Exemption From Certain Prohibited Transaction Restrictions, 30936-30937 [2013-12236]
Download as PDF
30936
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 100 / Thursday, May 23, 2013 / Notices
request and payment to: Consent Decree
Library, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box
7611, Washington, DC 20044–7611.
Please enclose a check or money order
for $4.00 (25 cents per page
reproduction cost) payable to the United
States Treasury.
4 of 1978, 5 U.S.C. App. 1 (1996),
transferred the authority of the Secretary
of the Treasury to issue exemptions of
the type proposed to the Secretary of
Labor.
Exemption From Certain Prohibited
Transaction Restrictions
Statutory Findings
In accordance with section 408(a) of
the Act and/or section 4975(c)(2) of the
Code and the procedures set forth in 29
CFR Part 2570, Subpart B (76 FR 66637,
66644, October 27, 2011) 1 and based
upon the entire record, the Department
makes the following findings:
(a) The exemption is administratively
feasible;
(b) The exemption is in the interests
of the plan and its participants and
beneficiaries; and
(c) The exemption is protective of the
rights of the participants and
beneficiaries of the plan.
Employee Benefits Security
Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Grant of Individual Exemption.
The Mo-Kan Teamsters Apprenticeship
and Training Fund (the Fund) Located
in Kansas City, Missouri
Maureen Katz,
Assistant Section Chief, Environmental
Enforcement Section, Environment and
Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 2013–12270 Filed 5–22–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employee Benefits Security
Administration
AGENCY:
This document contains an
exemption issued by the Department of
Labor (the Department) from certain of
the prohibited transaction restrictions of
the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act of 1974 (ERISA or the Act)
and/or the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 (the Code). This notice includes
the following: 2013–07, The Mo-Kan
Teamsters Apprenticeship and Training
Fund (the Fund) L–11720.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A notice
was published in the Federal Register of
the pendency before the Department of
a proposal to grant such exemption. The
notice set forth a summary of facts and
representations contained in the
application for exemption and referred
interested persons to the application for
a complete statement of the facts and
representations. The application has
been available for public inspection at
the Department in Washington, DC. The
notice also invited interested persons to
submit comments on the requested
exemption to the Department. In
addition, the notice stated that any
interested person might submit a
written request that a public hearing be
held (where appropriate). The applicant
has represented that it has complied
with the requirements of the notification
to interested persons. No requests for a
hearing were received by the
Department. Public comments were
received by the Department as described
in the granted exemption.
The notice of proposed exemption
was issued and the exemption is being
granted solely by the Department
because, effective December 31, 1978,
section 102 of Reorganization Plan No.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:14 May 22, 2013
Jkt 229001
[Prohibited Transaction Exemption 2013–07;
Exemption Application No. L–11720]
Exemption
The restrictions of sections
406(a)(1)(A) and (D) of the Act shall not
apply to the purchase (the Purchase) by
the Fund of certain real property located
in Kansas City, Missouri (the Property)
from Jim Kidwell Construction, a party
in interest with respect to the Fund;
provided that the following conditions
are satisfied:
(a) The terms and conditions of the
Purchase are at least as favorable to the
Fund as those obtainable in an arm’s
length transaction with an unrelated
party;
(b) The Purchase is a one-time
transaction for cash;
(c) The Fund pays the lesser of
$1,500,000 or the fair market value of
the Property, as of the date of the
Purchase, as determined by a qualified,
independent appraiser (the Appraiser);
(d) The Fund’s fiduciaries (the
Trustees) review and approve the
methodology used by the Appraiser,
ensure that such methodology is
properly applied in determining the fair
market value of the Property, and
determine whether it is prudent to go
forward with the transaction; and
(e) The Fund pays only reasonable
closing costs with respect to the
Purchase that a similarly situated buyer
would customarily pay in a similar
transaction.
1 The Department has considered exemption
applications received prior to December 27, 2011
under the exemption procedures set forth in 29 CFR
part 2570, subpart B (55 FR 32836, 32847, August
10, 1990).
PO 00000
Frm 00095
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Written Comments
The Department invited all interested
persons to submit written comments
with respect to the notice of proposed
exemption on or before February 10,
2013. During this comment period, the
Department received one written
comment. To ensure that all participants
had been given the opportunity to
comment, the Department decided to
extend the comment period until March
21, 2013. During the second comment
period, the Department received three
written comments from Fund
participants.
Of the four comments received by the
Department, one commenter
disapproved of the proposed transaction
because he thought it might affect his
benefits. The three comments that were
substantive were, in part, concerned
with the value of the Property. The
participants’ comments, as well as the
responses to these comments by the
Appraiser and the Trustees, are
described below.
Comments Regarding Property
Overvaluation and Purchase Not
Negotiated in Good Faith
In three comment letters, the
participants noted that the Property’s
value was overstated. One commenter
attached an online document (the
Document) that placed the fair market
value of the Property at $300,000.00, as
of January 17, 2013. The commenter
further stated that the Purchase was not
negotiated in good faith.
The Appraiser’s Response
The Appraiser reviewed the
comments relating to the value of the
Property and the Document. The
Appraiser states that he disagrees with
the participants’ assertion that the
Property is overvalued. The Appraiser
also explains that the Document only
depicts the value of a single parcel of
land rather than the twelve parcels
comprising the Property.
In addition, the Appraiser notes that
the Document was obtained from the
Jackson County, Missouri Web site,
containing the tax assessment
information. According to the
Appraiser, this information has no
relevance for the purposes of assessing
market value and is not a source of
information that the Appraiser relied on
or should rely on.
Comment Regarding Union Voting and
Fund Assets Invested in the Property
Another participant inquired about
the lack of information offered to the
union membership and why the
transaction was not subject to a union
vote. The participant also questioned
E:\FR\FM\23MYN1.SGM
23MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 100 / Thursday, May 23, 2013 / Notices
the knowledge and experience of the
Fund with managing a mine that is
located on the Property. Further, the
participant questioned whether it is
prudent to spend 83% of the Fund’s
cash on the Purchase.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Trustees’ Response
In response to the participant’s
comments, the Trustees note that the
decision to purchase the Property was a
financial decision made by the Trustees
for the benefit of the participants and
beneficiaries of the Fund. The Trustees
state further that all of the Trustees are
familiar with the matters regarding the
Purchase. According to the Trustees, the
decision to purchase the Property by the
Fund is not a union matter or a decision
that the union or its members were
required or permitted to make.
With respect to the knowledge and
experience of the Fund to manage the
mine, the Trustees state that there is no
requirement that the Fund manage the
mine or conduct mining activities on
the Property. The Trustees point out
that the Property will be used for the
purpose of truck driving, heavy
equipment training, and equipment
storage underneath the surface where
the mine is located. The Trustees
explain that they expect to oversee and
employ proper personnel to handle
issues of maintenance when necessary.
In response to the participant’s
comment regarding the high percentage
of the Fund’s assets involved in this
Purchase, the Trustees represent that the
decision to purchase the Property was
made with due diligence as established
and required by the regulations under
the Act. The Trustees represent further
that based on this due diligence, they
have determined that purchasing the
Property is in the Fund’s best interest.
The Trustees note that the Fund will be
able to make any changes or additions
to meet future training requirements of
the Training Fund and its
apprenticeship program without the
consent or outside interference from
other parties. In addition, the Fund will
acquire an equity interest in the
Property which will, in return, have a
future value as a plan asset, and the
Purchase is a transaction that is
customary for similarly situated
employee benefit plans.
After giving full consideration to the
entire record, including the written
comments, the Department has decided
to grant the exemption, as described
above. The complete application is
made available for inspection in the
Public Disclosure Room of the
Employee Benefits Security
Administration, Room N–1513, U.S.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:14 May 22, 2013
Jkt 229001
30937
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20210.
For a complete statement of the facts
and representations supporting the
Department’s decision to grant this
exemption, refer to the proposed
exemption published in the Federal
Register on December 28, 2012 at 77 FR
76776.
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr.
Asrar Ahmed of the Department,
telephone (202) 693–8557. (This is not
a toll-free number.)
AGENCY:
General Information
SUMMARY: NACOSH will meet June 11,
2013 in Washington, DC.
DATES: NACOSH meeting: NACOSH will
meet from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. e.t., Tuesday,
June 11, 2013.
Comments, requests to speak, speaker
presentations, and requests for special
accommodation: You must submit
(postmark, send, transmit) comments,
requests to address NACOSH, speaker
presentations (written or electronic),
and requests for special
accommodations for the NACOSH
meeting by June 4, 2013.
ADDRESSES: NACOSH meeting: The
NACOSH meeting will be in Room C–
5320–6, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20210.
Submission of comments, requests to
speak, and speaker presentations: You
may submit comments, requests to
speak at the NACOSH meeting and
speaker presentations, using one of the
following methods:
Electronically: You may submit
materials, including attachments,
electronically at https://
www.regulations.gov, which is the
Federal eRulemaking Portal. Follow the
instructions on that Web page for
making submissions;
Facsimile: If your submission,
including attachments, does not exceed
10 pages, you may fax it to the OSHA
Docket Office at (202) 693–1648; or
Regular mail, express mail, hand
delivery, or messenger/courier service:
You may submit your materials to the
OSHA Docket Office, Docket No.
OSHA–2013–0015, Room N–2625, U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210;
telephone (202) 693–2350 (OSHA TTY
(887) 889–5627). OSHA’s Docket Office
accepts deliveries (hand deliveries,
express mail, and messenger service)
during normal business hours, 8:15 a.m.
to 4:45 p.m., e.t., weekdays.
Requests for special accommodation:
Please submit requests for special
accommodations to attend the NACOSH
meeting to Ms. Frances Owens, OSHA,
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.
Lyssa E. Hall,
Director of Exemption Determinations,
Employee Benefits Security Administration,
U.S. Department of Labor.
[FR Doc. 2013–12236 Filed 5–22–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–29–P
PO 00000
Frm 00096
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration
[Docket No. OSHA–2013–0015]
National Advisory Committee on
Occupational Safety and Health
(NACOSH)
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA), Labor.
ACTION: Announcement of a meeting of
NACOSH.
E:\FR\FM\23MYN1.SGM
23MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 100 (Thursday, May 23, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30936-30937]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-12236]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employee Benefits Security Administration
Exemption From Certain Prohibited Transaction Restrictions
AGENCY: Employee Benefits Security Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Grant of Individual Exemption.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document contains an exemption issued by the Department
of Labor (the Department) from certain of the prohibited transaction
restrictions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
(ERISA or the Act) and/or the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the Code).
This notice includes the following: 2013-07, The Mo-Kan Teamsters
Apprenticeship and Training Fund (the Fund) L-11720.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A notice was published in the Federal
Register of the pendency before the Department of a proposal to grant
such exemption. The notice set forth a summary of facts and
representations contained in the application for exemption and referred
interested persons to the application for a complete statement of the
facts and representations. The application has been available for
public inspection at the Department in Washington, DC. The notice also
invited interested persons to submit comments on the requested
exemption to the Department. In addition, the notice stated that any
interested person might submit a written request that a public hearing
be held (where appropriate). The applicant has represented that it has
complied with the requirements of the notification to interested
persons. No requests for a hearing were received by the Department.
Public comments were received by the Department as described in the
granted exemption.
The notice of proposed exemption was issued and the exemption is
being granted solely by the Department because, effective December 31,
1978, section 102 of Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1978, 5 U.S.C. App. 1
(1996), transferred the authority of the Secretary of the Treasury to
issue exemptions of the type proposed to the Secretary of Labor.
Statutory Findings
In accordance with section 408(a) of the Act and/or section
4975(c)(2) of the Code and the procedures set forth in 29 CFR Part
2570, Subpart B (76 FR 66637, 66644, October 27, 2011) \1\ and based
upon the entire record, the Department makes the following findings:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Department has considered exemption applications
received prior to December 27, 2011 under the exemption procedures
set forth in 29 CFR part 2570, subpart B (55 FR 32836, 32847, August
10, 1990).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) The exemption is administratively feasible;
(b) The exemption is in the interests of the plan and its
participants and beneficiaries; and
(c) The exemption is protective of the rights of the participants
and beneficiaries of the plan.
The Mo-Kan Teamsters Apprenticeship and Training Fund (the Fund)
Located in Kansas City, Missouri
[Prohibited Transaction Exemption 2013-07; Exemption Application No. L-
11720]
Exemption
The restrictions of sections 406(a)(1)(A) and (D) of the Act shall
not apply to the purchase (the Purchase) by the Fund of certain real
property located in Kansas City, Missouri (the Property) from Jim
Kidwell Construction, a party in interest with respect to the Fund;
provided that the following conditions are satisfied:
(a) The terms and conditions of the Purchase are at least as
favorable to the Fund as those obtainable in an arm's length
transaction with an unrelated party;
(b) The Purchase is a one-time transaction for cash;
(c) The Fund pays the lesser of $1,500,000 or the fair market value
of the Property, as of the date of the Purchase, as determined by a
qualified, independent appraiser (the Appraiser);
(d) The Fund's fiduciaries (the Trustees) review and approve the
methodology used by the Appraiser, ensure that such methodology is
properly applied in determining the fair market value of the Property,
and determine whether it is prudent to go forward with the transaction;
and
(e) The Fund pays only reasonable closing costs with respect to the
Purchase that a similarly situated buyer would customarily pay in a
similar transaction.
Written Comments
The Department invited all interested persons to submit written
comments with respect to the notice of proposed exemption on or before
February 10, 2013. During this comment period, the Department received
one written comment. To ensure that all participants had been given the
opportunity to comment, the Department decided to extend the comment
period until March 21, 2013. During the second comment period, the
Department received three written comments from Fund participants.
Of the four comments received by the Department, one commenter
disapproved of the proposed transaction because he thought it might
affect his benefits. The three comments that were substantive were, in
part, concerned with the value of the Property. The participants'
comments, as well as the responses to these comments by the Appraiser
and the Trustees, are described below.
Comments Regarding Property Overvaluation and Purchase Not Negotiated
in Good Faith
In three comment letters, the participants noted that the
Property's value was overstated. One commenter attached an online
document (the Document) that placed the fair market value of the
Property at $300,000.00, as of January 17, 2013. The commenter further
stated that the Purchase was not negotiated in good faith.
The Appraiser's Response
The Appraiser reviewed the comments relating to the value of the
Property and the Document. The Appraiser states that he disagrees with
the participants' assertion that the Property is overvalued. The
Appraiser also explains that the Document only depicts the value of a
single parcel of land rather than the twelve parcels comprising the
Property.
In addition, the Appraiser notes that the Document was obtained
from the Jackson County, Missouri Web site, containing the tax
assessment information. According to the Appraiser, this information
has no relevance for the purposes of assessing market value and is not
a source of information that the Appraiser relied on or should rely on.
Comment Regarding Union Voting and Fund Assets Invested in the Property
Another participant inquired about the lack of information offered
to the union membership and why the transaction was not subject to a
union vote. The participant also questioned
[[Page 30937]]
the knowledge and experience of the Fund with managing a mine that is
located on the Property. Further, the participant questioned whether it
is prudent to spend 83% of the Fund's cash on the Purchase.
Trustees' Response
In response to the participant's comments, the Trustees note that
the decision to purchase the Property was a financial decision made by
the Trustees for the benefit of the participants and beneficiaries of
the Fund. The Trustees state further that all of the Trustees are
familiar with the matters regarding the Purchase. According to the
Trustees, the decision to purchase the Property by the Fund is not a
union matter or a decision that the union or its members were required
or permitted to make.
With respect to the knowledge and experience of the Fund to manage
the mine, the Trustees state that there is no requirement that the Fund
manage the mine or conduct mining activities on the Property. The
Trustees point out that the Property will be used for the purpose of
truck driving, heavy equipment training, and equipment storage
underneath the surface where the mine is located. The Trustees explain
that they expect to oversee and employ proper personnel to handle
issues of maintenance when necessary.
In response to the participant's comment regarding the high
percentage of the Fund's assets involved in this Purchase, the Trustees
represent that the decision to purchase the Property was made with due
diligence as established and required by the regulations under the Act.
The Trustees represent further that based on this due diligence, they
have determined that purchasing the Property is in the Fund's best
interest. The Trustees note that the Fund will be able to make any
changes or additions to meet future training requirements of the
Training Fund and its apprenticeship program without the consent or
outside interference from other parties. In addition, the Fund will
acquire an equity interest in the Property which will, in return, have
a future value as a plan asset, and the Purchase is a transaction that
is customary for similarly situated employee benefit plans.
After giving full consideration to the entire record, including the
written comments, the Department has decided to grant the exemption, as
described above. The complete application is made available for
inspection in the Public Disclosure Room of the Employee Benefits
Security Administration, Room N-1513, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20210.
For a complete statement of the facts and representations
supporting the Department's decision to grant this exemption, refer to
the proposed exemption published in the Federal Register on December
28, 2012 at 77 FR 76776.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Asrar Ahmed of the Department,
telephone (202) 693-8557. (This is not a toll-free number.)
General Information
The attention of interested persons is directed to the following:
(1) The fact that a transaction is the subject of an exemption
under section 408(a) of the Act and/or section 4975(c)(2) of the Code
does not relieve a fiduciary or other party in interest or disqualified
person from certain other provisions to which the exemption does not
apply and the general fiduciary responsibility provisions of section
404 of the Act, which among other things require a fiduciary to
discharge his duties respecting the plan solely in the interest of the
participants and beneficiaries of the plan and in a prudent fashion in
accordance with section 404(a)(1)(B) of the Act; nor does it affect the
requirement of section 401(a) of the Code that the plan must operate
for the exclusive benefit of the employees of the employer maintaining
the plan and their beneficiaries;
(2) This exemption is supplemental to and not in derogation of, any
other provisions of the Act and/or the Code, including statutory or
administrative exemptions and transactional rules. Furthermore, the
fact that a transaction is subject to an administrative or statutory
exemption is not dispositive of whether the transaction is in fact a
prohibited transaction; and
(3) The availability of this exemption is subject to the express
condition that the material facts and representations contained in the
application accurately describes all material terms of the transaction
which is the subject of the exemption.
Lyssa E. Hall,
Director of Exemption Determinations, Employee Benefits Security
Administration, U.S. Department of Labor.
[FR Doc. 2013-12236 Filed 5-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-29-P