Proposed Exemption From Certain Prohibited Transaction Restrictions, 20384-20388 [2017-08687]
Download as PDF
20384
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 82 / Monday, May 1, 2017 / Notices
Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the
Act on January 31, 2017 (82 FR 8857).
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Antitrust Division
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Notice Pursuant to the National
Cooperative Research and Production
Act of 1993—Integrated Photonics
Institute for Manufacturing Innovation
Operating Under the Name of the
American Institute for Manufacturing
Integrated Photonics
Notice is hereby given that, on March
22, 2017, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the
National Cooperative Research and
Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301
et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), the Integrated
Photonics Institute for Manufacturing
Innovation operating under the name of
the American Institute for
Manufacturing Integrated Photonics
(‘‘AIM Photonics’’) has filed written
notifications simultaneously with the
Attorney General and the Federal Trade
Commission disclosing changes in its
membership. The notifications were
filed for the purpose of extending the
Act’s provisions limiting the recovery of
antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages
under specified circumstances.
Specifically, International Business
Machines, Yorktown Heights, NY;
Mentor Graphics Corporation,
Wilsonville, OR; Keysight Technologies,
Inc., Santa Rosa, CA; Analog Photonics,
LLC, Boston, MA; Coventor, Inc., Cary,
NC; Trustees of Boston University,
Boston, MA; Georgia Tech Research
Corporation, Atlanta, GA; The
University of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK;
University of Massachusetts Lowell,
Lowell, MA; University of Delaware,
Newark, DE; PricewaterhouseCoopers,
LLC, Rochester, NY; and ESL Federal
Credit Union, Rochester, NY have been
added as parties to this venture.
No other changes have been made in
either the membership or planned
activity of the group research project.
Membership in this group research
project remains open, and AIM
Photonics intends to file additional
written notifications disclosing all
changes in membership.
On June 16, 2016, AIM Photonics
filed its original notification pursuant to
Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department
of Justice published a notice in the
Federal Register pursuant to Section
6(b) of the Act on July 25, 2016 (81 FR
48450).
The last notification was filed with
the Department on December 23, 2016.
A notice was published in the Federal
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:35 Apr 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
Patricia A. Brink,
Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust
Division.
[FR Doc. 2017–08694 Filed 4–28–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employee Benefits Security
Administration
Proposed Exemption From Certain
Prohibited Transaction Restrictions
Employee Benefits Security
Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Notice of proposed exemption.
AGENCY:
This document contains
notices of pendency before the
Department of Labor (the Department) of
proposed exemption 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 exemption: D–
11845, Rosetree & Company 401(k) Plan
and Trust.
DATES: All interested persons are invited
to submit written comments or requests
for a hearing on the pending exemption
within May 31, 2017.
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, U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue NW., Suite 400, 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 requests
should be sent either by email to:
moffitt.betty@dol.gov, or by FAX to
(202) 693–8474 by the end of the
scheduled comment period. The
applications for exemption and the
comments received will be available for
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
public inspection in the Public
Documents Room of the Employee
Benefits Security Administration, U.S.
Department of Labor, Room N–1515,
200 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20210.
Warning: All comments will be made
available to the public. Do not include
any personally identifiable information
(such as Social Security number, name,
address, or other contact information) or
confidential business information that
you do not want publicly disclosed. All
comments may be posted on the Internet
and can be retrieved by most Internet
search engines.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The proposed exemption was
requested in an application 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 (76
FR 66637, 66644, October 27, 2011).1
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, this notice of proposed
exemption is issued solely by the
Department.
The application contains
representations with regard to the
proposed exemption 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.
Rosetree & Company 401(k) Plan and
Trust (the Plan)
Located in Skokie, IL
[Application No. D–11845]
PROPOSED EXEMPTION
Based on the facts and representations
set forth in the application, the
Department is considering granting an
exemption under section 4975(c)(2) of
the Code and in accordance with the
procedures set forth in 29 CFR part
2570, subpart B (76 FR 66637, 66644,
October 27, 2011).
SECTION I. COVERED TRANSACTION
If the proposed exemption is granted,
the sanctions resulting from the
application of section 4975(c)(1)(B) of
the Code, shall not apply to the
proposed guarantee (the Guarantee) by
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).
E:\FR\FM\01MYN1.SGM
01MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 82 / Monday, May 1, 2017 / Notices
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Richard Rosenbaum (Mr. Rosenbaum),
the Plan trustee, a disqualified person
with respect to the Plan, of: (1) a loan
(the Loan) made by the Great Lakes
Credit Union (GLCU), an unrelated third
party lender, to Kurtson Realty, LLC
(Kurtson), a real estate company that is
wholly owned by the Plan; 2 and (2) a
future Loan made by an unrelated third
party lender (hereinafter, GLCU and any
third party lender is referred to as a
‘‘Lender’’) to Kurtson, provided that the
general conditions that are set forth
below in Section II are met.
(j) No interest or any fee is charged to
Kurtson or the Plan in connection with
the Guarantee; and
(k) The Guarantee is not part of an
agreement, arrangement, or
understanding in which Mr. Rosenbaum
causes the assets of the Plan to be used
in a manner that is designed to benefit
himself or any person who has an
interest which would affect the exercise
of Mr. Rosenbaum’s best judgment as a
fiduciary of the Plan.
SECTION II. GENERAL CONDITIONS
(a) The Loan is made for purposes of
the Plan acquiring and rehabilitating
investment property from an unrelated
third party through Kurtson;
(b) The Loan is made on commercially
reasonable terms;
(c) The debt service and value to loan
ratio for the Loan, and for any future
Loan, are based primarily on the
characteristics of the property serving as
collateral for such Loan (the Collateral
Property);
(d) The Lender and the Loan servicer
(the Loan Servicer) are unrelated to Mr.
Rosenbaum and the Plan;
(e) The Lender has a pre-existing Loan
service arrangement with the Loan
Servicer, and maintains this
relationship for the duration of the
Loan;
(f) Mr. Rosenbaum does not receive
any compensation or derive any
personal benefit from the Collateral
Property;
(g) For the duration of the Loan or any
future Loan, the Collateral Property is
not used by or leased to: (1) any other
disqualified persons with respect to the
Plan; (2) Rosetree or any affiliate of
Rosetree; or (3) any person or entity in
which Mr. Rosenbaum may have an
interest that would affect his best
judgment as a Plan fiduciary;
(h) The Guarantee is a condition that
is: (1) customarily required in similar
transactions between Kurtson and the
Lender, and is not unique to the Loan
or to the specific parties to the Loan;
and (2) solely due to a regulatory
requirement of the National Credit
Union Administration that is imposed
upon credit unions, including GLCU;
(i) If the Plan defaults on a Loan, Mr.
Rosenbaum pays the balance of such
Loan, and has no recourse against the
Plan for repayment;
The Parties
1. The Plan is a 401(k) Plan sponsored
by Rosetree, a licensed CPA firm,
insurance agency, and registered
investment adviser. Mr. Rosenbaum (the
Applicant) is the sole shareholder and
employee of Rosetree. He performs all of
Rosetree’s operations and receives
periodic compensation. Mr. Rosenbaum
is also the sole participant in the Plan,
as well as the Plan administrator and
trustee. As of March 31, 2016, the Plan
had approximately $480,000 in total
assets.
2. Kurtson is a real estate operating
company that is wholly owned by the
Plan. Kurtson currently owns three
investment properties, including a 3unit apartment building located at 1842
S. Drake, Chicago, Illinois (the Collateral
Property), which is rented to unrelated
parties. Mr. Rosenbaum performs
administrative duties for Kurtson, but
he receives no compensation for his
services.
3. The Plan contemplates entering
into a Loan from GLCU, a credit union
based in Bannockburn, Illinois. As of
December 31, 2015, GLCU had $719
million in assets.
4. Spectrum Business Resources, LLC
(Spectrum) is GLCU’s loan servicing
agent in Lisle, Illinois. As the Loan
Servicer for several member credit
unions, Spectrum identifies potential
borrowers, prepares loan write-ups for
the credit union loan committees,
prepares loan documents and maintains
correspondence and relationships with
the borrowers. Both GLCU and
Spectrum are unrelated to the Plan and
Mr. Rosenbaum.4
2 Because Mr. Rosenbaum is the sole owner of
Rosetree & Company, Ltd. (Rosetree), the Plan
sponsor, and the only participant in the Plan, there
is no jurisdiction under Title I of the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (the Act),
pursuant to 29 CFR 2510.3–3(b). However, there is
jurisdiction under Title II of the Act pursuant to
section 4975 of the Code.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:35 Apr 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
20385
The Loans
5. Kurtson seeks an initial Loan from
GLCU in order to acquire and
rehabilitate a new investment property
that will serve as the Collateral Property
for the Loan. A Loan proposal (the Loan
Proposal) from Spectrum, which
specifies the terms and conditions
under which the requested financing
will be provided to Kurtson, states that
‘‘GLCU will provide up to a $90,000,
secured, guaranteed commercial
mortgage on the [Collateral Property],
[which will require] 60 monthly
payments of principal and interest
through maturity in 5 years, based on a
20-year amortization schedule, at a
5.95% fixed interest rate.’’ The Loan
Proposal also provides that ‘‘the Loan
amount will not exceed 75% of the
appraised value of the [Collateral
Property].’’
6. In addition to the Collateral
Property, the collateral for the Loan will
consist of an assignment of rents on the
Collateral Property by Kurtson to GLCU.
Other terms of the Loan Proposal
require an appraisal of the Collateral
Property prior to the formal approval of
such Loan, to confirm a minimum
market value of $120,000. Further,
pursuant to credit union regulations, the
Loan will require a written Guarantee
from Mr. Rosenbaum.5
7. With respect to fees and other
expenses associated with the Loan, the
Applicant represents that there will be
a processing fee of $250. In addition,
Kurtson will be required to reimburse
GLCU for all costs associated with the
transaction, including but not limited to
attorney’s fees, appraisal fees, recording
fees, title insurance costs, survey costs,
searches, documentation fees, and any
other costs and fees associated with the
transaction. The Loan will not have any
prepayment penalties.
Although the Loan Proposal allows
for a Loan amount of up to $90,000,
Kurtson will obtain a Loan for $80,000,
resulting in a value to loan ratio of
150%. The Loan would represent
approximately 14.29% of the Plan’s
assets.
8. The Applicant anticipates that the
Plan will engage in additional Loans of
a similar nature in the future.
Accordingly, Kurtson will obtain all
future Loans from the Lender under
similar, commercially-reasonable terms,
subject to changes in market conditions
that would affect the interest rate. The
debt service and value to loan ratio for
the Loan, and for any future Loan, will
be based primarily on the characteristics
of the Collateral Property.
3 The Summary of Facts and Representations is
based on the Applicant’s representations and does
not reflect the views of the Department, unless
indicated otherwise.
4 Mr. Rosenbaum also represents that he has no
relationship with any of Spectrum’s member credit
unions other than as a depositor or borrower.
5 Mr. Rosenbaum represents that he is also a
guarantor of other loans made to entities he controls
for transactions that are substantially similar to the
proposed exemption transaction. He states that the
outstanding loan amounts for which he serves as a
guarantor are approximately $767,000 on properties
having an appraised value of $1,240,000.
SUMMARY OF FACTS AND
REPRESENTATIONS 3
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01MYN1.SGM
01MYN1
20386
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 82 / Monday, May 1, 2017 / Notices
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
In addition, the Lender and the Loan
Servicer will be unrelated to Mr.
Rosenbaum and the Plan. Although, the
Lender may not have a pre-existing loan
service arrangement with the Loan
Servicer, it will maintain this
relationship with Spectrum for the
duration of a Loan. Further, Mr.
Rosenbaum will not receive any
compensation or derive any personal
benefit from the Collateral Property.
Finally, the Collateral Property for the
Loan or any future Loan, may not be
used by or leased to: (a) any other
disqualified persons with respect to the
Plan; (b) Rosetreee or any affiliate of
Rosetree; or (c) any person or entity in
which Mr. Rosenbaum may have an
interest that would affect his best
judgment as a Plan fiduciary.
Appraisal of the Collateral Property
9. The Collateral Property for the
initial Loan has been appraised by
Steven F. Eggler, a Certified Residential
Real Estate Appraiser, of C.A. Benson
and Associates, Inc., which is located in
La Grange Park, Illinois. Mr. Eggler
represents that he has no interest in the
Collateral Property and no bias with
respect to the participants in the
proposed transaction, or with respect to
Rosetree, the Plan, or Kurtson. Mr.
Eggler also represents that his
employment and/or compensation for
performing the appraisal or any future
appraisals was not conditioned on any
agreement or understanding that he
would report (or present analysis,
supporting), among other things, a
predetermined specific value, a
predetermined minimum value, a range
or direction in value, or a value that
favors the cause of any party.
10. In an appraisal report dated
September 30, 2014 (the 2014
Appraisal), Mr. Eggler certifies that he
developed his opinion of the market
value of the Collateral Property based
solely on the Sales Comparison and
Income Approaches to valuation. As of
September 23, 2014, Mr. Eggler placed
the fair market value of the Collateral
Property at $120,000, under the Sales
Comparison Approach, and at $117,000,
under the Income Approach. After
reconciling both valuations, Mr. Eggler
ultimately determined that the
Collateral Property was worth $120,000,
as of September 30, 2014.
11. In a statement dated May 31, 2016,
Charles A. Benson, Jr., SRA of C. A.
Benson and Associates, Inc., who was
the supervisory appraiser for the 2014
Appraisal, provided an update to the
sales data discussed in the 2014
Appraisal, as it applies to the Collateral
Property. As noted in the 2014
Appraisal, Mr. Benson represents that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:35 Apr 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
the average sale price of a 2–4 unit [in
the $100,000–200,000 price range] in
the North Lawndale community, where
the Collateral Property is located, was
$136,171 over the 12-month period
prior to the 2014 Appraisal. According
to Mr. Benson, in the ensuing 12 month
period, the average sale price for
properties in the same price range as the
Collateral Property was $131,287, which
represented a 3.6% decline in value. Mr.
Benson also represents that from
September 25, 2015 to May 10, 2016, the
average sale price of properties that
were comparable to the Collateral
Property was $137,953. According to
Mr. Benson, this amount represents a
1.3% increase from the average sale
price noted in the 2014 Appraisal. Mr.
Benson explains that this price
difference reflects a small decrease in
the year after the 2014 Appraisal,
followed by an increase to a level that
was slightly higher than what was noted
in the 2014 Appraisal. Overall, Mr.
Benson represents that market
conditions in the area have stabilized
since the 2014 Appraisal.
The Applicant represents that any
investment property used by the
Applicant as Collateral Property to
support a future Loan will be similarly
valued by a qualified, independent
appraiser.
Rationale for the Loans
13. Mr. Rosenbaum represents that he
is an experienced real estate investor.
As a former Partner in charge of the
Chicago Real Estate practice of Coopers
& Lybrand (now Price Waterhouse
Coopers), Mr. Rosenbaum states that he
has been a senior executive at other real
estate industry entities, and that he
personally owns ten properties that are
similar to the Collateral Property.
It is Mr. Rosenbaum’s opinion that,
given the current investment
environment, real estate investments of
this type provide higher rates of return
and less risk than other investments
available. Mr. Rosenbaum is also of the
view that the proposed Loans will
enable the Plan to earn a higher rate of
return by investing in an additional
property, which would not be
obtainable if the exemption request is
denied.
The Guarantee
14. As represented above, the Loan
Proposal requires Mr. Rosenbaum’s
Guarantee. Accordingly, the Applicant
is requesting an administrative
exemption from the Department that
will allow Mr. Rosenbaum to provide a
Guarantee for the Loan that Kurtson, a
wholly-owned entity of the Plan and
thus, a Plan asset, is requesting from
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
GLCU, as well as for future Loans from
Lenders, which may include GLCU. The
proposed Loan will be made on
commercially reasonable terms, and
both the debt service and value to loan
ratios for the Loan from GLCU indicate
that the Loan will be based primarily
upon the characteristics of the Collateral
Property that is being financed for
purposes of the Loan. The Applicant
represents that, although the Plan is
dealing with GLCU, an independent
lender, Mr. Rosenbaum is being asked
by GLCU to participate as a Loan
guarantor. The Applicant represents that
the proposed Guarantee is solely due to
a regulatory requirement of the National
Credit Union Administration 6 that is
imposed upon credit unions, including
GLCU. Further, the Applicant represents
that it is not aware of any other bank or
savings institution that makes nonrecourse loans at present.7 The
Applicant represents that only
insurance companies do not require
guarantees, but only for loans over $1
million.
Notwithstanding the regulatory
requirement, the Applicant believes that
with respect to the Loan, the Collateral
Property provides adequate collateral
and cash flow to repay the Loan without
relying upon Mr. Rosenbaum’s personal
credit or funds.
No interest or any fee will be charged
to Kurtson or the Plan in connection
with the Guarantee. In addition, the
Guarantee will not be part of an
agreement, arrangement, or
understanding in which Mr. Rosenbaum
causes the assets of the Plan to be used
in a manner that is designed to benefit
himself or any person who has an
interest which would affect the exercise
of Mr. Rosenbaum’s best judgment as a
fiduciary of the Plan.
The Applicant also requests
exemptive relief for Mr. Rosenbaum’s
Guarantee of certain future Loans that
may be made to Kurtson by a Lender. As
represented above, the debt service and
value to loan ratios for all future Loans
will be based primarily upon the
characteristics of the Collateral Property
for the specific Loan.
Legal Analysis
15. Section 4975(c)(1)(B) of the Code
prohibits any direct or indirect lending
6 See 12 CFR 723.7(b)—(‘‘Principals, other than a
not for profit organization, as defined by the
Internal Revenue Service Code (26 U.S.C. 501) or
those where the Regional Director grants a waiver,
must provide their personal liability and
guarantee.’’)
7 The Applicant represents that prior to 2008, it
is aware of only two financial institutions that made
non-recourse loans to retirement plans. However,
the Applicant explains that both institutions are no
longer in business.
E:\FR\FM\01MYN1.SGM
01MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 82 / Monday, May 1, 2017 / Notices
of money or other extension of credit
between a plan and a disqualified
person. Section 4975(e)(2)(A) of the
Code defines the term ‘‘disqualified
person’’ to include a plan fiduciary.
Section 4975(e)(3) of the Code defines
the term ‘‘fiduciary,’’ in part, to include
any person who exercises any
discretionary authority or discretionary
control respecting management of such
plan or exercises any authority or
control regarding management or
disposition of its assets. As Plan trustee,
with investment discretion over the
assets of the Plan, Mr. Rosenbaum is a
fiduciary and therefore, a disqualified
person. Thus, in absence of a statutory
or administrative exemption, the
Guarantee would violate section
4975(c)(1)(B) of the Code.
Statutory Findings
17. The Applicant states that the
proposed exemption is administratively
feasible in that it covers a specific
factual situation that will not require
ongoing monitoring by the Department.
In addition, the Applicant states that the
proposed exemption is in the best
interests of the Plan and Mr. Rosenbaum
as the sole participant because the Loan
will allow the Plan to invest in another
property in which the rate of return will
be substantially higher for the Plan than
investing in traditional assets, such as
the stock market, and with less risk.8
Further, the Applicant represents that
the proposed exemption is protective of
the rights of Mr. Rosenbaum as the sole
Plan participant because the Loan is
made by an unrelated, third party to the
Plan and guaranteed by Mr. Rosenbaum
in his individual capacity. In addition,
the Applicant represents that no interest
or fee is charged to Kurtson or the Plan
in connection with the Guarantee.
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Summary
18. In summary, the Applicant
represents that the proposed transaction
satisfies the statutory criteria of section
4975(c)(2) of the Code because:
(a) The Loan will be made for
purposes of the Plan acquiring and
rehabilitating investment property from
an unrelated third party through
Kurtson;
(b) The Loan will be made on
commercially reasonable terms;
(c) The debt service and value to loan
ratio for the Loan, and for any future
8 As an example, the Applicant states that the
typical property he acquires costs $100,000 to
purchase and rehabilitate, which then generates
$25,000 annually in cash flow and appraises for
$150,000. The Applicant further explains that there
is strong demand for apartments that are similar to
the Collateral Property, and the rents are generally
guaranteed by the Federal Government under the
Section 8 Housing Program.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:35 Apr 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
Loan, will be based primarily on the
characteristics of the Collateral
Property;
(d) The Lender and the Loan Servicer
will be unrelated to Mr. Rosenbaum and
the Plan;
(e) The Lender will have a preexisting Loan service arrangement with
the Loan Servicer, and will maintain
this relationship for the duration of the
Loan;
(f) Mr. Rosenbaum will not receive
any compensation or derive any
personal benefit from the Collateral
Property;
(g) For the duration of the Loan or any
future Loan, the Collateral Property will
not be used by or leased to: (1) any other
disqualified persons with respect to the
Plan; (2) Rosetree or any affiliate of
Rosetree; or (3) any person or entity in
whom Mr. Rosenbaum may have an
interest that would affect his best
judgment as a Plan fiduciary;
(h) The Guarantee will be a condition
that is: (1) customarily required in
similar transactions between Kurtson
and the Lender, and will not be unique
to the Loan or to the specific parties to
the Loan; and (2) solely due to a
regulatory requirement of the National
Credit Union Administration that is
imposed upon credit unions, including
GLCU;
(i) If the Plan defaults on a Loan, Mr.
Rosenbaum will pay the balance of each
Loan and will have no recourse against
the Plan for repayment;
(j) No interest or any fee will be
charged to Kurtson or the Plan in
connection with the Guarantee; and
(k) The Guarantee will not be part of
an agreement, arrangement, or
understanding in which Mr. Rosenbaum
causes the assets of the Plan to be used
in a manner that is designed to benefit
himself or any person who has an
interest which would affect the exercise
of Mr. Rosenbaum’s best judgment as a
fiduciary of the Plan.
NOTICE TO INTERESTED PERSONS
As Mr. Rosenbaum is the sole
participant and beneficiary of the Plan,
it has been determined that there is no
need to distribute the Notice of
Proposed Exemption (Notice) to
interested persons. Therefore, comments
and requests for a hearing must be
received by the Department within
thirty (30) days of the publication of this
Notice in the Federal Register.
All comments will be made available
to the public. Warning: Do not include
any personally identifiable information
(such as name, address, or other contact
information) or confidential business
information that you do not want
publicly disclosed. All comments may
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
20387
be posted on the Internet and can be
retrieved by most Internet search
engines.
Ms.
Anna Mpras Vaughan of the
Department, telephone (202) 693–8565.
(This is not a toll-free number.)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
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 exemption, 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
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 exemption, if
granted, will be subject to the express
condition that the material facts and
representations contained in the
application are true and complete, and
that the application accurately describes
all material terms of the transaction
which is the subject of the exemption.
E:\FR\FM\01MYN1.SGM
01MYN1
20388
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 82 / Monday, May 1, 2017 / Notices
Signed at Washington, DC, this 24th day of
April, 2017.
Lyssa E. Hall,
Director, Office of Exemption Determinations,
Employee Benefits Security Administration,
U.S. Department of Labor.
[FR Doc. 2017–08687 Filed 4–28–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–29–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration
OSHA Training Institute (OTI)
Education Center; Notice of
Competition and Request for
Applications
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA), Labor.
ACTION: Notice of competition and
request for applications for the OSHA
Training Institute Education Centers
Program.
AGENCY:
This notice announces the
opportunity for interested non-profit
organizations, including qualifying
educational institutions, trade
associations, labor unions, and
community-based and faith-based
organizations that are not an agency of
a state or local government to submit
applications to become an OSHA
Training Institute Education Center and
deliver standard classroom instruction
on a regional basis. State or local
government-supported institutions of
higher education are eligible to apply.
Eligible organizations can apply
independently or in partnership with
other eligible organizations, but in such
a case, a lead organization must be
identified along with a list of any
consortium partners. Current OSHAauthorized OSHA Training Institute
Education Centers required to renew
their status must submit a new
application in order to maintain their
OSHA Training Institute Education
Center status. If the corporate identity of
an applicant, or its membership have
changed, the new entity must submit an
application. Applications will only be
accepted during the solicitation period
and will be rated on a competitive basis.
Complete application instructions are
contained in this notice.
This notice also contains information
on a proposal conference designed to
provide potential applicants with
information about the OSHA Training
Institute Education Centers Program.
The conference will clarify OSHA
expectations for OSHA Training
Institute Education Centers, courses and
methods of instruction, as well as
administrative and program
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:35 Apr 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
requirements for OSHA Training
Institute Education Centers and the
OSHA Outreach Training Program.
Applicants are strongly encouraged to
attend the proposal conference.
OSHA will enter into five-year, nonfinancial cooperative agreements with
successful applicants. These
authorization agreements are intended
solely to facilitate the ongoing
monitoring and evaluation of safety
training provided by authorized OSHA
Training Institute Education Centers.
These cooperative agreements will not
constitute a grant or financial assistance
instrument, and OSHA will provide no
compensation to authorized OSHA
Training Institute Education Centers.
Such non-financial cooperative
agreements are renewable, at the
Government’s sole option, for one fiveyear period, if the organization has
performed satisfactorily during the
initial term.
DATES: Applications (three copies) must
be received no later than 4:30 p.m.
Central Time on June 30, 2017. Requests
for extension of this application
deadline will not be granted.
A proposal conference will be held on
May 17, 2017, at the OSHA Directorate
of Training and Education, 2020 South
Arlington Heights Rd., Arlington
Heights, Illinois 60005–4102. Attendees
are required to pre-register for this
conference. Specific details are
discussed in the Proposal Conference
section of this notice.
ADDRESSES: Submit applications (three
copies) to the OSHA Directorate of
Training and Education, Office of
Training Programs and Administration,
Attn: James Brock, 2020 South
Arlington Heights Rd., Arlington
Heights, Illinois 60005–4102.
Applicants selected to be OSHA
Training Institute Education Centers
must attend a mandatory orientation
meeting to be held at the OSHA
Directorate of Training and Education,
2020 South Arlington Heights Rd.,
Arlington Heights, Illinois 60005–4102
at a time and date to be determined.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Any
questions regarding this opportunity
should be directed to: James Brock,
OSHA Training Institute Education
Centers Program Manager, email address
brock.james.e@dol.gov, or Annette
Braam, Assistant Director, Training
Programs, OSHA Directorate of Training
and Education, email address
braam.annette@dol.gov. Both can be
reached at: (847) 759–7700.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION contains
details concerning the following:
• Background Information
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Overview of the OSHA Directorate of
Training and Education (DTE)
Overview of the OSHA Training Institute
(OTI)
Overview of the OTI Education Centers
Program
Overview of the OSHA Outreach Training
Program
Organizational Responsibilities
OTI Education Centers Responsibilities
OSHA DTE Responsibilities
OSHA Jurisdiction
Geographic Distribution
Application Submission Requirements
Selection Guidelines
Selection Criteria
Consortia and Partnerships
Funding Provisions
Cooperative Agreement Duration
Proposal Conference
Application Submission
Application Deadline
Application Evaluation and Selection
Process
Notification of Selection
Freedom of Information Act
Paperwork Reduction Act
Transparency
Notification of Non-Selection
Non-Selection Appeal
Appendix A—Current List of Required,
Elective, and Short Courses
Background Information
Overview of the OSHA Directorate of
Training and Education (DTE)
DTE, located in Arlington Heights,
Illinois, supports the Agency’s mission
and performance goals of securing safe
and healthy workplaces and increasing
workers’ voice in the workplace through
the development and delivery of
training courses and educational
programs. The Directorate has three
distinct functional areas: the OSHA
Training Institute (OTI), the Office of
Training Programs and Administration,
and the Office of Training Educational
Development. The Directorate provides
training for federal and state compliance
officers and state consultants. The
Directorate administers three distinct
external training programs including the
OSHA Training Institute (OTI)
Education Centers Program, the
Outreach Training Program, and the
Susan Harwood Training Grants
Program. The Directorate also develops
training and educational materials that
support OTI courses and the Agency’s
compliance assistance initiatives.
Overview of the OSHA Training
Institute (OTI)
OTI, located in Arlington Heights,
Illinois, is OSHA’s primary training
provider. OTI conducts over 50 unique
course offerings on an annual basis.
Training includes job hazard
recognition as well as OSHA standards,
policies, and procedures for persons
responsible for enforcing or directly
E:\FR\FM\01MYN1.SGM
01MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 82 (Monday, May 1, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20384-20388]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-08687]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employee Benefits Security Administration
Proposed Exemption From Certain Prohibited Transaction
Restrictions
AGENCY: Employee Benefits Security Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Notice of proposed exemption.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document contains notices of pendency before the
Department of Labor (the Department) of proposed exemption 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 exemption: D-11845, Rosetree & Company 401(k) Plan and Trust.
DATES: All interested persons are invited to submit written comments or
requests for a hearing on the pending exemption within May 31, 2017.
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, U.S. Department of Labor,
200 Constitution Avenue NW., Suite 400, 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 email or FAX. Any such comments or
requests should be sent either by email to: moffitt.betty@dol.gov, or
by FAX to (202) 693-8474 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-1515, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210.
Warning: All comments will be made available to the public. Do not
include any personally identifiable information (such as Social
Security number, name, address, or other contact information) or
confidential business information that you do not want publicly
disclosed. All comments may be posted on the Internet and can be
retrieved by most Internet search engines.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The proposed exemption was requested in an application 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 (76 FR 66637, 66644, October 27, 2011).\1\ 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, this notice of proposed exemption is issued solely by
the Department.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The application contains representations with regard to the
proposed exemption 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.
Rosetree & Company 401(k) Plan and Trust (the Plan)
Located in Skokie, IL
[Application No. D-11845]
PROPOSED EXEMPTION
Based on the facts and representations set forth in the
application, the Department is considering granting an exemption under
section 4975(c)(2) of the Code and in accordance with the procedures
set forth in 29 CFR part 2570, subpart B (76 FR 66637, 66644, October
27, 2011).
SECTION I. COVERED TRANSACTION
If the proposed exemption is granted, the sanctions resulting from
the application of section 4975(c)(1)(B) of the Code, shall not apply
to the proposed guarantee (the Guarantee) by
[[Page 20385]]
Richard Rosenbaum (Mr. Rosenbaum), the Plan trustee, a disqualified
person with respect to the Plan, of: (1) a loan (the Loan) made by the
Great Lakes Credit Union (GLCU), an unrelated third party lender, to
Kurtson Realty, LLC (Kurtson), a real estate company that is wholly
owned by the Plan; \2\ and (2) a future Loan made by an unrelated third
party lender (hereinafter, GLCU and any third party lender is referred
to as a ``Lender'') to Kurtson, provided that the general conditions
that are set forth below in Section II are met.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Because Mr. Rosenbaum is the sole owner of Rosetree &
Company, Ltd. (Rosetree), the Plan sponsor, and the only participant
in the Plan, there is no jurisdiction under Title I of the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (the Act), pursuant to 29 CFR
2510.3-3(b). However, there is jurisdiction under Title II of the
Act pursuant to section 4975 of the Code.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECTION II. GENERAL CONDITIONS
(a) The Loan is made for purposes of the Plan acquiring and
rehabilitating investment property from an unrelated third party
through Kurtson;
(b) The Loan is made on commercially reasonable terms;
(c) The debt service and value to loan ratio for the Loan, and for
any future Loan, are based primarily on the characteristics of the
property serving as collateral for such Loan (the Collateral Property);
(d) The Lender and the Loan servicer (the Loan Servicer) are
unrelated to Mr. Rosenbaum and the Plan;
(e) The Lender has a pre-existing Loan service arrangement with the
Loan Servicer, and maintains this relationship for the duration of the
Loan;
(f) Mr. Rosenbaum does not receive any compensation or derive any
personal benefit from the Collateral Property;
(g) For the duration of the Loan or any future Loan, the Collateral
Property is not used by or leased to: (1) any other disqualified
persons with respect to the Plan; (2) Rosetree or any affiliate of
Rosetree; or (3) any person or entity in which Mr. Rosenbaum may have
an interest that would affect his best judgment as a Plan fiduciary;
(h) The Guarantee is a condition that is: (1) customarily required
in similar transactions between Kurtson and the Lender, and is not
unique to the Loan or to the specific parties to the Loan; and (2)
solely due to a regulatory requirement of the National Credit Union
Administration that is imposed upon credit unions, including GLCU;
(i) If the Plan defaults on a Loan, Mr. Rosenbaum pays the balance
of such Loan, and has no recourse against the Plan for repayment;
(j) No interest or any fee is charged to Kurtson or the Plan in
connection with the Guarantee; and
(k) The Guarantee is not part of an agreement, arrangement, or
understanding in which Mr. Rosenbaum causes the assets of the Plan to
be used in a manner that is designed to benefit himself or any person
who has an interest which would affect the exercise of Mr. Rosenbaum's
best judgment as a fiduciary of the Plan.
SUMMARY OF FACTS AND REPRESENTATIONS \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The Summary of Facts and Representations is based on the
Applicant's representations and does not reflect the views of the
Department, unless indicated otherwise.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Parties
1. The Plan is a 401(k) Plan sponsored by Rosetree, a licensed CPA
firm, insurance agency, and registered investment adviser. Mr.
Rosenbaum (the Applicant) is the sole shareholder and employee of
Rosetree. He performs all of Rosetree's operations and receives
periodic compensation. Mr. Rosenbaum is also the sole participant in
the Plan, as well as the Plan administrator and trustee. As of March
31, 2016, the Plan had approximately $480,000 in total assets.
2. Kurtson is a real estate operating company that is wholly owned
by the Plan. Kurtson currently owns three investment properties,
including a 3-unit apartment building located at 1842 S. Drake,
Chicago, Illinois (the Collateral Property), which is rented to
unrelated parties. Mr. Rosenbaum performs administrative duties for
Kurtson, but he receives no compensation for his services.
3. The Plan contemplates entering into a Loan from GLCU, a credit
union based in Bannockburn, Illinois. As of December 31, 2015, GLCU had
$719 million in assets.
4. Spectrum Business Resources, LLC (Spectrum) is GLCU's loan
servicing agent in Lisle, Illinois. As the Loan Servicer for several
member credit unions, Spectrum identifies potential borrowers, prepares
loan write-ups for the credit union loan committees, prepares loan
documents and maintains correspondence and relationships with the
borrowers. Both GLCU and Spectrum are unrelated to the Plan and Mr.
Rosenbaum.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Mr. Rosenbaum also represents that he has no relationship
with any of Spectrum's member credit unions other than as a
depositor or borrower.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Loans
5. Kurtson seeks an initial Loan from GLCU in order to acquire and
rehabilitate a new investment property that will serve as the
Collateral Property for the Loan. A Loan proposal (the Loan Proposal)
from Spectrum, which specifies the terms and conditions under which the
requested financing will be provided to Kurtson, states that ``GLCU
will provide up to a $90,000, secured, guaranteed commercial mortgage
on the [Collateral Property], [which will require] 60 monthly payments
of principal and interest through maturity in 5 years, based on a 20-
year amortization schedule, at a 5.95% fixed interest rate.'' The Loan
Proposal also provides that ``the Loan amount will not exceed 75% of
the appraised value of the [Collateral Property].''
6. In addition to the Collateral Property, the collateral for the
Loan will consist of an assignment of rents on the Collateral Property
by Kurtson to GLCU. Other terms of the Loan Proposal require an
appraisal of the Collateral Property prior to the formal approval of
such Loan, to confirm a minimum market value of $120,000. Further,
pursuant to credit union regulations, the Loan will require a written
Guarantee from Mr. Rosenbaum.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Mr. Rosenbaum represents that he is also a guarantor of
other loans made to entities he controls for transactions that are
substantially similar to the proposed exemption transaction. He
states that the outstanding loan amounts for which he serves as a
guarantor are approximately $767,000 on properties having an
appraised value of $1,240,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. With respect to fees and other expenses associated with the
Loan, the Applicant represents that there will be a processing fee of
$250. In addition, Kurtson will be required to reimburse GLCU for all
costs associated with the transaction, including but not limited to
attorney's fees, appraisal fees, recording fees, title insurance costs,
survey costs, searches, documentation fees, and any other costs and
fees associated with the transaction. The Loan will not have any
prepayment penalties.
Although the Loan Proposal allows for a Loan amount of up to
$90,000, Kurtson will obtain a Loan for $80,000, resulting in a value
to loan ratio of 150%. The Loan would represent approximately 14.29% of
the Plan's assets.
8. The Applicant anticipates that the Plan will engage in
additional Loans of a similar nature in the future. Accordingly,
Kurtson will obtain all future Loans from the Lender under similar,
commercially-reasonable terms, subject to changes in market conditions
that would affect the interest rate. The debt service and value to loan
ratio for the Loan, and for any future Loan, will be based primarily on
the characteristics of the Collateral Property.
[[Page 20386]]
In addition, the Lender and the Loan Servicer will be unrelated to
Mr. Rosenbaum and the Plan. Although, the Lender may not have a pre-
existing loan service arrangement with the Loan Servicer, it will
maintain this relationship with Spectrum for the duration of a Loan.
Further, Mr. Rosenbaum will not receive any compensation or derive any
personal benefit from the Collateral Property. Finally, the Collateral
Property for the Loan or any future Loan, may not be used by or leased
to: (a) any other disqualified persons with respect to the Plan; (b)
Rosetreee or any affiliate of Rosetree; or (c) any person or entity in
which Mr. Rosenbaum may have an interest that would affect his best
judgment as a Plan fiduciary.
Appraisal of the Collateral Property
9. The Collateral Property for the initial Loan has been appraised
by Steven F. Eggler, a Certified Residential Real Estate Appraiser, of
C.A. Benson and Associates, Inc., which is located in La Grange Park,
Illinois. Mr. Eggler represents that he has no interest in the
Collateral Property and no bias with respect to the participants in the
proposed transaction, or with respect to Rosetree, the Plan, or
Kurtson. Mr. Eggler also represents that his employment and/or
compensation for performing the appraisal or any future appraisals was
not conditioned on any agreement or understanding that he would report
(or present analysis, supporting), among other things, a predetermined
specific value, a predetermined minimum value, a range or direction in
value, or a value that favors the cause of any party.
10. In an appraisal report dated September 30, 2014 (the 2014
Appraisal), Mr. Eggler certifies that he developed his opinion of the
market value of the Collateral Property based solely on the Sales
Comparison and Income Approaches to valuation. As of September 23,
2014, Mr. Eggler placed the fair market value of the Collateral
Property at $120,000, under the Sales Comparison Approach, and at
$117,000, under the Income Approach. After reconciling both valuations,
Mr. Eggler ultimately determined that the Collateral Property was worth
$120,000, as of September 30, 2014.
11. In a statement dated May 31, 2016, Charles A. Benson, Jr., SRA
of C. A. Benson and Associates, Inc., who was the supervisory appraiser
for the 2014 Appraisal, provided an update to the sales data discussed
in the 2014 Appraisal, as it applies to the Collateral Property. As
noted in the 2014 Appraisal, Mr. Benson represents that the average
sale price of a 2-4 unit [in the $100,000-200,000 price range] in the
North Lawndale community, where the Collateral Property is located, was
$136,171 over the 12-month period prior to the 2014 Appraisal.
According to Mr. Benson, in the ensuing 12 month period, the average
sale price for properties in the same price range as the Collateral
Property was $131,287, which represented a 3.6% decline in value. Mr.
Benson also represents that from September 25, 2015 to May 10, 2016,
the average sale price of properties that were comparable to the
Collateral Property was $137,953. According to Mr. Benson, this amount
represents a 1.3% increase from the average sale price noted in the
2014 Appraisal. Mr. Benson explains that this price difference reflects
a small decrease in the year after the 2014 Appraisal, followed by an
increase to a level that was slightly higher than what was noted in the
2014 Appraisal. Overall, Mr. Benson represents that market conditions
in the area have stabilized since the 2014 Appraisal.
The Applicant represents that any investment property used by the
Applicant as Collateral Property to support a future Loan will be
similarly valued by a qualified, independent appraiser.
Rationale for the Loans
13. Mr. Rosenbaum represents that he is an experienced real estate
investor. As a former Partner in charge of the Chicago Real Estate
practice of Coopers & Lybrand (now Price Waterhouse Coopers), Mr.
Rosenbaum states that he has been a senior executive at other real
estate industry entities, and that he personally owns ten properties
that are similar to the Collateral Property.
It is Mr. Rosenbaum's opinion that, given the current investment
environment, real estate investments of this type provide higher rates
of return and less risk than other investments available. Mr. Rosenbaum
is also of the view that the proposed Loans will enable the Plan to
earn a higher rate of return by investing in an additional property,
which would not be obtainable if the exemption request is denied.
The Guarantee
14. As represented above, the Loan Proposal requires Mr.
Rosenbaum's Guarantee. Accordingly, the Applicant is requesting an
administrative exemption from the Department that will allow Mr.
Rosenbaum to provide a Guarantee for the Loan that Kurtson, a wholly-
owned entity of the Plan and thus, a Plan asset, is requesting from
GLCU, as well as for future Loans from Lenders, which may include GLCU.
The proposed Loan will be made on commercially reasonable terms, and
both the debt service and value to loan ratios for the Loan from GLCU
indicate that the Loan will be based primarily upon the characteristics
of the Collateral Property that is being financed for purposes of the
Loan. The Applicant represents that, although the Plan is dealing with
GLCU, an independent lender, Mr. Rosenbaum is being asked by GLCU to
participate as a Loan guarantor. The Applicant represents that the
proposed Guarantee is solely due to a regulatory requirement of the
National Credit Union Administration \6\ that is imposed upon credit
unions, including GLCU. Further, the Applicant represents that it is
not aware of any other bank or savings institution that makes non-
recourse loans at present.\7\ The Applicant represents that only
insurance companies do not require guarantees, but only for loans over
$1 million.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See 12 CFR 723.7(b)--(``Principals, other than a not for
profit organization, as defined by the Internal Revenue Service Code
(26 U.S.C. 501) or those where the Regional Director grants a
waiver, must provide their personal liability and guarantee.'')
\7\ The Applicant represents that prior to 2008, it is aware of
only two financial institutions that made non-recourse loans to
retirement plans. However, the Applicant explains that both
institutions are no longer in business.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notwithstanding the regulatory requirement, the Applicant believes
that with respect to the Loan, the Collateral Property provides
adequate collateral and cash flow to repay the Loan without relying
upon Mr. Rosenbaum's personal credit or funds.
No interest or any fee will be charged to Kurtson or the Plan in
connection with the Guarantee. In addition, the Guarantee will not be
part of an agreement, arrangement, or understanding in which Mr.
Rosenbaum causes the assets of the Plan to be used in a manner that is
designed to benefit himself or any person who has an interest which
would affect the exercise of Mr. Rosenbaum's best judgment as a
fiduciary of the Plan.
The Applicant also requests exemptive relief for Mr. Rosenbaum's
Guarantee of certain future Loans that may be made to Kurtson by a
Lender. As represented above, the debt service and value to loan ratios
for all future Loans will be based primarily upon the characteristics
of the Collateral Property for the specific Loan.
Legal Analysis
15. Section 4975(c)(1)(B) of the Code prohibits any direct or
indirect lending
[[Page 20387]]
of money or other extension of credit between a plan and a disqualified
person. Section 4975(e)(2)(A) of the Code defines the term
``disqualified person'' to include a plan fiduciary. Section 4975(e)(3)
of the Code defines the term ``fiduciary,'' in part, to include any
person who exercises any discretionary authority or discretionary
control respecting management of such plan or exercises any authority
or control regarding management or disposition of its assets. As Plan
trustee, with investment discretion over the assets of the Plan, Mr.
Rosenbaum is a fiduciary and therefore, a disqualified person. Thus, in
absence of a statutory or administrative exemption, the Guarantee would
violate section 4975(c)(1)(B) of the Code.
Statutory Findings
17. The Applicant states that the proposed exemption is
administratively feasible in that it covers a specific factual
situation that will not require ongoing monitoring by the Department.
In addition, the Applicant states that the proposed exemption is in the
best interests of the Plan and Mr. Rosenbaum as the sole participant
because the Loan will allow the Plan to invest in another property in
which the rate of return will be substantially higher for the Plan than
investing in traditional assets, such as the stock market, and with
less risk.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ As an example, the Applicant states that the typical
property he acquires costs $100,000 to purchase and rehabilitate,
which then generates $25,000 annually in cash flow and appraises for
$150,000. The Applicant further explains that there is strong demand
for apartments that are similar to the Collateral Property, and the
rents are generally guaranteed by the Federal Government under the
Section 8 Housing Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, the Applicant represents that the proposed exemption is
protective of the rights of Mr. Rosenbaum as the sole Plan participant
because the Loan is made by an unrelated, third party to the Plan and
guaranteed by Mr. Rosenbaum in his individual capacity. In addition,
the Applicant represents that no interest or fee is charged to Kurtson
or the Plan in connection with the Guarantee.
Summary
18. In summary, the Applicant represents that the proposed
transaction satisfies the statutory criteria of section 4975(c)(2) of
the Code because:
(a) The Loan will be made for purposes of the Plan acquiring and
rehabilitating investment property from an unrelated third party
through Kurtson;
(b) The Loan will be made on commercially reasonable terms;
(c) The debt service and value to loan ratio for the Loan, and for
any future Loan, will be based primarily on the characteristics of the
Collateral Property;
(d) The Lender and the Loan Servicer will be unrelated to Mr.
Rosenbaum and the Plan;
(e) The Lender will have a pre-existing Loan service arrangement
with the Loan Servicer, and will maintain this relationship for the
duration of the Loan;
(f) Mr. Rosenbaum will not receive any compensation or derive any
personal benefit from the Collateral Property;
(g) For the duration of the Loan or any future Loan, the Collateral
Property will not be used by or leased to: (1) any other disqualified
persons with respect to the Plan; (2) Rosetree or any affiliate of
Rosetree; or (3) any person or entity in whom Mr. Rosenbaum may have an
interest that would affect his best judgment as a Plan fiduciary;
(h) The Guarantee will be a condition that is: (1) customarily
required in similar transactions between Kurtson and the Lender, and
will not be unique to the Loan or to the specific parties to the Loan;
and (2) solely due to a regulatory requirement of the National Credit
Union Administration that is imposed upon credit unions, including
GLCU;
(i) If the Plan defaults on a Loan, Mr. Rosenbaum will pay the
balance of each Loan and will have no recourse against the Plan for
repayment;
(j) No interest or any fee will be charged to Kurtson or the Plan
in connection with the Guarantee; and
(k) The Guarantee will not be part of an agreement, arrangement, or
understanding in which Mr. Rosenbaum causes the assets of the Plan to
be used in a manner that is designed to benefit himself or any person
who has an interest which would affect the exercise of Mr. Rosenbaum's
best judgment as a fiduciary of the Plan.
NOTICE TO INTERESTED PERSONS
As Mr. Rosenbaum is the sole participant and beneficiary of the
Plan, it has been determined that there is no need to distribute the
Notice of Proposed Exemption (Notice) to interested persons. Therefore,
comments and requests for a hearing must be received by the Department
within thirty (30) days of the publication of this Notice in the
Federal Register.
All comments will be made available to the public. Warning: Do not
include any personally identifiable information (such as name, address,
or other contact information) or confidential business information that
you do not want publicly disclosed. All comments may be posted on the
Internet and can be retrieved by most Internet search engines.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Anna Mpras Vaughan of the
Department, telephone (202) 693-8565. (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 exemption, 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 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 exemption, if granted, will be subject to the
express condition that the material facts and representations contained
in the application are true and complete, and that the application
accurately describes all material terms of the transaction which is the
subject of the exemption.
[[Page 20388]]
Signed at Washington, DC, this 24th day of April, 2017.
Lyssa E. Hall,
Director, Office of Exemption Determinations, Employee Benefits
Security Administration, U.S. Department of Labor.
[FR Doc. 2017-08687 Filed 4-28-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-29-P