fund.’’ The applicant
believes that disclosure of all Fund fees
are within the scope of the exemption,
but is not clear that all Client Plan fees
should be subject to disclosure. The
applicant believes that the focus on the
fees charged to or paid by the Client
Plan should only be those fees that are
related to the investment in a Fund by
a Client Plan. Accordingly, the
applicant requests that the language of
Section II(h)(2)(iv) should be amended
to read as follows: ‘‘All other fees to be
charged to or paid by a Client Plan in
connection with its investment in such
Fund and by such Fund.’’
In addition, the applicant has
requested an amendment to Section
II(h)(2), as set forth in the Notice on
page 13243, column 2, lines 54–57.
Section II(h)(2) requires: ‘‘A statement
describing the fees, including the nature
and extent of any differential between
the rates of such fees’’ for: (i) Any
investment advisory or similar services
to be paid by a Fund to BlackRock, (ii)
any Secondary Services to be paid by a
Fund to PNC, (iii) any Mutual Fund
Administration Services to be paid by
BlackRock to PNC, and (iv) all other fees
to be charges to or paid by a Client Plan
and by a Fund. The applicant believes
that the disclosure of the nature and
extent of any differential between the
rates of such fees should be limited to
the fees paid for investment advisory or
similar services. In this regard, the
applicant request that the phrase,
‘‘including the nature and extent of any
differential between the rates of such
fees,’’ be deleted from Section II(h)(2)
and moved to the end of Section
II(h)(2)(i) following the word,
‘‘BlackRock.’’ Accordingly, the
applicant has requested that Section
II(h)(2)(i) be amended to read as follows:
‘‘Any investment advisory or similar
services to be paid by such Fund to
BlackRock, including the nature and
extent of any differential between the
rates of such fees.’’
The limitations suggested by the
applicant do not conform to the
requirements as set forth in Prohibited
Transaction Exemption 77–4 (PTE 77–
4).4 In this regard, PTE 77–4 deals with
the receipt of fees by a fiduciary of a
plan in connection with the purchase or
sale by a plan of shares of a registered,
open-end investment company when
4 42
E:\FR\FM\01SEN2.SGM
FR 18732, April 8, 1977.
01SEN2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2009 / Notices
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES2
such fiduciary or an affiliate is also the
investment adviser for such investment
company. Section II(d) of PTE 77–4
requires that a second fiduciary with
respect to such plan, who is
independent of and unrelated to the
fiduciary/investment adviser or any
affiliate thereof, receive full and
detailed written disclosure of the
investment advisory and other fees
charged to or paid by such plan and by
such investment company, including
the nature and extent of any differential
between the rates of such fees.
Accordingly, the Department does not
concur with the applicant’s request to
alter the language of Section II(h)(2) and
has not amended Section II(h)(2) in the
final exemption. Nor does the
Department concur with the applicant’s
request to alter the language of Section
II(h)(2)(iv) and has not amended Section
II(h)(2)(iv) in the final exemption.
2. Reference to Part 4 of Title I of the
Act—Section II(i)
Section II(i), as set forth in the Notice,
requires that on the basis of certain
disclosure, a Second Fiduciary, acting
on behalf of the Client Plan, authorizes
in writing: (1) The investment of the
assets of a Client Plan in shares of a
particular Fund and (2) the receipt of
fees by PNC and by BlackRock in
connection with services provided by
PNC and by BlackRock to such Fund.
The last sentence in Section II(i), as set
forth in the Notice on page 13243,
column 3, lines 25–29, requires that
‘‘Such authorization by a Second
Fiduciary must be consistent with the
responsibilities, obligations, and duties
imposed on fiduciaries by Part 4 of Title
I of the Act.’’ The applicant maintains
that ‘‘whether the Second Fiduciary
violates its fiduciary duties in providing
the authorization is outside the control
of PNC and should not affect whether
PNC has coverage under the
exemption.’’ Further, the applicant
notes that this language was not
included in prior individual exemption
providing analogous relief. Therefore,
the applicants request that the sentence
in Section II(i) referring to the Second
Fiduciary’s responsibilities under Part 4
of Title I of the Act should be deleted
from the final exemption.
The Department does not concur with
the applicant’s request and has not
deleted the last sentence from Section
II(i) in the final exemption. In this
regard, PTE 77–4 contains language
similar to that set forth Section II(i) of
the Notice. In this regard, Section II(e)
of PTE 77–4, states that ‘‘On the basis
of the prospectus and disclosure
referred to in paragraph (d), the second
fiduciary referred to in paragraph (d)
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:37 Aug 31, 2009
Jkt 217001
approves such purchase and sales
consistent with the responsibilities
obligations, and duties imposed on
fiduciaries by Part 4 of Title I of the
Act.’’
3. Statement of Additional Information
Disclosure—Section II(m)(2)
Section II(m)(2), as set forth in the
Notice on page 13244, column 2, lines
49–52, requires on an annual basis that
PNC, serving as fiduciary to a Client
Plan, provide the Second Fiduciary of
such Client Plan with certain
disclosures. Such disclosures should
include a copy of a Statement of
Additional Information for a Fund,
upon request by the Second Fiduciary.
Further, such Statement of Additional
Information should contain a
description of all fees paid to PNC by a
Fund and by BlackRock for services
provided by PNC to such Fund. The
applicant notes that while Statements of
Additional Information for Funds do, in
fact, describe the Mutual Fund
Administration Services fees, such
document does not specify the rate of
such fees. The applicant argues that
such disclosure should be sufficient
because the rate of such fees would have
been described in the initial disclosure
to the Client Plan and cannot be
changed without prior notice.
The Department concurs with the
applicant’s comment.
4. Independent Audit Disclosure—
Section II(m)(3)
Section II(m)(3), as set forth in the
Notice on page 13244, column 2, lines
56–59, requires that PNC provide the
Second Fiduciary of a Client Plan with
‘‘a copy of the annual financial
disclosure report which includes
information about Fund portfolios, as
well as the audit findings of the
independent Auditor, within sixty (60)
days of the preparation of such report.’’
The audit findings referred to in Section
II(m)(3) are those required under
Section II(a)(3) of the exemption in
connection with the audit of the Credit
Fee Method. The applicant suggests that
the requirement to disclose a copy of the
audit finding be deleted from Section
II(m)(3) and be made a separate
requirement, in a new Section II(m)(5)
in the final exemption. Accordingly, the
applicant requests that the requirement
in Section II(m)(5) apply only to those
Client Plans using the Credit Fee
Method, described in Section II(a)(3) of
the final exemption.
The Department concurs with the
applicant’s request and has amended
Section II(m)(3) to delete the phrase, ‘‘as
well as the audit findings of the
independent Auditor.’’ Further, the
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
45289
Department has included in the final
exemption a new Section II(m)(5) which
reads, as follows:
A copy of the audit findings prepared by
the independent Auditor, as required by
Section II(a)(3), is provided by PNC at least
annually within sixty (60) days of the
completion of the report of such audit
findings, to the Second Fiduciary of those
Client Plans using the Credit Fee Method, as
described in Section II(a)(3).
5. Change in Fee Method—Section
IV(h)(3)(iii)
Section IV(h), as set forth in the
Notice on page 13245, column 1, lines
33–68, and column 2, lines 1–4, defines
the term, ‘‘Second Fiduciary,’’ as a
fiduciary of a Client Plan who is
independent of and unrelated to PNC
and BlackRock. Section IV(h)(2)
provides that a Second Fiduciary will
not be deemed to be independent if
such fiduciary, or any officer, director,
partner, employee, or relative of the
fiduciary is an officer, director, partner,
or employee of PNC or of BlackRock (or
is a relative of such person). However,
Section IV(h)(3) provides an exception
to the requirement, set forth in Section
IV(2). In this regard, a director of a
Second Fiduciary of a Client Plan who
is also an officer, director, partner, or
employee of PNC or of BlackRock (or a
relative of such persons) is permitted to
abstain from: (1) The selection of the
Client Plan’s investment adviser; (2) the
approval of any purchase or sale
between a Client Plan and a Fund; and
(3) ‘‘the approval of any change in fees,
as described, above, in Section II (k) or
(l), charged to or paid by such Client
Plan in connection with any of the
transactions described in Section I
above.’’
The applicant requests that the
language of Section IV(h)(3)(iii), as set
forth in the Notice on page 13245,
column 1, lines 67–68, be revised to
insert the phrase, ‘‘or fee method,’’ after
the phrase, ‘‘any change in fees,’’ in
order to be consistent with other
provisions in the exemption where
references to changes of fees also apply
to changes in fee methods.
The Department concurs with the
applicant’s suggestions, and
accordingly, has amended the language
of Section IV(h)(3)(iii) in the final
exemption.
After giving full consideration to the
entire record, including the written
comment from the applicant and from
the commentators, the Department has
decided to grant the exemption, as
described and amended, above. In this
regard, the comment letters from the
applicant and from the commentators
which were submitted to the
E:\FR\FM\01SEN2.SGM
01SEN2
45290
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2009 / Notices
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 Benefits 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
March 26, 2009, at 74 FR 13242.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Angelena Le Blanc of the Department,
telephone (202) 693–8540 (This is not a
toll-free number).
Verizon Investment Management
Corporation, Located in Basking
Ridge, New Jersey.
[Prohibited Transaction Exemption
2009–23, Exemption Application No.
D–11447.]
Exemption
Section I—Transaction(s)
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES2
The restrictions of section
406(a)(1)(A) through (D) of the Act and
the taxes imposed by section 4975(a)
and (b) of the Code, by reason of section
4975(c)(1)(A) through (D) of the Code,5
shall not apply, effective for the period
January 1, through December 31, 2001,
and for the period January 1, through
December 31, 2003, to any transaction,
as described in Part I of Prohibited
Transaction Exemption 96–23 (PTE 96–
23),6 between a Verizon Plan or Verizon
Plans, as defined, below, in section
III(h) of this exemption, and a party in
interest, as defined, below, in section
III(c) of this exemption, with respect to
5 The Department, herein, is not providing any
retroactive or prospective relief for a transaction
between a plan (a Verizon Plan or Verizon Plans),
as defined, below, in section III(h) of this
exemption, and a party in interest with respect to
such Verizon Plan, if such transaction was entered
into or is entered into in years other than 2001 and
2003, nor is the Department, herein, providing any
retroactive or prospective relief for any continuing
transaction, or for any subsequent renewal or
modification of a transaction that required or
requires the consent of Verizon Investment
Management Corporation (VIMCO), if entry into
such continuing transaction, or entry into such
renewal or modification occurred or occurs in years
other than 2001 and 2003. In order to obtain relief
for the entry into a transaction, or the entry into a
continuing transaction or a subsequent renewal or
modification of a transaction, as the case may be,
VIMCO must have satisfied or must satisfy at the
time of each such transaction, the terms and
conditions as set forth in PTE 96–23 or, if
applicable, the terms and conditions of PTE 96–23
as hereafter amended.
6 61 FR 15975, April 10, 1996.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:37 Aug 31, 2009
Jkt 217001
such Verizon Plan; provided that:
during the period January 1, through
December 31, 2001, and during the
period January 1, through December 31,
2003, VIMCO satisfied the definition of
an in-house asset manager (INHAM), as
defined, below, in section III(a) of this
exemption, and had discretionary
authority or control with respect to the
assets of such Verizon Plan involved in
each such transaction; and the
conditions, as set forth, below, in
section I(a) through (b) and section II of
this exemption were satisfied and, the
conditions, as set forth, below, in
section I(c) and section II of this
exemption are satisfied;
(a) All the requirements of PTE 96–23
were satisfied for the period January 1,
through December 31, 2001, and the
period January 1, through December 31,
2003, except with respect to the annual
audit requirement, as set forth in section
I(h) of PTE 96–23;
(b) An exemption audit, as defined, in
Part IV(f) of PTE 96–23, for the period
January 1, through December 31, 2001,
must have been completed by no later
than December 31, 2003, and an
exemption audit for the period January
1, through December 31, 2003, must
have been completed by no later than
December 31, 2005; and
(c) If VIMCO, satisfies the definition
of an INHAM, as defined, below, in
section III(a) of this exemption, at any
time during the period beginning on the
date of the publication in the Federal
Register of the final exemption for
application D–11447 and ending on the
effective date of a final amendment to
PTE 96–23, then an independent
auditor, who has appropriate technical
training or experience and proficiency
with the fiduciary responsibility
provisions of the Act and who so
represents in writing, must conduct an
exemption audit, as defined, below, in
section III(f) of this exemption, on an
annual basis. Following completion of
such exemption audit, the auditor shall
issue a written report to the Verizon
Plan or Verizon Plans that engage in
transactions, described in Part I of PTE
96–23, presenting such auditor’s
specific findings regarding the level of
compliance: (1) with the policies and
procedures adopted by VIMCO in
accordance with Part I(g) of PTE 96–23;
and (2) with the objective requirements
of PTE 96–23. The written report shall
also contain the auditor’s overall
opinion regarding whether VIMCO’s
program complied: (1) With the policies
and procedures adopted by VIMCO; and
(2) with the objective requirements of
PTE 96–23. The exemption audit and
the written report must be completed
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
within six (6) months following the end
of the year to which the audit relates.
Section II—General Conditions
(a) VIMCO must maintain or cause to
be maintained, for a period of six (6)
years, such records as are necessary to
enable the persons described, below, in
section II(b) of this exemption, to
determine whether the conditions of
this exemption have been met, except
that:
(1) A prohibited transaction shall not
be considered to have occurred solely
because, due to circumstances beyond
the control of VIMCO, such records are
lost or destroyed prior to the end of the
six-year period, and
(2) No party in interest with respect
to a Verizon Plan which engages in a
transaction, described in section I of this
exemption, other than VIMCO, shall be
subject to a civil penalty under section
502(i) of the Act or to the taxes imposed
by section 4975(a) and (b) of the Code,
if such records are not maintained, or
are not available for examination, as
required, below, by section II(b) of this
exemption.
(b)(1) Except as provided, below, in
section II(b)(2) of this exemption, and
notwithstanding any provisions of
section 504(a)(2) of the Act, the records
referred to, above, in section II(a) of this
exemption, are unconditionally
available at their customary location for
examination during normal business
hours by—
(i) Any duly authorized employee or
representative of the Department of
Labor (the Department) or the Internal
Revenue Service,
(ii) Any fiduciary of a Verizon Plan
that engages in a transaction, described
in Part I of PTE 96–23, or any duly
authorized employee or representative
of such fiduciary, and
(iii) Any participant or beneficiary of
a Verizon Plan or duly authorized
employee or representative of such
participant or beneficiary.
(2) None of the persons described,
above, in section II(b)(1)(ii) and (iii) of
this exemption, shall be authorized to
examine trade secrets of VIMCO, or
commercial or financial information
which is privileged or confidential.
Section III—Definitions
For the purposes of this exemption:
(a) The term, ‘‘in-house asset
manager’’ or ‘‘INHAM,’’ means VIMCO,
provided that VIMCO is:
(1) Either (A) a direct or indirect
wholly-owned subsidiary of Verizon
Communications, Inc. (Verizon), or a
direct or indirect wholly-owned
subsidiary of a parent organization of
Verizon, or (B) a membership non-profit
E:\FR\FM\01SEN2.SGM
01SEN2
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2009 / Notices
corporation a majority of whose
members are officers or directors of
Verizon or a parent organization; and
(2) An investment adviser registered
under the Investment Advisers Act of
1940 that, as of the last day of its most
recent fiscal year, has under its
management and control total assets
attributable to Verizon Plans maintained
by affiliates of VIMCO, as defined,
below, in section III(b) of this
exemption, in excess of $50 million; and
provided that if VIMCO had no prior
fiscal year as a separate legal entity as
a result of its constituting a division or
group within Verizon’s organizational
structure, then this requirement is
deemed to have been met as of the date
during VIMCO’s initial fiscal year as a
separate legal entity that responsibility
for the management of such assets in
excess of $50 million was transferred to
it from Verizon.
In addition, Verizon Plans maintained
by affiliates of VIMCO and/or by
VIMCO, have aggregate assets of at least
$250 million, calculated as of the last
day of each such Verizon Plan’s
reporting year.
(b) For purposes of sections III(a) and
III(h) of this exemption, an ‘‘affiliate’’ of
VIMCO means a member of either:
(1) a controlled group of corporations,
as defined in section 414(b) of the Code,
of which VIMCO is a member, or
(2) A group of trades or businesses
under common control, as defined in
section 414(c) of the Code, of which
VIMCO is a member; provided that ‘‘50
percent’’ shall be substituted for ‘‘80
percent’’ wherever ‘‘80 percent’’ appears
in section 414(b) or 414(c) of the Code
or the rules thereunder.
(c) The term, ‘‘party in interest,’’
means a person described in section
3(14) of the Act and includes a
‘‘disqualified person,’’ as defined in
section 4975(e)(2) of the Code.
(d) The term, ‘‘control,’’ means the
power to exercise a controlling
influence over the management or
policies of a person other than an
individual.
(e) For purposes of this exemption,
the time as of which any transaction
occurred is the date upon which the
transaction was entered into. In
addition, the time as of which any
renewal or modification of any
transaction occurred is the date upon
which the renewal or the modification
of the transaction was entered into. For
any transaction that required the
consent of VIMCO that was entered into,
renewed, or modified, as the case may
be, during the period from January 1,
through December 31, 2001, or during
the period from January 1, through
December 31, 2003, the requirements of
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:37 Aug 31, 2009
Jkt 217001
this exemption must have been satisfied
at the time such transaction was entered
into, or was renewed, or was modified,
as the case may be. In addition, in the
case of a transaction that is continuing,
the transaction is deemed to occur until
it is terminated.
Nothing in this paragraph shall be
construed as exempting a transaction
entered into by a Verizon Plan which
becomes a transaction described in
section 406 of the Act or section 4975
of the Code, while the transaction is
continuing, unless the conditions of
PTE 96–23 were met at the time the
transaction was entered into, or at the
time the transaction would have become
prohibited but for PTE 96–23. In
determining compliance with the
conditions of PTE 96–23 at the time that
the transaction was entered into for
purposes of the preceding sentence, Part
I(e) of PTE 96–23, will be deemed
satisfied if the transaction was entered
into between a Verizon Plan and a
person who was not then a party in
interest.
(f) Exemption Audit. An ‘‘exemption
audit’’ of a Verizon Plan must consist of
the following:
(1) A review by an independent
auditor of the written policies and
procedures adopted by VIMCO,
pursuant to Part I(g) of PTE 96–23, for
consistency with each of the objective
requirements of PTE 96–23, as described
below, in section III(g) of this
exemption.
(2) A test of a sample of VIMCO’s
transactions during the audit period that
is sufficient in size and nature to afford
the auditor a reasonable basis: (A) to
make specific findings regarding
whether VIMCO is in compliance with
(i) the written policies and procedures
adopted by VIMCO, pursuant to Part I(g)
of PTE 96–23 and (ii) the objective
requirements of PTE 96–23, as described
below, in section III(g) of this exemption
and (B) to render an overall opinion
regarding the level of compliance of
VIMCO’s program with section
III(f)(2)(A)(i) and (ii) of this exemption.
(3) A determination as to whether
VIMCO satisfied the definition of an
INHAM, as defined, above, in section
III(a), of this exemption; and
(4) Issuance of a written report
describing the steps performed by the
auditor during the course of its review
and the auditor’s findings.
(g) For purposes of section III(f),
above, of this exemption, the written
policies and procedures must describe
the following objective requirements of
the exemption and the steps adopted by
VIMCO to assure compliance with each
of these requirements:
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
45291
(1) The definition of an INHAM in
section III(a) of this exemption.
(2) The requirements of Part I and Part
I(a) of PTE 96–23 regarding the
discretionary authority or control of
VIMCO with respect to the assets of a
Verizon Plan involved in the
transaction, in negotiating the terms of
the transaction, and with regard to the
decision on behalf of such Verizon Plan
to enter into the transaction.
(3) That any procedure for approval or
veto of the transaction meets the
requirements of Part I(a) of PTE 96–23.
(4) For a transaction described in Part
I of PTE 96–23:
(A) That the transaction is not entered
into with any person who is excluded
from relief under Part I(e)(1), Part I(e)(2)
of PTE 96–23, to the extent such person
has discretionary authority or control
over the plan assets involved in the
transaction, or Part I(f) of PTE 96–23,
and
(B) That the transaction is not
described in any of the class exemptions
listed in Part I(b) of PTE 96–23.
(h) The term, ‘‘Verizon Plan(s),’’
means a plan or plans maintained by
VIMCO or an affiliate of VIMCO.
Effective Date: This exemption is
effective for the period from January 1,
through December 31, 2001, and for the
period from January 1, through
December 31, 2003.
Written Comments
In the Notice of Proposed Exemption
(the Notice), the Department invited all
interested persons to submit written
comments and requests for a hearing on
the proposed exemption within fortyfive (45) days of the date of the
publication of the Notice in the Federal
Register on February 25, 2009. All
comments and requests for a hearing
were due by April 13, 2009.
During the comment period, the
Department received no requests for a
hearing. However, the Department
received, on April 9, 2009, a facsimile
from the applicant, informing the
Department of a correction to the
language of the exemption, as proposed
in the Notice. In this regard, the
references to ‘‘Verizon Investment
Management Company,’’ as set forth in
the heading of the Notice on page 8571,
in the heading of the Proposed
Exemption on page 8572, and in the
language in footnote no. 2 on page 8572,
should be revised to read ‘‘Verizon
Investment Management Corporation.’’
The Department acknowledges the
correction, as requested by the
applicant, and in the final exemption
has amended the references to Verizon
Investment Management Corporation.
E:\FR\FM\01SEN2.SGM
01SEN2
45292
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2009 / Notices
In addition to the correction described
above, the applicant requested: (1) An
amendment to the exemption audit
conditions of section I(c); (2) a change
of the effective date of section I(c); and
(3) a change in the definition of an
INHAM, in section III(a), as set forth in
the Notice. The applicant’s comments
are sumarized in the paragraphs, below.
Timing of Exemption Audit
Section I(c) of the Notice, as set forth
on page 8572, column 3, in lines 56–59,
requires that the exemption audit and
the written audit report must be
completed within six (6) months
following the end of the year to which
such audit relates.
In its comment, VIMCO states that it
understands the appropriateness of
imposing a timing condition on future
audits. However, VIMCO maintains that
six (6) months after the end of the plan
year is a relatively short period
considering the volume of corporate and
employee benefit activities that VIMCO
engages in at that time of year.
Accordingly, VIMCO requests that this
deadline should be one (1) year
following the end of the year to which
such audit relates, rather than six (6)
months. In this regard, VIMCO
maintains that a one-year deadline
would be consistent with the
requirement that an exemption audit be
performed annually and would avoid
the unintended loss of the exemption
due to inadvertent delays in the
exemption audit process.
The Department does not concur with
the applicant’s request and has not
amended the six (6) month audit
requirement, set forth in section I(c) of
this exemption. In this regard, it is the
Department’s view that the six (6)
month audit requirement is reasonable.
The Department believes that extending
the audit requirement beyond the six (6)
month requirement would result in
audit reports which would not be
timely.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES2
Exemption Audit Conditions
Section I(c), as set forth on page 8572,
column 3, in lines 50–55, also requires
that that the written report of the
exemption audit must contain:
The auditor’s overall opinion regarding
whether VIMCO’s program complied: (1)
With the policies and procedures adopted by
VIMCO; and (2) with the objective
requirements of PTE 96–23.
The applicant believes that the
requirement imposed in section I(c) of
the Notice goes beyond the frameowrk
envisioned by PTE 96–23. In this regard,
VIMCO notes that in the preamble to
PTE 96–23, the auditor was not required
to reach any opinion regarding
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:37 Aug 31, 2009
Jkt 217001
compliance. The auditor was simply to
make the findings based on its review.
In the opinion of the applicant, the
requirement set forth in section I(c) of
the Notice, would cause additional
review and expense. In addition, the
applicant points out that this
requirement may trigger issues for
accounting firms and law firms under
their respective professional standards.
The applicant suggests that, if the
Department intends to impose this
requirement generally on INHAMs in
the course of amending PTE 96–23, then
the Department should do so in that
proceeding, at which time this
requirement can be subject to a broader
range of comments that would better
define the issues.
The Department does not concur with
the applicant’s request and has not
amended this requirement, as set forth
in section I(c) of this exemption. It is the
Department’s view that it is not
unreasonable to require an auditor to
issue a written report which presents
such auditor’s specific findings
regarding the level of compliance with
the policies and procedures adopted by
VIMCO, and with the objective
requirements of PTE 96–23. Further, the
Department believes that it is reasonable
to require the auditor’s written report to
contain such auditor’s overall opinion
regarding whether VIMCO’s program
complied with the policies and
procedures adopted by VIMCO, and
with the objective requirements of PTE
96–23, based on a representative sample
of the transactions.
Effective Date for Condition I(c) of the
Exemption
The effective date for section I(c), as
set forth in the Notice at page 8572,
column 3, in lines 25–30, is stated as
follows:
(c) For the period beginning on the date of
the publication in the Federal Register of the
final exemption for application D–11447 and
ending on the effective date of the final
amendment to PTE 96–23, * * *.
The applicant points out that the final
exemption will not necessarily be
published at the beginning or end of a
calendar year or at the beginning or end
of an audit period. Accordingly, the
applicant is concerned that if an
exemption audit covers an annual
period which straddles the effective
date, as set forth in section I(c) of the
exemption, the exemption audit could
be subject to two different sets of
standards. To avoid this problem, the
applicant requests that the effective date
for section I(c) of the exemption should
be changed to the beginning of the first
fiscal year of VIMCO after publication of
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
the final exemption in the Federal
Register.
The Department does not concur with
the applicant’s request and has not
amended the effective date, as set forth
in section I(c) of this exemption. In this
regard, the Department notes that
satisfaction of the exemption audit
requirement, as set forth in this
exemption, will also satisfy the
exemption audit requirements, as set
forth in PTE 96–23 if the audit period
straddles both this final exemption and
PTE 96–23. Accordingly, any exemption
audit covering an annual period that
straddles the effective date, as set forth
in section I(c) of this exempiton, will
not be subject to two different sets of
standards.
Definition of an INHAM
Section III(a) of the exemption, as set
forth in the Notice on page 8573,
column 1, in lines 50–68, and
continuing on page 8573, column 2, in
lines 1–21, defines the term, ‘‘in-house
asset manager’’ or ‘‘INHAM.’’ The
definition of an ‘‘in-house asset
manager’’ or ‘‘INHAM,’’ as set forth in
the Notice, requires that an INHAM
must satisfy certain criteria on January
1, 2001, and at all times thereafter.
Specifically, section III(a) of the
exemption reads as follows:
(a) The term ‘‘in-house asset manager’’ or
‘‘INHAM,’’ means VIMCO, provided that
VIMCO on January 1, 2001, was and
continued thereafter to be:
(1) Either (A) a direct or indirect whollyowned subsidiary of Verizon, or a direct or
indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of a parent
organization of Verizon, or (B) a membership
non-profit corporation a majority of whose
members are officers or directors of such an
employer or parent organization; and
(2) An investment adviser registered under
the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 that, as
of the last day of its most recent fiscal year,
had and continued thereafter to have under
its management and control total assets
attributable to Verizon Plans maintained by
affiliates of VIMCO, as defined, below, in
section III(b) of this exemption, in excess of
$50 million; and provided that if VIMCO had
no prior fiscal year as a separate legal entity
as a result of its constituting a division or
group within Verizon’s organizational
structure, then this requirement is deemed to
have been met as of the date during VIMCO’s
initial fiscal year as a separate legal entity
that responsibility for the management of
such assets in excess of $50 million was
transferred to it from Verizon.
In addition, Verizon Plans maintained by
affiliates of VIMCO and/or by VIMCO, had,
as of January 1, 2001, and continued
thereafter to have, aggregate assets of at least
$250 million, calculated as of the last day of
each such Verizon Plan’s reporting year.
The applicant is concerned that the
definition of an INHAM, as set forth in
the proposed exemption, would require
E:\FR\FM\01SEN2.SGM
01SEN2
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2009 / Notices
that VIMCO continue to meet certain
criteria at all times after January 1, 2001.
According to the applicant, ‘‘this raises
the question of whether VIMCO would
lose all relief under the exemption in
the event that it ceases at some point in
the future to meet those criteria.’’
Accordingly, the applicant requests that
‘‘to avoid this problem, the exemption
should provide that in the event VIMCO
ceases to meet the terms of the
definition, it ceases to be an INHAM
only prospectively, and therefore does
not lose relief for prior transactions.’’
The Department concurs with the
applicant’s request. In this regard, the
Department notes that the retroactive
exemptive relief effective for the period
from January 1, through December 31,
2001, and from January 1, through
December 31, 2003, will continue to
apply, even if in the future, VIMCO
ceases to satisfy the definition of an
INHAM, as set forth in section III(a) of
this exemption. However, if VIMCO,
satisfies the definition of an INHAM, as
defined, above, in section III(a) of this
exemption, at any time during the
period, beginning on the date of the
publication in the Federal Register of
the final exemption for application D–
11447 and ending on the effective date
of a final amendment to PTE 96–23,
then retroactive exemptive relief
effective for the period from January 1,
through December 31, 2001, and from
January 1, through December 31, 2003,
will not continue to apply, unless the
conditions, as set forth, in section I(a)
through (b) and section II of this
exemption, were satisfied during the
period January 1, through December 31,
2001, and during the period January 1,
through December 31, 2003, and the
conditions, as set in section I(c) and
section II of this exemption, are
satisfied, during the period, beginning
on the date of the publication in the
Federal Register of the final exemption
for application D–11447 and ending on
the effective date of a final amendment
to PTE 96–23. Accordingly, the
Department has amended this
exemption, as follows:
(1) In section III(a) to delete the
phrase, ‘‘on January 1, 2001, was and
continued thereafter to be,’’ as set forth
in the Notice on page 8573, column 1,
in lines 52–53, and to insert the word,
‘‘is,’’ after the phrase, ‘‘provided that
VIMCO,’’
(2) In section III(a)(2) to delete the
phrase, ‘‘had and continued thereafter to
have,’’ as set forth in the Notice on page
8573, column 1, in lines 64–66, and to
add the word, ‘‘has,’’ after the word,
‘‘year,’’
(3) In the last paragraph of section
III(a)(2), as set forth in the Notice on
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:37 Aug 31, 2009
Jkt 217001
page 8573, column 2, in lines 17–18, to
delete the phrase, ‘‘had, as of January 1,
2001, and continued thereafter to have,’’
and to add the word, ‘‘have,’’ after the
word, ‘‘VIMCO,’’
(4) In section I, as set forth in the
Notice on page 8572, column 2, in line
45, to add the phrase, ‘‘during the
period January 1, through December 31,
2001, and during the period January 1,
through December 31, 2003,’’ after the
phrase, ‘‘provided that:,’’
(5) In section I, as set forth in the
Notice on page 8572, column 3, in lines
6–8, to delete the phrase, ‘‘in sections
I(a) through (c) and section II of this
proposed exemption were satisfied,’’
and to add the phrase, ‘‘in section I(a)
through (b) and section II of this
exemption were satisfied and, the
conditions, as set forth, below, in
section I(c) and section II of this
exemption are satisfied,’’ and
(6) To amend the first sentence in
section I(c), as set forth in the Notice on
page 8572, column 3, in lines 25–38 to
read as follows:
If VIMCO, satisfies the definition of
INHAM, as defined, below, in section III(a)
of this exemption, at any time during the
period beginning on the date of the
publication in the Federal Register of the
final exemption for application D–11447 and
ending on the effective date of a final
amendment to PTE 96–23, then an
independent auditor, who has appropriate
technical training or experience and
proficiency with the fiduciary responsibility
provisions of the Act and who so represents
in writing, must conduct an exemption audit,
as defined, below, in section III(f) of this
exemption, on an annual basis.
Further, the Department wishes to
make the following clarifying
amendments to this exemption:
(1) To amend the second sentence in
section I(c), as set forth in the Notice on
page 8572, column 3, in lines 42–43, to
delete the phrase, ‘‘in section I of this
proposed exemption,’’ and to substitute
instead the phrase, ‘‘in Part I of PTE 96–
23,’’
(2) To amend section II(b)(1)(ii), as set
forth in the Notice on page 8573,
column 1, in line 33, to delete the
phrase, ‘‘in section I of this exemption,’’
and add the phrase, ‘‘in Part I of PTE
96–23,’’
(3) To amend section III(a)(1), as set
forth in the Notice on page 8573,
column 1, in line 55, to delete the word,
‘‘Verizon,’’ and substitute instead, the
phrase, ‘‘Verizon Communications, Inc.
(Verizon),’’ and
(4) To amend section III(a)(1), as set
forth in the Notice on page 8573,
column 1, in lines 60–61, to delete the
phrase, ‘‘such an employer,’’ and
substutite instead, the word, ‘‘Verizon.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
45293
Request for an Extension of Time
In addition to the applicant’s
comment on the language of the final
exemption, the applicant seeks a ninety
(90) day extension of time to complete
the audit for 2008, as set forth under
section I(c) of this exemption. In this
regard, section I(c) of this exemption
requires the following, ‘‘The exemption
audit and the written report must be
completed within six (6) months
following the end of the year to which
the audit relates.’’ The applicant is
concerned that VIMCO will not be able
to meet a June 30, 2009, deadline for the
2008 audit, as required pursuant to
section I(c) of this exemption. In this
regard, it is represented that the
attorneys who have performed all of
VIMCO’s audits, pursuant to PTE 96–23,
beginning with the 2003 audit have
moved to a new law firm early in 2009.
Notwithstanding that VIMCO sent in the
audit materials for 2008, and
notwithstanding negotiations over a
period of several months, VIMCO and
the new law firm have thus far been
unable to agree upon terms of an
engagement letter. This result was not
anticipated by VIMCO or the attorneys.
It is represented that VIMCO is
confident that it will be able to complete
the audit within the requested extension
period, including hiring new auditors
who are qualified to conduct the audit
should that be necessary.
The Department concurs with the
applicant’s request and will permit
VIMCO a 90 day extension of time from
the date of the publication in the
Federal Register of the grant of this
exemption to complete the exemption
audit and the written report for 2008.
After giving full consideration to the
entire record, including the written
comment from the applicant and the
applicant’s request for an extension of
time to complete the exemption audit
and written report for 2008, the
Department has decided to grant the
exemption, as described and amended,
above. In this regard, the comment letter
and the request for an extension of time
to complete the exemption audit and
written report for 2008 which the
applicant submitted 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
Benefits Security Administration, Room
N–1513, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20210.
E:\FR\FM\01SEN2.SGM
01SEN2
45294
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2009 / Notices
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 February 25, 2009, at 74 FR 8572.
For Further Information Contact:
Angelena C. Le Blanc of the Department,
telephone (202) 693–8540 (This is not a
toll-free number).
United States Steel and Carnegie
Pension Fund (the Applicant),
Located in New York, NY.
[Prohibited Transaction Exemption
2009–24; Exemption Application No.
D–11465.]
Exemption
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES2
I. Retroactive Relief
The restrictions of section
406(a)(1)(A) through (D) and the
sanctions resulting from the application
of section 4975 of the Code by reason of
section 4975(c)(1)(A) through (D), shall
not apply, for the period beginning
February 15, 2003 through December 31,
2007, to a transaction between a party
in interest with respect to the Former
U.S. Steel Related Plans, as defined in
Section IV(e), below, and an investment
fund in which such plans have an
interest (the Investment Fund), as
defined in Section IV(l), below,
provided that United States Steel and
Carnegie Pension Fund or its successor
(collectively, UCF) has discretionary
authority or control with respect to the
plan assets involved in the transaction,
and the following conditions are
satisfied:
(a) UCF is an investment adviser
registered under the Investment
Advisers Act of 1940 that has, as of the
last day of its most recent fiscal year,
total client assets, including in-house
assets (In-house Plan Assets), as defined
in Section IV(h), below, under its
management and control in excess of
$100,000,000 and equity, as defined in
Section IV(k), below, in excess of
$750,000;
(b) At the time of the transaction, as
defined in Section IV(n), below, the
party in interest or its affiliate, as
defined in Section IV(a), below, does
not have, and during the immediately
preceding one (1) year has not
exercised, the authority to—
(1) Appoint or terminate UCF as a
manager of any of the Former U.S. Steel
Related Plans’ assets, or
(2) Negotiate the terms of the
management agreement with UCF
(including renewals or modifications
thereof) on behalf of the Former U.S.
Steel Related Plans;
(c) The transaction is not described
in—
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:37 Aug 31, 2009
Jkt 217001
(1) Prohibited Transaction Exemption
81–6 (PTE 81–6),7 relating to securities
lending arrangements (as amended,
superseded or replaced);
(2) Prohibited Transaction Exemption
83–1 (PTE 83–1),8 relating to
acquisitions by plans of interests in
mortgage pools (as amended or
superseded), or
(3) Prohibited Transaction Exemption
88–59 (PTE 88–59),9 relating to certain
mortgage financing arrangements (as
amended or superseded);
(d) The terms of the transaction are
negotiated on behalf of the Investment
Fund by, or under the authority and
general direction of UCF, and either
UCF, or (so long as UCF retains full
fiduciary responsibility with respect to
the transaction) a property manager
acting in accordance with written
guidelines established and administered
by UCF, makes the decision on behalf of
the Investment Fund to enter into the
transaction;
(e) At the time the transaction is
entered into, and at the time of any
subsequent renewal or modification
thereof that requires the consent of UCF,
the terms of the transaction are at least
as favorable to the Investment Fund as
the terms generally available in arm’slength transactions between unrelated
parties;
(f) Neither UCF nor any affiliate
thereof, as defined in Section IV(b),
below, nor any owner, direct or indirect,
of a 5 percent (5%) or more interest in
UCF is a person who, within the ten (10)
years immediately preceding the
transaction has been either convicted or
released from imprisonment, whichever
is later, as a result of:
(1) Any felony involving abuse or
misuse of such person’s employee
benefit plan position or employment, or
position or employment with a labor
organization;
(2) Any felony arising out of the
conduct of the business of a broker,
dealer, investment adviser, bank,
insurance company, or fiduciary;
(3) Income tax evasion;
(4) Any felony involving the larceny,
theft, robbery, extortion, forgery,
counterfeiting, fraudulent concealment,
embezzlement, fraudulent conversion,
or misappropriation of funds or
securities; conspiracy or attempt to
commit any such crimes or a crime in
which any of the foregoing crimes is an
element; or
7 46 FR 7527, January 23, 1981. PTE 81–6 was
amended and replaced by PTE 2006–16 (71 FR
63786, October 31, 2006). The effective date of PTE
2006–16 was January 2, 2007, and PTE 81–6 was
revoked as of that date.
8 48 FR 895, January 7, 1983.
9 53 FR 24811, June 30, 1988.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
(5) Any other crimes described in
section 411 of the Act.
For purposes of this Section I(f), a
person shall be deemed to have been
‘‘convicted’’ from the date of the
judgment of the trial court, regardless of
whether the judgment remains under
appeal;
(g) The transaction is not part of an
agreement, arrangement, or
understanding designed to benefit a
party in interest;
(h) The party in interest dealing with
the Investment Fund:
(1) Is a party in interest with respect
to the Former U.S. Steel Related Plans
(including a fiduciary) solely by reason
of providing services to the Former U.S.
Steel Related Plans, or solely by reason
of a relationship to a service provider
described in section 3(14)(F),(G),(H), or
(I) of the Act;
(2) Does not have discretionary
authority or control with respect to the
investment of plan assets involved in
the transaction and does not render
investment advice (within the meaning
of 29 CFR 2510.3–21(c)) with respect to
those assets; and
(3) Is neither UCF nor a person related
to UCF, as defined in Section IV(j),
below;
(i) UCF adopts written policies and
procedures that are designed to assure
compliance with the conditions of this
exemption;
(j) An independent auditor, who has
appropriate technical training or
experience and proficiency with the
fiduciary responsibility provisions of
the Act and who so represents in
writing, conducts an exemption audit,
as defined in Section IV(f), below, on an
annual basis. Following completion of
the exemption audit, the auditor shall
issue a written report to the Former U.S.
Steel Related Plans presenting its
specific findings regarding the level of
compliance: (1) With the policies and
procedures adopted by UCF in
accordance with Section I(i), above, of
this exemption; and (2) with the
objective requirements of this
exemption.
(k)(1) UCF or an affiliate maintains or
causes to be maintained within the
United States, for a period of six (6)
years from the date of each transaction,
the records necessary to enable the
persons described in Section I(k)(2) to
determine whether the conditions of
this exemption have been met, except
that (A) a separate prohibited
transaction will not be considered to
have occurred if, due to circumstances
beyond the control of UCF and/or its
affiliates, the records are lost or
destroyed prior to the end of the six (6)
year period, and (B) no party in interest
E:\FR\FM\01SEN2.SGM
01SEN2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2009 / Notices
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES2
or disqualified person other than UCF
shall be subject to the civil penalty that
may be assessed under section 502(i) of
the Act, or to the taxes imposed by
section 4975(a) and (b) of the Code, if
the records have not been maintained or
are not maintained, or have not been
available or are not available for
examination as required by Section
I(k)(2), below, of this exemption.
(2) Except as provided in Section
I(k)(3), below, and notwithstanding any
provisions of subsections (a)(2) and (b)
of section 504 of the Act, the records
referred to in Section I(k)(1), above, of
this exemption are unconditionally
available for examination at their
customary location during normal
business hours by:
(A) Any duly authorized employee or
representative of the Department or of
the Internal Revenue Service;
(B) Any fiduciary of any of the Former
U.S. Steel Related Plans investing in the
Investment Fund or any duly authorized
representative of such fiduciary;
(C) Any contributing employer to any
of the Former U.S. Steel Related Plans
investing in the Investment Fund or any
duly authorized employee
representative of such employer;
(D) Any participant or beneficiary of
any of the Former U.S. Steel Related
Plans investing in the Investment Fund,
or any duly authorized representative of
such participant or beneficiary; and
(E) Any employee organization whose
members are covered by such Former
U.S. Steel Related Plans;
(3) None of the persons described in
Section I(k)(2)(B) through (E), above, of
this exemption shall be authorized to
examine trade secrets of UCF or its
affiliates or commercial or financial
information which is privileged or
confidential; and
(l) With respect to the transactions
described in Section II and Section III of
this exemption, the conditions
contained in those Sections are satisfied
through the date which is five (5) years
from the date of the publication of this
final exemption in the Federal Register.
II. Interim Relief
The restrictions of section
406(a)(1)(A) through (D) and the
sanctions resulting from the application
of section 4975 of the Code by reason of
section 4975(c)(1)(A) through (D), shall
not apply, for the period beginning on
January 1, 2008 and ending on the day
preceding the first day of the first fiscal
year of UCF beginning after the date of
the publication of this final exemption
in the Federal Register, to a transaction
between a party in interest with respect
to the Former U.S. Steel Related Plans,
as defined in Section IV(e), below, and
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:37 Aug 31, 2009
Jkt 217001
the Investment Fund, as defined in
Section IV(l), below, provided that UCF
has discretionary authority or control
with respect to the plan assets involved
in the transaction, and the following
conditions are satisfied:
(a) Each of the conditions contained
in paragraphs (a) through (k) of Section
I are met; and
(b) With respect to the exemption
audit and written report by the
independent auditor described in
Section I(j), the independent auditor
must complete each such exemption
audit and must issue such written report
to the administrators, or other
appropriate fiduciary of the Former U.S.
Steel Related Plans within six (6)
months following the end of the year to
which each such exemption audit and
report relates.
III. Prospective Relief
If the exemption is granted, the
restrictions of section 406(a)(1)(A)
through (D) and the sanctions resulting
from the application of section 4975 of
the Code by reason of section
4975(c)(1)(A) through (D), shall not
apply, for the period beginning with the
first day of the first fiscal year of UCF
after the date of the publication of this
final exemption in the Federal Register,
and expiring five years from that date,
to a transaction between a party in
interest with respect to the Former U.S.
Steel Related Plans, as defined in
Section IV(e), below, and the Investment
Fund, as defined in Section IV(l), below,
provided that UCF has discretionary
authority or control with respect to the
plan assets involved in the transaction,
and the following conditions are
satisfied:
(a) UCF is an investment adviser
registered under the Investment
Advisers Act of 1940 that has, as of the
last day of its most recent fiscal year,
total client assets, including In-house
Plan Assets, under its management and
control in excess of $100,000,000 and
equity, as defined in Section IV(k),
below, in excess of $1,000,000 (as
measured yearly on UCF’s most recent
balance sheet prepared in accordance
with generally accepted accounting
principles);
(b) Each of the conditions contained
in paragraphs (c) through (i), and (k) of
Section I are met;
(c) An independent auditor, who has
appropriate technical training, or
experience and proficiency with the
fiduciary responsibility provisions of
the Act, and who so represents in
writing, conducts an exemption audit,
as defined, below, in Section IV(g) of
this exemption, on an annual basis. In
conjunction with the completion of each
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
45295
such exemption audit, the independent
auditor must issue a written report to
the Former U.S. Steel Related Plans that
engaged in such transactions, presenting
its specific findings with respect to the
audited sample regarding the level of
compliance with the policies and
procedures adopted by UCF, pursuant to
Section I(i) of this exemption, and with
the objective requirements of the
exemption. The written report also shall
contain the auditor’s overall opinion
regarding whether UCF’s program as a
whole complied with the policies and
procedures adopted by UCF and with
the objective requirements of this
exemption. The independent auditor
must complete each such exemption
audit and must issue such written report
to the administrators, or other
appropriate fiduciary of the Former U.S.
Steel Related Plans within six (6)
months following the end of the year to
which each such exemption audit and
report relates; and
(d) At the time of the transaction, as
defined in Section IV(n), below, the
party in interest or its affiliate, as
defined in Section IV(p), below, does
not have the authority to—
(1) Appoint or terminate UCF as a
manager of any of the plan assets of the
Former U.S. Steel Related Plans
involved in the transaction, or
(2) Negotiate the terms of the
management agreement with UCF
(including renewals or modifications
thereof) on behalf of the Former U.S.
Steel Related Plans with respect to the
plan assets involved in the transaction.
IV. Definitions
(a) For purposes of Section I(b) of this
exemption, an ‘‘affiliate’’ of a person
means—
(1) Any person directly or indirectly,
through one or more intermediaries,
controlling, controlled by, or under
common control with the person,
(2) Any corporation, partnership,
trust, or unincorporated enterprise of
which such person is an officer,
director, 5 percent (5%) or more partner,
or employee (but only if the employer
of such employee is the plan sponsor),
and
(3) Any director of the person or any
employee of the person who is a highly
compensated employee, as defined in
section 4975(e)(2)(H) of the Code, or
who has direct or indirect authority,
responsibility, or control regarding the
custody, management, or disposition of
plan assets.
A named fiduciary (within the
meaning of section 402(a)(2) of the Act)
of a plan, and an employer any of whose
employees are covered by the plan will
also be considered affiliates with respect
E:\FR\FM\01SEN2.SGM
01SEN2
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES2
45296
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2009 / Notices
to each other for purposes of Section
I(b), above, if such employer or an
affiliate of such employer has the
authority, alone or shared with others,
to appoint or terminate the named
fiduciary or otherwise negotiate the
terms of the named fiduciary’s
employment agreement.
(b) For purposes of Section I(f), above,
of this exemption, an ‘‘affiliate’’ of a
person means—
(1) Any person directly or indirectly
through one or more intermediaries,
controlling, controlled by, or under
common control with the person,
(2) Any director of, relative of, or
partner in, any such person,
(3) Any corporation, partnership,
trust, or unincorporated enterprise of
which such person is an officer,
director, or a 5 percent (5%) or more
partner or owner, and
(4) Any employee or officer of the
person who—
(A) Is a highly compensated employee
(as defined in section 4975(e)(2)(H) of
the Code) or officer (earning 10 percent
(10%) or more of the yearly wages of
such person) or
(B) Has direct or indirect authority,
responsibility or control regarding the
custody, management, or disposition of
plan assets.
(c) For purposes of Section IV(e) and
(h), below, of this exemption, an
‘‘affiliate’’ of UCF includes a member of
either:
(1) A controlled group of
corporations, as defined in section
414(b) of the Code, of which United
States Steel Corporation or its successor
(collectively, U.S. Steel) is a member, or
(2) A group of trades or businesses
under common control, as defined in
section 414(c) of the Code, of which
U.S. Steel is a member; provided that
‘‘50 percent’’ shall be substituted for ‘‘80
percent’’ wherever ‘‘80 percent’’ appears
in section 414(b) or 414(c) of the rules
thereunder.
(d) The term, ‘‘control’’ means the
power to exercise a controlling
influence over the management or
policies of a person other than an
individual.
(e) ‘‘Former U.S. Steel Related Plans’’
mean:
(1) Retirement Plan of Marathon Oil
Company, Marathon Petroleum LLC
Retirement Plan and the Speedway
SuperAmerica LLC Retirement Plan (the
Marathon Plans);
(2) Pension Plan of RMI Titanium
Company (RMI), Pension Plan of
Eligible Employees of RMI Titanium
Company, Pension Plan for Eligible
Salaried Employees of RMI Titanium
Company, and Tradco Pension Plan (the
RTI Plans);
VerDate Nov<24>2008
19:30 Aug 31, 2009
Jkt 217001
(3) Any plan the assets of which
include or have included assets that
were managed by UCF as an in-house
asset manager (INHAM) pursuant to
Prohibited Transaction Class Exemption
96–23 (PTE 96–23) 10 but as to which
PTE 96–23 is no longer available
because such assets are not held under
a plan maintained by an affiliate of UCF
(as defined in Section IV(c) of this
exemption); and
(4) Any plan (an Add-On Plan) that is
sponsored or becomes sponsored by an
entity that was, but has ceased to be, an
affiliate of UCF (as defined in Section
IV(c), above, of this exemption);
provided that:
(A) The assets of the Add-On Plan are
invested in a commingled fund (the
Commingled Fund), as defined in
Section IV(o) of this exemption, with
the assets of a plan or plans (the
Commingled Plans), described in
Section IV(e)(1)–(3), above; and
(B) The assets of the Add-On Plan in
the Commingled Fund do not comprise
more than 25 percent (25%) of the value
of the aggregate assets of such fund, as
measured on the day immediately
following the initial commingling of
their assets (the 25% Test).
For purposes of the 25% Test, as set
forth in Section IV(e)(4):
(i) In the event that less than all of the
assets of an Add-On Plan are invested
in a Commingled Fund on the date of
the initial transfer of such Add-On
Plan’s assets to such fund, and if such
Add-On Plan subsequently transfers to
such Commingled Fund some or all of
the assets that remain in such plan, then
for purposes of compliance with the
25% Test, the sum of the value of the
initial and each additional transfer of
assets of such Add-On Plan shall not
exceed 25 percent (25%) of the value of
the aggregate assets in such
Commingled Fund, as measured on the
day immediately following the addition
of each subsequent transfer of such
Add-On Plan’s assets to such
Commingled Fund;
(ii) Where the assets of more than one
Add-On Plan are invested in a
Commingled Fund with the assets of
plans described in Section IV(e)(1)–(3),
above, of the exemption, the 25% Test
will be satisfied, if the aggregate amount
of the assets of such Add-On Plans
invested in such Commingled Fund do
not represent more than 25 percent
(25%) of the value of all of the assets of
such Commingled Fund, as measured
on the day immediately following each
addition of Add-On Plan assets to such
Commingled Fund;
10 61
PO 00000
FR 15975, April 10, 1996.
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
(iii) If the 25% Test is satisfied at the
time of the initial and any subsequent
transfer of an Add-On Plan’s assets to a
Commingled Fund, as provided in
Section IV(e), above, this requirement
shall continue to be satisfied
notwithstanding that the assets of such
Add-On Plan in the Commingled Fund
exceed 25 percent (25%) of the value of
the aggregate assets of such fund solely
as a result of:
(AA) A distribution to a participant in
a Former U.S. Steel Related Plan;
(BB) Periodic employer or employee
contributions made in accordance with
the terms of the governing plan
documents;
(CC) The exercise of discretion by a
Former U.S. Steel Related Plan
participant to re-allocate an existing
account balance in a Commingled Fund
managed by UCF or to withdraw assets
from a Commingled Fund; or
(DD) An increase in the value of the
assets of the Add-On Plan held in such
Commingled Fund due to investment
earnings or appreciation;
(iv) If, as a result of a decision by an
employer or a sponsor of a plan
described in Section IV(e)(1)–(3) of the
exemption to withdraw some or all of
the assets of such plan from a
Commingled Fund, the 25% Test is no
longer satisfied with respect to any AddOn Plan in such Commingled Fund,
then the exemption will immediately
cease to apply to all of the Add-On
Plans invested in such Commingled
Fund; and
(v) Where the assets of a Commingled
Fund include assets of plans other than
Former U.S. Steel Related Plans, as
defined in Section IV(e), above, of this
exemption, the 25% Test will be
determined without regard to the assets
of such other plans in such Commingled
Fund.
(f) For purposes of Sections I and II of
this exemption, ‘‘Exemption Audit’’ of
any of the Former U.S. Steel Related
Plans must consist of the following:
(1) A review by an independent
auditor of the written policies and
procedures adopted by UCF, pursuant to
Section I(i) of this exemption, for
consistency with each of the objective
requirements of this exemption, as
described, below, in Section IV(f)(5) of
this exemption; and
(2)(i) A test by an independent auditor
of a representative sample of the Plan’s
transactions in order to make findings
regarding whether UCF is in compliance
with:
(I) The written policies and
procedures adopted by UCF pursuant to
Section I(i) of this exemption, and
(II) The objective requirements
described in Section I of this exemption;
E:\FR\FM\01SEN2.SGM
01SEN2
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2009 / Notices
(3) A determination as to whether
UCF has satisfied the requirements of
Section I(a), above, of this exemption;
(4) The issuance by an independent
auditor of a written report describing
the steps performed by such
independent auditor during the course
of its review and such independent
auditor’s findings.
(5) For purposes of Section IV(f) of
this exemption, the written policies and
procedures must describe the following
objective requirements of the exemption
and the steps adopted by UCF to assure
compliance with each of these
requirements:
(A) The requirements of Section I(a),
above, of this exemption regarding
registration under the Investment
Advisers Act of 1940, total assets under
management, and equity;
(B) The requirements of Section I of
this exemption, regarding the
discretionary authority or control of
UCF with respect to the assets of the
Former U.S. Steel Related Plans
involved in the transaction, in
negotiating the terms of the transaction,
and with regard to the decision on
behalf of the Former U.S. Steel Related
Plans to enter into the transaction;
(C) The transaction is not entered into
with any person who is excluded from
relief under Section I(h)(1), above, of
this exemption, or Section I(h)(2) to the
extent that such person has
discretionary authority or control over
the plan assets involved in the
transaction, or Section I(h)(3); and
(D) The transaction is not described in
any of the class exemptions listed in
Section I(c), above, of this exemption.
(g) For purposes of Section III of this
exemption, ‘‘Exemption Audit’’ of any
of the Former U.S. Steel Related Plans
must consist of the following:
(1) A review by an independent
auditor of the written policies and
procedures adopted by UCF pursuant to
section I(i) for consistency with each of
the objective requirements of this
exemption (as described in section
IV(g)(5)(A)–(D)).
(2) A test of a sample of UCF’s
transactions during the audit period that
is sufficient in size and nature to afford
the auditor a reasonable basis: (A) To
make specific findings regarding
whether UCF is in compliance with (i)
the written policies and procedures
adopted by UCF pursuant to section I(i)
of the exemption and (ii) the objective
requirements of the exemption; and (B)
to render an overall opinion regarding
the level of compliance of UCF’s
program with this section
IV(g)(2)(A)(i)and (ii) of the exemption;
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:37 Aug 31, 2009
Jkt 217001
(3) A determination as to whether
UCF has satisfied the requirements of
Section III(a), above, of this exemption;
(4) Issuance of a written report
describing the steps performed by the
auditor during the course of its review
and the auditor’s findings; and
(5) For purposes of this section IV(g),
the written policies and procedures
must describe the following objective
requirements of the exemption and the
steps adopted by UCF to assure
compliance with each of these
requirements:
(A) The requirements of Section III(a),
above, of this exemption regarding
registration under the Investment
Advisers Act of 1940, total assets under
management, and equity;
(B) The requirements of Section I(d) of
this exemption, regarding the
discretionary authority or control of
UCF with respect to the assets of the
Former U.S. Steel Related Plans
involved in the transaction, in
negotiating the terms of the transaction,
and with regard to the decision on
behalf of the Former U.S. Steel Related
Plans to enter into the transaction;
(C) The transaction is not entered into
with any person who is excluded from
relief under Section I(h)(1), above, of
this exemption, or Section I(h)(2) to the
extent that such person has
discretionary authority or control over
the plan assets involved in the
transaction, or Section I(h)(3); and
(D) The transaction is not described in
any of the class exemptions listed in
Section I(c), above, of this exemption.
(h) ‘‘In-house Plan Assets’’ means the
assets of any plan maintained by an
affiliate of UCF, as defined in Section
IV(c), above, of this exemption and with
respect to which UCF has discretionary
authority or control.
(i) The term, ‘‘party in interest,’’
means a person described in section
3(14) of the Act and includes a
‘‘disqualified person,’’ as defined in
section 4975(e)(2) of the Code.
(j) UCF is ‘‘related’’ to a party in
interest for purposes of Section I(h)(3) of
this exemption, if the party in interest
(or a person controlling, or controlled
by, the party in interest) owns a 5
percent (5%) or more interest in U.S.
Steel, or if UCF (or a person controlling,
or controlled by UCF) owns a 5 percent
(5%) or more interest in the party in
interest. For purposes of this definition:
(1) The term, ‘‘interest,’’ means with
respect to ownership of an entity—
(A) The combined voting power of all
classes of stock entitled to vote or the
total value of the shares of all classes of
stock of the entity if the entity is a
corporation,
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
45297
(B) The capital interest or the profits
interest of the entity if the entity is a
partnership; or
(C) The beneficial interest of the
entity if the entity is a trust or
unincorporated enterprise; and
(2) A person is considered to own an
interest held in any capacity if the
person has or shares the authority—
(A) To exercise any voting rights or to
direct some other person to exercise the
voting rights relating to such interest, or
(B) To dispose or to direct the
disposition of such interest.
(k) For purposes of Section I(a) of this
exemption, the term, ‘‘equity’’ means
the equity shown on the most recent
balance sheet prepared within the two
(2) years immediately preceding a
transaction undertaken pursuant to this
exemption, in accordance with
generally accepted accounting
principles.
(l) ‘‘Investment Fund’’ includes single
customer and pooled separate accounts
maintained by an insurance company,
individual trust and common collective
or group trusts maintained by a bank,
and any other account or fund to the
extent that the disposition of its assets
(whether or not in the custody of UCF)
is subject to the discretionary authority
of UCF.
(m) The term, ‘‘relative,’’ means a
relative as that term is defined in
section 3(15) of the Act, or a brother,
sister, or a spouse of a brother or sister.
(n) The ‘‘time’’ as of which any
transaction occurs is the date upon
which the transaction is entered into. In
addition, in the case of a transaction
that is continuing, the transaction shall
be deemed to occur until it is
terminated. If any transaction is entered
into on or after the date when this
exemption is published in the Federal
Register or a renewal that requires the
consent of UCF occurs on or after such
publication date and the requirements
of this exemption are satisfied at the
time the transaction is entered into or
renewed, respectively, the requirements
will continue to be satisfied thereafter
with respect to the transaction. Nothing
in this subsection shall be construed as
exempting a transaction entered into by
an Investment Fund which becomes a
transaction described in section 406(a)
of the Act or section 4975(c)(1)(A)
through (D) of the Code while the
transaction is continuing, unless the
conditions of this exemption were met
either at the time the transaction was
entered into or at the time the
transaction would have become
prohibited but for this exemption. In
determining compliance with the
conditions of the exemption at the time
that the transaction was entered into for
E:\FR\FM\01SEN2.SGM
01SEN2
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES2
45298
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2009 / Notices
purposes of the preceding sentence,
Section I(h) of this exemption will be
deemed satisfied if the transaction was
entered into between a plan and a
person who was not then a party in
interest.
(o) ‘‘Commingled Fund’’ means a trust
fund managed by UCF containing assets
of some or all of the plans described in
Section IV(e)(1)–(3) of this exemption,
plans other than Former U.S. Steel
Related Plans, and if applicable, any
Add-On Plan, as to which the 25% Test
provided in Section IV(e)(4) of this
exemption have been satisfied; provided
that:
(1) Where UCF manages a single subfund or investment portfolio within
such trust, the sub-fund or portfolio will
be treated as a single Commingled Fund;
and
(2) Where UCF manages more than
one sub-fund or investment portfolio
within such trust, the aggregate value of
the assets of such sub-funds or
portfolios managed by UCF within such
trust will be treated as though such
aggregate assets were invested in a
single Commingled Fund.
(p) For purposes of Section III(d) of
this exemption, an ‘‘affiliate’’ of a
person means—
(1) Any person directly or indirectly,
through one or more intermediaries,
controlling, controlled by, or under
common control with the person,
(2) Any corporation, partnership,
trust, or unincorporated enterprise of
which such person is an officer,
director, ten percent (10%) or more
partner, or employee (but only if the
employer of such employee is the plan
sponsor), and
(3) Any director of the person or any
employee of the person who is a highly
compensated employee, as defined in
section 4975(e)(2)(H) of the Code, or
who has direct or indirect authority,
responsibility, or control regarding the
custody, management, or disposition of
plan assets.
A named fiduciary (within the
meaning of section 402(a)(2) of the Act)
of a plan, and an employer any of whose
employees are covered by the plan will
also be considered affiliates with respect
to each other for purposes of Section
III(d), above, if such employer or an
affiliate of such employer has the
authority, alone or shared with others,
to appoint or terminate the named
fiduciary or otherwise negotiate the
terms of the named fiduciary’s
employment agreement. Reliance. The
exemption is applicable to a particular
transaction only if the transaction
satisfies the conditions specified herein.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:37 Aug 31, 2009
Jkt 217001
Temporary Nature of Exemption
The Department has determined that
the relief provided by this exemption is
temporary in nature. The exemption, is
effective February 15, 2003, and will
expire on the day which is five (5) years
from the date of the publication of this
final exemption in the Federal Register.
Accordingly, the relief provided by this
exemption will not be available upon
the expiration of such five-year period
for any new or additional transactions,
as described herein, after such date, but
would continue to apply beyond the
expiration of such five-year period for
continuing transactions entered into
before the expiration of the five-year
period. Should the Applicant wish to
extend, beyond the expiration of such
five-year period, the relief provided by
this exemption to new or additional
transactions, the Applicant may submit
another application for exemption.
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 December 24, 2008 at 73
FR 79186.
Written Comments
The Department received one
comment with respect to the Notice,
which was filed by the Applicant. The
Applicant addressed several points in
the Notice in its comment letter. The
Applicant’s commentary, a discussion
of the Department’s views in response
thereto and the modifications to the
proposed exemption are discussed
below.
The Applicant’s first comment
focused on condition III(c) of the Notice
regarding the written report to be issued
by an independent auditor. As a
condition for prospective relief, such
report must contain the auditor’s overall
opinion regarding whether UCF’s
program, as a whole, complied with the
policies and procedures adopted by
UCF and with the objective
requirements of the exemption. The
Applicant asked the Department to
clarify or further explain this condition.
In addition, the Applicant requested
further guidance on the selection and
testing of the representative sample of
transactions.
With regard to these comments, the
Department wishes to note that because
the auditor necessarily has to use its
experience and judgment in designing
and conducting a particular audit, the
auditor must take into account the
totality of the facts and circumstances in
determining the appropriate size and
types of transactions to audit. Based
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
upon the specific sample of transactions
tested during the audit period, we
expect the auditor to render an overall
opinion regarding the level of
compliance of UCF’s program with the
objective requirements of the
exemption. The Department notes,
however, that in certain instances, an
auditor may need to construct and test
more than one sample of transactions.
For example, an auditor may initially
believe that the most appropriate way to
make the required findings is to
construct a sample that represents a
subset of the total universe of relevant
transactions engaged in by UCF under
the exemption. In testing the sample,
however, the auditor should look for,
and may find, patterns of compliance
failures that indicate that certain types
of transactions are more prone to
compliance failures than others. If such
patterns appear, the auditor may need to
test additional transactions to more
accurately assess the extent and causes
of non-compliant transactions.
Ultimately, an auditor must construct
and test a sampling of transactions that
is sufficient in size (i.e., number of
transactions) and nature (i.e., type of
transactions) to afford the auditor a
reasonable basis to make its required
determinations under the exemption.
Since the sole purpose of the audit is to
assure compliance with the exemption,
the sample should be sufficient in size
and nature for the auditor to render an
overall opinion regarding whether
UCF’s program complied with the
objective requirements of the exemption
and of its own policies and procedures.
If the sample of transactions selected for
testing by the independent auditor is
properly designed so that it contains the
appropriate weighting of representative
transactions and if no instances of noncompliance are discovered, the auditor
could then proceed to issue an overall
opinion, without performing any further
audit work, that, based upon its
sampling of transactions, UCF’s program
as a whole complied with the policies
and procedures adopted by UCF and
with the objective requirements of the
exemption. If, on the other hand, the
auditor determined that a single
transaction from the representative
sample did not conform to the
conditions for exemptive relief, the
auditor must then determine whether
the overall opinion could be issued
without expanding the scope of the
audit and conducting further testing. If
the auditor were to decide that further
auditing would not be necessary based
upon valid documented reasoning (e.g.,
the auditor’s report explains why the
auditor was able to determine why non-
E:\FR\FM\01SEN2.SGM
01SEN2
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2009 / Notices
compliance with respect to the single
transaction was an isolated violation),
the auditor could then issue the
required overall opinion. It is noted that
in such a case, the exemptive relief
would not be available for a single
transaction that did not satisfy the
conditions of the exemption, but that
exemptive relief would continue to be
available for the remaining transactions
provided that they met the conditions of
the exemption.
The Applicant also raised some
related questions that concerned item
number 14 in the Summary of Facts and
Representations of the Notice, which
enumerated several items to be included
in the auditor’s written report required
for prospective relief. The Applicant
asked the Department to explain the
difference between the content of
subparagraph (ii) of item 14 of the facts
and representations and subparagraph
(v), because both items relate to the
sample selected for review by the
auditor. The Department responds that
subparagraph (ii) focuses on the general
process and methodology used to select
the representative sample, whereas
subparagraph (v) requires an
explanation regarding the
appropriateness of the specific sample
size selected for review and taking into
account instances of non-compliance.
In addition, the Applicant commented
with respect to subparagraph (vi) of item
number 14 in the Summary of Facts and
Representations of the Notice. The
Applicant commented that the
subparagraph as written would require
the auditor to determine the adequacy of
the Plan’s written policies and
procedures, described in Section I(i),
and their administration by UCF. The
Applicant requested that this provision
be made consistent with PTE 96–23,
which requires that the auditor review
the written policies and procedures of
the INHAM not for ‘‘adequacy,’’ but
rather for ‘‘consistency’’ with the
objective requirements of the
exemption. The Department agrees with
this comment and notes that the
requirement that an auditor determine
the adequacy of UCF’s written policies
and procedures, described in Section
I(i), is deleted. However, the Department
notes that where there is a pattern of
failure to comply rather than an isolated
instance of non-compliance, the
Department expects that the auditor
would review UCF’s policies and
procedures to determine whether the
weakness of the written policies and
procedures contributed to this general
pattern of non-compliance.
The Applicant next commented with
respect to the requirement for
prospective relief that the written audit
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:37 Aug 31, 2009
Jkt 217001
reports be issued within six months
following the end of the year to which
the audit relates. The comment referred
to other tasks which UCF must perform
following the end of a year, and
requested that the period be lengthened
to one year following the end of the year
to which the audit relates, rather than
six months. The Department is not
persuaded by this comment, and also
believes that an additional six month
delay is inconsistent with the
underlying purposes of the annual audit
requirement. Accordingly, the
Department has not made the requested
modification.
The Applicant also commented with
respect to the effective dates of Section
II of the exemption, which provides
‘‘Interim Relief,’’ and Section III, which
provides ‘‘Prospective Relief.’’ The
Applicant pointed out that as written in
the Notice, there was a gap between the
end of the effective period for interim
relief and the beginning of the effective
period for prospective relief. In
addition, the Applicant noted that the
effective dates will not necessarily come
out at the beginning or end of a year or
of an audit period. This would raise
questions under two of the conditions of
the prospective relief. First, the $1
million equity requirement of Section
III(a) must be met as of the date of UCF’s
most recent balance sheet. Second, if an
exemption audit covers an annual
period that straddles the effective dates,
the audit could be subject to two
differing sets of standards. The
Applicant recommended that to avoid
these problems, the effective date for
prospective relief should begin at the
start of the first fiscal year of UCF after
the date of publication of this final
exemption in the Federal Register, and
the end date of the interim relief should
be concomitantly extended. The
Department agrees with this comment
and has modified the final exemption
accordingly.
The Applicant also pointed out a
cross-reference in the Notice that should
be changed. In Section IV(g)(1), the
parenthetical should reference
subparagraphs IV(g)(5)(A)–(D) instead of
subparagraphs IV(f)(5)(A)–(D). The
Department agrees and had made the
change in the exemption.
The Applicant also commented that
in section II(a), the reference should be
to subparagraphs (a) through (k) of
Section I instead of subparagraphs (a)
through (l), since subparagraph (l) refers
to Section II. The Department agrees
with this comment and has modified
Section II(a) accordingly. Although it is
the Department’s intention that the
retroactive relief in this case be
conditioned upon the Applicant’s good
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
45299
faith satisfaction of prospective
conditions for future transactions, the
Department believes that it is
appropriate to make the retroactive
relief contingent upon meeting the
conditions for prospective relief for a
finite period. Accordingly, in order for
the Applicant to qualify for retroactive
relief, it must comply with Sections II
and III, as appropriate, through the date
which is five (5) years from the date of
the publication of the final exemption in
the Federal Register. The Department
has modified Section I(l) accordingly to
reflect this requirement.
The Applicant also requested that the
Department clarify that in the second-tolast sentence in item 3(b) of the
Summary of Facts and Representations
in the Notice, ‘‘majority ownership on
the UCF Board’’ should read ‘‘majority
membership on the UCF Board.’’ The
Department notes this correction.
The Applicant also commented that
item 11 of the Summary of Facts and
Representations in the Notice could be
read to imply that UCF represented it
did not comply with the exemption
audit requirement of FAN 2003–03E
(the FAN). UCF, in its comment,
maintained its position that it did
indeed comply with the exemption
audit requirement of the FAN, but it
acknowledges the Department’s view
that it did not comply and has requested
retroactive relief to February 15, 2003
for that reason.
Finally, the Applicant requested three
changes to the Notice with respect to the
prospective relief provided in Section III
so that the conditions and definitions
would be made consistent with the 2005
amendment to PTE 84–14.11 First, the
Applicant requested that the
Department delete the ‘‘one-year lookback rule’’ that makes the exemption
unavailable to a party in interest if it
had exercised the power of appointment
over UCF within the one-year period
preceding the transaction, and clarifying
that the power of appointment refers
only to the power to appoint UCF as
manager of the assets used in the
transaction. The Department concurs
with this suggestion and has added
Section III(d) for prospective
transactions while deleting the
requirement that such prospective
transactions satisfy the condition
contained in Section I(b). Second, the
Applicant requested that Section IV(a)
exclude from the definition of an
‘‘affiliate’’ those partnerships in which
the person has less than a 10% interest
(rather than 5%). The Department
concurs with this suggestion and made
the requested change to the Notice by
11 70
E:\FR\FM\01SEN2.SGM
FR 49305, August 23, 2005.
01SEN2
45300
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2009 / Notices
adding Section IV(p). Third, the
Applicant requested that Section IV(j)
be revised for prospective transactions
with respect to the definition of
‘‘related’’ by changing the percentage of
ownership in certain entities. The
Department has determined not to make
this requested modification to the final
exemption. In this regard, the
Department notes that the modification
requested would conflict with other
limitations contained in section I(h) in
a number of instances.12
For Further Information, Contact:
Gary H. Lefkowitz of the Department,
telephone (202) 693–8546 (this is not a
toll-free number).
Barclays Global Investors, N.A. and its
affiliates and successors (BGI) and
Barclays Capital Inc. and its affiliates
and successors (BarCap) (collectively
Applicants); Located in San
Francisco, CA, and New York, NY.
[Prohibited Transaction Exemption 09–
25; Application No. D–11508.]
Exemption
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES2
Section I—Temporary Exemption for
Securities Lending Transactions
Involving Index and Model-Driven
Funds That Are Based on BarCapLehman Indices
For the period from September 22,
2008, through the earlier of (i) the
effective date of an individual
exemption granting permanent relief for
the following transactions or (ii) one
year from September 1, 2009 (the Relief
Period), the restrictions of section
406(a)(1)(A) through (D) and 406(b)(1)
and (2) of the Act, section 8477(c)(2)(A)
and (B) of FERSA, 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 lending of
securities carried out on behalf of Client
Plans in reliance on Prohibited
Transaction Exemption (PTE) 2002–
46,13 where the applicable Index or
Model-Driven Fund managed by BGI
meets the definition of an ‘‘Index Fund’’
or a ‘‘Model-Driven Fund’’ as set forth
in Section III of PTE 2002–46 but for the
fact that the underlying index is a
BarCap-Lehman Index, provided that all
of the other conditions of PTE 2002–46
and the conditions set forth in Section
IV of this exemption are met.
12 The Department notes that it is currently
considering an amendment to PTE 96–23. The
Department has under consideration an amendment
to the ‘‘related to’’ definition in section IV(d) of PTE
96–23. To the extent the Department adopts such
changes, the Department would consider making
similar changes to this exemption at such time.
13 67 FR 59569, September 23, 2002.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:37 Aug 31, 2009
Jkt 217001
Section II—Temporary Exemption for
Transactions Involving ExchangeTraded Funds That Are Index and
Model-Driven Funds Based on BarCapLehman Indices
Effective for the Relief Period, the
restrictions of section 406(a) and (b) of
the Act, section 8477(c)(2) of FERSA,
and the taxes imposed by section
4975(a) and (b) of the Code, by reason
of section 4975(c)(1)(A) through (F) of
the Code, shall not apply to transactions
carried out on behalf of Client Plans in
reliance upon Prohibited Transaction
Exemption (PTE) 2008–01,14 where the
applicable Index or Model-Driven Fund
would meet the definition of an ‘‘Index
Fund’’ or a ‘‘Model-Driven Fund’’ as set
forth in Section V of PTE 2008–01 but
for the fact that the underlying index is
a BarCap-Lehman Index, provided that
all of the other conditions of PTE 2008–
01 and the conditions set forth in
Section IV of this exemption are met.
Section III—Temporary Exemption for
Principal Transactions With the
BarCap-Lehman Broker-Dealer
Effective for the Relief Period, the
restrictions of section 406(a) and
406(b)(1) and (2) of the Act, section
8477(c)(2)(A) and (B) of FERSA, and the
taxes imposed by section 4975(a) and (b)
of the Code by reason of section
4975(c)(1)(A) through (E) of the Code,
shall not apply to the purchase or sale
of fixed income securities between BGI
on behalf of Client Plans and the
BarCap-Lehman Broker-Dealer (Covered
Principal Transactions) provided that
the conditions set forth in Section V are
met.
Section IV—Conditions Applicable to
Sections I and II
(a) Each BarCap-Lehman Index is a
published Index widely used in the
market by independent institutional
investors other than pursuant to an
investment management or advisory
relationship with BGI and is prepared or
applied in the same manner for nonaffiliated customers as for BGI.
(b) Prior to the use of a BarCapLehman Index in connection with the
exemption and on an annual basis
thereafter (but in no event prior to the
date that is 90 days following May 6,
2009), BGI will provide BarCap with a
list of BarCap Lehman Indices proposed
to be used by BGI in connection with
the exemption. BarCap will certify to
BGI whether, in its reasonable
judgment, each such index is widely
used in the market. In making this
determination, BarCap shall take into
consideration factors such as (i)
14 73
PO 00000
FR 3274, January 17, 2008.
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
publication by Bloomberg, or a similar
institution involved in the
dissemination of financial information,
(ii) hits on relevant Web sites including
LehmanLive (or any successor Web site
maintained by BarCap or its affiliate(s))
and Bloomberg.com (or similar Web
site), and (iii) delivery of index
information to clients by means other
than through Web site access.
(c) Any fees charged for the use of the
BarCap-Lehman Index are paid by BGI
and not Client Plans.
(d) Information barriers are in place
throughout the Relief Period between
BGI and BarCap such that BGI is not
provided access to information
regarding the rules, decisions and data
underlying the BarCap-Lehman Indices
before such information is provided to
users of such Indices who are
independent of BarCap and such rules,
decisions and data are determined
objectively without regard to BGI’s use
of such BarCap-Lehman Indices.
(e) At the end of the Relief Period, a
Qualified Independent Reviewer, as
defined in Section VII(n), shall issue a
written report (the Compliance Report),
following its review of relevant BarCapLehman Indices and the underlying
rules, certifying to each of the following:
(i) Each BarCap-Lehman Index was
operated in accordance with objective
rules, in the ordinary course of business
as would be conducted between
unaffiliated parties;
(ii) No manipulation of any BarCapLehman Index for the purpose of
benefiting BGI, BarCap, or their affiliates
occurred;
(iii) In the event that any rule change
occurred in connection with the rules
underlying any BarCap-Lehman Index,
such rule change was not made for the
purpose of benefiting BGI, BarCap, or
their affiliates;
(iv) Based on a review of the factors
cited in condition (b) above, each
BarCap-Lehman Index was widely used
in the market during the Relief Period;
(v) Based on the result of the
Qualified Independent Reviewer’s
factual inquiries to the Applicants,
condition (d) above was met; and
(vi) Based on the Qualified
Independent Reviewer’s review of paid
bills or invoices, condition (c) above
was met with respect to the fee or fees
paid in connection with each
transaction.
The Compliance Report shall be
issued no later than 90 days following
the end of the Relief Period describing
the steps performed during the course of
the Qualified Independent Reviewer’s
review, the level of compliance with
conditions (e)(i) through (vi), and any
specific instances of non-compliance.
E:\FR\FM\01SEN2.SGM
01SEN2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2009 / Notices
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES2
The Compliance Report shall be
included in the records maintained by
BGI pursuant to Section VI of this
exemption, and BGI shall notify the
independent fiduciary(ies) of each
Client Plan, as part of its regular
disclosure with respect to the applicable
Fund(s), that the Compliance Report is
available for their review.
(f) The Index or Model-Driven Funds
described in Sections I and II meet the
definition of Index Fund or ModelDriven Fund in Sections VII(k) or (l) of
this exemption.
Section V—Conditions Applicable to
Section III
(a) BGI exercises discretionary
authority or control or renders
investment advice with respect to the
Client Plan assets involved in the
Covered Principal Transaction solely in
connection with an Index Fund or
Model-Driven Fund in which Client
Plans invest.15
(b) Each Covered Principal
Transaction occurs as a direct result of
a Triggering Event, as defined in Section
VII(o), and is executed no later than the
close of the third business day following
such Triggering Event.
(c) Each Covered Principal
Transaction is a purchase or sale, for no
consideration other than cash payment
against prompt delivery of a security.
(d) Each Covered Principal
Transaction is on terms that BGI
reasonably determines to be as favorable
or more favorable to the Client Plan than
the terms of an arm’s length transaction
with an unaffiliated counterparty would
have been.
(e) Each Covered Principal
Transaction is executed either:
(i) Through an automated routing
system reasonably designed to ensure
execution at the best available net price
to the Client Plan for the number of
securities to be purchased or sold in the
Covered Principal Transaction; or
(ii) At a net price to the Client Plan
for the number of securities to be
purchased or sold in the Covered
Principal Transaction which is as
favorable or more favorable to the Client
Plan as the prices at which at least two
independent Approved Counterparties,
who are ready and willing to trade the
relevant security, offer to purchase or
sell such security.
(f) The Covered Principal Transaction
does not involve any security issued by
Barclays PLC.
15 This does not preclude, in the case of a BGI
Plan that is a defined contribution plan under
which participants direct the investment of their
accounts among various investment options, the
discretionary authority to select and offer
investment options under the plan.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:37 Aug 31, 2009
Jkt 217001
(g) At the end of the Relief Period, a
Qualified Independent Reviewer shall
issue a Compliance Report certifying to
each of the following:
(i) Based on a review of execution
policies and procedures during the
Relief Period and a sample of Covered
Principal Transactions, that the policies
and execution procedures used in
connection with Covered Principal
Transactions were reasonably designed
to obtain best execution for the
securities to be purchased or sold in the
Covered Principal Transaction; and
(ii) Each sampled Covered Principal
Transaction occurred in accordance
with conditions (a), (b), (c) and (e)
above.
The Compliance Report shall be
issued no later than 90 days following
the end of the Relief Period describing
the steps performed during the course of
the Qualified Independent Reviewer’s
review, the level of compliance with
conditions (g)(i) and (ii), and any
specific instances of non-compliance.
The Compliance Report shall be
included in the records maintained by
BGI pursuant to Section VI of this
exemption, and BGI shall notify the
independent fiduciary(ies) of each
Client Plan, as part of its regular
disclosure with respect to the applicable
Fund(s), that the Compliance Report is
available for their review.
(h) In the case of any Covered
Principal Transaction in connection
with an Index Fund or a Model-Driven
Fund with respect to which the
underlying Index is a BarCap-Lehman
Index, each of conditions (a) through (f)
set forth in Section IV above is met.
Section VI—Recordkeeping Conditions
Applicable to Sections I, II and III
(a) BGI maintains, or causes to be
maintained, for a period of six (6) years
following the end of the Relief Period
the records necessary to enable the
persons described in paragraph (b)
Below to determine whether the
conditions of the exemption have been
met, including the Compliance Reports
described in Sections IV(e) and V(g),
and records which identify with respect
to the Covered Principal Transactions:
(i) On a Fund by Fund basis, the
specific Triggering Events which result
in the creation of the index or model
prescribed output describing the
characteristics of the securities to be
traded; 16
(ii) On a Fund by Fund basis, the
index or model prescribed output which
16 Characteristics of the securities used in
rebalancing a fixed income index would include
changes in (a) amount of securities, (b) duration, (c)
yield curve, and (d) convexity.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
45301
described the characteristics of the
securities to be traded in detail
sufficient to allow an independent plan
fiduciary or the Qualified Independent
Reviewer to verify that each of the above
decisions for the Fund was made in
response to specific Triggering Events;
and
(iii) On a Fund by Fund basis, the
actual trades executed by the Fund on
a particular day, the identity of the
counterparty, the prices offered by the
Approved Counterparties, if relevant,
and which of those trades resulted from
Triggering Events.
Such records must be readily
available to assure accessibility and
maintained so that an independent
fiduciary, the Qualified Independent
Reviewer, or other persons identified
below in paragraph (b) of this Section,
may obtain them within a reasonable
period of time. However, a prohibited
transaction will not be considered to
have occurred if, due to circumstances
beyond the control of BGI, the records
are lost or destroyed prior to the end of
the six-year period; and no party in
interest other than BGI and its affiliates
shall be subject to the civil penalty that
may be assessed under section 502(i) of
the Act, or to the taxes imposed by
section 4975(a) and (b) of the Code, if
the records are not maintained, or are
not available for examination as
required by paragraph (b) below.
(b)(1) Except as provided in Section
(2) of this paragraph and
notwithstanding any provisions of
subsections (a)(2) and (b) of section 504
of the Act, the records referred to in
paragraph (a) are unconditionally
available at their customary location
during normal business hours by:
(A) Any duly authorized employee or
representative of the Department, the
Internal Revenue Service or the
Securities and Exchange Commission;
(B) Any fiduciary of a participating
Client Plan or any duly authorized
representative of such fiduciary;
(C) Any contributing employer to any
participating Client Plan or any duly
authorized employee representative of
such employer;
(D) Any participant or beneficiary of
any participating Client Plan, or any
duly authorized representative of such
Client Plan participant or beneficiary;
and
(E) The Qualified Independent
Reviewer.
(2) None of the persons described
above in subparagraphs (B)–(E) of
paragraph (b)(1) are authorized to
examine the trade secrets of BGI or its
affiliates or commercial or financial
information that is privileged or
confidential.
E:\FR\FM\01SEN2.SGM
01SEN2
45302
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2009 / Notices
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES2
(3) Should BGI refuse to disclose
information on the basis that such
information is exempt from disclosure,
BGI shall, by the close of the thirtieth
(30th) day following the request,
provide written notice advising that
person of the reason for the refusal and
that the Department may request such
information.
Section VII—Definitions
(a) Approved Counterparty: A dealer
that (x) is either (i) registered in
accordance with section 15(b) of the
Exchange Act or (ii) exempt from the
requirement to register as a dealer under
the Exchange Act because it is a bank
that buys and sells government
securities (as such terms are defined in
the Exchange Act) and (y) meets the
credit and execution standards of BGI as
described in paragraph 20 of the
summary of facts and representations of
the notice of proposed exemption (74
FR 20981, May 6, 2009).
(b) Barclays: Barclays PLC and its
direct and indirect subsidiaries.
(c) BarCap: Barclays Capital Inc. and
its successors.
(d) BarCap-Lehman Broker-Dealer:
BarCap’s U.S. broker-dealer business,
including the broker-dealer business
acquired by BarCap from Lehman on
September 22, 2008.
(e) BarCap-Lehman Index: A generally
accepted standardized securities Index
created by Lehman prior to the closing
of the Asset Purchase Agreement on
September 22, 2008, and maintained by
its successor, BarCap.
(f) BGI: Barclays Global Investors,
N.A., its investment advisory affiliates
and their respective successors.
(g) BGI Plan: A Plan maintained by
BGI or an affiliate for the benefit of its
own employees.
(h) Client Plan: An employee benefit
plan subject to the Act, FERSA and/or
the Code, whose assets are managed by
or which is advised by BGI, or a BGImanaged fund or separate account in
which assets of such plans are invested.
(i) Exchange Act: The Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
(j) Index: A securities index that
represents the investment performance
of a specific segment of the public
market for equity or debt securities in
the United States and/or foreign
countries, but only if—
(1) The organization creating and
maintaining the index is—
(A) Engaged in the business of
providing financial information,
evaluation, advice or securities
brokerage services to institutional
clients;
(B) A publisher of financial news or
information; or
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:37 Aug 31, 2009
Jkt 217001
(C) A public stock exchange or
association of securities dealers; and
(2) The index is either (i) created and
maintained by an organization
independent of Barclays or (ii) a
BarCap-Lehman Index; and
(3) The index is a generally accepted
standardized index of securities which
is not specifically tailored for the use of
BGI.
(k) Index Fund: Any investment fund,
account or portfolio sponsored,
maintained, trusteed or managed by BGI
in which one or more investors invest,
and—
(1) Which is designed to track the rate
of return, risk profile and other
characteristics of an Index by either (i)
replicating the same combination of
securities which compose such Index or
(ii) sampling the securities which
compose such Index based on objective
criteria and data;
(2) For which either (i) BGI or its
affiliate does not use its discretion, or
data within its control, to affect the
identity or amount of securities to be
purchased or sold or (ii) the underlying
Index is a BarCap-Lehman Index;
(3) That contains ‘‘plan assets’’ subject
to the Act; and
(4) That involves no agreement,
arrangement or understanding regarding
the design or operation of the Fund
which is intended to benefit BGI its
affiliate or any party in which BGI or its
affiliate may have an interest.17
(l) Model-Driven Fund: Any
investment fund, account or portfolio
sponsored, maintained, trusteed or
managed by BGI in which one or more
investors invest and—
(1) Which is composed of securities
the identity of which and the amount of
which are selected by a computer model
that is based on prescribed objective
criteria to transform an Index using
either (i) independent third-party data
not within the control of BGI or an
affiliate or (ii) data provided by the
BarCap-Lehman Broker-Dealer that is
commercially available on a widespread
basis to unaffiliated end users such as
mutual funds and collective investment
funds on the same terms and conditions;
(2) Which contains ‘‘plan assets’’
subject to the Act; and
(3) That involves no agreement,
arrangement or understanding regarding
the design or operation of the Fund or
the utilization of any specific objective
criteria which is intended to benefit BGI
or its affiliate or any party in which BGI
or its affiliate may have an interest.18
17 This requirement does not preclude BGI’s
payment of fees to BarCap for use of the Indices.
18 This requirement does not preclude BGI’s
payment of fees to BarCap for use of the Indices or
data.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
(m) Lehman: Lehman Brothers
Holdings Inc. and, as the context
requires, its subsidiaries and affiliates
prior to September 15, 2008.
(n) Qualified Independent Reviewer:
A third party appointed by BGI that is
independent of Barclays and its
affiliates and has extensive experience
in reviewing and/or auditing
transactions and procedures involving
assets of plans subject to the Act,
FERSA and/or the Code for the purpose
of confirming that the applicable
transactions or procedures serve the best
interests of such plans.
(o) Triggering Event: Any of the
following events in connection with an
Index Fund or a Model-Driven Fund
(together, ‘‘Funds’’):
(1) A change in the composition or
weighting of the Index underlying a
Fund by either (i) the independent
organization creating and maintaining
the Index or (ii) in the case of a BarCapLehman Index, by the BarCap-Lehman
Broker-Dealer. In the case of a change
described in clause (ii) of the preceding
sentence, the change is uniformly
applied to all customers using the
Index, including non-affiliated
customers, and is not adopted for the
purpose of benefiting BGI.
(2) A material amount of net change
in the overall level of assets in a Fund,
as a result of investments in and
withdrawals from the Fund, provided
that:
(A) Such material amount has either
been identified in advance as a specified
amount of net change relating to such
Fund and disclosed in writing as a
‘‘triggering event’’ to an independent
fiduciary of each Client Plan having
assets held in the Fund prior to, or
within ten (10) days following, its
inclusion as a ‘‘triggering event’’ for
such Fund or BGI has otherwise
disclosed to the independent fiduciary
the parameters for determining a
material amount of net change,
including any amount of discretion
retained by the BGI that may affect such
net change; and
(B) Investments or withdrawals as a
result of BGI’s discretion to invest or
withdraw assets of a BGI Plan, other
than a BGI Plan which is a defined
contribution plan under which
participants direct the investment of
their accounts among various
investment options, including the
applicable Fund, will not be taken into
account in determining the specified
amount of net change;
(3) An accumulation in the Fund of a
material amount of either:
(A) Cash which is attributable to
interest or dividends on, and/or tender
offers for, portfolio securities; or
E:\FR\FM\01SEN2.SGM
01SEN2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2009 / Notices
(B) Stock attributable to dividends on
portfolio securities; provided that such
material amount has been identified in
advance as a specified amount relating
to such Fund and disclosed in writing
as a ‘‘triggering event’’ to an
independent fiduciary of each Client
Plan having assets held in the Fund
prior to, or within ten (10) days
following, its inclusion as a ‘‘triggering
event’’ for such Fund, or BGI has
otherwise disclosed to the independent
fiduciary the parameters for determining
a material amount of accumulated cash
or securities, including any amount of
discretion retained by the BGI that may
affect such net change.
(4) A change in the composition of the
portfolio of a Model-Driven Fund
mandated solely by operation of the
formulae contained in the computer
model underlying the Fund where the
basic factors for making such changes
(and any fixed frequency for operating
the computer model) have been
disclosed in writing to an independent
fiduciary of each Client Plan having
assets held in the Fund prior to, or
within ten (10) days following, its
inclusion as a ‘‘triggering event’’ for
such Fund; or
(5) A change in the composition or
weighting of a portfolio for an Index or
Model-Driven Fund which results from
an independent fiduciary’s direction to
exclude certain securities or types of
securities from the Fund,
notwithstanding that such securities are
part of the Index used by the Fund.
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 May
6, 2009 at 74 FR 20981 (the Notice).
Effective Date: The exemption is
effective September 22, 2008.
Written Comments
The Department received one
comment with respect to the Notice,
which was filed by the Applicants. The
Applicants’ comment concerns Section
V(d) of the Notice, which provided that:
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES2
[E]ach Covered Principal Transaction is on
terms that BGI reasonably determines to be
more favorable to the Client Plan than the
terms of an arm’s length transaction with an
unaffiliated counterparty would have been.
The Applicants note that the Notice
provided another standard for Covered
Principal Transactions, relating to price.
That condition, Section V(e), provides
that:
[E]ach Covered Principal Transaction is
executed either:
(i) Through an automated routing system
reasonably designed to ensure execution at
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:37 Aug 31, 2009
Jkt 217001
45303
the best available net price to the Client Plan
for the number of securities to be purchased
or sold in the Covered Principal Transaction;
or
(ii) at a net price to the Client Plan for the
number of securities to be purchased or sold
in the Covered Principal Transaction which
is as favorable or more favorable to the Client
Plan as the prices at which at least two
independent Approved Counterparties, who
are ready and willing to trade the relevant
security, offer to purchase or sell such
security.
the terms of an arm’s length transaction
with an unaffiliated counterparty.’’
To address its concerns, BGI requests
that the required standard for the overall
terms of the Covered Principal
Transaction (i.e., Section V(d)) be
conformed to the same required
standard for the specific term of price of
the Covered Principal Transaction.
Therefore, BGI requests that Section
V(d) be revised as follows:
In this regard, BGI represents that it
is not currently executing transactions
through an automated routing system.
With respect to Covered Principal
Transactions involving prices quoted by
at least two independent Approved
Counterparties (subsection (ii) above),
BGI represents as follows: BGI’s fixed
income policies and procedures include
consideration of various factors (of
which one—price—is quantifiable) that
may go into the selection of a
counterparty for execution. In the
context of Covered Principal
Transactions, each counterparty with
whom BGI would trade through a
trading platform (for example,
Tradeweb) is already a BGI approved
counterparty that has been subject to
internal approvals, including approval
by BGI’s credit group. For the execution
of all Covered Principal Transactions
made using the platform, the
predominant (though not exclusive)
factor used when comparing the terms
offered by one of those Approved
Counterparties is price.
Accordingly, because in BGI’s view
price is the only quantifiable factor and
all the Approved Counterparties have
been subject to prior internal approval,
BGI is concerned that it may be difficult
to prove that a Covered Principal
Transaction is on terms ‘‘more favorable
to the Client Plan than the terms of an
arm’s length transaction with an
unaffiliated counterparty’’ under
circumstances in which the price is ‘‘as
favorable or more favorable’’ than the
prices offered by two independent
Approved Counterparties. BGI’s concern
also relates to the language governing
transactions executed through an
automated routing system (subsection (i)
above), in the event that future trades
are executed in that manner. The
requirement that the trade be executed
at ‘‘best available net price’’ would leave
room for the possibility that two or more
trading opportunities would exist at the
same price, each of which could
represent the ‘‘best available net price.’’
In such a case, BGI believes it may be
difficult to demonstrate compliance
with the requirement in Section V(d)
that the terms of the transaction be
‘‘more favorable to the Client Plan than
Each Covered Principal Transaction is on
terms that BGI reasonably determines to be
as favorable or more favorable to the Client
Plan than the terms of an arm’s length
transaction with an unaffiliated counterparty
would have been.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
Upon consideration of BGI’s
comment, the Department has
determined to make the change
requested by BGI.
For Further Information Contact:
Karen E. Lloyd of the Department, 202–
693–8554. (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.
E:\FR\FM\01SEN2.SGM
01SEN2
45304
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2009 / Notices
Signed at Washington, DC, this 24th day of
August, 2009.
Ivan Strasfeld,
Director of Exemption Determinations,
Employee Benefits Security, Administration,
U.S. Department of Labor.
[FR Doc. E9–20724 Filed 8–31–09; 8:45 am]
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES2
BILLING CODE 4510–29–P
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:37 Aug 31, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01SEN2.SGM
01SEN2
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 168 (Tuesday, September 1, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45284-45304]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-20724]
[[Page 45283]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Department of Labor
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Employee Benefits Security Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Grant of Individual Exemptions and Prohibited Transaction Exemptions
Involving: PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. (PNC Financial), PTE
2009-22; Verizon Investment Management Corporation, PTE 2009-23; United
States Steel and Carnegie Pension Fund (the Applicant), PTE 2009-24;
and Barclays Global Investors, N.A. and Its Affiliates and Successors
(BGI) and Barclays Capital Inc. and Its Affiliates and Successors
(BarCap) (Collectively the Applicants), PTE 2009-25; Notice
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 168 / Tuesday, September 1, 2009 /
Notices
[[Page 45284]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employee Benefits Security Administration
Grant of Individual Exemptions and Prohibited Transaction
Exemptions Involving: PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. (PNC
Financial), PTE 2009-22; Verizon Investment Management Corporation, PTE
2009-23; United States Steel and Carnegie Pension Fund (the Applicant),
PTE 2009-24; and Barclays Global Investors, N.A. and Its Affiliates and
Successors (BGI) and Barclays Capital Inc. and Its Affiliates and
Successors (BarCap) (Collectively the Applicants), PTE 2009-25
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
(ERISA or 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.
PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. (PNC Financial), Located in
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
[Prohibited Transaction Exemption 2009-22 Application No. D-11397.]
Exemption
Section I--Exemption for Receipt of Fees
In connection with the investment in an open-end investment company
(a Fund or Funds), as defined, below, in Section IV(e), by certain
employee benefit plans (Client Plan or Client Plans) for which PNC, as
defined, below, in Section IV(a), serves as a fiduciary and is a party
in interest with respect to such Client Plan(s), the restrictions of
sections 406(a) and 406(b) of the Act and the sanctions resulting from
the application of section 4975 of the Code, by reason of sections
4975(c)(1)(A) through (F) \1\ of the Code, shall not apply, effective
September 29, 2006, 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 receipt of fees by PNC from a Fund where BlackRock, as
defined, below, in Section IV(b), acts as the investment adviser for
such Fund, and the receipt of fees by BlackRock for the provision of
investment advisory services, or similar services, to such Fund;
(b) The receipt of fees by PNC from a Fund for providing certain
service(s) (Secondary Service(s)), as defined, below, in Section IV(i),
to such Fund; and
(c) The receipt of fees by PNC from BlackRock in connection with
administrative service(s) (Mutual Fund Administration Service(s)), as
defined, below, in Section IV(l), provided to a Fund in which a Client
Plan invests; provided that the conditions, as set forth in Section II
and Section III, below, were satisfied, as of the effective date of
this exemption and thereafter.
Section II--Specific Conditions
(a) PNC, serving as a fiduciary for a Client Plan, satisfies any
one (but not all) of the following:
(1) A Client Plan invested in a Fund does not pay any plan-level
investment management fee, investment advisory fee, or similar fee
(Plan-Level Fee(s)) to PNC with respect to any of the assets of such
Client Plan which are invested in shares of such Fund for the entire
period of such investment (the Offset Fee Method). This condition does
not preclude the payment of investment advisory fees or similar fees
(Fund-Level Fee(s)) by a Fund to BlackRock under the terms of an
investment advisory agreement adopted in accordance with section 15 of
the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the Investment Company Act);
(2) A Client Plan invested in a Fund pays an investment management
fee or similar fee based on total assets of such Client Plan from which
a credit has been subtracted representing such Client Plan's pro rata
share of investment advisory fees or similar fees paid by such Fund to
BlackRock (the Subtraction Fee Method). If, during any fee period for
which a Client Plan has prepaid its investment management or similar
fee, such Client Plan purchases shares of such Fund, the requirement of
this Section II(a)(2) shall be deemed met with respect to such prepaid
fee if, by a method reasonably designed to accomplish the same, the
amount of the prepaid fee that constitutes the fee with respect to the
assets of such Client Plan invested in shares of such Fund: (i) Is
anticipated and subtracted from the prepaid fee at the time of payment
of such fee, (ii) is returned to such Client Plan no later than during
the immediately following fee period, or (iii) is offset against the
prepaid fee for the immediately following fee period or for the fee
period immediately following thereafter. For purposes of this Section
II(a)(2), a fee shall be deemed to be prepaid for any fee period, if
the amount of such fee is calculated as of a date not later than the
first day of such period; or
(3) A Client Plan invested in a Fund receives a ``a credit'' \2\
(the Credit Fee Method) of such Client Plan's proportionate share of
all fees charged to such Fund by BlackRock for
[[Page 45285]]
investment advisory services or similar services for a particular
month: (1) Effective for the period, September 29, 2006, through
December 31, 2008, on the earlier of either: (a) The same day as PNC
receives a fee from BlackRock for Mutual Fund Administration Services
provided for that month to such Fund by PNC, or (b) the fifth business
day before the end of the month following the month in which fees for
investment advisory services, or similar services, accrued, or (2)
effective for the period beginning, January 1, 2009, and continuing
thereafter, on a date which is no later than one business day after
BlackRock receives fees from the Fund for investment advisory services,
or similar services, provided for that month to such Fund by BlackRock.
The crediting of all such fees to such Client Plan by PNC is audited by
an independent accounting firm (the Auditor) on at least an annual
basis to verify the proper crediting of such fees to such Client Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ PNC Financial represents that it would be accurate to
describe ``the credit'' as a ``credited dollar amount'' to cover
situations in which the credited amount is used to acquire
additional shares of a Fund, rather than being held by a Client Plan
in the form of cash. It is represented that the standard practice is
to reinvest the ``credited dollar amount'' in additional shares of
the same Fund with respect to which the fees were credited.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) The price paid or received by a Client Plan for shares in a
Fund is the net asset value per share, as defined, below, in Section
IV(f), at the time of the transaction, and is the same price which
would have been paid or received for such shares by any other investor
in such Fund at that time;
(c) PNC, including any officer or director of PNC, does not
purchase shares of a Fund from any Client Plan or sell shares of a Fund
to any Client Plan;
(d) A Client Plan does not pay sales commissions in connection with
any purchase or sale of shares of a Fund, and a Client Plan does not
pay redemption fees in connection with any sale of shares to a Fund,
unless
(1) Such redemption fee is paid only to a Fund, and
(2) The existence of such redemption fee is disclosed in the
prospectus for such Fund in effect both at the time of any purchase of
such shares and at the time of such sale;
(e) The combined total of all fees received by PNC for services
provided by PNC:
(1) To Client Plans, and
(2) To Funds in which Client Plans invest is not in excess of
reasonable compensation within the meaning of section 408(b)(2) of the
Act;
(f) PNC does not receive any fees payable pursuant to Rule 12b-1
under the Investment Company Act in connection with the subject
transactions;
(g) A Client Plan is not an employee benefit plan sponsored or
maintained by PNC;
(h) A second fiduciary (Second Fiduciary), as defined, below, in
Section IV(h), who is acting on behalf of a Client Plan receives, in
advance of any initial investment by a Client Plan in a Fund, full and
detailed written disclosure of information concerning such Fund,
including but not limited to:
(1) A current prospectus for each Fund in which such Client Plan is
considering investing;
(2) A statement describing the fees, including the nature and
extent of any differential between the rates of such fees for:
(i) Any investment advisory or similar services to be paid by such
Fund to BlackRock,
(ii) Any Secondary Services to be paid by such Fund to PNC,
(iii) Any Mutual Fund Administration Services to be paid by
BlackRock to PNC, and
(iv) All other fees to be charged to or paid by a Client Plan and
by such Fund;
(3) The reasons why PNC, acting as fiduciary for such Client Plan,
may consider investment in such Fund to be appropriate for such Client
Plan;
(4) A statement describing whether there are any limitations
applicable to PNC with respect to which assets of a Client Plan that
may be invested in such Fund, and if so, the nature of such
limitations; and
(5) Upon the request of the Second Fiduciary, acting on behalf of a
Client Plan, a copy of the proposed exemption and a copy of the final
exemption, once such documents are published in the Federal Register.
(i) On the basis of the information described, above, in Section
II(h), a Second Fiduciary, acting on behalf of a Client Plan,
authorizes in writing: (1) The investment of the assets of such Client
Plan in shares of each particular Fund; and (2) the fees received by
PNC and by BlackRock in connection with services provided by PNC and by
BlackRock to such Fund. Such authorization by a Second Fiduciary must
be consistent with the responsibilities, obligations, and duties
imposed on fiduciaries by Part 4 of Title I of the Act.
(j)(1) All authorizations, described, above, in Section II(i), made
by a Second Fiduciary, regarding: (i) Investments by a Client Plan in a
Fund, (ii) fees paid for investment advisory services or similar
services provided by BlackRock to such Fund, (iii) fees paid for
Secondary Services provided by PNC to such Fund, and (iv) fees paid by
BlackRock to PNC for Mutual Fund Administration Services provided by
PNC to such Fund, shall be terminable at will by the Second Fiduciary,
acting on behalf of such Client Plan, without penalty to such Client
Plan, upon receipt by PNC of a written notice of termination. A form
(the Termination Form), as defined, below, in Section IV(j), expressly
providing an election to terminate the authorizations, described,
above, in Section II(i), with instructions on the use of such
Termination Form must be provided to such Second Fiduciary at least
annually. However, if a Termination Form has been provided to such
Second Fiduciary, pursuant to Section II(k) and (l), below, then a
Termination Form need not be provided again, pursuant to this Section
II(j), unless at least six (6) months but no more than twelve (12)
months have elapsed, since a Termination Form was provided, pursuant to
Section II(k) and (l), below.
(2) The instructions for the Termination Form must include the
following statements:
(i) The authorization, described, above, in Section II(i), is
terminable at will by the Second Fiduciary, acting on behalf of a
Client Plan, without penalty to such Client Plan, upon receipt by PNC
of written notice from such Second Fiduciary.
(ii) Failure by such Second Fiduciary to return the Termination
Form on behalf of such Client Plan will be deemed to be an approval by
the Second Fiduciary and will result in the continuation of the
authorization, as described, above, in Section II(i), of PNC to engage
in the transactions which are the subject of this exemption.
(k) For a Client Plan invested in a Fund which uses one of the fee
methods described, above, in Section II(a)(1), (a)(2), or (a)(3), in
the event of a proposed change from one of the fee methods to another
or in the event of a proposed increase in the rate of any fee paid by a
Fund to BlackRock for any investment advisory service, or similar
service that BlackRock provides to such Fund over an existing rate for
such services or method of determining the fee for such services, which
had been authorized, in accordance with Section II(i), above, by the
Second Fiduciary for such Client Plan, at least thirty (30) days in
advance of the implementation of such change from one of the fee
methods to another or such increase in a fee, PNC will provide a
written notice (which may take the form of a proxy statement, letter,
or similar communication that is separate from the prospectus of such
Fund and which explains the nature and amount of such change from one
of the fee methods to another or increase in fee) to the Second
Fiduciary of each Client Plan affected by such change from one of the
fee
[[Page 45286]]
methods to another or increased fee. Such notice shall be accompanied
by a Termination Form, with instructions on the use of such Termination
Form, as described, above, in Section II(j).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ It is represented that PNC furnished only disclosure, not
advanced notice, of a mid-2007 advisory fee change to the Second
Fiduciaries of Client Plans invested in Funds using the Credit Fee
Method. The change, which resulted in increased fees to BlackRock of
0.5 basis points, (which it is represented was credited back to the
Client Plans) occurred effective June 1, 2007, with the disclosure
being provided in October 2007, after the effective date of such
change. As the Second Fiduciaries of the Client Plans did not
receive notification of such increase at least thirty (30) days in
advance of the implementation of such increase, the Department,
herein, is not providing relief for the receipt of such fee increase
by BlackRock.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(l) In the event of:
(i) A proposed addition of a Secondary Service for which an
additional fee is charged; or
(ii) A proposed addition of a Mutual Fund Administration Service
provided by PNC to a Fund in which a Client Plan invests and for which
an additional fee is charged; or
(iii) A proposed increase in the rate of any fee paid by a Fund to
PNC for any Secondary Service, or
(iv) A proposed increase in the rate of any fee paid by BlackRock
to PNC for Mutual Fund Administration Services provided to such Fund,
or
(v) A proposed increase in the rate of any fee paid for Secondary
Services or for Mutual Fund Administration Services that results from
the decrease in the number or kind of services performed by PNC for
such fee over an existing rate for services which had been authorized,
in accordance with Section II(i), by the Second Fiduciary for a Client
Plan invested in such Fund, PNC, at least thirty (30) days in advance
of the implementation of such fee increase or additional service for
which an additional fee is charged, will provide a written notice
(which may take the form of a proxy statement, letter, or similar
communication that is separate from the prospectus of such Fund and
which explains the nature and amount of the additional service for
which an additional fee is charged or the nature and amount of the
increase in fees) to the Second Fiduciary of each Client Plan invested
in such Fund which is proposing to increase fees or add services for
which an additional fee is charged. Such notice shall be accompanied by
a Termination Form, with instructions on the use of such Termination
Form, as described, above in Section II(j).
(m) On an annual basis, PNC, serving as fiduciary to a Client Plan,
provides the Second Fiduciary of such Client Plan invested in a Fund
with:
(1) A copy of the current prospectus for such Fund in which such
Client Plan invests;
(2) Upon the request of such Second Fiduciary, a copy of the
Statement of Additional Information for such Fund which contains a
description of all fees paid by such Fund to PNC and all fees paid by
BlackRock to PNC for Mutual Fund Administration Services;
(3) A copy of the annual financial disclosure report which includes
information about Fund portfolios, within sixty (60) days of the
preparation of such report;
(4) Oral or written responses to inquiries of the Second Fiduciary
of such Client Plan, as such inquiries arise; and
(5) A copy of the audit findings prepared by the independent
Auditor, as required by Section II(a)(3), is provided by PNC at least
annually within sixty (60) days of the completion of the report of such
audit findings, to the Second Fiduciary of those Client Plans using the
Credit Fee Method, as described in Section II(a)(3).
(n) All dealings between a Client Plan and a Fund are on a basis no
less favorable to such Client Plan than dealings between such Fund and
other shareholders invested in such Fund.
Section III--General Conditions
(a) PNC maintains for a period of six (6) years the records
necessary to enable the persons described, below, in Section III(b) to
determine whether the conditions of this exemption have been met,
except that:
(1) A prohibited transaction will not be considered to have
occurred, if solely because of circumstances beyond the control of PNC,
the records are lost or destroyed prior to the end of the six-year
period, and
(2) No party in interest other than PNC shall be subject to the
civil penalty that may be assessed under section 502(i) of the Act or
to the taxes imposed by section 4975(a) and (b) of the Code if the
records are not maintained or are not available for examination as
required by Section III(b), below.
(b)(1) Except as provided in Section III(b)(2) and notwithstanding
any provisions of section 504(a)(2) of the Act, the records referred to
in Section III(a) are unconditionally available at their customary
location for examination during normal business hours by--
(i) Any duly authorized employee or representative of the
Department of Labor (the Department) or the Internal Revenue Service,
(ii) Any fiduciary of a Client Plan who has authority to acquire or
dispose of shares of a Fund owned by such Client Plan, or any duly
authorized employee or representative of such fiduciary, and
(iii) Any participant or beneficiary of a Client Plan or duly
authorized employee or representative of such participant or
beneficiary.
(2) None of the persons described in Section III(b)(1)(ii) and
(iii) shall be authorized to examine trade secrets of PNC, or
commercial or financial information which is privileged or
confidential.
Section IV--Definitions
For purposes of this exemption:
(a) The term, ``PNC,'' means PNC Financial, and any affiliate
thereof, as defined, below in Section IV(c).
(b) The term, ``BlackRock,'' means BlackRock, Inc., and any
affiliate thereof, as defined, below in Section IV(c).
(c) An ``affiliate'' of a person includes:
(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 in any
such person; and
(3) Any corporation or partnership of which such person is an
officer, director, partner, or employee.
(d) The term, ``control,'' means the power to exercise a
controlling influence over the management or policies of a person other
than an individual.
(e) The term, ``Fund(s),'' shall mean any diversified open-end
investment company or companies registered with the Securities and
Exchange Commission under the Investment Company Act, as amended, for
which BlackRock serves as an investment adviser (but not sub-adviser).
(f) The term, ``net asset value,'' means the amount for purposes of
pricing all purchases and sales of shares of a Fund calculated by
dividing the value of all securities, determined by a method as set
forth in the prospectus for such Fund and in the statement of
additional information, and other assets belonging to the Fund or
portfolio of the Fund, less the liabilities charged to each such
portfolio or Fund, by the number of outstanding shares.
(g) The term, ``relative,'' means a relative as that term is
defined in section 3(15) of the Act (or a member of the family as that
term is defined in section 4975(e)(6) of the Code), or a brother, a
sister, or a spouse of a brother or a sister.
(h) The term, ``Second Fiduciary,'' means a fiduciary of a Client
Plan who is independent of and unrelated to PNC
[[Page 45287]]
and BlackRock. For purposes of this exemption, the Second Fiduciary
will not be deemed to be independent of and unrelated to PNC and
BlackRock if:
(1) Such fiduciary, directly or indirectly controls, through one or
more intermediaries, is controlled by, or is under common control with
PNC or with BlackRock;
(2) Such fiduciary, or any officer, director, partner, employee, or
relative of the fiduciary, is an officer, director, partner, or
employee of PNC or of BlackRock (or is a relative of such persons); or
(3) Such fiduciary, directly or indirectly, receives any
compensation or other consideration for his or her personal account in
connection with any transaction described in this exemption.
If an officer, director, partner, or employee of PNC or of
BlackRock (or relative of such persons) is a director of such Second
Fiduciary, and if he or she abstains from participation in:
(i) The choice of such Client Plan's investment adviser,
(ii) The approval of any such purchase or sale between such Client
Plan and a Fund, and
(iii) The approval of any change in fees or fee method, as
described, above, in Section II (k) or (l), charged to or paid by such
Client Plan in connection with any of the transactions described in
Section I above, then Section IV(h)(2), above, shall not apply.
(i) The term, ``Secondary Service(s),'' means a service or services
which is/are provided by PNC to a Fund, including but not limited to
custodial, accounting, or administrative services. The fees for
providing Secondary Services to a Fund are paid to PNC by such Fund.
(j) The term, ``Termination Form,'' means the form supplied to a
Second Fiduciary which expressly provides an election to such Second
Fiduciary to terminate on behalf of a Client Plan the authorization
described, above, in Section II(i).
(k) The term, ``business day,'' means any day that
(i) PNC Financial is open for conducting all or substantially all
of its banking functions, and
(ii) the New York Stock Exchange (or any successor exchange) is
open for trading.
(l) The term, ``Mutual Fund Administration Services,'' means a
service or services which is/are provided by PNC to, or on behalf of, a
Fund, including PNC's maintaining records of investments by Client
Plans in such Fund, processing Fund transactions for Client Plans,
transmitting account statements and shareholder communications,
responding to inquiries from Client Plans regarding account balances
and dividends, and providing information to such Fund on sales and
assisting in monitoring possible market timing. The fees for providing
Mutual Fund Administration Services to a Fund are paid to PNC by
BlackRock, rather than by such Fund.
DATES: Effective Date: This exemption is effective as of September 29,
2006.
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
forty-five (45) days of the date of the publication of the Notice in
the Federal Register on March 26, 2009. The deadline for providing
notice to all interested persons was April 10, 2009. All comments and
requests for a hearing from interested persons were due by May 11,
2009. The Department received no requests for a hearing. However, three
(3) commentators informed the Department that the mailing to them was
not complete.
In this regard, the first commentator did not receive a copy of the
Notice. In response, the applicant indicated that the Notice had been
inadvertently omitted from the initial mailing, dated April 3, 2009, to
one group of interested persons, and that the mailing was resent to
that group, including the Notice, before the deadline on April 10,
2009, for providing notice to interest persons. The second commentator
indicated that certain enclosures were not included. In response, the
applicant indicated that this commentator was part of the group that
had received the mailing without the Notice, and that he should have
subsequently received the second mailing, before the deadline on April
10, 2009, for providing notice to interest persons.
The third commentator indicated that he had received only the
Notice and no cover letters. The applicant was unable to explain how
this error could have occurred, because this part of the mailing was
assembled by a machine designed to confirm that the inserts in each
envelope were of the correct thickness. Accordingly, the applicant
confirmed through a sampling of other packages that were part of this
group that there were no other apparent instances of this error. In any
event, the applicant mailed a complete package to the third
commentator.
During the comment period, the Department received 24 telephone
inquiries from commentators seeking an explanation of the contents of
the Notice. In response, the staff of the Office of Exemption
Determinations spoke to each commentator and provided an explanation
``in plain English'' of the proposed exemption.
In addition, eight (8) commentators wrote to the Department
requesting a further explanation of the proposed exemption. In response
to these commentators, the applicant states that the notice to
interested persons provided by PNC contained all the information
required by the Department's exemption procedures, and also included an
additional cover page that was intended to help the recipients
understand the contents of the Notice. The applicant maintains that no
further written explanation on PNC's part was either required or
permitted. Further, the applicant maintains that in any event, these
comments do not raise any substantive issues on the proposed exemption
itself.
The Department concurs.
During the comment period, the Department also received via e-mail,
facsimile, and mail comments from three (3) commentators who raised
substantive issues. Copies of these letters were posted on the Web site
regulations.gov. At the close of the comment period, the Department
forwarded a copy of these comments to the applicant for response. The
comments and the applicant's response thereto are summarized in the
numbered paragraphs below.
1. One commentator, identified as an IRA trustee, in an e-mail,
dated April 20, 2009, took the view that the requested exemption
``appears to be an effort to modify the existing ERISA law to allow a
corporate `sweetheart deal' of two interlocked corporations (PNC and
BLACKROCK),'' and says that a change to the existing law ``would be a
step backward.'' The commentator further characterizes the described
arrangement as appearing ``to have an intended benefit for the two
corporations at the likely eventual expense of perhaps thousands of
individuals with IRAs.'' In addition, the commentator expresses concern
that the costs of implementing the proposed exemption would be paid by
either taxpayers or ``The IRA owner who gets clobbered with higher and
higher fees to pay the costs.''
In response to this comment, the applicant maintains that the
proposed exemption is not a modification to existing law, but rather an
exception to certain provisions under existing law pursuant to a
procedure contemplated by the statute. The applicant represents that
PNC's goal in requesting the relief
[[Page 45288]]
is not to favor BlackRock, but rather to preserve existing investments
in plan and IRA accounts that may no longer be permitted after the
changes in the ownership of BlackRock, and also to ensure that
BlackRock Funds continue to be available as investments to accounts
managed by PNC to the extent that investment in those funds is prudent
and meets an account's investment needs. Investments in BlackRock Funds
under the exemption are not expected to increase IRA fees, as the
structure for complying with the exemption is already in place.
Furthermore, the applicant points out that to the extent the
commentator objects to her IRA investing in BlackRock Funds, she can
exercise her right under the proposed exemption to withhold her
authorization of such investments or, if BlackRock Fund investments
have previously been authorized, to terminate that authorization.
Therefore, the applicant concludes that the commentator's comment
does not provide any reason why the exemption should not be granted.
The Department concurs.
2. One commentator, in an e-mail, dated April 28, 2009, argued that
granting the exemption would be wrong because there is an inherent
conflict of interest, giving the following reasons:
(a) No amount of explanation, adjustment/manipulation of fees or
documentation of facts can cancel out that conflict.
(b) The very fact that PNC is requesting the exemption shows it is
in their interest.
(c) A massive mailing and disgorgement of data does not show this
is good for investors. The commentator further argues that it must
clearly be convenient and remunerative for PNC to utilize an ``in-house
organization'' to control, invest and report on client money, but there
is no claim or promise that BlackRock is or would be the best option.
The commentator says that because of the bank being placed in conflict
with its clients, a PNC manager, when faced with a choice, will opt for
BlackRock. Therefore, the commentator concludes, the proposal should be
withdrawn.
In response, the applicant represents that the conditions of the
exemption are designed to address the potential conflict, namely by
requiring fee offsets or credits, disclosures and independent
approvals. In the opinion of the applicant, the potential conflict in
this case is attenuated in that PNC is a minority owner in BlackRock as
a result of the transaction with Merrill Lynch, currently holding only
a 33% interest (down slightly from the 34% interest described in the
application). Any decisions by PNC portfolio managers to invest in the
BlackRock Funds for plans are subject to fiduciary obligations imposed
by section 404(a)(1) of the Act, including the duty to act solely in
the interest of the plan and its participants and beneficiaries and to
act in a prudent manner, and any investment decisions for IRA accounts
are subject to similar obligations under State law. PNC's objective is
to have BlackRock Funds available in the event it would be prudent to
use them, and PNC portfolio managers commonly use other fund families
as well.
Further, the applicant points out that if the commentator is
concerned about these conflicts, he has the right under the proposed
exemption to either withhold his authorization of PNC investing his
account in BlackRock Funds or, if he has previously given his
authorization, he can exercise his right to terminate that
authorization at any time without penalty.
Therefore, the applicant maintains that this comment by the
commentator has not provided any reason why the proposed exemption
should not be granted.
The Department concurs.
3. One commentator indicated her opposition to any exemption that
would authorize additional fees to be charged by PNC Bank. The
commentator did not give any further reason.
In response, the applicant notes that the proposed exemption
contains a series of protections to deal with the potential for PNC
receiving additional fees, including fee offsets and credits.
Furthermore, if the commentator continues to be concerned about PNC
Bank charging additional fees, she would have the right under the
exemption to withhold or terminate authorization of the investment of
her account in BlackRock Funds. Therefore, the applicant maintains that
the commentator has not provided any reason why the proposed exemption
should not be granted.
The Department concurs.
In addition to the comments described above, the Department
received, on May 8, 2009, an e-mail from the applicant, requesting
certain changes to the operating language of the exemption. The
applicant's comment was also posted on the Web site regulation.gov. The
applicant's comments are summarized in the numbered paragraphs, below.
1. Fee Disclosure and Differential Language--Section II(h)(2)
Section II(h)(2)(iv), as set forth in the Notice on page 13243,
column 2, line 67, requires disclosure of, ``All other fees to be
charged to or paid by a Client Plan and by such Fund.'' The applicant
believes that disclosure of all Fund fees are within the scope of the
exemption, but is not clear that all Client Plan fees should be subject
to disclosure. The applicant believes that the focus on the fees
charged to or paid by the Client Plan should only be those fees that
are related to the investment in a Fund by a Client Plan. Accordingly,
the applicant requests that the language of Section II(h)(2)(iv) should
be amended to read as follows: ``All other fees to be charged to or
paid by a Client Plan in connection with its investment in such Fund
and by such Fund.''
In addition, the applicant has requested an amendment to Section
II(h)(2), as set forth in the Notice on page 13243, column 2, lines 54-
57. Section II(h)(2) requires: ``A statement describing the fees,
including the nature and extent of any differential between the rates
of such fees'' for: (i) Any investment advisory or similar services to
be paid by a Fund to BlackRock, (ii) any Secondary Services to be paid
by a Fund to PNC, (iii) any Mutual Fund Administration Services to be
paid by BlackRock to PNC, and (iv) all other fees to be charges to or
paid by a Client Plan and by a Fund. The applicant believes that the
disclosure of the nature and extent of any differential between the
rates of such fees should be limited to the fees paid for investment
advisory or similar services. In this regard, the applicant request
that the phrase, ``including the nature and extent of any differential
between the rates of such fees,'' be deleted from Section II(h)(2) and
moved to the end of Section II(h)(2)(i) following the word,
``BlackRock.'' Accordingly, the applicant has requested that Section
II(h)(2)(i) be amended to read as follows: ``Any investment advisory or
similar services to be paid by such Fund to BlackRock, including the
nature and extent of any differential between the rates of such fees.''
The limitations suggested by the applicant do not conform to the
requirements as set forth in Prohibited Transaction Exemption 77-4 (PTE
77-4).\4\ In this regard, PTE 77-4 deals with the receipt of fees by a
fiduciary of a plan in connection with the purchase or sale by a plan
of shares of a registered, open-end investment company when
[[Page 45289]]
such fiduciary or an affiliate is also the investment adviser for such
investment company. Section II(d) of PTE 77-4 requires that a second
fiduciary with respect to such plan, who is independent of and
unrelated to the fiduciary/investment adviser or any affiliate thereof,
receive full and detailed written disclosure of the investment advisory
and other fees charged to or paid by such plan and by such investment
company, including the nature and extent of any differential between
the rates of such fees. Accordingly, the Department does not concur
with the applicant's request to alter the language of Section II(h)(2)
and has not amended Section II(h)(2) in the final exemption. Nor does
the Department concur with the applicant's request to alter the
language of Section II(h)(2)(iv) and has not amended Section
II(h)(2)(iv) in the final exemption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 42 FR 18732, April 8, 1977.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Reference to Part 4 of Title I of the Act--Section II(i)
Section II(i), as set forth in the Notice, requires that on the
basis of certain disclosure, a Second Fiduciary, acting on behalf of
the Client Plan, authorizes in writing: (1) The investment of the
assets of a Client Plan in shares of a particular Fund and (2) the
receipt of fees by PNC and by BlackRock in connection with services
provided by PNC and by BlackRock to such Fund. The last sentence in
Section II(i), as set forth in the Notice on page 13243, column 3,
lines 25-29, requires that ``Such authorization by a Second Fiduciary
must be consistent with the responsibilities, obligations, and duties
imposed on fiduciaries by Part 4 of Title I of the Act.'' The applicant
maintains that ``whether the Second Fiduciary violates its fiduciary
duties in providing the authorization is outside the control of PNC and
should not affect whether PNC has coverage under the exemption.''
Further, the applicant notes that this language was not included in
prior individual exemption providing analogous relief. Therefore, the
applicants request that the sentence in Section II(i) referring to the
Second Fiduciary's responsibilities under Part 4 of Title I of the Act
should be deleted from the final exemption.
The Department does not concur with the applicant's request and has
not deleted the last sentence from Section II(i) in the final
exemption. In this regard, PTE 77-4 contains language similar to that
set forth Section II(i) of the Notice. In this regard, Section II(e) of
PTE 77-4, states that ``On the basis of the prospectus and disclosure
referred to in paragraph (d), the second fiduciary referred to in
paragraph (d) approves such purchase and sales consistent with the
responsibilities obligations, and duties imposed on fiduciaries by Part
4 of Title I of the Act.''
3. Statement of Additional Information Disclosure--Section II(m)(2)
Section II(m)(2), as set forth in the Notice on page 13244, column
2, lines 49-52, requires on an annual basis that PNC, serving as
fiduciary to a Client Plan, provide the Second Fiduciary of such Client
Plan with certain disclosures. Such disclosures should include a copy
of a Statement of Additional Information for a Fund, upon request by
the Second Fiduciary. Further, such Statement of Additional Information
should contain a description of all fees paid to PNC by a Fund and by
BlackRock for services provided by PNC to such Fund. The applicant
notes that while Statements of Additional Information for Funds do, in
fact, describe the Mutual Fund Administration Services fees, such
document does not specify the rate of such fees. The applicant argues
that such disclosure should be sufficient because the rate of such fees
would have been described in the initial disclosure to the Client Plan
and cannot be changed without prior notice.
The Department concurs with the applicant's comment.
4. Independent Audit Disclosure--Section II(m)(3)
Section II(m)(3), as set forth in the Notice on page 13244, column
2, lines 56-59, requires that PNC provide the Second Fiduciary of a
Client Plan with ``a copy of the annual financial disclosure report
which includes information about Fund portfolios, as well as the audit
findings of the independent Auditor, within sixty (60) days of the
preparation of such report.'' The audit findings referred to in Section
II(m)(3) are those required under Section II(a)(3) of the exemption in
connection with the audit of the Credit Fee Method. The applicant
suggests that the requirement to disclose a copy of the audit finding
be deleted from Section II(m)(3) and be made a separate requirement, in
a new Section II(m)(5) in the final exemption. Accordingly, the
applicant requests that the requirement in Section II(m)(5) apply only
to those Client Plans using the Credit Fee Method, described in Section
II(a)(3) of the final exemption.
The Department concurs with the applicant's request and has amended
Section II(m)(3) to delete the phrase, ``as well as the audit findings
of the independent Auditor.'' Further, the Department has included in
the final exemption a new Section II(m)(5) which reads, as follows:
A copy of the audit findings prepared by the independent
Auditor, as required by Section II(a)(3), is provided by PNC at
least annually within sixty (60) days of the completion of the
report of such audit findings, to the Second Fiduciary of those
Client Plans using the Credit Fee Method, as described in Section
II(a)(3).
5. Change in Fee Method--Section IV(h)(3)(iii)
Section IV(h), as set forth in the Notice on page 13245, column 1,
lines 33-68, and column 2, lines 1-4, defines the term, ``Second
Fiduciary,'' as a fiduciary of a Client Plan who is independent of and
unrelated to PNC and BlackRock. Section IV(h)(2) provides that a Second
Fiduciary will not be deemed to be independent if such fiduciary, or
any officer, director, partner, employee, or relative of the fiduciary
is an officer, director, partner, or employee of PNC or of BlackRock
(or is a relative of such person). However, Section IV(h)(3) provides
an exception to the requirement, set forth in Section IV(2). In this
regard, a director of a Second Fiduciary of a Client Plan who is also
an officer, director, partner, or employee of PNC or of BlackRock (or a
relative of such persons) is permitted to abstain from: (1) The
selection of the Client Plan's investment adviser; (2) the approval of
any purchase or sale between a Client Plan and a Fund; and (3) ``the
approval of any change in fees, as described, above, in Section II (k)
or (l), charged to or paid by such Client Plan in connection with any
of the transactions described in Section I above.''
The applicant requests that the language of Section IV(h)(3)(iii),
as set forth in the Notice on page 13245, column 1, lines 67-68, be
revised to insert the phrase, ``or fee method,'' after the phrase,
``any change in fees,'' in order to be consistent with other provisions
in the exemption where references to changes of fees also apply to
changes in fee methods.
The Department concurs with the applicant's suggestions, and
accordingly, has amended the language of Section IV(h)(3)(iii) in the
final exemption.
After giving full consideration to the entire record, including the
written comment from the applicant and from the commentators, the
Department has decided to grant the exemption, as described and
amended, above. In this regard, the comment letters from the applicant
and from the commentators which were submitted to the
[[Page 45290]]
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
Benefits 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 March 26, 2009, at 74 FR
13242.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Angelena Le Blanc of the Department,
telephone (202) 693-8540 (This is not a toll-free number).
Verizon Investment Management Corporation, Located in Basking Ridge,
New Jersey.
[Prohibited Transaction Exemption 2009-23, Exemption Application No. D-
11447.]
Exemption
Section I--Transaction(s)
The restrictions of section 406(a)(1)(A) through (D) of the Act and
the taxes imposed by section 4975(a) and (b) of the Code, by reason of
section 4975(c)(1)(A) through (D) of the Code,\5\ shall not apply,
effective for the period January 1, through December 31, 2001, and for
the period January 1, through December 31, 2003, to any transaction, as
described in Part I of Prohibited Transaction Exemption 96-23 (PTE 96-
23),\6\ between a Verizon Plan or Verizon Plans, as defined, below, in
section III(h) of this exemption, and a party in interest, as defined,
below, in section III(c) of this exemption, with respect to such
Verizon Plan; provided that: during the period January 1, through
December 31, 2001, and during the period January 1, through December
31, 2003, VIMCO satisfied the definition of an in-house asset manager
(INHAM), as defined, below, in section III(a) of this exemption, and
had discretionary authority or control with respect to the assets of
such Verizon Plan involved in each such transaction; and the
conditions, as set forth, below, in section I(a) through (b) and
section II of this exemption were satisfied and, the conditions, as set
forth, below, in section I(c) and section II of this exemption are
satisfied;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The Department, herein, is not providing any retroactive or
prospective relief for a transaction between a plan (a Verizon Plan
or Verizon Plans), as defined, below, in section III(h) of this
exemption, and a party in interest with respect to such Verizon
Plan, if such transaction was entered into or is entered into in
years other than 2001 and 2003, nor is the Department, herein,
providing any retroactive or prospective relief for any continuing
transaction, or for any subsequent renewal or modification of a
transaction that required or requires the consent of Verizon
Investment Management Corporation (VIMCO), if entry into such
continuing transaction, or entry into such renewal or modification
occurred or occurs in years other than 2001 and 2003. In order to
obtain relief for the entry into a transaction, or the entry into a
continuing transaction or a subsequent renewal or modification of a
transaction, as the case may be, VIMCO must have satisfied or must
satisfy at the time of each such transaction, the terms and
conditions as set forth in PTE 96-23 or, if applicable, the terms
and conditions of PTE 96-23 as hereafter amended.
\6\ 61 FR 15975, April 10, 1996.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) All the requirements of PTE 96-23 were satisfied for the period
January 1, through December 31, 2001, and the period January 1, through
December 31, 2003, except with respect to the annual audit requirement,
as set forth in section I(h) of PTE 96-23;
(b) An exemption audit, as defined, in Part IV(f) of PTE 96-23, for
the period January 1, through December 31, 2001, must have been
completed by no later than December 31, 2003, and an exemption audit
for the period January 1, through December 31, 2003, must have been
completed by no later than December 31, 2005; and
(c) If VIMCO, satisfies the definition of an INHAM, as defined,
below, in section III(a) of this exemption, at any time during the
period beginning on the date of the publication in the Federal Register
of the final exemption for application D-11447 and ending on the
effective date of a final amendment to PTE 96-23, then an independent
auditor, who has appropriate technical training or experience and
proficiency with the fiduciary responsibility provisions of the Act and
who so represents in writing, must conduct an exemption audit, as
defined, below, in section III(f) of this exemption, on an annual
basis. Following completion of such exemption audit, the auditor shall
issue a written report to the Verizon Plan or Verizon Plans that engage
in transactions, described in Part I of PTE 96-23, presenting such
auditor's specific findings regarding the level of compliance: (1) with
the policies and procedures adopted by VIMCO in accordance with Part
I(g) of PTE 96-23; and (2) with the objective requirements of PTE 96-
23. The written report shall also contain the auditor's overall opinion
regarding whether VIMCO's program complied: (1) With the policies and
procedures adopted by VIMCO; and (2) with the objective requirements of
PTE 96-23. The exemption audit and the written report must be completed
within six (6) months following the end of the year to which the audit
relates.
Section II--General Conditions
(a) VIMCO must maintain or cause to be maintained, for a period of
six (6) years, such records as are necessary to enable the persons
described, below, in section II(b) of this exemption, to determine
whether the conditions of this exemption have been met, except that:
(1) A prohibited transaction shall not be considered to have
occurred solely because, due to circumstances beyond the control of
VIMCO, such records are lost or destroyed prior to the end of the six-
year period, and
(2) No party in interest with respect to a Verizon Plan which
engages in a transaction, described in section I of this exemption,
other than VIMCO, shall be subject to a civil penalty under section
502(i) of the Act or to the taxes imposed by section 4975(a) and (b) of
the Code, if such records are not maintained, or are not available for
examination, as required, below, by section II(b) of this exemption.
(b)(1) Except as provided, below, in section II(b)(2) of this
exemption, and notwithstanding any provisions of section 504(a)(2) of
the Act, the records referred to, above, in section II(a) of this
exemption, are unconditionally available at their customary location
for examination during normal business hours by--
(i) Any duly authorized employee or representative of the
Department of Labor (the Department) or the Internal Revenue Service,
(ii) Any fiduciary of a Verizon Plan that engages in a transaction,
described in Part I of PTE 96-23, or any duly authorized employee or
representative of such fiduciary, and
(iii) Any participant or beneficiary of a Verizon Plan or duly
authorized employee or representative of such participant or
beneficiary.
(2) None of the persons described, above, in section II(b)(1)(ii)
and (iii) of this exemption, shall be authorized to examine trade
secrets of VIMCO, or commercial or financial information which is
privileged or confidential.
Section III--Definitions
For the purposes of this exemption:
(a) The term, ``in-house asset manager'' or ``INHAM,'' means VIMCO,
provided that VIMCO is:
(1) Either (A) a direct or indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of
Verizon Communications, Inc. (Verizon), or a direct or indirect wholly-
owned subsidiary of a parent organization of Verizon, or (B) a
membership non-profit
[[Page 45291]]
corporation a majority of whose members are officers or directors of
Verizon or a parent organization; and
(2) An investment adviser registered under the Investment Advisers
Act of 1940 that, as of the last day of its most recent fiscal year,
has under its management and control total assets attributable to
Verizon Plans maintained by affiliates of VIMCO, as defined, below, in
section III(b) of this exemption, in excess of $50 million; and
provided that if VIMCO had no prior fiscal year as a separate legal
entity as a result of its constituting a division or group within
Verizon's organizational structure, then this requirement is deemed to
have been met as of the date during VIMCO's initial fiscal year as a
separate legal entity that responsibility for the management of such
assets in excess of $50 million was transferred to it from Verizon.
In addition, Verizon Plans maintained by affiliates of VIMCO and/or
by VIMCO, have aggregate assets of at least $250 million, calculated as
of the last day of each such Verizon Plan's reporting year.
(b) For purposes of sections III(a) and III(h) of this exemption,
an ``affiliate'' of VIMCO means a member of either:
(1) a controlled group of corporations, as defined in section
414(b) of the Code, of which VIMCO is a member, or
(2) A group of trades or businesses under common control, as
defined in section 414(c) of the Code, of which VIMCO is a member;
provided that ``50 percent'' shall be substituted for ``80 percent''
wherever ``80 percent'' appears in section 414(b) or 414(c) of the Code
or the rules thereunder.
(c) The term, ``party in interest,'' means a person described in
section 3(14) of the Act and includes a ``disqualified person,'' as
defined in section 4975(e)(2) of the Code.
(d) The term, ``control,'' means the power to exercise a
controlling influence over the management or policies of a person other
than an individual.
(e) For purposes of this exemption, the time as of which any
transaction occurred is the date upon which the transaction was entered
into. In addition, the time as of which any renewal or modification of
any transaction occurred is the date upon which the renewal or the
modification of the transaction was entered into. For any transaction
that required the consent of VIMCO that was entered into, renewed, or
modified, as the case may be, during the period from January 1, through
December 31, 2001, or during the period from January 1, through
December 31, 2003, the requirements of this exemption must have been
satisfied at the time such transaction was entered into, or was
renewed, or was modified, as the case may be. In addition, in the case
of a transaction that is continuing, the transaction is deemed to occur
until it is terminated.
Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed as exempting a
transaction entered into by a Verizon Plan which becomes a transaction
described in section 406 of the Act or section 4975 of the Code, while
the transaction is continuing, unless the conditions of PTE 96-23 were
met at the time the transaction was entered into, or at the time the
transaction would have become prohibited but for PTE 96-23. In
determining compliance with the conditions of PTE 96-23 at the time
that the transaction was entered into for purposes of the preceding
sentence, Part I(e) of PTE 96-23, will be deemed satisfied if the
transaction was entered into between a Verizon Plan and a person who
was not then a party in interest.
(f) Exemption Audit. An ``exemption audit'' of a Verizon Plan must
consist of the following:
(1) A review by an independent auditor of the written policies and
procedures adopted by VIMCO, pursuant to Part I(g) of PTE 96-23, for
consistency with each of the objective requirements of PTE 96-23, as
described below, in section III(g) of this exemption.
(2) A test of a sample of VIMCO's transactions during the audit
period that is sufficient in size and nature to afford the auditor a
reasonable basis: (A) to make specific findings regarding whether VIMCO
is in compliance with (i) the written policies and procedures adopted
by VIMCO, pursuant to Part I(g) of PTE 96-23 and (ii) the objective
requirements of PTE 96-23, as described below, in section III(g) of
this exemption and (B) to render an overall opinion regarding the level
of compliance of VIMCO's program with section III(f)(2)(A)(i) and (ii)
of this exemption.
(3) A determination as to whether VIMCO satisfied the definition of
an INHAM, as defined, above, in section III(a), of this exemption; and
(4) Issuance of a written report describing the steps performed by
the auditor during the course of its review and the auditor's findings.
(g) For purposes of section III(f), above, of this exemption, the
written policies and procedures must describe the following objective
requirements of the exemption and the steps adopted by VIMCO to assure
compliance with each of these requirements:
(1) The definition of an INHAM in section III(a) of this exemption.
(2) The requirements of Part I and Part I(a) of PTE 96-23 regarding
the discretionary authority or control of VIMCO with respect to the
assets of a Verizon Plan involved in the transaction, in negotiating
the terms of the transaction, and with regard to the decision on behalf
of such Verizon Plan to enter into the transaction.
(3) That any procedure for approval or veto of the transaction
meets the requirements of Part I(a) of PTE 96-23.
(4) For a transaction described in Part I of PTE 96-23:
(A) That the transaction is not entered into with any person who is
excluded from relief under Part I(e)(1), Part I(e)(2) of PTE 96-23, to
the extent such person has discretionary authority or control over the
plan assets involved in the transaction, or Part I(f) of PTE 96-23, and
(B) That the transaction is not described in any of the class
exemptions listed in Part I(b) of PTE 96-23.
(h) The term, ``Verizon Plan(s),'' means a plan or plans maintained
by VIMCO or an affiliate of VIMCO.
Effective Date: This exemption is effective for the period from
January 1, through December 31, 2001, and for the period from January
1, through December 31, 2003.
Written Comments
In the Notice of Proposed Exemption (the Notice), the Department
invited all interested persons to submit written comments and requests
for a hearing on the proposed exemption within forty-five (45) days of
the date of the publication of the Notice in the Federal Register on
February 25, 2009. All comments and requests for a hearing were due by
April 13, 2009.
During the comment period, the Department received no requests for
a hearing. However, the Department received, on April 9, 2009, a
facsimile from the applicant, informing the Department of a correction
to the language of the exemption, as proposed in the Notice. In this
regard, the references to ``Verizon Investment Management Company,'' as
set forth in the heading of the Notice on page 8571, in the heading of
the Proposed Exemption on page 8572, and in the language in footnote
no. 2 on page 8572, should be revised to read ``Verizon Investment
Management Corporation.''
The Department acknowledges the correction, as requested by the
applicant, and in the final exemption has amended the references to
Verizon Investment Management Corporation.
[[Page 45292]]
In addition to the correction described above, the applicant
requested: (1) An amendment to the exemption audit conditions of
section I(c); (2) a change of the effective date of section I(c); and
(3) a change in the definition of an INHAM, in section III(a), as set
forth in the Notice. The applicant's comments are sumarized in the
paragraphs, below.
Timing of Exemption Audit
Section I(c) of the Notice, as set forth on page 8572, column 3, in
lines 56-59, requires that the exemption audit and the written audit
report must be completed within six (6) months following the end of the
year to which such audit relates.
In its comment, VIMCO states that it understands the
appropriateness of imposing a timing condition on future audits.
However, VIMCO maintains that six (6) months after the end of the plan
year is a relatively short period considering the volume of corporate
and employee benefit activities that VIMCO engages in at that time of
year. Accordingly, VIMCO requests that this deadline should be one (1)
year following the end of the year to which such audit relates, rather
than six (6) months. In this regard, VIMCO maintains that a one-year
deadline would be consistent with the requirement that an exemption
audit be performed annually and would avoid the unintended loss of the
exemption due to inadvertent delays in the exemption audit process.
The Department does not concur with the applicant's request and has
not amended the six (6) month audit requirement, set forth in section
I(c) of this exemption. In this regard, it is the Department's view
that the six (6) month audit requirement is reasonable. The Department
believes that extending the audit requirement beyond the six (6) month
requirement would result in audit reports which would not be timely.
Exemption Audit Conditions
Section I(c), as set forth on page 8572, column 3, in lines 50-55,
also requires that that the written report of the exemption audit must
contain:
The auditor's overall opinion regarding whether VIMCO's program
complied: (1) With the policies and procedures adopted by VIMCO; and
(2) with the objective requirements of PTE 96-23.
The applicant believes that the requirement imposed in section I(c)
of the Notice goes beyond the frameowrk envisioned by PTE 96-23. In
this regard, VIMCO notes that in the preamble to PTE 96-23, the auditor
was not required to reach any opinion regarding compliance. The auditor
was simply to make the findings based on its review. In the opinion of
the applicant, the requirement set forth in section I(c) of the Notice,
would cause additional review and expense. In addition, the applicant
points out that this requirement may trigger issues for accounting
firms and law firms under their respective professional standards. The
applicant suggests that, if the Department intends to impose this
requirement generally on INHAMs in the course of amending PTE 96-23,
then the Department should do so in that proceeding, at which time this
requirement can be subject to a broader range of comments that would
better define the issues.
The Departme