Proposed Exemptions From Certain Prohibited Transaction Restrictions, 34260-34270 [2011-14520]
Download as PDF
34260
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 113 / Monday, June 13, 2011 / Notices
clarifications and updates to the
Summary.
After giving full consideration to the
entire record, including the written
comments, the Department has decided
to grant this exemption amending PTE
2010–08, as described above. The
complete application file 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 proposed
amendment, published in the Federal
Register on March 15, 2011 at 76 FR
14074.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Warren Blinder of the Department,
telephone (202) 693–8553. (This is not
a toll-free number.)
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:06 Jun 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
Signed at Washington, DC, this 8th day of
June, 2011.
Ivan Strasfeld,
Director of Exemption Determinations,
Employee Benefits Security Administration,
U.S. Department of Labor.
[FR Doc. 2011–14521 Filed 6–10–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–29–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employee Benefits Security
Administration
Proposed Exemptions From Certain
Prohibited Transaction Restrictions
Employee Benefits Security
Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Notice of proposed exemptions.
AGENCY:
This document contains
notices of pendency before the
Department of Labor (the Department) of
proposed exemptions 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). This notice includes the
following proposed exemptions: D–
11608, Russell Trust Company; and D–
11659, Pacific Capital Bancorp
Amended and Restated Incentive and
Investment and Salary Savings Plan
DATES: All interested persons are invited
to submit written comments or requests
for a hearing on the pending
exemptions, unless otherwise stated in
the Notice of Proposed Exemption,
within 45 days from the date of
publication of this Federal Register
Notice.
ADDRESSES: Comments and requests for
a hearing should state: (1) The name,
address, and telephone number of the
person making the comment or request,
and (2) the nature of the person’s
interest in the exemption and the
manner in which the person would be
adversely affected by the exemption. A
request for a hearing must also state the
issues to be addressed and include a
general description of the evidence to be
presented at the hearing. All written
comments and requests for a hearing (at
least three copies) should be sent to the
Employee Benefits Security
Administration (EBSA), Office of
Exemption Determinations, Room N–
5700, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20210. Attention: Application
No.ll, stated in each Notice of
Proposed Exemption. Interested persons
are also invited to submit comments
and/or hearing requests to EBSA via email or FAX. Any such comments or
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
requests should be sent either by e-mail
to: moffitt.betty@dol.gov, or by FAX to
(202) 219–0204 by the end of the
scheduled comment period. The
applications for exemption and the
comments received will be available for
public inspection in the Public
Documents Room of the Employee
Benefits Security Administration, U.S.
Department of Labor, Room N–1513,
200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20210.
Warning: If you submit written
comments or hearing requests, do not
include any personally-identifiable or
confidential business information that
you do not want to be publiclydisclosed. All comments and hearing
requests are posted on the Internet
exactly as they are received, and they
can be retrieved by most Internet search
engines. The Department will make no
deletions, modifications or redactions to
the comments or hearing requests
received, as they are public records.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Notice to Interested Persons
Notice of the proposed exemptions
will be provided to all interested
persons in the manner agreed upon by
the applicant and the Department
within 15 days of the date of publication
in the Federal Register. Such notice
shall include a copy of the notice of
proposed exemption as published in the
Federal Register and shall inform
interested persons of their right to
comment and to request a hearing
(where appropriate).
The proposed exemptions were
requested in applications filed pursuant
to section 408(a) of the Act and/or
section 4975(c)(2) of the Code, and in
accordance with procedures set forth in
29 CFR Part 2570, Subpart B (55 FR
32836, 32847, August 10, 1990).
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
requested to the Secretary of Labor.
Therefore, these notices of proposed
exemption are issued solely by the
Department.
The applications contain
representations with regard to the
proposed exemptions which are
summarized below. Interested persons
are referred to the applications on file
with the Department for a complete
statement of the facts and
representations.
E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM
13JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 113 / Monday, June 13, 2011 / Notices
Russell Trust Company (RTC or the
Applicant); Located in Seattle,
Washington; [Exemption Application
No. D–11608]
Proposed Exemption
The Department is considering
granting an exemption under the
authority of section 408(a) of the Act
and section 4975(c)(2) of the Code and
in accordance with the procedures set
forth in 29 CFR Part 2570, Subpart B (55
FR 32836, 32847, August 10, 1990).
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Section I—Covered Transactions
If the proposed exemption is
granted—
(a) The restrictions of sections
406(a)(1)(A), (a)(1)(B), (a)(1)(D),
406(b)(1) and 406(b)(2) of the Act, and
the sanctions resulting from the
application of section 4975 of the Code,
by reason of section 4975(c)(1)(A),
(c)(1)(B), (c)(1)(D), and (c)(1)(E) of the
Code, shall not apply, between
September 14, 2009 and September 10,
2010, inclusive, to an arrangement
involving the following transactions:
(1) The extension of credit, through a
revised capital support agreement, to
certain employee benefit plans (the
Plans) invested, directly or indirectly, in
the Russell Securities Lending ShortTerm Investment Fund (the SecLending
Fund) by the Frank Russell Company
(FRC), the parent company of RTC and
a party in interest with respect to the
Plans, in connection with the
SecLending Fund’s holding of certain
notes (the Notes) issued by Lehman
Brothers Holdings Inc. or its affiliates
(the Revised SecLending Fund CSA);
(2) The extension of credit, through a
revised capital support agreement, to
certain Plans invested, directly or
indirectly, in the RTC Russell Liquidity
Fund (the Liquidity Fund) by FRC in
connection with the Liquidity Fund’s
holding of the Notes (the Revised
Liquidity Fund CSA);
(3) The provision of a revised
guarantee to FRC by its parent company,
the Northwest Mutual Life Insurance
Company (NML), a party in interest
with respect to the Plans, in order to
ensure FRC’s foregoing capital support
obligation to the SecLending Fund (the
Revised SecLending Fund Guarantee);
(4) The provision of a revised
guarantee to FRC by NML in order to
ensure FRC’s foregoing capital support
obligation to the Liquidity Fund (the
Revised Liquidity Fund Guarantee);
(5) The accrual and periodic payment
of certain supplemental yield
contributions by FRC to the SecLending
Fund (the SecLending Fund
Supplemental Yield Contributions); and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:06 Jun 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
(6) The accrual and periodic payment
of certain supplemental yield
contributions by FRC to the Liquidity
Fund (the Liquidity Fund Supplemental
Yield Contributions);
(b) The restrictions of sections
406(a)(1)(A), 406(b)(1) and (b)(2) of the
Act, and the sanctions resulting from
the application of section 4975 of the
Code, by reason of section 4975(c)(1)(A)
and (E) of the Code shall not apply to
the September 10, 2010 cash sale (the
Sale) of all of the Notes held by both the
SecLending Fund and the Liquidity
Fund (taken together, the Funds) to
FRC; provided that all of the conditions
set forth below in Section II are
satisfied.
Section II—Conditions
(a) With respect to the arrangement
involving (i) The Revised SecLending
Fund CSA and the Revised Liquidity
Fund CSA transactions (together, the
Revised CSAs), (ii) the Revised
SecLending Fund Guarantee and the
Revised Liquidity Fund Guarantee
transactions (together, the Revised
Guarantees), and (iii) the SecLending
Fund Supplemental Yield Contributions
and the Liquidity Fund Supplemental
Yield Contribution transactions
(together, the Supplemental Yield
Contributions):
(1) The decision to enter into each of
these transactions was made on behalf
of the Funds (and the employee benefit
plans invested, directly or indirectly, in
the Funds) by an independent fiduciary
(the Independent Fiduciary), who
reviewed their terms and conditions of
each of the foregoing transactions and
determined that they were protective of,
and in the interest of, the Funds and the
Plans investing therein;
(2) The foregoing transactions were
entered into pursuant to written
agreements that contained all of the
relevant terms and conditions relating to
such transactions; and
(3) The Funds did not pay any fees,
commissions or other expenses in
connection with the foregoing
transactions;
(b) With respect to the Sale of the
Notes by each Fund to FRC:
(1) The Sale was a one-time
transaction for cash;
(2) In connection with the Sale, the
applicable Fund received an amount
which was equal to the greater of: (i)
The market value of the Notes being
sold on the date of the Sale; or (ii) the
sum of the amortized cost of such Notes,
plus any accrued but unpaid interest on
such Notes through the earlier of the
maturity date of the applicable Note or
September 14, 2009, in each case
calculated at the contract rate;
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
34261
(3) The Funds did not pay any fees,
commissions or other expenses in
connection with the Sale;
(4) The decision to sell all of the
Notes held by the Funds to FRC was
made by an Independent Fiduciary, who
determined that the Sale of the Notes
was appropriate for, and in the best
interests of, each of the Funds and the
Plans invested, directly or indirectly, in
the Funds, at the time of the Sale
transaction;
(5) The Independent Fiduciary has
taken all appropriate actions necessary
to safeguard the interests of the Funds,
and of the employee benefit plans
invested, directly or indirectly, in the
Funds, in connection with the
transaction;
(6) If the exercise of any of FRC’s
rights, claims, or causes of action in
connection with its ownership of the
Notes results in recovering from the
issuer of the Notes, or any third party,
an aggregate amount that is in excess of
the sum of: (i) The Sale price paid for
the Notes by FRC; and (ii) interest on
such Sale price paid from September 10,
2010 to September 14, 2010, inclusive,
made by FRC to the Funds, then FRC
will refund such excess amount
promptly to the Fund (after deducting
all reasonable expenses incurred in
connection with the recovery);
(c) RTC and its affiliates, as
applicable, maintain, or cause to be
maintained, for a period of six (6) years
from the date of any covered transaction
such records as are necessary to enable
the person described below in
paragraph (d)(1), to determine whether
the conditions of this exemption have
been met, except that:
(1) No party in interest with respect
to a plan which engages in the covered
transaction, other than FRC, RTC and
their affiliates, as applicable, shall be
subject to a civil penalty under section
502(i) of the Act or the taxes imposed
by section 4975(a) and (b) of the Code,
if such records are not maintained, or
not available for examination, as
required, below, by paragraph (d)(1);
(2) A separate prohibited transaction
shall not be considered to have occurred
solely because due to circumstances
beyond the control of FRC, RTC or their
affiliates, as applicable, such records are
lost or destroyed prior to the end of the
six-year period.
(d)(1) Except as provided, below, in
paragraph (d)(2), and notwithstanding
any provisions of subsections (a)(2) and
(b) of section 504 of the Act, the records
referred to, above, in paragraph (c) are
unconditionally available at their
customary location for examination
during normal business hours by —
E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM
13JNN1
34262
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 113 / Monday, June 13, 2011 / Notices
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
(A) Any duly authorized employee or
representative of the Department, the
Internal Revenue Service, or the
Securities and Exchange Commission;
or
(B) Any fiduciary of any plan that
engages in the covered transaction, or
any duly authorized employee or
representative of such fiduciary; or
(C) Any employer of participants and
beneficiaries and any employee
organization whose members are
covered by a plan that engages in the
covered transaction, or any authorized
employee or representative of these
entities; or
(D) Any participant or beneficiary of
a plan that engages in the covered
transaction, or duly authorized
employee or representative of such
participant or beneficiary;
(2) None of the persons described,
above, in paragraph (d)(1)(B)–(D) shall
be authorized to examine trade secrets
of FRC, RTC or their affiliates, or
commercial or financial information
which is privileged or confidential; and
(3) Should RTC refuse to disclose
information on the basis that such
information is exempt from disclosure,
RTC shall, by the close of the thirtieth
(30th) day following the request,
provide a written notice advising that
person of the reasons for the refusal and
that the Department may request such
information.
Summary of Facts and Representations
1. RTC is a trust company organized
under the laws of the State of
Washington that is subject to regulation
by the Washington State Department of
Financial Institutions. RTC provides a
wide range of fiduciary and investment
management services to a broad array of
institutional clients, including
employee benefit plans subject to the
Act and the Code. RTC serves as
discretionary trustee for several
commingled employee benefit fund
trusts. RTC has numerous affiliates and
is a subsidiary of FRC, a Washington
corporation. FRC, in turn, is a
subsidiary of NML.
2. The Applicant represents that the
SecLending Fund is a separate fund of
the Russell Trust Company Commingled
Employee Benefit Funds Trust (the
Trust), a group trust that is exempt from
federal income tax pursuant to Rev. Rul.
81–100. The SecLending Fund is used
as an investment vehicle for cash
collateral received in connection with
securities lending activities. The
Applicant also represents that, on all
dates relevant to the requested
exemption, the SecLending Fund had
Plan investors who were subject to the
Act and the Code. The Liquidity Fund
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:06 Jun 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
(like its predecessor fund, the Russell
Short-Term Investment Fund, or STIF
Fund) is a cash sweep vehicle that does
not engage in securities lending
activities. The Applicant represents
that, on all dates relevant to the
requested exemption, the assets of both
the Liquidity Fund and its predecessor,
the STIF Fund, constituted ‘‘plan assets’’
subject to the Act because each of the
foregoing funds were collective trust
funds maintained by a bank, and
included Plan investors who were
subject to the Act and the Code. In this
connection, the Applicant represents
that, under 29 CFR section 2510.3–
101(h)(1)(ii), when a plan acquires or
holds an interest in such a common or
collective fund of a bank, its assets are
deemed to include an undivided
interest in each of the underlying assets
of such fund.
Each of the Funds is bank-maintained
for purposes of the Act, and RTC serves
as a discretionary trustee for each Fund.
The Funds are short-term investment
funds that seek to maintain a constant
net asset value, or ‘‘NAV,’’ equal to $1.00
per unit. RTC has investment discretion
with respect to the assets of the Funds,
and makes all determinations with
respect to the purchase, sale, and
holding of the assets by the Funds
(within the investment parameters
established for each Fund).
3. The Applicant represents that, as of
September 15, 2008, numerous
collective investment funds maintained
by RTC or its affiliates (the RTC CIFs)
were direct investors in the STIF Fund.
Further, numerous Plans were indirectly
invested in the SecLending Fund and
the STIF Fund through their investment
in the RTC CIFs. One Plan sponsored by
RTC or its affiliates had a direct (rather
than an indirect) investment in the STIF
Fund.
The Lehman Notes
4. On September 15, 2008, both the
SecLending Fund and the STIF Fund
held Notes issued by Lehman Brothers
Holdings Inc. or its affiliates (the
Lehman Issuers). The SecLending Fund
acquired all of the Notes described in
this proposed exemption between
September of 2007 and March of 2008,
while the STIF Fund acquired the Notes
between September of 2007 and August
of 2008. The decision both to acquire
and to hold the Notes was made by RTC
in its capacity as trustee and investment
manager for each of the foregoing funds.
Prior to investing in the Notes, the
Applicant represents that RTC
conducted an investigation of the
potential investment, examining and
considering the economic and other
terms of the Notes. RTC represents that
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the investment in the Notes was
consistent with the applicable
investment policies and objectives of
both the SecLending Fund and the STIF
Fund. At the time they were acquired by
the foregoing funds, the Notes were
rated at least ‘‘A’’ or ‘‘A+’’ by both
Moody’s and S&P rating agencies. Based
on its consideration of the relevant facts
and circumstances, RTC determined
that it was prudent and appropriate to
acquire the Notes.1
The Initial Capital Support Agreements
and Guarantees
5. On September 15, 2008, each of the
Lehman Issuers filed for Chapter 11
bankruptcy protection. As a
consequence of the Lehman Issuers’
bankruptcy filing, the market value of
the Notes decreased substantially and
the market for the Notes became
relatively illiquid, with prices for actual
trades being substantially lower than the
SecLending Fund’s and the STIF Fund’s
amortized cost for the Notes. In this
connection, the Applicant determined
that FRC should immediately provide
capital support to both the SecLending
Fund and the STIF Fund in an amount
sufficient to maintain a constant NAV of
1 The Department is expressing no opinion herein
regarding whether the acquisition and holding of
the Notes on, before, or after September 15, 2008
by either the SecLending Fund or the STIF Fund
(or its successor fund, the Liquidity Fund) violated
any of the fiduciary responsibility provisions of Part
4 of Title I of the Act. In this regard, the Department
notes that section 404(a) of the Act requires, among
other things, that a fiduciary of a plan act
prudently, solely in the interest of the plan’s
participants and beneficiaries, and for the exclusive
purpose of providing benefits to participants and
beneficiaries when making investment decisions on
behalf of a plan. Section 404(a) of the Act also states
that a plan fiduciary should diversify the
investments of a plan so as to minimize the risk of
large losses, unless under the circumstances it is
clearly prudent not to do so.
Moreover, the Department is not providing any
opinion herein as to whether a particular category
of investments or investment strategy would be
considered prudent or in the best interests of a plan
as required by section 404 of the Act. The
determination of the prudence of a particular
investment or investment course of action must be
made by a plan fiduciary after appropriate
consideration of those facts and circumstances that,
given the scope of such fiduciary’s investment
duties, the fiduciary knows or should know are
relevant to the particular investment or investment
course of action involved, including a plan’s
potential exposure to losses and the role the
investment or investment course of action plays in
that portion of the plan’s portfolio with respect to
which the fiduciary has investment duties (see 29
CFR 2550.404a–1). The Department also notes that
in order to act prudently in making investment
decisions, a plan fiduciary must consider, among
other factors, the availability, risks and potential
return of alternative investments for the plan. Thus,
a particular investment by a plan, which is selected
in preference to other alternative investments,
would generally not be prudent if such investment
involves a greater risk to the security of a plan’s
assets than other comparable investments offering
a similar return or result.
E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM
13JNN1
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 113 / Monday, June 13, 2011 / Notices
$1.00 per unit for each of the foregoing
funds.
Accordingly, on September 15, 2008,
FRC entered into separate capital
support agreements with both the
SecLending Fund (the Initial
SecLending Fund CSA) and the STIF
Fund (the STIF Fund CSA). The
Applicant explains that, pursuant to
these agreements (which, taken together,
constitute the Initial CSAs), FRC
contractually agreed to provide on-going
capital support to both the SecLending
Fund and the STIF Fund with respect to
the Notes, up to the lesser of: (a) An
agreed upon ‘‘maximum contribution
amount’’ ($75,000,000 for the STIF Fund
and $70,000,000 for the SecLending
Fund), which amounts equaled the
aggregate par value of the Notes held by
the SecLending Fund and the STIF
Fund, as applicable, as of September 15,
2008; (b) the difference between the
amortized cost of such Notes and any
proceeds received by either the
SecLending Fund or the STIF Fund as
a result of the subsequent sale or other
disposition of the Notes by either fund;
or (c) the minimum capital contribution
amount necessary for each of the
foregoing funds to maintain an NAV of
$0.995 per unit, after taking into
account the market value of the Notes
held or disposed of by such fund. On
the same date, NML contracted to
guarantee FRC’s capital support
obligations to both the SecLending Fund
(under the Initial SecLending Fund
Guarantee) and the STIF Fund (under
the STIF Fund Guarantee). The
Applicant represents that, at all times
relevant to this exemption, NML has
maintained a rating of AAA by Standard
& Poor’s.
The Applicant represents that each of
the Initial CSAs, as well as the Initial
SecLending Fund Guarantee and the
STIF Fund Guarantee (which, taken
together, constitute the Initial
Guarantees) were set to expire on
September 15, 2009 unless, prior to that
date, the SecLending Fund and the STIF
Fund received either full cash
repayment of the Notes or capital
contributions from FRC and NML equal
to the respective maximum contribution
amounts pursuant to the Initial CSAs.
Each of the Initial CSAs and Initial
Guarantees also contained a repayment
provision stipulating that, in the event
that either the SecLending Fund or the
STIF Fund received a capital
contribution from FRC (or from NML, as
guarantor) with respect to a Note and
subsequently received additional
payments from or on behalf of the
Lehman Issuer in respect of the Note,
such fund would repay to FRC (if NML
had received contributions equal to its
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:06 Jun 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
capital contribution) the lesser of: (i)
The amount of such capital
contribution; or (ii) the amount of such
subsequent payments, provided that in
no event would such repayment cause
the respective fund’s NAV per share to
fall below $0.995 or such greater
amount as required by any nationallyrecognized statistical rating organization
(NRSRO).2
6. The Applicant represents that the
decision to enter into the Initial CSAs
was a fund-level decision made by RTC
(similar to any decision to acquire or
dispose of assets) that was intended to
limit the downside risk for both the
SecLending Fund and the STIF Fund
with respect to the Notes, while
preserving the upside potential for the
foregoing funds, and that this
determination did not represent any
change to the funds’ goals or investment
strategies or any deviation from the
funds’ investment parameters. The
Applicant further represents that the
relative rights and interests of the Plans
with respect to both the SecLending
Fund and the STIF Fund (and the RTC
CIFs having an interest in each fund)
and the terms and conditions of any
agreements between RTC and the Plans
were not affected by this decision.
The Applicant maintains that the
terms of the Initial CSAs and Initial
Guarantees executed on September 14,
2008 to provide capital support to both
the SecLending Fund and the STIF
Fund constituted a lending of money or
other extension of credit from a party in
interest to an employee benefit plan that
satisfied the conditions contained in a
class exemption, Prohibited Transaction
Exemption (PTE) 80–26; for this reason,
the Applicant is not seeking an
individual exemption for the period of
time during which the Initial CSAs and
Initial Guarantees were in force.3
2 The Department expresses no opinion herein as
to the role of an NRSRO in determining whether a
fund’s net asset value per share has fallen below
$0.9950.
3 Section IV of PTE 80–26 (as amended at 71 FR
17920, Apr. 7, 2006) provides that, effective as of
December 15, 2004, the restrictions of section
406(a)(1)(B) and (D) and section 406(b)(2) of the
Act, and the taxes imposed by section 4975(a) and
(b) of the Code, by reason of section 4975(c)(1)(B)
and (D) of the Code, shall not apply to the lending
of money or other extension of credit from a party
in interest or disqualified person to an employee
benefit plan, nor to the repayment of such loan or
other extension of credit in accordance with its
terms or written modifications thereof, if:
(a) No interest or other fee is charged to the plan,
and no discount for payment in cash is relinquished
by the plan, in connection with the loan or
extension of credit;
(b) The proceeds of the loan or extension of credit
are used only—
(1) For the payment of ordinary operating
expenses of the plan, including the payment of
benefits in accordance with the terms of the plan
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
34263
Transfer of the Assets of the STIF Fund
to the Liquidity Fund
7. On September 11, 2009, RTC
reorganized the STIF Fund, and
transferred all of the assets of the STIF,
including the Notes held by the STIF
Fund that were subject to the STIF Fund
CSA, to the Liquidity Fund. In
connection with this reorganization, the
Liquidity Fund became the beneficiary
of both FRC’s capital support
obligations under the STIF Fund CSA
and of NML’s guarantee of FRC’s
foregoing capital support obligation
pursuant to the STIF Fund Guarantee.
The Retention of an Independent
Fiduciary
8. As noted previously, the terms of
both the Initial CSAs and the Initial
Guarantees were set to expire on
September 15, 2009. Expiration of the
Initial CSAs, however, would have
triggered a contractual obligation that
the Funds liquidate the Notes in the
market. The Applicant further
represents that the Funds’ liquidation of
the Notes would, in turn, have triggered
the payment of FRC’s capital support
obligations to the Funds. The Applicant
states that the capital support payments
required under the Initial CSAs
represented the amount that would have
been necessary to permit each Fund to
maintain an NAV of $0.995 per unit.
Accordingly, it is represented that,
because both FRC and RTC did not
believe that it would be in the best
interest of either Fund to liquidate the
Notes upon the expiration of the Initial
CSAs on September 15, 2009, FRC and
RTC determined to seek the amendment
and extension of the Initial CSAs and
the Initial Guarantees for one year,
through an expiration date of September
15, 2010.
and periodic premiums under an insurance or
annuity contract, or
(2) For a purpose incidental to the ordinary
operation of the plan;
(c) The loan or extension of credit is unsecured;
(d) The loan or extension of credit is not directly
or indirectly made by an employee benefit plan;
(e) The loan is not described in section 408(b)(3)
of ERISA and the regulations promulgated
thereunder (29 CFR 2550.408b–3) or section
4975(d)(3) of the Code and the regulations
promulgated thereunder (26 CFR 54.4975–7(b)); and
(f) (1) Any loan described in section IV(b)(1) that
is entered into on or after April 7, 2006 and that
has a term of 60 days or longer must be made
pursuant to a written loan agreement that contains
all of the material terms of such loan.
(2) Any loan described in (b)(2) of this paragraph
that is entered into for a term of 60 days or longer
must be made pursuant to a written loan agreement
that contains all of the material terms of such loan.
The Department offers no opinion herein as to
whether each of the applicable conditions for
exemptive relief contained in PTE 80–26 were
satisfied in this particular instance.
E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM
13JNN1
34264
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 113 / Monday, June 13, 2011 / Notices
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
When, in September 2009, RTC
determined that it would be necessary
and in the best interest of the Funds to
extend the terms of the Initial CSAs,
RTC considered that such amendments
would not qualify for relief in reliance
upon PTE 80–26. In this connection, the
Applicant represents that, had the
Initial CSAs not included termination
dates (i.e., September 15, 2009), RTC
could have continued to rely upon the
exemptive relief provided under PTE
80–26; however, given these fixed
termination dates, the amendment and
renewal of the terms of the Initial CSAs
could have been interpreted as
depriving the Funds of payments to
which they were contractually entitled
to receive. Alternatively, the Applicant
represents that the delay of such
payments could have been construed as
an extension of credit from the Funds to
FRC, which would not have been
permitted under PTE 80–26 or any other
class exemption.4 In light of these
assumptions, the Applicant engaged
Fiduciary Counselors Inc. (hereinafter
the Independent Fiduciary) to negotiate
and approve, on behalf of each Fund
(and the Plans invested, directly or
indirectly, in each Fund) the
amendment and extension of the term of
the Initial CSAs for an additional 12
months; this engagement was
formalized under a letter agreement
dated August 25, 2009 (the Engagement
Letter).
9. Pursuant to the Engagement Letter,
the Independent Fiduciary was retained
to represent the Funds through
September 15, 2010. The Independent
Fiduciary represents that it is both an
‘‘investment adviser’’ within the
meaning of the Investment Advisers Act
of 1940 and a ‘‘qualified professional
asset manager’’ within the meaning of
PTE 84–14. The Applicant further
represents that the Independent
Fiduciary has provided independent
fiduciary services to clients since its
incorporation in 1999.
Under the terms of the Engagement
Letter, the Independent Fiduciary
assumed responsibility for, among other
things: (1) Negotiating, on behalf of each
Fund, the terms of any amendments to
the Initial CSAs on behalf of each Fund
and determining that such terms were
4 The Department offers no opinion herein
concerning whether any exemptive relief for which
the Applicant may have been eligible under PTE
80–26 on or before September 15, 2009 would have
expired upon the termination of the Initial CSAs
and the Initial Guarantees. Moreover, the
Department offers no opinion herein concerning the
Applicant’s contention that the inclusion of
termination dates in the Initial CSAs and the Initial
Guarantees would have made the Applicant
ineligible for exemptive relief under PTE 80–26
after September 15, 2009.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:06 Jun 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
fair and reasonable to each Fund; (2)
determining whether to enter into any
amendments on behalf of each Fund
and directing RTC to sign any such
amendments; (3) monitoring the future
capital support agreements on a goingforward basis, including negotiating the
terms, and determining the fairness and
reasonableness, of any modifications,
extensions, or renewals thereof; and (4)
determining on behalf of each Fund
whether to liquidate the Notes, and
determining the fairness and
reasonableness of any proposed sale of
the Notes to RTC or an affiliate of RTC.
The Independent Fiduciary also
assumed the same duties on behalf of
the Funds with respect to the
negotiation and approval of any
extension to, and amendment of, the
Initial Guarantees made by NML.
The 2009–2010 Payment of
Supplemental Yield Contributions to the
Funds
10. The Applicant represents that the
Independent Fiduciary reviewed the
terms of the Initial CSAs and Initial
Guarantees in place at the time of its
engagement, and the proceeds that each
Fund would receive if these instruments
expired as scheduled and were not
extended. Upon reviewing the terms of
the Initial CSAs, the Independent
Fiduciary determined that it would be
in the best interests of the investors in
each Fund for FRC to make additional
periodic cash contributions, or
Supplemental Yield Contributions, to
each Fund. By letter agreement dated
September 14, 2009, FRC agreed, after
negotiation with the Independent
Fiduciary, to pay the Supplemental
Yield Contributions to each Fund. The
amount of such contributions would be
determined by a mathematical formula.
The first step of this formula would
require computing the sum of (a) the
amount of capital support that would
have been required under the Initial
CSAs as of September 14, 2009, had the
Notes been sold by the Funds at the
September 14, 2009 closing market
price, and (b) the market value of the
Notes as of September 14, 2009 based
upon the closing market price on such
date (the date prior to the date that
accrual of such Supplemental Yield
Contributions commenced). The sum
resulting from the first step of the
formula (i.e., the Base Amount) would
then be multiplied by an annual interest
rate figure equal to (a) t he 3-month
LIBOR (expressed as an annual rate) as
quoted by Bloomberg at end of day print
on September 14, 2009, and updated
every three months thereafter, plus (b)
0.15 percent. If any Notes were sold by
a Fund after September 14, 2009, the
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Supplemental Yield Contributions
would be proportionately reduced based
on the par value of such sold Notes as
a proportion of the aggregate par value
of the Notes. The Supplemental Yield
Contributions would accrue daily
beginning on September 15, 2009, and
would be paid to the Funds in arrears
on a monthly basis. The Supplemental
Yield Contributions would also not
reduce or offset any of FRC’s obligations
under the proposed revision of the
capital support agreements. FRC’s
obligation to make Supplemental Yield
Contributions to the Funds pursuant to
the September 14, 2009 letter agreement
would cease only upon the occurrence
of a termination event under the
proposed revision of the capital support
agreements (such as the sale of all of the
Notes held by the Funds). Because
accrual of the Supplemental Yield
Contributions would commence on
September 15, 2009, the Independent
Fiduciary determined that, in the event
of such sale, RTC (or its affiliate) would
not be required to pay interest for any
purchased Notes with respect to the
period following September 14, 2009.
11. The following chart documents
the monthly payment of accrued
Supplemental Yield Contributions that
were made by FRC to the Funds during
the years 2009 and 2010, pursuant to the
foregoing contractual arrangements:
Supplemental
yield contributions to the
SecLending
fund
September 2009
(9/14/09 through
9/30/09) ............
October 2009 ......
November 2009 ...
December 2009 ...
January 2010 ......
February 2010 .....
March 2010 .........
April 2010 ............
May 2010 ............
June 2010 ...........
July 2010 .............
August 2010 ........
September 2010
(9/1/10 through
9/14/10) ............
Total Supplemental
Yield Contributions
Paid by
FRC to the
Funds: .......
Supplemental
yield contributions to the liquidity fund
$13,910.18
25,365.61
24,547.37
24,000.34
23,014.31
20,787.12
23,135.59
22,485.94
23,235.47
31,220.59
39,163.17
39,163.17
$12,647.38
23,062.88
22,318.91
21,821.54
20,925.03
18,900.02
21,035.30
20,444.63
21,126.11
28,386.33
35,608.04
35,608.04
17,686.68
16,081.05
327,715.54
297,965.26
The 2009 Revision of the CSAs and the
Guarantees
12. In addition to requiring FRC to
make Supplemental Yield Contributions
to the Funds, the Independent Fiduciary
(in a letter to RTC dated September 14,
2009) directed RTC and FRC to execute,
E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM
13JNN1
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 113 / Monday, June 13, 2011 / Notices
on behalf of each Fund, revised capital
support agreements between FRC and
each of the Funds (namely, the Revised
CSAs), as well as revised guarantees by
NML of FRC’s capital support
obligations to each of the Funds under
the Revised CSAs (namely, the Revised
Guarantees). Each of the foregoing
contracts were executed on September
14, 2009. The Applicant represents that
a new provision was included in each
of the Revised CSAs stipulating that if
all of the Notes were sold after
September 14, 2009 (or another event
occurs triggering FRC’s capital support
obligations under each of the Revised
CSAs, the total amount of capital
support payable to each Fund under
each of the Revised CSAs would be no
less than the Base Amount, minus the
sum of (a) The proceeds actually
received by the Fund from the
disposition of the Notes, plus (b) all
payments received by the Fund in
respect of the Notes to the extent not
already included in (a), and excluding
the amount of any Supplemental Yield
Contributions. The Independent
Fiduciary determined that this
provision, in conjunction with the
Supplemental Yield Contributions,
would help to ensure that each Fund’s
total recovery with respect to the Notes
and the required capital support would
not decline as a result of the adoption
of the Revised CSAs.
Further, the Independent Fiduciary
determined it to be appropriate and in
the best interest of the Funds to include
a new provision in each of the Revised
CSAs stipulating that, in the event the
Funds determined to sell some or all of
the Notes to RTC or an affiliate of RTC
(through either a single transaction or
series of transactions with each Fund),
the purchase price for such Notes would
be equal to the greater of (a) The market
value of such Notes on the date of any
such transaction, or (b) the sum of (i) the
amortized cost of such Notes to be sold
in such transaction, plus (ii) any
accrued but unpaid interest through the
earlier of the maturity date of the
applicable Note or September 14, 2009
(the date prior to the date that accrual
of the Supplemental Yield
Contributions commenced) calculated at
the contract rate.
It is represented that each of the
Revised CSAs, as well as the Revised
SecLending Fund Guarantee and the
Revised Liquidity Fund Guarantee
(which, taken together, constitute the
Revised Guarantees) were set to expire
on September 15, 2010 (unless, prior to
that date, the Funds received either full
cash payment for the Notes or capital
contributions from FRC and NML equal
to their respective maximum
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:06 Jun 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
contribution amounts under each of the
Revised CSAs). It is further represented
that the Funds paid no fees or
commissions in connection with the
negotiation of either the Revised CSAs
and Guarantees or the payment of the
Supplemental Yield Contributions, nor
for the Independent Fiduciary’s services
relating to such matters.
13. The Applicant represents that the
Revised CSAs and the Revised
Guarantees, as well as the Supplemental
Yield Contributions, benefitted the
investors in the Funds because the
Independent Fiduciary determined that
they placed the Funds in a position that
was at least as favorable as that which
would have been obtained had the
Initial CSAs and Guarantees expired by
their terms on September 15, 2009 and
FRC and NML had made payments to
the Funds in satisfaction of its capital
support obligations. The Applicant also
represents that the Revised CSAs and
the Revised Guarantees provided the
Funds the opportunity to seek recovery
of their amortized cost or the full par
value of the Notes, either through
recovery from the Lehman Issuers,
liquidation on the market or a potential
sale to RTC or its affiliate. The
Supplemental Yield Contributions were
intended to ensure that the Funds
remained in a position that was at least
as favorable as if FRC had satisfied its
capital support obligations upon
expiration of the Initial CSAs on
September 15, 2009 and the proceeds
were invested in instruments providing
a comparable yield. The Applicant also
states that the Revised CSAs contained
new provisions ensuring that the Funds
would receive an aggregate amount not
less than the Base Amount in
connection with any sale of the Notes
(or other event that would otherwise
trigger FRC’s capital support
obligations). The foregoing
arrangements were negotiated by and
determined to be fair, reasonable and in
the best interest of each of the Funds by
the Independent Fiduciary.
The 2010 Sale of the Notes to FRC by
the Funds
14. At a meeting of its investment
committee on September 2, 2010, the
Independent Fiduciary discussed and
approved the terms of a proposed sale
of the Notes by the Funds to FRC.
Pursuant to this determination, RTC and
FRC negotiated the terms of the Sale of
the Notes with the Independent
Fiduciary. The Independent Fiduciary
concluded that the Sale transaction
would benefit the investors in the Funds
because it would permit the Funds to
recover an amount equal to or in excess
of its amortized cost for each of the
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
34265
Notes and maintain an NAV per unit of
at least $0.995, while also retaining a
right to recover amounts received by
FRC in excess of the sale price for the
Notes. In addition, under the terms of
the Sale negotiated by the Independent
Fiduciary, each Fund would continue to
earn interest under the Supplemental
Yield Agreements until the settlement of
the transaction, and would be entitled to
additional amounts in the event that
FRC subsequently recovered an amount
greater than the sale price adjusted for
interest accrued through the date of the
refund to the relevant Fund.5 Given
these factors, the Independent Fiduciary
determined that the terms of the Sale
were fair and reasonable to each Fund.
Accordingly, by the terms of a letter
dated September 8, 2010, the
Independent Fiduciary directed in
writing that all of the Notes held by
each of the Funds be sold to FRC.
15. In accordance with the
Independent Fiduciary’s direction, the
Sale of all of the Notes from the
Liquidity Fund to FRC was executed on
September 10, 2010, and settled two
business days later on September 14,
2010 for an aggregate price of
$75,296,431; similarly, the Sale of all of
the Notes from the SecLending Fund to
FRC was executed on September 10,
2010, and settled two business days
later on September 14, 2010 for an
aggregate price of $70,436,820. The
Applicant represents that the Sale
resulted in an NAV for the Liquidity
Fund of $1.0000 per unit and for the
SecLending Fund of $0.9991 per unit.6
For each Note, the foregoing amounts
paid by FRC (which were computed in
accordance with the formula specified
in the Revised CSAs with each of the
Funds) represented the sum of (i) The
applicable Fund’s amortized cost of the
Note ($75,000,000 in the aggregate for
the Liquidity Fund and $70,000,000 for
the SecLending Fund), plus (ii) any
accrued but unpaid interest on the
5 In this connection, the Independent Fiduciary
stipulated that should FRC, through the exercise of
any of its rights, claims, or causes of action related
to its ownership of any Notes after the Sale date,
recover from the Lehman Issuers or any third party
an aggregate amount that was in excess of the sum
of (a) the purchase price paid for the Notes by FRC
and (b) interest on such purchase price from and
after the date of the Sale transaction (determined at
the rate of interest equal to the rate of interest
applicable to the Supplemental Yield
Contributions), FRC would refund such excess
promptly to the applicable Fund (after deducting all
reasonable expenses incurred in connection with
the recovery).
6 The Applicant represents that as of the close of
business on September 10, 2010, the net asset value
of the Liquidity Fund’s portfolio was approximately
$2,137,000,000, or $1.0000 per unit. As of the close
of business on September 10, 2010, the net asset
value of the SecLending Fund’s portfolio was
approximately $1,767,000,000, or $0.9991 per unit.
E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM
13JNN1
34266
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 113 / Monday, June 13, 2011 / Notices
Notes that was owed by the Lehman
Issuers through the earlier of the
maturity date of the applicable Note or
September 14, 2009, calculated at the
contract rate ($296,431 of aggregate
interest for the Liquidity Fund, and
$436,820 in aggregate interest for the
SecLending Fund).7 The following chart
summarizes the par values and the
September 10, 2010 sale prices 8 of the
various Notes held by each of the
Funds:
Fund
Lehman note
Aggregate
par value
Acquisition price & date
Sale price
Liquidity Fund ....................................
Lehman Brothers Disc (52525MJF6)
Maturity Date: 9/18/08; Face Interest
Rate: 2.80%
Lehman Brothers V/R (52517P5C1)
Maturity date: 9/26/08; Face Interest
Rate: 3.75%
Lehman Brothers V/R (52525KAB8)
Maturity Date: 3/11/09; Face Interest
Rate: 3.75%
$10,000,000
$9,981,000 (acquired 8/22/08) .........
$10,000,000
35,000,000
35,000,000 (acquired 8/28/07) .........
35,218,410
30,000,000
30,000,000 (acquired 2/11/08) .........
30,078,021
Total ...........................................
...........................................................
$75,000,000
$74,981,000 ......................................
$75,296,431
SecLending Fund ..............................
Lehman Brothers V/R (52517P5C1)
Maturity Date: 9/26/08; Face Interest
Rate: 5.51%
Lehman Brothers V/R (52517P5C1)
Maturity Date: 9/26/08; Face Interest
Rate: 5.51%
$40,000,000
$40,000,000 (acquired 8/28/07) .......
$40,249,611
30,000,000
30,000,000 (acquired 8/28/07) .........
30,187,209
...........................................................
$70,000,000
$70,000,000 ......................................
$70,436,820
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Total ...........................................
16. The Applicant represents that,
with the execution of the Sale on
September 10, 2010, the terms of
Revised CSAs, the Revised Guarantees,
and the agreement concerning the
accrual and payment of the
Supplemental Yield Contributions each
ceased to be effective as of that date. On
September 14, 2010, the Sale transaction
was settled when each of the Funds
received the sale price of the Notes from
FRC. The Applicant further represents
that, while FRC’s obligation to accrue
the Supplemental Yield Contributions
technically terminated on September 10,
2010, FRC and RTC (following
discussions with the Independent
Fiduciary) determined that these
contributions would continue to accrue
(and would be paid on) the date that the
Sale settled. Accordingly, the final
installment of the Supplemental Yield
Contributions to the Funds was paid on
the settlement date of September 14,
2010.
17. In summary, the Applicant
represents that the transactions
described herein satisfied the statutory
criteria of section 408(a) of the Act and
section 4975(c)(2) of the Code because:
(a) The transactions were easily
identifiable, have been completed, and
will not require ongoing monitoring; (b)
The Revised CSAs, the Revised
Guarantees, and the Supplemental Yield
Contributions were negotiated and
documented, and were monitored by the
Independent Fiduciary through their
expiration; (c) The Sale was a one-time
transaction for cash that was negotiated
by the Independent Fiduciary, and
neither of the Funds bore any brokerage
commissions, fees or other expenses in
connection with the Sale; (d) The
transactions enabled the Funds, and the
participating investors therein,
including the Plans invested therein, to
receive (i) Continued capital support
from FRC with respect to the Notes
under the Revised CSAs (guaranteed by
NML) and (ii) periodic payment of the
Supplemental Yield Contributions; (e)
The Independent Fiduciary determined
the foregoing arrangements placed the
Funds in a position that was at least as
favorable as the position they would
have been in had the Initial CSAs and
the Initial Guarantees expired by their
terms; (f) The Revised CSAs and the
Revised Guarantees provided the Funds
the opportunity to seek recovery of their
amortized cost, the full par value, or at
least a greater portion of the par value
of the Notes, either through recovery
from the Lehman Issuers, liquidation on
the market, or a potential Sale to RTC
or its affiliates; and (g) the Independent
Fiduciary determined that it would be
in the best interests of the investors in
each Fund for FRC to make
Supplemental Yield Contributions to
each Fund.
Notice to Interested Persons: Notice of
the proposed exemption shall be given
to all interested persons in the manner
agreed upon by the Applicant and the
Department within 15 days of the date
of publication in the Federal Register.
Comments and requests for a hearing are
due forty-five (45) days after publication
of the notice in the Federal Register.
For Further Information Contact: Mr.
Mark Judge of the Department at (202)
693–8550 (This is not a toll-free
number).
7 Pursuant to the terms of the Revised CSAs, the
one-time payment to the Funds of accrued but
unpaid interest on the Notes owed by the Lehman
Issuers was separate from, and in addition to, the
accrual and payment of the Supplemental Yield
Contributions to the Funds that commenced on
September 15, 2009.
8 The Applicant further represents that, prior to
the consummation of the Sale, the Independent
Fiduciary confirmed that the sale price calculated
pursuant to the formula discussed above for each
Note was greater than the market value of such Note
as determined by reference to price quotes provided
by two major investment brokers (since no
transaction on the Notes was available through
Bloomberg). Specifically, Barclays provided a quote
of $19.25 (representing a bid price per unit received
for each Note as of September 10, 2010), and J.P.
Morgan provided a quote of $19.00 (representing
the bid price per unit for each Note as of September
10, 2010). These prices reflect a decrease of
approximately 81% from the par value of the Notes.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:06 Jun 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Pacific Capital Bancorp Amended and
Restated Incentive and Investment and
Salary Savings Plan (the Plan); Located
in Santa Barbara, California;
[Application No. D–11659]
Proposed Exemption
The Department is considering
granting an exemption under the
authority of section 408(a) of the Act
and section 4975(c)(2) of the Code and
in accordance with the procedures set
forth in 29 CFR Part 2570, subpart B (55
FR 32836, 32847, August 10, 1990).
E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM
13JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 113 / Monday, June 13, 2011 / Notices
Section I: Transactions
If the proposed exemption is granted,
effective October 27, 2010, the
restrictions of sections 406(a)(1)(A),
406(a)(1)(E), 406(a)(2), 406(b)(1),
406(b)(2), and 407(a)(1)(A) of the Act
and the sanctions resulting from the
application of section 4975 of the Code,
by reason of section 4975(c)(1)(A) and
4975(c)(1)(E) of the Code,9 shall not
apply:
(1) To the acquisition of certain rights
(the Rights) by the Plan in connection
with an offering (the Offering) of shares
of the common stock (the Stock) in
Pacific Capital Bancorp (Bancorp) by
Bancorp, a party in interest with respect
to the Plan, and
(2) To the holding of the Rights
received by the Plan during the
subscription period of the Offering;
provided that the conditions as set forth
in section II of this proposed exemption
were satisfied for the duration of the
acquisition and holding.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Section II: Conditions
The relief provided in this exemption
is conditioned upon adherence to the
material facts and representations
described, herein, and as set forth in the
application file and upon compliance
with the conditions, as set forth in this
proposed exemption.
(1) The receipt of the Rights by the
Plan occurred in connection with the
Offering and was made available by
Bancorp on the same terms to all
shareholders of the Stock of Bancorp;
(2) The acquisition of the Rights by
the Plan resulted from an independent
act of Bancorp, as a corporate entity,
and all holders of the Rights, including
the Plan, were treated in the same
manner with respect to the acquisition
of such Rights;
(3) Each shareholder of the Stock,
including the Plan, received the same
proportionate number of Rights based
on the number of shares of Stock of
Bancorp held by such shareholder;
(4) The Board of Directors of Bancorp
(the Board) decided that the Offering
should be made available to all
shareholders of the Stock, including the
Plan, as record owner of the Stock held
in the Plan on behalf of the accounts of
the individual participants (the Invested
Participants) all or a portion of whose
accounts in the Plan are invested in the
Stock, in accordance with provisions
under such Plan for individuallydirected investment of such accounts;
9 For purposes of this proposed exemption,
references to specific provisions of Title I of the
Act, unless otherwise specified, refer also to the
corresponding provisions of the Code.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:06 Jun 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
(5) The decision to exercise the Rights
or to refrain from exercising the Rights
was made by each of the Invested
Participants in accordance with the
provision under the Plan for
individually-directed accounts; and
(6) No brokerage fees, commissions,
subscription fees, or any other charges
were paid by the Plan with respect to
the Offering, and no brokerage fees,
commissions, or other monies were paid
by the Plan to any broker in connection
with the exercise of the Rights.
Effective Date: This proposed
exemption, if granted, will be effective,
October 27, 2010, the date the Plan
acquired the Rights.
Summary of Facts and Representations
1. The Plan is a defined contribution
profit sharing plan. Bancorp is the
sponsor of the Plan. The Plan is
intended to satisfy the requirements
under section 401(a), 401(k) and 401(m)
of the Code. The Plan is a participant
directed account plan intended to
satisfy the requirements of section
404(c) of the Act.
As of August 30, 2010, the Plan had
approximately 1,417 participants. The
fair market value of the total assets of
the Plan, as of August 30, 2010, was
$64,324,228.
The Compensation & Benefits
Committee (the Committee) became the
fiduciary responsible for Plan matters
on October 2010. The Committee is
comprised of non-employee members of
the Board of Bancorp. It is represented
the members of the Committee satisfy
the independence requirements of
NASDAQ, the Code, and various
banking laws and regulations. As a
fiduciary with respect to the Plan, the
Committee is a party in interest to the
Plan, pursuant to section 3(14)(A) of the
Act.
On December 1, 2007, the Charles
Schwab Trust Company (Charles
Schwab Trust), a California chartered
non-depository trust company, became
the directed trustee for the Plan. Charles
Schwab Trust also serves as custodian
for the Plan. As custodian, Charles
Schwab Trust executes investment
directions in accordance with
participants’ written or electronic
instructions. In addition Charles
Schwab Corporate and Retirement
Services (CSC) is the broker for the Plan.
As service providers to the Plan, Charles
Schwab Trust and CSC are parties in
interest to the Plan, pursuant to section
3(14)(B) of the Act.
2. The Plan offers to participants the
following permitted investment options
in which to invest all or a portion of
such participants’ account balances: (a)
The Stock, (b) a variety of money market
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
34267
funds, (c) common collective trusts, (d)
mutual funds, and (e) self-directed
accounts. Charles Schwab Stable Value
Fund is the common collective trust
fund in which Plan assets are invested.
Certain Plan assets are also invested in
mutual funds managed by an affiliate of
Charles Schwab Trust.
3. The application was filed on behalf
of Bancorp, a bank holding company,
located in Santa Barbara, California.
Pacific Capital Bank, National
Association (the Bank) is a whollyowned subsidiary of Bancorp. The Bank
is a full-service, state-chartered
commercial bank located in California
whose deposits are insured by the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
As of June 30, 2010, the Bank had $7.1
billion in assets. The Bank, as an
employer any of whose employees are
covered by the plan, is a party in
interest with respect to the Plan,
pursuant to section 3(14)(C) of the Act.
Substantially all of the activities of
Bancorp are conducted through the
Bank. Bancorp, as the parent of the
Bank, is a party in interest with respect
to the Plan, pursuant to section 3(14)(E)
of the Act.
4. The Stock of Bancorp is listed for
quotation on the NASDAQ Global Select
Market under the symbol PCBC. The
total number of shares of Stock
outstanding, as of August 18, 2010, was
47,406,579. During the period beginning
on October 19, 2010 and ending on
November 15, 2010, the Stock was
trading on the NASDAQ at prices
ranging between $0.73 and $0.42 per
share.
The Stock is a ‘‘qualifying employer
security,’’ as defined under section
407(d)(5) of the Act and 4975(e) of the
Code.
5. On April 29, 2010, Bancorp and the
Bank entered into an investment
agreement with SB Acquisition
Company LLC, a wholly-owned
subsidiary of Ford Financial Fund, L.P.
(the Investor) for the sale to the Investor
of 225,000,000 shares of Stock at $0.20
per share and 455,000 shares of
mandatorily convertible participating
voting preferred stock at $1,000 per
share. The aggregate consideration paid
to Bancorp by the Investor for these
securities was $500 million in cash.
Before accounting for any issuance of
Stock pursuant to the Offering, the
Investor owned approximately 86
percent (86%) of the outstanding Stock.
As a condition of the investment
agreement with the Investor, Bancorp
agreed to commence the Offering, which
is the subject of this proposed
exemption, whereby shareholders of
record would receive non-transferable
rights to purchase a number of shares of
E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM
13JNN1
34268
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 113 / Monday, June 13, 2011 / Notices
Stock equal to 20 percent (20%) of the
then outstanding shares of Stock, at a
purchase price equal to $0.20 per share.
It is represented that the Rights were
non-transferable to allow only legacy
shareholders of the Stock the
opportunity to purchase additional
shares of the Stock to help offset the
share dilution such shareholders
incurred when the Stock was acquired
by the Investor. Accordingly, Bancorp,
as a corporate entity and issuer of
securities, announced in connection
with the Offering the issuance of up to
726,975,565 shares of Stock, as required
by the investment agreement: (a) To
raise equity capital; and (2) to provide
existing shareholders the opportunity to
purchase common stock at the same
price per share paid by the Investor for
the Stock. Bancorp intends to use the
net proceeds from the Offering for
general corporate purposes, including
an investment in the Bank.
6. Under the terms of the Offering, all
shareholders of the Stock of Bancorp,
such as the Invested Participants,
received at no charge the Rights to
purchase, through the exercise of such
Rights, the Stock being issued by
Bancorp in connection with the
Offering. With respect to the Rights,
under the terms of the Offering, 15.335
Rights were issued for every share of the
Stock held by each shareholder on
August 30, 2010, (the Record Date). All
Rights were rounded down to the
nearest whole number for each
shareholder. For example, an Invested
Participant’s account in the Plan that
held 543 shares of Stock, as of the
Record Date, would entitle such
Invested Participant to 8,326 Rights
(15.335 × 543 = 8,326.905 rounded
down to 8,326), pursuant to the
Offering, which in turn would permit an
Invested Participant to purchase 8,326
shares of Stock.
It is represented that the Rights were
not listed, traded or quoted on NASDAQ
or on any other stock exchange or
trading market. Further, the terms of the
Offering stipulated that the Rights could
not be sold, assigned or transferred.
7. The Rights could only be exercised
in whole numbers. Upon exercise, each
of the Rights permitted a shareholder of
the Stock of Bancorp to purchase one (1)
additional share of Stock at a
subscription price of $0.20 per share. A
shareholder had the right to choose to
exercise some, all, or none of his Rights.
The exercise of any of the Rights was
irrevocable. It is represented that there
were no over-subscription rights
associated with the Offering. The Rights
could be exercised beginning October
18, 2010, the date of the issuance of the
prospectus describing the Offering. The
Offering closed with respect to the
exercise of the Rights on November 19,
2010, at 5 p.m. New York City time.
Pursuant to the terms of the Offering all
unexercised Rights expired and became
worthless after the closing of the
Offering.
8. It is represented that on the Record
Date, the Plan was the record owner of
1,573,450 shares of Stock which were
allocated to the individual accounts of
the 1,417 Invested Participants. The
aggregate fair market value of the assets
of the Plan invested in shares of the
Stock, on the Record Date, based on a
closing price of $0.859 on that date was
$1,351,593.55. The approximate
percentage of the fair market value of
the Plan’s total assets invested in the
Stock is 2.1 percent (2.1%). As of the
Record Date, 1,573,450 shares of Stock
constituted approximately 3.32 percent
(3.32%) of the 47,406,579 shares of
Stock outstanding.
Based on the ratio of 15.335 Rights for
each share of Stock held, the Plan
acquired 24,128,855 Rights as a result of
the Offering. It is represented that the
Number of
shares owned
Ownership
percentage 10
Edward E. Birch ............................................................
H. Gerald Bidwell ..........................................................
Richard S. Hambleton, Jr., Committee Member ..........
D. Vernon Horton .........................................................
6,485
0
6,485
9,317
0.014
0.000
0.014
0.020
S. Lachlan Hough .........................................................
Roger C. Knopf .............................................................
George S. Leis .............................................................
0
363
6,318
0.000
0.001
0.013
William R. Loomis, Committee Member .......................
John R. Mackall ............................................................
0
10,909
0.000
0.023
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Name
Rights held by the Plan for the accounts
of Invested Participants were plan
assets. It is represented that 11,751,048
shares of Stock were subscribed for by
the Plan. Of the Rights received by the
Plan on behalf of accounts of the
Invested Participants, all Rights were
either exercised or expired.
It is represented that the Committee
recommended to the Board that it was
in the best interest of the Invested
Participants to provide such Invested
Participants with an opportunity to
participate in (and the ability to make
the decision not to participate in) the
Offering which would prevent dilution
of such Interested Participants’ interest
in Bancorp from the exercise of the
Rights by other shareholders of Bancorp.
Accordingly, the Board after considering
the Committee’s recommendation
concluded, as a matter of California
Corporations law and as a matter of
fairness, that the Rights should be made
available to all shareholders of Bancorp,
including the Plan, as record owner of
the Stock. In this regard, the Plan holds
title to the Stock on behalf of the
accounts of the Invested Participants, in
accordance with provisions under such
Plan for individually-directed
investment of such accounts. The
Offering was approved by the Board on
April 28, 2010, August 18, 2010, and
August 27, 2011. It is represented that
all members of the Board participated in
each vote to approve the Offering and
each vote was unanimously approved
by the Board.
On the dates of approval, the Board
was comprised of eleven (11)
individuals, two (2) of whom are
employees of Bancorp or a subsidiary.
The following table identifies the
members of the Board and the
Committee and each member’s
respective ownership interests in
Bancorp, as of August 27, 2010:
Employed by Bancorp or subsidiary
No.
No.
No.
Yes.
Mr. Horton provides services to Bancorp on a parttime basis.
No.
No.
Yes.
Mr. Leis was the CEO of Bancorp at the time of the
Offering and is currently the Chief Operating Officer
of Bancorp.
No.
No.
10 This ownership percentage is based on
47,406,579 common shares of Stock outstanding on
August 18, 2010.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:06 Jun 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM
13JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 113 / Monday, June 13, 2011 / Notices
Number of
shares owned
Name
Ownership
percentage 10
15,204
7,285
0.032
0.015
Richard A. Nightingale, Committee Member ................
Kathy J. Odell, Committee Member .............................
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
9. Enclosed with a form letter mailed
to each participant in the Plan, on
October 19, 2010, Bancorp provided a
copy of the prospectus which described
the Offering, a document providing
frequently asked questions and answers
regarding the Offering for Plan
participants, an election form for Plan
participants, and a return envelope
addressed to BNY Mellon Shareowner
Services (BMSS), the subscription agent.
10. In order to exercise the Rights,
Invested Participants had to complete
an election form, deliver such form to
BMSS, the subscription agent, liquidate
sufficient existing investments in the
Plan in order to generate the full
subscription price in cash, transfer such
cash to the Schwab Value Advantage
Money Institutional Prime Shares Fund
by the close of business on the fourth
(4th) business day (November 15, 2010)
prior to the expiration of the Offering on
November 19, 2010. It is represented
that the date, November 15, 2010,
provided the third party administrator
with four (4) days within which to
compile the exercise elections of the
Invested Participants, update the Plan
records, and forward such exercise
elections to the subscription agent.
It is represented that 404 Invested
Participants out of 1,417 decided to
exercise the Rights. In this regard, the
Rights of such Invested Participants
were executed on November 19, 2010.11
It is represented that November 19,
2010, the last day of the Offering, was
selected as the exercise date with
respect to the Rights held under the
Plan for the purpose of providing a
protective cut-off date, where if on such
date the exercise price of the Rights was
greater than the trading price of the
Stock, the election to exercise would not
be honored and the Rights would be
canceled. The Invested Participants
exercised 11,751,048 Rights. As a result
of this exercise, the Invested
Participants received 11,751,048 shares
of Stock. Accordingly, it is represented
that the Plan received total gross
11 It is represented that the Invested Participants
rely on the relief provided by the statutory
exemption, pursuant to section 408(e) of the Act for
the exercise of the Rights. The Department is
offering no view, as to whether the requirements of
the statutory exemption provided in section 408(e)
of the Act have been satisfied. Further, the
Department, herein, is not providing any relief with
respect to the exercise of the Rights.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:06 Jun 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
Employed by Bancorp or subsidiary
No.
No.
proceeds of $2,350,209.60 as a result of
participation in the Offering.
11. It is represented that no brokerage
fees, commissions, subscription fees, or
any other charges were paid by the Plan
with respect to the Offering, and no
brokerage fees, commissions, or other
monies were paid by the Plan to any
broker in connection with the exercise
of the Rights. It is further represented
that Bancorp did not charge any fees or
sales commissions to issue the Rights or
to issue the Stock upon the exercise of
the Rights.
12. It is represented that, as soon as
practicable after the expiration of the
Offering, BMSS, as the subscription
agent, arranged for the distribution of
the Stock purchased as a result of the
exercise of the Rights. It is further
represented that the Stock purchased in
connection with the Offering was
eligible for trading on NASDAQ by the
Invested Participants at any time after
such Stock was credited to such
participants’ accounts.
13. Bancorp has requested an
exemption with respect to the
transactions which are the subject of
this proposed exemption. In this regard,
relief has been requested: (a) For the
acquisition of the Rights by the Plan in
connection with the Offering by
Bancorp, and (b) for the holding of the
Rights by the Plan during the
subscription period of the Offering. It is
represented that the Rights acquired by
the Plan satisfy the definition of
‘‘employer securities,’’ pursuant to
section 407(d)(1) of the Act. As the
Rights were not stock or a marketable
obligation, such Rights do not meet the
definition of ‘‘qualifying employer
securities,’’ as set forth in section
407(d)(5) of the Act. Accordingly, the
subject transactions constitute an
acquisition and holding on behalf of a
plan, of an employer security which is
not a qualifying employer security, in
violation of section 407(a) of the Act, for
which the applicant has requested relief
from sections 406(a)(1)(A), 406(a)(1)(E),
406(a)(2), and 407(a)(1)(A) of the Act.
The subject transactions also raise
conflict of interest issues by fiduciaries
of the Plan for which relief from the
prohibitions of section 406(b)(1) and
406(b)(2) of the Act has been requested.
14. It is represented that the subject
transactions have already been
consummated. In this regard, the Plan
acquired the Rights pursuant to the
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
34269
Offering on October 27, 2010, and held
such Rights pending the closing of the
Offering on November 19, 2010. As
there was insufficient time between the
dates when the Plan acquired the Rights
and when such Rights expired, to apply
for and be granted an exemption,
Bancorp is seeking a retroactive
exemption to be granted, effective as of
October 27, 2010, the date that the Plan
acquired the Rights.
15. Bancorp represents that the
proposed exemption is administratively
feasible. In this regard, the acquisition
and holding of the Rights by the Plan
were one-time transactions that
involved a distribution of the Rights to
all shareholders at no cost. It is
represented that it is customary for the
industry involved to make a rights
offering available to all shareholders.
16. Bancorp represents that the
transactions which are the subject of
this proposed exemption are in the
interest of the Plan, because the subject
transactions represented a valuable
opportunity to the accounts of the
Invested Participants in the Plan to buy
the Stock at a discount. It is represented
that this discount could be realized by
selling the Stock immediately after the
exercise of the Rights and investing the
proceeds from such sale of the Stock in
other investment options under the
Plan. If the Plan had not participated in
the Offering, the Invested Participants
whose accounts in the Plan were
invested in shares of the Stock on the
Record Date would not have received
the benefit all other shareholders of the
Stock received.
Bancorp represents that denial of the
requested exemption would result in the
imposition of a tax to be paid by any
disqualified person who participated in
the prohibited transaction. Thus, the
denial of the exemption would result in
an economic loss to Bancorp, to its
shareholders, and therefore to the
Invested Participants.
17. Bancorp represents that the
proposed exemption provides sufficient
safeguards for the protection of the Plan
and its participants and beneficiaries. In
this regard, the participation in the
Offering protected the accounts of the
Invested Participants in the Plan from
having their interest in the Stock being
diluted as a result of the Offering.
It is further represented that the
interests of the accounts of Invested
Participants in the Plan were adequately
E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM
13JNN1
34270
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 113 / Monday, June 13, 2011 / Notices
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
protected in the decision for the Plan to
acquire and hold the Rights in that such
decision was made by the Board which
was independent of management and
Bancorp.
The accounts of Invested Participants
in the Plan were protected against
economic loss in that, if on November
15, 2010, the trading price of the Stock
was not greater than $0.20 per share, all
Rights that such Invested Participants
had elected to exercise would be
immediately cancelled.
18. In summary, Bancorp represents
that the subject transactions satisfy the
statutory criteria of section 408(a) of the
Act and section 4975(c)(2) of the Code
because:
(a) The receipt by the Plan of the
Rights occurred in connection with the
Offering made available by Bancorp on
the same terms to all shareholders of the
Stock of Bancorp;
(b) The acquisition of the Rights by
the Plan resulted from an independent
act of Bancorp, as a corporate entity,
and all holders of the Rights, including
the Plan, were treated in the same
manner with respect to the acquisition
of such Rights;
(c) Each shareholder of the Stock,
including the Plan, received the same
proportionate number of Rights based
on the number of shares of Stock of
Bancorp held by such shareholder;
(d) The Board decided that the
Offering should be made available to all
shareholders of the Stock, including the
Plan, as record owner of the Stock held
in the Plan on behalf of the accounts of
the Invested Participants, all or a
portion of whose accounts in the Plan
are invested in the Stock, in accordance
with provisions under such Plan for
individually-directed investment of
such accounts;
(e) The decision to exercise the Rights
or to refrain from exercising the Rights
was made by each of the Invested
Participants in accordance with the
provision under the Plan for
individually-directed accounts; and
(f) No brokerage fees, commissions,
subscription fees, or any other charges
were paid by the Plan with respect to
the Offering, and no brokerage fees,
commissions, or other monies were paid
by the Plan to any broker in connection
with the exercise of the Rights.
Notice to Interested Persons
The persons who may be interested in
the publication in the Federal Register
of the Notice of Proposed Exemption
(the Notice) include current participants
and beneficiaries, former participants
and beneficiaries, who were participants
and beneficiaries as of the Record Date,
alternate payees, the Committee, the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:06 Jun 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
Board, and the administrator, all
trustees of the plan, and any other
parties determined to be ‘‘interested
persons.’’
It is represented that each of these
classes of interested persons will be
notified of the publication of the Notice
by first class mail, within fifteen (15)
days of publication of the Notice in the
Federal Register. Such mailing will
contain a copy of the Notice, as it
appears in the Federal Register on the
date of publication, plus a copy of the
Supplemental Statement, as required,
pursuant to 29 CFR 2570.43(b)(2), which
will advise all interested persons of
their right to comment and to request a
hearing.
All written comments and/or requests
for a hearing must be received by the
Department from interested persons
within 45 days of the publication of this
proposed exemption in the Federal
Register.
For Further Information Contact: Ms.
Angelena C. Le Blanc of the Department,
telephone (202) 693–8540. (This is not
a toll-free number.)
General Information
The attention of interested persons is
directed to the following:
(1) The fact that a transaction is the
subject of an exemption under section
408(a) of the Act and/or section
4975(c)(2) of the Code does not relieve
a fiduciary or other party in interest or
disqualified person from certain other
provisions of the Act and/or the Code,
including any prohibited transaction
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) Before an exemption may be
granted under section 408(a) of the Act
and/or section 4975(c)(2) of the Code,
the Department must find that the
exemption is administratively feasible,
in the interests of the plan and of its
participants and beneficiaries, and
protective of the rights of participants
and beneficiaries of the plan;
(3) The proposed exemptions, if
granted, will be supplemental to, and
not in derogation of, any other
provisions of the Act and/or the Code,
including statutory or administrative
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
exemptions and transitional 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
(4) The proposed exemptions, if
granted, will be subject to the express
condition that the material facts and
representations contained in each
application are true and complete, and
that each application accurately
describes all material terms of the
transaction which is the subject of the
exemption.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 8th day of
June, 2011.
Ivan Strasfeld,
Director of Exemption Determinations,
Employee Benefits Security Administration,
U.S. Department of Labor.
[FR Doc. 2011–14520 Filed 6–10–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–29–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
Federal-State Extended Benefits
Program—Methodology for Calculating
‘‘on’’ or ‘‘off’’ Total Unemployment Rate
Indicators for Purposes of Determining
When a State Begins and Ends an
Extended Benefit Period
Employment and Training
Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
UIPL 16–11 informs states of
the methodology used to calculate the
‘‘on’’ or ‘‘off’’ total unemployment rate
(TUR) indicators to determine when
extended benefit (EB) periods begin and
end in a state. UIPL 16–11 is published
below to inform the public and is
available at: https://wdr.doleta.gov/
directives/corr_doc.cfm?DOCN=3027.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
UIPL 16–11: Federal-State Extended
Benefits Program—Methodology for
Calculating ‘‘on’’ or ‘‘off’’ Total
Unemployment Rate Indicators for
Purposes of Determining When a State
Begins and Ends an Extended Benefit
Period
1. Purpose. To inform states of the
new methodology used to calculate the
‘‘on’’ or ‘‘off’’ total unemployment rate
(TUR) indicators to determine when
extended benefit (EB) periods begin and
end in a state.
2. References. The Federal-State
Extended Unemployment Compensation
Act of 1970 (EUCA); Section 2005 of
Division B, Title II, the Assistance for
E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM
13JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 113 (Monday, June 13, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34260-34270]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-14520]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employee Benefits Security Administration
Proposed Exemptions From Certain Prohibited Transaction
Restrictions
AGENCY: Employee Benefits Security Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Notice of proposed exemptions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document contains notices of pendency before the
Department of Labor (the Department) of proposed exemptions 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). This notice includes the
following proposed exemptions: D-11608, Russell Trust Company; and D-
11659, Pacific Capital Bancorp Amended and Restated Incentive and
Investment and Salary Savings Plan
DATES: All interested persons are invited to submit written comments or
requests for a hearing on the pending exemptions, unless otherwise
stated in the Notice of Proposed Exemption, within 45 days from the
date of publication of this Federal Register Notice.
ADDRESSES: Comments and requests for a hearing should state: (1) The
name, address, and telephone number of the person making the comment or
request, and (2) the nature of the person's interest in the exemption
and the manner in which the person would be adversely affected by the
exemption. A request for a hearing must also state the issues to be
addressed and include a general description of the evidence to be
presented at the hearing. All written comments and requests for a
hearing (at least three copies) should be sent to the Employee Benefits
Security Administration (EBSA), Office of Exemption Determinations,
Room N-5700, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20210. Attention: Application No.----, stated in each
Notice of Proposed Exemption. Interested persons are also invited to
submit comments and/or hearing requests to EBSA via e-mail or FAX. Any
such comments or requests should be sent either by e-mail to:
moffitt.betty@dol.gov, or by FAX to (202) 219-0204 by the end of the
scheduled comment period. The applications for exemption and the
comments received will be available for public inspection in the Public
Documents Room of the Employee Benefits Security Administration, U.S.
Department of Labor, Room N-1513, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20210.
Warning: If you submit written comments or hearing requests, do not
include any personally-identifiable or confidential business
information that you do not want to be publicly-disclosed. All comments
and hearing requests are posted on the Internet exactly as they are
received, and they can be retrieved by most Internet search engines.
The Department will make no deletions, modifications or redactions to
the comments or hearing requests received, as they are public records.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Notice to Interested Persons
Notice of the proposed exemptions will be provided to all
interested persons in the manner agreed upon by the applicant and the
Department within 15 days of the date of publication in the Federal
Register. Such notice shall include a copy of the notice of proposed
exemption as published in the Federal Register and shall inform
interested persons of their right to comment and to request a hearing
(where appropriate).
The proposed exemptions were requested in applications filed
pursuant to section 408(a) of the Act and/or section 4975(c)(2) of the
Code, and in accordance with procedures set forth in 29 CFR Part 2570,
Subpart B (55 FR 32836, 32847, August 10, 1990). 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 requested to the Secretary of Labor.
Therefore, these notices of proposed exemption are issued solely by the
Department.
The applications contain representations with regard to the
proposed exemptions which are summarized below. Interested persons are
referred to the applications on file with the Department for a complete
statement of the facts and representations.
[[Page 34261]]
Russell Trust Company (RTC or the Applicant); Located in Seattle,
Washington; [Exemption Application No. D-11608]
Proposed Exemption
The Department is considering granting an exemption under the
authority of section 408(a) of the Act and section 4975(c)(2) of the
Code and in accordance with the procedures set forth in 29 CFR Part
2570, Subpart B (55 FR 32836, 32847, August 10, 1990).
Section I--Covered Transactions
If the proposed exemption is granted--
(a) The restrictions of sections 406(a)(1)(A), (a)(1)(B),
(a)(1)(D), 406(b)(1) and 406(b)(2) of the Act, and the sanctions
resulting from the application of section 4975 of the Code, by reason
of section 4975(c)(1)(A), (c)(1)(B), (c)(1)(D), and (c)(1)(E) of the
Code, shall not apply, between September 14, 2009 and September 10,
2010, inclusive, to an arrangement involving the following
transactions:
(1) The extension of credit, through a revised capital support
agreement, to certain employee benefit plans (the Plans) invested,
directly or indirectly, in the Russell Securities Lending Short-Term
Investment Fund (the SecLending Fund) by the Frank Russell Company
(FRC), the parent company of RTC and a party in interest with respect
to the Plans, in connection with the SecLending Fund's holding of
certain notes (the Notes) issued by Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. or
its affiliates (the Revised SecLending Fund CSA);
(2) The extension of credit, through a revised capital support
agreement, to certain Plans invested, directly or indirectly, in the
RTC Russell Liquidity Fund (the Liquidity Fund) by FRC in connection
with the Liquidity Fund's holding of the Notes (the Revised Liquidity
Fund CSA);
(3) The provision of a revised guarantee to FRC by its parent
company, the Northwest Mutual Life Insurance Company (NML), a party in
interest with respect to the Plans, in order to ensure FRC's foregoing
capital support obligation to the SecLending Fund (the Revised
SecLending Fund Guarantee);
(4) The provision of a revised guarantee to FRC by NML in order to
ensure FRC's foregoing capital support obligation to the Liquidity Fund
(the Revised Liquidity Fund Guarantee);
(5) The accrual and periodic payment of certain supplemental yield
contributions by FRC to the SecLending Fund (the SecLending Fund
Supplemental Yield Contributions); and
(6) The accrual and periodic payment of certain supplemental yield
contributions by FRC to the Liquidity Fund (the Liquidity Fund
Supplemental Yield Contributions);
(b) The restrictions of sections 406(a)(1)(A), 406(b)(1) and (b)(2)
of the Act, and the sanctions resulting from the application of section
4975 of the Code, by reason of section 4975(c)(1)(A) and (E) of the
Code shall not apply to the September 10, 2010 cash sale (the Sale) of
all of the Notes held by both the SecLending Fund and the Liquidity
Fund (taken together, the Funds) to FRC; provided that all of the
conditions set forth below in Section II are satisfied.
Section II--Conditions
(a) With respect to the arrangement involving (i) The Revised
SecLending Fund CSA and the Revised Liquidity Fund CSA transactions
(together, the Revised CSAs), (ii) the Revised SecLending Fund
Guarantee and the Revised Liquidity Fund Guarantee transactions
(together, the Revised Guarantees), and (iii) the SecLending Fund
Supplemental Yield Contributions and the Liquidity Fund Supplemental
Yield Contribution transactions (together, the Supplemental Yield
Contributions):
(1) The decision to enter into each of these transactions was made
on behalf of the Funds (and the employee benefit plans invested,
directly or indirectly, in the Funds) by an independent fiduciary (the
Independent Fiduciary), who reviewed their terms and conditions of each
of the foregoing transactions and determined that they were protective
of, and in the interest of, the Funds and the Plans investing therein;
(2) The foregoing transactions were entered into pursuant to
written agreements that contained all of the relevant terms and
conditions relating to such transactions; and
(3) The Funds did not pay any fees, commissions or other expenses
in connection with the foregoing transactions;
(b) With respect to the Sale of the Notes by each Fund to FRC:
(1) The Sale was a one-time transaction for cash;
(2) In connection with the Sale, the applicable Fund received an
amount which was equal to the greater of: (i) The market value of the
Notes being sold on the date of the Sale; or (ii) the sum of the
amortized cost of such Notes, plus any accrued but unpaid interest on
such Notes through the earlier of the maturity date of the applicable
Note or September 14, 2009, in each case calculated at the contract
rate;
(3) The Funds did not pay any fees, commissions or other expenses
in connection with the Sale;
(4) The decision to sell all of the Notes held by the Funds to FRC
was made by an Independent Fiduciary, who determined that the Sale of
the Notes was appropriate for, and in the best interests of, each of
the Funds and the Plans invested, directly or indirectly, in the Funds,
at the time of the Sale transaction;
(5) The Independent Fiduciary has taken all appropriate actions
necessary to safeguard the interests of the Funds, and of the employee
benefit plans invested, directly or indirectly, in the Funds, in
connection with the transaction;
(6) If the exercise of any of FRC's rights, claims, or causes of
action in connection with its ownership of the Notes results in
recovering from the issuer of the Notes, or any third party, an
aggregate amount that is in excess of the sum of: (i) The Sale price
paid for the Notes by FRC; and (ii) interest on such Sale price paid
from September 10, 2010 to September 14, 2010, inclusive, made by FRC
to the Funds, then FRC will refund such excess amount promptly to the
Fund (after deducting all reasonable expenses incurred in connection
with the recovery);
(c) RTC and its affiliates, as applicable, maintain, or cause to be
maintained, for a period of six (6) years from the date of any covered
transaction such records as are necessary to enable the person
described below in paragraph (d)(1), to determine whether the
conditions of this exemption have been met, except that:
(1) No party in interest with respect to a plan which engages in
the covered transaction, other than FRC, RTC and their affiliates, as
applicable, shall be subject to a civil penalty under section 502(i) of
the Act or the taxes imposed by section 4975(a) and (b) of the Code, if
such records are not maintained, or not available for examination, as
required, below, by paragraph (d)(1);
(2) A separate prohibited transaction shall not be considered to
have occurred solely because due to circumstances beyond the control of
FRC, RTC or their affiliates, as applicable, such records are lost or
destroyed prior to the end of the six-year period.
(d)(1) Except as provided, below, in paragraph (d)(2), and
notwithstanding any provisions of subsections (a)(2) and (b) of section
504 of the Act, the records referred to, above, in paragraph (c) are
unconditionally available at their customary location for examination
during normal business hours by --
[[Page 34262]]
(A) Any duly authorized employee or representative of the
Department, the Internal Revenue Service, or the Securities and
Exchange Commission; or
(B) Any fiduciary of any plan that engages in the covered
transaction, or any duly authorized employee or representative of such
fiduciary; or
(C) Any employer of participants and beneficiaries and any employee
organization whose members are covered by a plan that engages in the
covered transaction, or any authorized employee or representative of
these entities; or
(D) Any participant or beneficiary of a plan that engages in the
covered transaction, or duly authorized employee or representative of
such participant or beneficiary;
(2) None of the persons described, above, in paragraph (d)(1)(B)-
(D) shall be authorized to examine trade secrets of FRC, RTC or their
affiliates, or commercial or financial information which is privileged
or confidential; and
(3) Should RTC refuse to disclose information on the basis that
such information is exempt from disclosure, RTC shall, by the close of
the thirtieth (30th) day following the request, provide a written
notice advising that person of the reasons for the refusal and that the
Department may request such information.
Summary of Facts and Representations
1. RTC is a trust company organized under the laws of the State of
Washington that is subject to regulation by the Washington State
Department of Financial Institutions. RTC provides a wide range of
fiduciary and investment management services to a broad array of
institutional clients, including employee benefit plans subject to the
Act and the Code. RTC serves as discretionary trustee for several
commingled employee benefit fund trusts. RTC has numerous affiliates
and is a subsidiary of FRC, a Washington corporation. FRC, in turn, is
a subsidiary of NML.
2. The Applicant represents that the SecLending Fund is a separate
fund of the Russell Trust Company Commingled Employee Benefit Funds
Trust (the Trust), a group trust that is exempt from federal income tax
pursuant to Rev. Rul. 81-100. The SecLending Fund is used as an
investment vehicle for cash collateral received in connection with
securities lending activities. The Applicant also represents that, on
all dates relevant to the requested exemption, the SecLending Fund had
Plan investors who were subject to the Act and the Code. The Liquidity
Fund (like its predecessor fund, the Russell Short-Term Investment
Fund, or STIF Fund) is a cash sweep vehicle that does not engage in
securities lending activities. The Applicant represents that, on all
dates relevant to the requested exemption, the assets of both the
Liquidity Fund and its predecessor, the STIF Fund, constituted ``plan
assets'' subject to the Act because each of the foregoing funds were
collective trust funds maintained by a bank, and included Plan
investors who were subject to the Act and the Code. In this connection,
the Applicant represents that, under 29 CFR section 2510.3-
101(h)(1)(ii), when a plan acquires or holds an interest in such a
common or collective fund of a bank, its assets are deemed to include
an undivided interest in each of the underlying assets of such fund.
Each of the Funds is bank-maintained for purposes of the Act, and
RTC serves as a discretionary trustee for each Fund. The Funds are
short-term investment funds that seek to maintain a constant net asset
value, or ``NAV,'' equal to $1.00 per unit. RTC has investment
discretion with respect to the assets of the Funds, and makes all
determinations with respect to the purchase, sale, and holding of the
assets by the Funds (within the investment parameters established for
each Fund).
3. The Applicant represents that, as of September 15, 2008,
numerous collective investment funds maintained by RTC or its
affiliates (the RTC CIFs) were direct investors in the STIF Fund.
Further, numerous Plans were indirectly invested in the SecLending Fund
and the STIF Fund through their investment in the RTC CIFs. One Plan
sponsored by RTC or its affiliates had a direct (rather than an
indirect) investment in the STIF Fund.
The Lehman Notes
4. On September 15, 2008, both the SecLending Fund and the STIF
Fund held Notes issued by Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. or its
affiliates (the Lehman Issuers). The SecLending Fund acquired all of
the Notes described in this proposed exemption between September of
2007 and March of 2008, while the STIF Fund acquired the Notes between
September of 2007 and August of 2008. The decision both to acquire and
to hold the Notes was made by RTC in its capacity as trustee and
investment manager for each of the foregoing funds. Prior to investing
in the Notes, the Applicant represents that RTC conducted an
investigation of the potential investment, examining and considering
the economic and other terms of the Notes. RTC represents that the
investment in the Notes was consistent with the applicable investment
policies and objectives of both the SecLending Fund and the STIF Fund.
At the time they were acquired by the foregoing funds, the Notes were
rated at least ``A'' or ``A+'' by both Moody's and S&P rating agencies.
Based on its consideration of the relevant facts and circumstances, RTC
determined that it was prudent and appropriate to acquire the Notes.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Department is expressing no opinion herein regarding
whether the acquisition and holding of the Notes on, before, or
after September 15, 2008 by either the SecLending Fund or the STIF
Fund (or its successor fund, the Liquidity Fund) violated any of the
fiduciary responsibility provisions of Part 4 of Title I of the Act.
In this regard, the Department notes that section 404(a) of the Act
requires, among other things, that a fiduciary of a plan act
prudently, solely in the interest of the plan's participants and
beneficiaries, and for the exclusive purpose of providing benefits
to participants and beneficiaries when making investment decisions
on behalf of a plan. Section 404(a) of the Act also states that a
plan fiduciary should diversify the investments of a plan so as to
minimize the risk of large losses, unless under the circumstances it
is clearly prudent not to do so.
Moreover, the Department is not providing any opinion herein as
to whether a particular category of investments or investment
strategy would be considered prudent or in the best interests of a
plan as required by section 404 of the Act. The determination of the
prudence of a particular investment or investment course of action
must be made by a plan fiduciary after appropriate consideration of
those facts and circumstances that, given the scope of such
fiduciary's investment duties, the fiduciary knows or should know
are relevant to the particular investment or investment course of
action involved, including a plan's potential exposure to losses and
the role the investment or investment course of action plays in that
portion of the plan's portfolio with respect to which the fiduciary
has investment duties (see 29 CFR 2550.404a-1). The Department also
notes that in order to act prudently in making investment decisions,
a plan fiduciary must consider, among other factors, the
availability, risks and potential return of alternative investments
for the plan. Thus, a particular investment by a plan, which is
selected in preference to other alternative investments, would
generally not be prudent if such investment involves a greater risk
to the security of a plan's assets than other comparable investments
offering a similar return or result.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Initial Capital Support Agreements and Guarantees
5. On September 15, 2008, each of the Lehman Issuers filed for
Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. As a consequence of the Lehman
Issuers' bankruptcy filing, the market value of the Notes decreased
substantially and the market for the Notes became relatively illiquid,
with prices for actual trades being substantially lower than the
SecLending Fund's and the STIF Fund's amortized cost for the Notes. In
this connection, the Applicant determined that FRC should immediately
provide capital support to both the SecLending Fund and the STIF Fund
in an amount sufficient to maintain a constant NAV of
[[Page 34263]]
$1.00 per unit for each of the foregoing funds.
Accordingly, on September 15, 2008, FRC entered into separate
capital support agreements with both the SecLending Fund (the Initial
SecLending Fund CSA) and the STIF Fund (the STIF Fund CSA). The
Applicant explains that, pursuant to these agreements (which, taken
together, constitute the Initial CSAs), FRC contractually agreed to
provide on-going capital support to both the SecLending Fund and the
STIF Fund with respect to the Notes, up to the lesser of: (a) An agreed
upon ``maximum contribution amount'' ($75,000,000 for the STIF Fund and
$70,000,000 for the SecLending Fund), which amounts equaled the
aggregate par value of the Notes held by the SecLending Fund and the
STIF Fund, as applicable, as of September 15, 2008; (b) the difference
between the amortized cost of such Notes and any proceeds received by
either the SecLending Fund or the STIF Fund as a result of the
subsequent sale or other disposition of the Notes by either fund; or
(c) the minimum capital contribution amount necessary for each of the
foregoing funds to maintain an NAV of $0.995 per unit, after taking
into account the market value of the Notes held or disposed of by such
fund. On the same date, NML contracted to guarantee FRC's capital
support obligations to both the SecLending Fund (under the Initial
SecLending Fund Guarantee) and the STIF Fund (under the STIF Fund
Guarantee). The Applicant represents that, at all times relevant to
this exemption, NML has maintained a rating of AAA by Standard &
Poor's.
The Applicant represents that each of the Initial CSAs, as well as
the Initial SecLending Fund Guarantee and the STIF Fund Guarantee
(which, taken together, constitute the Initial Guarantees) were set to
expire on September 15, 2009 unless, prior to that date, the SecLending
Fund and the STIF Fund received either full cash repayment of the Notes
or capital contributions from FRC and NML equal to the respective
maximum contribution amounts pursuant to the Initial CSAs. Each of the
Initial CSAs and Initial Guarantees also contained a repayment
provision stipulating that, in the event that either the SecLending
Fund or the STIF Fund received a capital contribution from FRC (or from
NML, as guarantor) with respect to a Note and subsequently received
additional payments from or on behalf of the Lehman Issuer in respect
of the Note, such fund would repay to FRC (if NML had received
contributions equal to its capital contribution) the lesser of: (i) The
amount of such capital contribution; or (ii) the amount of such
subsequent payments, provided that in no event would such repayment
cause the respective fund's NAV per share to fall below $0.995 or such
greater amount as required by any nationally-recognized statistical
rating organization (NRSRO).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The Department expresses no opinion herein as to the role of
an NRSRO in determining whether a fund's net asset value per share
has fallen below $0.9950.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. The Applicant represents that the decision to enter into the
Initial CSAs was a fund-level decision made by RTC (similar to any
decision to acquire or dispose of assets) that was intended to limit
the downside risk for both the SecLending Fund and the STIF Fund with
respect to the Notes, while preserving the upside potential for the
foregoing funds, and that this determination did not represent any
change to the funds' goals or investment strategies or any deviation
from the funds' investment parameters. The Applicant further represents
that the relative rights and interests of the Plans with respect to
both the SecLending Fund and the STIF Fund (and the RTC CIFs having an
interest in each fund) and the terms and conditions of any agreements
between RTC and the Plans were not affected by this decision.
The Applicant maintains that the terms of the Initial CSAs and
Initial Guarantees executed on September 14, 2008 to provide capital
support to both the SecLending Fund and the STIF Fund constituted a
lending of money or other extension of credit from a party in interest
to an employee benefit plan that satisfied the conditions contained in
a class exemption, Prohibited Transaction Exemption (PTE) 80-26; for
this reason, the Applicant is not seeking an individual exemption for
the period of time during which the Initial CSAs and Initial Guarantees
were in force.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Section IV of PTE 80-26 (as amended at 71 FR 17920, Apr. 7,
2006) provides that, effective as of December 15, 2004, the
restrictions of section 406(a)(1)(B) and (D) and section 406(b)(2)
of the Act, and the taxes imposed by section 4975(a) and (b) of the
Code, by reason of section 4975(c)(1)(B) and (D) of the Code, shall
not apply to the lending of money or other extension of credit from
a party in interest or disqualified person to an employee benefit
plan, nor to the repayment of such loan or other extension of credit
in accordance with its terms or written modifications thereof, if:
(a) No interest or other fee is charged to the plan, and no
discount for payment in cash is relinquished by the plan, in
connection with the loan or extension of credit;
(b) The proceeds of the loan or extension of credit are used
only--
(1) For the payment of ordinary operating expenses of the plan,
including the payment of benefits in accordance with the terms of
the plan and periodic premiums under an insurance or annuity
contract, or
(2) For a purpose incidental to the ordinary operation of the
plan;
(c) The loan or extension of credit is unsecured;
(d) The loan or extension of credit is not directly or
indirectly made by an employee benefit plan;
(e) The loan is not described in section 408(b)(3) of ERISA and
the regulations promulgated thereunder (29 CFR 2550.408b-3) or
section 4975(d)(3) of the Code and the regulations promulgated
thereunder (26 CFR 54.4975-7(b)); and
(f) (1) Any loan described in section IV(b)(1) that is entered
into on or after April 7, 2006 and that has a term of 60 days or
longer must be made pursuant to a written loan agreement that
contains all of the material terms of such loan.
(2) Any loan described in (b)(2) of this paragraph that is
entered into for a term of 60 days or longer must be made pursuant
to a written loan agreement that contains all of the material terms
of such loan.
The Department offers no opinion herein as to whether each of
the applicable conditions for exemptive relief contained in PTE 80-
26 were satisfied in this particular instance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transfer of the Assets of the STIF Fund to the Liquidity Fund
7. On September 11, 2009, RTC reorganized the STIF Fund, and
transferred all of the assets of the STIF, including the Notes held by
the STIF Fund that were subject to the STIF Fund CSA, to the Liquidity
Fund. In connection with this reorganization, the Liquidity Fund became
the beneficiary of both FRC's capital support obligations under the
STIF Fund CSA and of NML's guarantee of FRC's foregoing capital support
obligation pursuant to the STIF Fund Guarantee.
The Retention of an Independent Fiduciary
8. As noted previously, the terms of both the Initial CSAs and the
Initial Guarantees were set to expire on September 15, 2009. Expiration
of the Initial CSAs, however, would have triggered a contractual
obligation that the Funds liquidate the Notes in the market. The
Applicant further represents that the Funds' liquidation of the Notes
would, in turn, have triggered the payment of FRC's capital support
obligations to the Funds. The Applicant states that the capital support
payments required under the Initial CSAs represented the amount that
would have been necessary to permit each Fund to maintain an NAV of
$0.995 per unit. Accordingly, it is represented that, because both FRC
and RTC did not believe that it would be in the best interest of either
Fund to liquidate the Notes upon the expiration of the Initial CSAs on
September 15, 2009, FRC and RTC determined to seek the amendment and
extension of the Initial CSAs and the Initial Guarantees for one year,
through an expiration date of September 15, 2010.
[[Page 34264]]
When, in September 2009, RTC determined that it would be necessary
and in the best interest of the Funds to extend the terms of the
Initial CSAs, RTC considered that such amendments would not qualify for
relief in reliance upon PTE 80-26. In this connection, the Applicant
represents that, had the Initial CSAs not included termination dates
(i.e., September 15, 2009), RTC could have continued to rely upon the
exemptive relief provided under PTE 80-26; however, given these fixed
termination dates, the amendment and renewal of the terms of the
Initial CSAs could have been interpreted as depriving the Funds of
payments to which they were contractually entitled to receive.
Alternatively, the Applicant represents that the delay of such payments
could have been construed as an extension of credit from the Funds to
FRC, which would not have been permitted under PTE 80-26 or any other
class exemption.\4\ In light of these assumptions, the Applicant
engaged Fiduciary Counselors Inc. (hereinafter the Independent
Fiduciary) to negotiate and approve, on behalf of each Fund (and the
Plans invested, directly or indirectly, in each Fund) the amendment and
extension of the term of the Initial CSAs for an additional 12 months;
this engagement was formalized under a letter agreement dated August
25, 2009 (the Engagement Letter).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The Department offers no opinion herein concerning whether
any exemptive relief for which the Applicant may have been eligible
under PTE 80-26 on or before September 15, 2009 would have expired
upon the termination of the Initial CSAs and the Initial Guarantees.
Moreover, the Department offers no opinion herein concerning the
Applicant's contention that the inclusion of termination dates in
the Initial CSAs and the Initial Guarantees would have made the
Applicant ineligible for exemptive relief under PTE 80-26 after
September 15, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. Pursuant to the Engagement Letter, the Independent Fiduciary was
retained to represent the Funds through September 15, 2010. The
Independent Fiduciary represents that it is both an ``investment
adviser'' within the meaning of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and
a ``qualified professional asset manager'' within the meaning of PTE
84-14. The Applicant further represents that the Independent Fiduciary
has provided independent fiduciary services to clients since its
incorporation in 1999.
Under the terms of the Engagement Letter, the Independent Fiduciary
assumed responsibility for, among other things: (1) Negotiating, on
behalf of each Fund, the terms of any amendments to the Initial CSAs on
behalf of each Fund and determining that such terms were fair and
reasonable to each Fund; (2) determining whether to enter into any
amendments on behalf of each Fund and directing RTC to sign any such
amendments; (3) monitoring the future capital support agreements on a
going-forward basis, including negotiating the terms, and determining
the fairness and reasonableness, of any modifications, extensions, or
renewals thereof; and (4) determining on behalf of each Fund whether to
liquidate the Notes, and determining the fairness and reasonableness of
any proposed sale of the Notes to RTC or an affiliate of RTC. The
Independent Fiduciary also assumed the same duties on behalf of the
Funds with respect to the negotiation and approval of any extension to,
and amendment of, the Initial Guarantees made by NML.
The 2009-2010 Payment of Supplemental Yield Contributions to the Funds
10. The Applicant represents that the Independent Fiduciary
reviewed the terms of the Initial CSAs and Initial Guarantees in place
at the time of its engagement, and the proceeds that each Fund would
receive if these instruments expired as scheduled and were not
extended. Upon reviewing the terms of the Initial CSAs, the Independent
Fiduciary determined that it would be in the best interests of the
investors in each Fund for FRC to make additional periodic cash
contributions, or Supplemental Yield Contributions, to each Fund. By
letter agreement dated September 14, 2009, FRC agreed, after
negotiation with the Independent Fiduciary, to pay the Supplemental
Yield Contributions to each Fund. The amount of such contributions
would be determined by a mathematical formula. The first step of this
formula would require computing the sum of (a) the amount of capital
support that would have been required under the Initial CSAs as of
September 14, 2009, had the Notes been sold by the Funds at the
September 14, 2009 closing market price, and (b) the market value of
the Notes as of September 14, 2009 based upon the closing market price
on such date (the date prior to the date that accrual of such
Supplemental Yield Contributions commenced). The sum resulting from the
first step of the formula (i.e., the Base Amount) would then be
multiplied by an annual interest rate figure equal to (a) t he 3-month
LIBOR (expressed as an annual rate) as quoted by Bloomberg at end of
day print on September 14, 2009, and updated every three months
thereafter, plus (b) 0.15 percent. If any Notes were sold by a Fund
after September 14, 2009, the Supplemental Yield Contributions would be
proportionately reduced based on the par value of such sold Notes as a
proportion of the aggregate par value of the Notes. The Supplemental
Yield Contributions would accrue daily beginning on September 15, 2009,
and would be paid to the Funds in arrears on a monthly basis. The
Supplemental Yield Contributions would also not reduce or offset any of
FRC's obligations under the proposed revision of the capital support
agreements. FRC's obligation to make Supplemental Yield Contributions
to the Funds pursuant to the September 14, 2009 letter agreement would
cease only upon the occurrence of a termination event under the
proposed revision of the capital support agreements (such as the sale
of all of the Notes held by the Funds). Because accrual of the
Supplemental Yield Contributions would commence on September 15, 2009,
the Independent Fiduciary determined that, in the event of such sale,
RTC (or its affiliate) would not be required to pay interest for any
purchased Notes with respect to the period following September 14,
2009.
11. The following chart documents the monthly payment of accrued
Supplemental Yield Contributions that were made by FRC to the Funds
during the years 2009 and 2010, pursuant to the foregoing contractual
arrangements:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Supplemental
yield Supplemental
contributions yield
to the contributions
SecLending to the
fund liquidity fund
------------------------------------------------------------------------
September 2009 (9/14/09 through 9/30/09) $13,910.18 $12,647.38
October 2009............................ 25,365.61 23,062.88
November 2009........................... 24,547.37 22,318.91
December 2009........................... 24,000.34 21,821.54
January 2010............................ 23,014.31 20,925.03
February 2010........................... 20,787.12 18,900.02
March 2010.............................. 23,135.59 21,035.30
April 2010.............................. 22,485.94 20,444.63
May 2010................................ 23,235.47 21,126.11
June 2010............................... 31,220.59 28,386.33
July 2010............................... 39,163.17 35,608.04
August 2010............................. 39,163.17 35,608.04
September 2010 (9/1/10 through 9/14/10). 17,686.68 16,081.05
-------------------------------
Total Supplemental Yield 327,715.54 297,965.26
Contributions Paid by FRC to the
Funds:.............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2009 Revision of the CSAs and the Guarantees
12. In addition to requiring FRC to make Supplemental Yield
Contributions to the Funds, the Independent Fiduciary (in a letter to
RTC dated September 14, 2009) directed RTC and FRC to execute,
[[Page 34265]]
on behalf of each Fund, revised capital support agreements between FRC
and each of the Funds (namely, the Revised CSAs), as well as revised
guarantees by NML of FRC's capital support obligations to each of the
Funds under the Revised CSAs (namely, the Revised Guarantees). Each of
the foregoing contracts were executed on September 14, 2009. The
Applicant represents that a new provision was included in each of the
Revised CSAs stipulating that if all of the Notes were sold after
September 14, 2009 (or another event occurs triggering FRC's capital
support obligations under each of the Revised CSAs, the total amount of
capital support payable to each Fund under each of the Revised CSAs
would be no less than the Base Amount, minus the sum of (a) The
proceeds actually received by the Fund from the disposition of the
Notes, plus (b) all payments received by the Fund in respect of the
Notes to the extent not already included in (a), and excluding the
amount of any Supplemental Yield Contributions. The Independent
Fiduciary determined that this provision, in conjunction with the
Supplemental Yield Contributions, would help to ensure that each Fund's
total recovery with respect to the Notes and the required capital
support would not decline as a result of the adoption of the Revised
CSAs.
Further, the Independent Fiduciary determined it to be appropriate
and in the best interest of the Funds to include a new provision in
each of the Revised CSAs stipulating that, in the event the Funds
determined to sell some or all of the Notes to RTC or an affiliate of
RTC (through either a single transaction or series of transactions with
each Fund), the purchase price for such Notes would be equal to the
greater of (a) The market value of such Notes on the date of any such
transaction, or (b) the sum of (i) the amortized cost of such Notes to
be sold in such transaction, plus (ii) any accrued but unpaid interest
through the earlier of the maturity date of the applicable Note or
September 14, 2009 (the date prior to the date that accrual of the
Supplemental Yield Contributions commenced) calculated at the contract
rate.
It is represented that each of the Revised CSAs, as well as the
Revised SecLending Fund Guarantee and the Revised Liquidity Fund
Guarantee (which, taken together, constitute the Revised Guarantees)
were set to expire on September 15, 2010 (unless, prior to that date,
the Funds received either full cash payment for the Notes or capital
contributions from FRC and NML equal to their respective maximum
contribution amounts under each of the Revised CSAs). It is further
represented that the Funds paid no fees or commissions in connection
with the negotiation of either the Revised CSAs and Guarantees or the
payment of the Supplemental Yield Contributions, nor for the
Independent Fiduciary's services relating to such matters.
13. The Applicant represents that the Revised CSAs and the Revised
Guarantees, as well as the Supplemental Yield Contributions, benefitted
the investors in the Funds because the Independent Fiduciary determined
that they placed the Funds in a position that was at least as favorable
as that which would have been obtained had the Initial CSAs and
Guarantees expired by their terms on September 15, 2009 and FRC and NML
had made payments to the Funds in satisfaction of its capital support
obligations. The Applicant also represents that the Revised CSAs and
the Revised Guarantees provided the Funds the opportunity to seek
recovery of their amortized cost or the full par value of the Notes,
either through recovery from the Lehman Issuers, liquidation on the
market or a potential sale to RTC or its affiliate. The Supplemental
Yield Contributions were intended to ensure that the Funds remained in
a position that was at least as favorable as if FRC had satisfied its
capital support obligations upon expiration of the Initial CSAs on
September 15, 2009 and the proceeds were invested in instruments
providing a comparable yield. The Applicant also states that the
Revised CSAs contained new provisions ensuring that the Funds would
receive an aggregate amount not less than the Base Amount in connection
with any sale of the Notes (or other event that would otherwise trigger
FRC's capital support obligations). The foregoing arrangements were
negotiated by and determined to be fair, reasonable and in the best
interest of each of the Funds by the Independent Fiduciary.
The 2010 Sale of the Notes to FRC by the Funds
14. At a meeting of its investment committee on September 2, 2010,
the Independent Fiduciary discussed and approved the terms of a
proposed sale of the Notes by the Funds to FRC. Pursuant to this
determination, RTC and FRC negotiated the terms of the Sale of the
Notes with the Independent Fiduciary. The Independent Fiduciary
concluded that the Sale transaction would benefit the investors in the
Funds because it would permit the Funds to recover an amount equal to
or in excess of its amortized cost for each of the Notes and maintain
an NAV per unit of at least $0.995, while also retaining a right to
recover amounts received by FRC in excess of the sale price for the
Notes. In addition, under the terms of the Sale negotiated by the
Independent Fiduciary, each Fund would continue to earn interest under
the Supplemental Yield Agreements until the settlement of the
transaction, and would be entitled to additional amounts in the event
that FRC subsequently recovered an amount greater than the sale price
adjusted for interest accrued through the date of the refund to the
relevant Fund.\5\ Given these factors, the Independent Fiduciary
determined that the terms of the Sale were fair and reasonable to each
Fund. Accordingly, by the terms of a letter dated September 8, 2010,
the Independent Fiduciary directed in writing that all of the Notes
held by each of the Funds be sold to FRC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ In this connection, the Independent Fiduciary stipulated
that should FRC, through the exercise of any of its rights, claims,
or causes of action related to its ownership of any Notes after the
Sale date, recover from the Lehman Issuers or any third party an
aggregate amount that was in excess of the sum of (a) the purchase
price paid for the Notes by FRC and (b) interest on such purchase
price from and after the date of the Sale transaction (determined at
the rate of interest equal to the rate of interest applicable to the
Supplemental Yield Contributions), FRC would refund such excess
promptly to the applicable Fund (after deducting all reasonable
expenses incurred in connection with the recovery).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. In accordance with the Independent Fiduciary's direction, the
Sale of all of the Notes from the Liquidity Fund to FRC was executed on
September 10, 2010, and settled two business days later on September
14, 2010 for an aggregate price of $75,296,431; similarly, the Sale of
all of the Notes from the SecLending Fund to FRC was executed on
September 10, 2010, and settled two business days later on September
14, 2010 for an aggregate price of $70,436,820. The Applicant
represents that the Sale resulted in an NAV for the Liquidity Fund of
$1.0000 per unit and for the SecLending Fund of $0.9991 per unit.\6\
For each Note, the foregoing amounts paid by FRC (which were computed
in accordance with the formula specified in the Revised CSAs with each
of the Funds) represented the sum of (i) The applicable Fund's
amortized cost of the Note ($75,000,000 in the aggregate for the
Liquidity Fund and $70,000,000 for the SecLending Fund), plus (ii) any
accrued but unpaid interest on the
[[Page 34266]]
Notes that was owed by the Lehman Issuers through the earlier of the
maturity date of the applicable Note or September 14, 2009, calculated
at the contract rate ($296,431 of aggregate interest for the Liquidity
Fund, and $436,820 in aggregate interest for the SecLending Fund).\7\
The following chart summarizes the par values and the September 10,
2010 sale prices \8\ of the various Notes held by each of the Funds:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The Applicant represents that as of the close of business on
September 10, 2010, the net asset value of the Liquidity Fund's
portfolio was approximately $2,137,000,000, or $1.0000 per unit. As
of the close of business on September 10, 2010, the net asset value
of the SecLending Fund's portfolio was approximately $1,767,000,000,
or $0.9991 per unit.
\7\ Pursuant to the terms of the Revised CSAs, the one-time
payment to the Funds of accrued but unpaid interest on the Notes
owed by the Lehman Issuers was separate from, and in addition to,
the accrual and payment of the Supplemental Yield Contributions to
the Funds that commenced on September 15, 2009.
\8\ The Applicant further represents that, prior to the
consummation of the Sale, the Independent Fiduciary confirmed that
the sale price calculated pursuant to the formula discussed above
for each Note was greater than the market value of such Note as
determined by reference to price quotes provided by two major
investment brokers (since no transaction on the Notes was available
through Bloomberg). Specifically, Barclays provided a quote of
$19.25 (representing a bid price per unit received for each Note as
of September 10, 2010), and J.P. Morgan provided a quote of $19.00
(representing the bid price per unit for each Note as of September
10, 2010). These prices reflect a decrease of approximately 81% from
the par value of the Notes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aggregate Acquisition price &
Fund Lehman note par value date Sale price
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Liquidity Fund...................... Lehman Brothers Disc $10,000,000 $9,981,000 (acquired 8/ $10,000,000
(52525MJF6). 22/08).
Maturity Date: 9/18/08;
Face Interest Rate:
2.80%.
Lehman Brothers V/R 35,000,000 35,000,000 (acquired 8/ 35,218,410
(52517P5C1). 28/07).
Maturity date: 9/26/08;
Face Interest Rate:
3.75%.
Lehman Brothers V/R 30,000,000 30,000,000 (acquired 2/ 30,078,021
(52525KAB8). 11/08).
Maturity Date: 3/11/09;
Face Interest Rate:
3.75%.
--------------------------------------------------
Total........................... ....................... $75,000,000 $74,981,000............ $75,296,431
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SecLending Fund..................... Lehman Brothers V/R $40,000,000 $40,000,000 (acquired 8/ $40,249,611
(52517P5C1). 28/07).
Maturity Date: 9/26/08;
Face Interest Rate:
5.51%.
Lehman Brothers V/R 30,000,000 30,000,000 (acquired 8/ 30,187,209
(52517P5C1). 28/07).
Maturity Date: 9/26/08;
Face Interest Rate:
5.51%.
--------------------------------------------------
Total........................... ....................... $70,000,000 $70,000,000............ $70,436,820
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. The Applicant represents that, with the execution of the Sale
on September 10, 2010, the terms of Revised CSAs, the Revised
Guarantees, and the agreement concerning the accrual and payment of the
Supplemental Yield Contributions each ceased to be effective as of that
date. On September 14, 2010, the Sale transaction was settled when each
of the Funds received the sale price of the Notes from FRC. The
Applicant further represents that, while FRC's obligation to accrue the
Supplemental Yield Contributions technically terminated on September
10, 2010, FRC and RTC (following discussions with the Independent
Fiduciary) determined that these contributions would continue to accrue
(and would be paid on) the date that the Sale settled. Accordingly, the
final installment of the Supplemental Yield Contributions to the Funds
was paid on the settlement date of September 14, 2010.
17. In summary, the Applicant represents that the transactions
described herein satisfied the statutory criteria of section 408(a) of
the Act and section 4975(c)(2) of the Code because: (a) The
transactions were easily identifiable, have been completed, and will
not require ongoing monitoring; (b) The Revised CSAs, the Revised
Guarantees, and the Supplemental Yield Contributions were negotiated
and documented, and were monitored by the Independent Fiduciary through
their expiration; (c) The Sale was a one-time transaction for cash that
was negotiated by the Independent Fiduciary, and neither of the Funds
bore any brokerage commissions, fees or other expenses in connection
with the Sale; (d) The transactions enabled the Funds, and the
participating investors therein, including the Plans invested therein,
to receive (i) Continued capital support from FRC with respect to the
Notes under the Revised CSAs (guaranteed by NML) and (ii) periodic
payment of the Supplemental Yield Contributions; (e) The Independent
Fiduciary determined the foregoing arrangements placed the Funds in a
position that was at least as favorable as the position they would have
been in had the Initial CSAs and the Initial Guarantees expired by
their terms; (f) The Revised CSAs and the Revised Guarantees provided
the Funds the opportunity to seek recovery of their amortized cost, the
full par value, or at least a greater portion of the par value of the
Notes, either through recovery from the Lehman Issuers, liquidation on
the market, or a potential Sale to RTC or its affiliates; and (g) the
Independent Fiduciary determined that it would be in the best interests
of the investors in each Fund for FRC to make Supplemental Yield
Contributions to each Fund.
Notice to Interested Persons: Notice of the proposed exemption
shall be given to all interested persons in the manner agreed upon by
the Applicant and the Department within 15 days of the date of
publication in the Federal Register. Comments and requests for a
hearing are due forty-five (45) days after publication of the notice in
the Federal Register.
For Further Information Contact: Mr. Mark Judge of the Department
at (202) 693-8550 (This is not a toll-free number).
Pacific Capital Bancorp Amended and Restated Incentive and Investment
and Salary Savings Plan (the Plan); Located in Santa Barbara,
California; [Application No. D-11659]
Proposed Exemption
The Department is considering granting an exemption under the
authority of section 408(a) of the Act and section 4975(c)(2) of the
Code and in accordance with the procedures set forth in 29 CFR Part
2570, subpart B (55 FR 32836, 32847, August 10, 1990).
[[Page 34267]]
Section I: Transactions
If the proposed exemption is granted, effective October 27, 2010,
the restrictions of sections 406(a)(1)(A), 406(a)(1)(E), 406(a)(2),
406(b)(1), 406(b)(2), and 407(a)(1)(A) of the Act and the sanctions
resulting from the application of section 4975 of the Code, by reason
of section 4975(c)(1)(A) and 4975(c)(1)(E) of the Code,\9\ shall not
apply:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ For purposes of this proposed exemption, references to
specific provisions of Title I of the Act, unless otherwise
specified, refer also to the corresponding provisions of the Code.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) To the acquisition of certain rights (the Rights) by the Plan
in connection with an offering (the Offering) of shares of the common
stock (the Stock) in Pacific Capital Bancorp (Bancorp) by Bancorp, a
party in interest with respect to the Plan, and
(2) To the holding of the Rights received by the Plan during the
subscription period of the Offering; provided that the conditions as
set forth in section II of this proposed exemption were satisfied for
the duration of the acquisition and holding.
Section II: Conditions
The relief provided in this exemption is conditioned upon adherence
to the material facts and representations described, herein, and as set
forth in the application file and upon compliance with the conditions,
as set forth in this proposed exemption.
(1) The receipt of the Rights by the Plan occurred in connection
with the Offering and was made available by Bancorp on the same terms
to all shareholders of the Stock of Bancorp;
(2) The acquisition of the Rights by the Plan resulted from an
independent act of Bancorp, as a corporate entity, and all holders of
the Rights, including the Plan, were treated in the same manner with
respect to the acquisition of such Rights;
(3) Each shareholder of the Stock, including the Plan, received the
same proportionate number of Rights based on the number of shares of
Stock of Bancorp held by such shareholder;
(4) The Board of Directors of Bancorp (the Board) decided that the
Offering should be made available to all shareholders of the Stock,
including the Plan, as record owner of the Stock held in the Plan on
behalf of the accounts of the individual participants (the Invested
Participants) all or a portion of whose accounts in the Plan are
invested in the Stock, in accordance with provisions under such Plan
for individually-directed investment of such accounts;
(5) The decision to exercise the Rights or to refrain from
exercising the Rights was made by each of the Invested Participants in
accordance with the provision under the Plan for individually-directed
accounts; and
(6) No brokerage fees, commissions, subscription fees, or any other
charges were paid by the Plan with respect to the Offering, and no
brokerage fees, commissions, or other monies were paid by the Plan to
any broker in connection with the exercise of the Rights.
Effective Date: This proposed exemption, if granted, will be
effective, October 27, 2010, the date the Plan acquired the Rights.
Summary of Facts and Representations
1. The Plan is a defined contribution profit sharing plan. Bancorp
is the sponsor of the Plan. The Plan is intended to satisfy the
requirements under section 401(a), 401(k) and 401(m) of the Code. The
Plan is a participant directed account plan intended to satisfy the
requirements of section 404(c) of the Act.
As of August 30, 2010, the Plan had approximately 1,417
participants. The fair market value of the total assets of the Plan, as
of August 30, 2010, was $64,324,228.
The Compensation & Benefits Committee (the Committee) became the
fiduciary responsible for Plan matters on October 2010. The Committee
is comprised of non-employee members of the Board of Bancorp. It is
represented the members of the Committee satisfy the independence
requirements of NASDAQ, the Code, and various banking laws and
regulations. As a fiduciary with respect to the Plan, the Committee is
a party in interest to the Plan, pursuant to section 3(14)(A) of the
Act.
On December 1, 2007, the Charles Schwab Trust Company (Charles
Schwab Trust), a California chartered non-depository trust company,
became the directed trustee for the Plan. Charles Schwab Trust also
serves as custodian for the Plan. As custodian, Charles Schwab Trust
executes investment directions in accordance with participants' written
or electronic instructions. In addition Charles Schwab Corporate and
Retirement Services (CSC) is the broker for the Plan. As service
providers to the Plan, Charles Schwab Trust and CSC are parties in
interest to the Plan, pursuant to section 3(14)(B) of the Act.
2. The Plan offers to participants the following permitted
investment options in which to invest all or a portion of such
participants' account balances: (a) The Stock, (b) a variety of money
market funds, (c) common collective trusts, (d) mutual funds, and (e)
self-directed accounts. Charles Schwab Stable Value Fund is the common
collective trust fund in which Plan assets are invested. Certain Plan
assets are also invested in mutual funds managed by an affiliate of
Charles Schwab Trust.
3. The application was filed on behalf of Bancorp, a bank holding
company, located in Santa Barbara, California. Pacific Capital Bank,
National Association (the Bank) is a wholly-owned subsidiary of
Bancorp. The Bank is a full-service, state-chartered commercial bank
located in California whose deposits are insured by the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation. As of June 30, 2010, the Bank had $7.1 billion
in assets. The Bank, as an employer any of whose employees are covered
by the plan, is a party in interest with respect to the Plan, pursuant
to section 3(14)(C) of the Act. Substantially all of the activities of
Bancorp are conducted through the Bank. Bancorp, as the parent of the
Bank, is a party in interest with respect to the Plan, pursuant to
section 3(14)(E) of the Act.
4. The Stock of Bancorp is listed for quotation on the NASDAQ
Global Select Market under the symbol PCBC. The total number of shares
of Stock outstanding, as of August 18, 2010, was 47,406,579. During the
period beginning on October 19, 2010 and ending on November 15, 2010,
the Stock was trading on the NASDAQ at prices ranging between $0.73 and
$0.42 per share.
The Stock is a ``qualifying employer security,'' as defined under
section 407(d)(5) of the Act and 4975(e) of the Code.
5. On April 29, 2010, Bancorp and the Bank entered into an
investment agreement with SB Acquisition Company LLC, a wholly-owned
subsidiary of Ford Financial Fund, L.P. (the Investor) for the sale to
the Investor of 225,000,000 shares of Stock at $0.20 per share and
455,000 shares of mandatorily convertible participating voting
preferred stock at $1,000 per share. The aggregate consideration paid
to Bancorp by the Investor for these securities was $500 million in
cash. Before accounting for any issuance of Stock pursuant to the
Offering, the Investor owned approximately 86 percent (86%) of the
outstanding Stock.
As a condition of the investment agreement with the Investor,
Bancorp agreed to commence the Offering, which is the subject of this
proposed exemption, whereby shareholders of record would receive non-
transferable rights to purchase a number of shares of
[[Page 34268]]
Stock equal to 20 percent (20%) of the then outstanding shares of
Stock, at a purchase price equal to $0.20 per share. It is represented
that the Rights were non-transferable to allow only legacy shareholders
of the Stock the opportunity to purchase additional shares of the Stock
to help offset the share dilution such shareholders incurred when the
Stock was acquired by the Investor. Accordingly, Bancorp, as a
corporate entity and issuer of securities, announced in connection with
the Offering the issuance of up to 726,975,565 shares of Stock, as
required by the investment agreement: (a) To raise equity capital; and
(2) to provide existing shareholders the opportunity to purchase common
stock at the same price per share paid by the Investor for the Stock.
Bancorp intends to use the net proceeds from the Offering for general
corporate purposes, including an investment in the Bank.
6. Under the terms of the Offering, all shareholders of the Stock
of Bancorp, such as the Invested Participants, received at no charge
the Rights to purchase, through the exercise of such Rights, the Stock
being issued by Bancorp in connection with the Offering. With respect
to the Rights, under the terms of the Offering, 15.335 Rights were
issued for every share of the Stock held by each shareholder on August
30, 2010, (the Record Date). All Rights were rounded down to the
nearest whole number for each shareholder. For example, an Invested
Participant's account in the Plan that held 543 shares of Stock, as of
the Record Date, would entitle such Invested Participant to 8,326
Rights (15.335 x 543 = 8,326.905 rounded down to 8,326), pursuant to
the Offering, which in turn would permit an Invested Participant to
purchase 8,326 shares of Stock.
It is represented that the Rights were not listed, traded or quoted
on NASDAQ or on any other stock exchange or trading market. Further,
the terms of the Offering stipulated that the Rights could not be sold,
assigned or transferred.
7. The Rights could only be exercised in whole numbers. Upon
exercise, each of the Rights permitted a shareholder of the Stock of
Bancorp to purchase one (1) additional share of Stock at a subscription
price of $0.20 per share. A shareholder had the right to choose to
exercise some, all, or none of his Rights. The exercise of any of the
Rights was irrevocable. It is represented that there were no over-
subscription rights associated with the Offering. The Rights could be
exercised beginning October 18, 2010, the date of the issuance of the
prospectus describing the Offering. The Offering closed with respect to
the exercise of the Rights on November 19, 2010, at 5 p.m. New York
City time. Pursuant to the terms of the Offering all unexercised Rights
expired and became worthless after the closing of the Offering.
8. It is represented that on the Record Date, the Plan was the
record owner of 1,573,450 shares of Stock which were allocated to the
individual accounts of the 1,417 Invested Participants. The aggregate
fair market value of the assets of the Plan invested in shares of the
Stock, on the Record Date, based on a closing price of $0.859 on that
date was $1,351,593.55. The approximate percentage of the fair market
value of the Plan's total assets invested in the Stock is 2.1 percent
(2.1%). As of the Record Date, 1,573,450 shares of Stock constituted
approximately 3.32 percent (3.32%) of the 47,406,579 shares of Stock
outstanding.
Based on the ratio of 15.335 Rights for each share of Stock held,
the Plan acquired 24,128,855 Rights as a result o