Administrative Review of Agency Decisions, 53084-53089 [2019-21495]
Download as PDF
53084
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 193 / Friday, October 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on
October 1, 2019.
Robert J. Ganley,
Manager, Engine & Propeller Standards
Branch, Aircraft Certification Service.
electronic engine control (EEC) software
earlier than FCS 5.0 from the engine and
install EEC software that is eligible for
installation.
(h) Installation Prohibition
(1) After the effective date of this AD, do
not install integrated drive generator (IDG) oil
pump drive gearshaft assembly, P/N
5322630–01, into an MGB assembly.
(2) After the effective date of this AD, do
not load EEC software earlier than FCS 5.0
on any engine identified in paragraph (c) of
this AD with an MGB assembly, P/N
5322505.
(i) Definitions
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
(1) For the purpose of this AD, a ‘‘part
eligible for installation’’ is an MGB assembly
with an IDG oil pump drive gearshaft
assembly other than P/N 5322630–01.
(2) For the purpose of this AD, an ‘‘engine
shop visit’’ is the induction of an engine into
the shop for maintenance involving the
separation of pairs of major mating engine
flanges, except that the separation of engine
flanges solely for the purposes of
transportation of the engine without
subsequent engine maintenance does not
constitute an engine shop visit.
(3) For the purpose of this AD, ‘‘EEC
software that is eligible for installation’’ is
EEC software FCS 5.0 and later.
[FR Doc. 2019–21618 Filed 10–3–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY
CORPORATION
29 CFR Part 4003
RIN 1212–AB35
Administrative Review of Agency
Decisions
Pension Benefit Guaranty
Corporation.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Pension Benefit Guaranty
Corporation is amending its regulation
on Rules for Administrative Review of
Agency Decisions. The proposed rule
would clarify and make changes to the
review process for certain agency
determinations and the procedures for
requesting administrative review.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before December 3, 2019 to be
assured of consideration.
(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance
ADDRESSES: Comments may be
(AMOCs)
submitted by any of the following
(1) The Manager, ECO Branch, FAA, has
methods:
the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD,
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
if requested using the procedures found in 14
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
instructions for submitting comments.
send your request to your principal inspector
• Email: reg.comments@pbgc.gov.
or local Flight Standards District Office, as
Refer to RIN–1212–AB35 in the subject
appropriate. If sending information directly
line.
to the manager of the certification office,
• Mail or Hand Delivery: Regulatory
send it to the attention of the person
Affairs
Division, Office of the General
identified in paragraph (k)(1) of this AD. You
Counsel, Pension Benefit Guaranty
may email your request to: ANE-AD-AMOC@
Corporation, 1200 K Street NW,
faa.gov.
Washington, DC 20005–4026.
(2) Before using any approved AMOC,
All submissions must include the
notify your appropriate principal inspector,
agency’s
name (Pension Benefit
or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
Guaranty Corporation, or PBGC) and the
of the local flight standards district office/
RIN for this rulemaking (RIN 1212–
certificate holding district office.
AB35). All comments received will be
(k) Related Information
posted without change to PBGC’s
(1) For more information about this AD,
website, https://www.pbgc.gov, including
contact Kevin M. Clark, Aerospace Engineer,
any personal information provided.
ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue,
Copies of comments may also be
Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781–238–
obtained by writing to Disclosure
7088; fax: 781–238–7199; email:
Division, Office of the General Counsel,
kevin.m.clark@faa.gov.
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation,
(2) For service information identified in
1200 K Street NW, Washington, DC
this AD, contact International Aero Engines,
20005–4026. For more information on
LLC, 400 Main Street, East Hartford, CT
how to submit a written request, please
06118; phone: 800–565–0140; email: help24@
call 202–326–4040 during normal
pw.utc.com; internet: https://
business hours. (TTY users may call the
fleetcare.pw.utc.com. You may view this
Federal relay service toll-free at 800–
referenced service information at the FAA,
Engine and Propeller Standards Branch, 1200 877–8339 and ask to be connected to
202–326–4040.)
District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. For
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 781–238–7759.
Karen B. Levin (levin.karen@pbgc.gov),
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Oct 03, 2019
Jkt 250001
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Attorney, Regulatory Affairs Division,
Office of the General Counsel, Pension
Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K
Street NW, Washington, DC 20005–
4026; 202–326–4400, extension 3559.
(TTY users may call the Federal Relay
Service toll-free at 800–877–8339 and
ask to be connected to 202–326–4400,
extension 3559.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
Purpose and Authority
This proposed rule would amend
PBGC’s regulation on rules for
administrative review of agency
decisions to clarify, simplify, and make
other editorial changes to the language,
and codify PBGC practices.
PBGC’s legal authority for this action
comes from section 4002(b)(3) of the
Employee Retirement Income Security
Act of 1974 (ERISA) which authorizes
PBGC to issue regulations to carry out
the purposes of title IV of ERISA.
Major Provisions
The proposed rulemaking would:
• Subject all coverage determinations
to appeal.
• Subject all determinations
concerning the allocation of a trusteed
plan’s assets upon plan termination to
appeal, except for determinations
concerning the distribution of residual
assets, which would remain subject to
reconsideration.
• Clarify that, consistent with PBGC’s
long-standing practice, when PBGC
makes an initial determination effective
on the date of issuance, a person
aggrieved by the initial determination
has no right to request reconsideration
or appeal of the determination.
• Clarify where to send requests for
extensions on appeals and extensions
for reconsideration.
• Clarify that persons seeking
administrative review may request
information in PBGC’s possession by
using PBGC’s procedures for requests
under the Freedom of Information Act
and the Privacy Act.
Background
The Pension Benefit Guaranty
Corporation (PBGC) administers two
insurance programs for private-sector
defined benefit pension plans under
title IV of the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA): A
single-employer plan termination
insurance program and a multiemployer
plan insolvency insurance program. The
amendments proposed in this
rulemaking only apply to the singleemployer program.
PBGC is committed to the ongoing
retrospective review of its regulations.
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 193 / Friday, October 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules
This practice ensures that PBGC
provides clear and helpful guidance,
minimizes burdens and maximizes
benefits, and addresses ineffective and
outdated rules. In the course of PBGC’s
regulatory review, PBGC has identified
opportunities to improve its regulation
on Rules for Administrative Review of
Agency Decisions (29 CFR part 4003) by
making it more transparent, simplifying
language, and codifying policies. The
proposed rule also makes clarifications
and other editorial changes to part 4003.
A detailed discussion of the proposed
regulatory changes follows. PBGC
invites comments on these proposals.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Review Process for Agency
Determinations
PBGC’s administrative review
regulation provides procedures so that
persons who are aggrieved by PBGC
determinations have an opportunity to
present their positions to PBGC before a
final decision is made by the agency.
When PBGC first promulgated its rules
on administrative review of agency
decisions in 1979 (the ‘‘1979 rule’’), it
emphasized the competing interests of
providing ‘‘fair and effective
administrative review’’ and ‘‘keep[ing]
to a minimum the time and cost entailed
in obtaining PBGC review of its
decisions.’’ 1 To balance these interests,
PBGC developed an administrative
review system with two separate
processes: Reconsideration and appeal.
Under reconsideration, aggrieved
persons generally raise their concerns
and make their cases directly to a
higher-level official within the same
department that issued the initial
determination. Most requests for
reconsideration are filed by the
designated payor 2 under § 4003.1(b)(2)
and relate to premiums, interest, and
late payment penalties.
Under the appeals process, the
decisionmaker reviewing the initial
determination is not within the same
department that issued the initial
determination. Rather, the PBGC
Appeals Board, which is located within
the Office of the General Counsel,
provides an independent review of the
initial determination. Decisions by the
Appeals Board may be made either by
a three-member panel or by an
individual member. Originally, a
decision on appeal was always decided
by a three-member PBGC Appeals
Board. The appeals process changed in
2002 when the administrative review
regulation was amended to expedite the
1 See
44 FR 42181, 42181 (July 19, 1979).
section 4007 of ERISA (designated payor is
defined as a contributing sponsor or plan
administrator in the case of a single-employer plan).
2 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Oct 03, 2019
Jkt 250001
appeals process, authorizing a single
member of the PBGC Appeals Board to
decide routine appeals instead of the
three-member PBGC Appeals Board.3
All non-routine appeals are decided by
a three-member panel. Most appeals are
filed by individuals (participants,
beneficiaries, and alternate payees) in
connection with benefit entitlement or
amounts, although sponsors can, and
sometimes do, file appeals of
termination liability assessments and
coverage denials.
Subpart A of the regulation provides
a list of initial determinations made by
PBGC, with each determination subject
to either the reconsideration procedures
described in subpart C or the appeals
procedures described in subpart D.
PBGC proposes to reorganize the list in
§ 4003.1(b) into two new paragraphs by
moving and reorganizing the list of
initial determinations subject to
reconsideration to § 4003.1(d) and the
list of initial determinations subject to
appeal to § 4003.1(e). These changes
would simplify references to the types
of determinations subject to each type of
administrative review and improve the
readability of this section.
Subpart B of the regulation provides
rules for the form and contents of initial
determinations and specifies that initial
determinations will not become
effective until the time for filing a
request for reconsideration under
subpart C or an appeal under subpart D
has elapsed.
Under an exception in § 4003.22(b),
PBGC may in its discretion order that an
initial determination is effective on the
date of issuance. As an example, when
PBGC makes an initial determination
under section 4042 of ERISA that the
statutory criteria for termination are
met, the initial determination states that
it is effective on the date of issuance.
When PBGC makes an order that an
initial determination is effective on the
date of issuance, any person aggrieved
by the initial determination has
exhausted all available administrative
remedies and may seek judicial review
of PBGC’s determination in an
appropriate court under section
4003(f)(2) of ERISA.
PBGC proposes to clarify the
exception under § 4003.22(b) by
providing that the exception does not
apply to initial determinations related to
a participant’s or beneficiary’s benefit
entitlement and the amount of benefit
payable under a covered plan, to
whether a domestic relations order is or
is not qualified, and to whether benefits
are payable under section 4050 of
ERISA and part 4050, as listed
3 See
PO 00000
67 FR 47694, 47694 (July 22, 2002).
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
53085
respectively in proposed § 4003.1(e)(2),
(3), and (6). PBGC proposes to further
clarify § 4003.22(b) by providing that
when PBGC issues an order making an
initial determination effective on the
date of issuance, a person aggrieved by
the initial determination has no right to
request review under subparts C and D,
consistent with PBGC’s long-standing
practice, and has exhausted all
administrative remedies.
Coverage Determinations
PBGC insures plans described in
section 4021(a) of ERISA that do not fall
within one of the exemptions from
coverage listed in section 4021(b)(1)–
(13) of ERISA. If a question arises about
whether a plan is covered under title IV,
PBGC may make a coverage
determination.
The current language in the
administrative review regulation
provides that coverage determinations
under section 4021 of ERISA are subject
to different review procedures. An
initial determination that a plan is
covered under section 4021 is subject to
reconsideration by the PBGC
department that issued the original
determination. An initial determination
that a plan is not covered is subject to
appeal to the PBGC Appeals Board.
Based on internal data gathered by
PBGC from fiscal years 2013 through
2017, there were few requests for
reconsideration of coverage
determinations (a total of 18) and even
fewer requests for appeal of coverage
determinations (one in 2017). The data
indicates that the total amount of time
and agency resources used to close
requests for reconsideration and appeals
of coverage determinations are similar.
As originally designed, case
resolution under the appeals process
generally took longer and put a greater
burden on PBGC’s administrative
resources than the reconsideration
process. The movement to single
member decisions for routine cases and
other process improvements have
largely mitigated these issues. In light of
these improvements, for the sake of
consistency, PBGC is proposing to make
all coverage determinations subject to
appeal to the PBGC Appeals Board. In
cases in which the Appeals Board is
considering granting a plan sponsor’s
appeal by finding that a plan is not
covered, the Appeals Board would make
reasonable efforts to notify plan
participants of the decision under
consideration and permit them an
opportunity to present matters as a
potential aggrieved party to the appeal
under § 4003.57(a). PBGC proposes to
remove the current § 4003.1(b)(1) and
proposes additional language in new
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
53086
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 193 / Friday, October 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 4003.1(e)(1), to subject all coverage
determinations to the appeals process.
Asset Allocation Determinations
Section 4044 of ERISA requires that
when an underfunded pension plan
terminates, PBGC must assign benefits
payable to each participant to one or
more of six priority categories and
allocate the plan’s assets to the benefits
in each category in a prescribed
sequential order (i.e., priority categories
1 through 6). To accomplish the
allocation process in a terminated plan,
PBGC first values the benefits in each of
a terminated plan’s six priority
categories and the terminated plan’s
assets as of the plan’s termination date.
After valuing the benefits and assets,
PBGC allocates the assets available to
pay benefits to the benefits assigned to
each priority category, beginning with
the highest priority category, i.e.,
priority category 1, and continuing in
sequential order until the assets satisfy
all benefits in all priority categories or
until the assets are insufficient to pay all
benefits within a particular category.
In substantially all plans that
terminate in a distress or involuntary
(PBGC-initiated) termination, the plan’s
assets do not satisfy all benefits assigned
to the six priority categories and the
assets will be insufficient to satisfy all
benefit liabilities, as defined under
section 4001(a)(16) of ERISA. PBGC
typically becomes the statutory trustee
of these plans and pays guaranteed
benefits to participants and beneficiaries
up to statutory limits. Some participants
may receive more than their statutorily
guaranteed benefit depending upon the
priority category to which their benefit
is assigned and the extent to which (if
any) assets are sufficient to pay all
benefits in that category. Such plans
rarely have residual assets.
In an employer-initiated standard
termination of a sufficient plan, a plan’s
assets must satisfy and may exceed all
benefit liabilities under the plan.
Section 4044(d) of ERISA describes the
circumstances under which any residual
assets of a single-employer plan may be
distributed to the employer or
participants and beneficiaries.
The current language in the
administrative review regulation
provides that PBGC’s asset allocation
determinations are subject to the
reconsideration process, describing
them in § 4003.1(b)(4) as
‘‘determinations with respect to
allocation of assets under section 4044
of ERISA, including distribution of
excess assets under section 4044(d).’’ 4
4 Note, section 4044(d) of ERISA uses the word
‘‘residual’’ instead of ‘‘excess.’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Oct 03, 2019
Jkt 250001
This language could be read to imply
that PBGC issues standalone
determinations with respect to asset
allocations. Although PBGC’s
processing of a trusteed plan includes
an allocation of the plan’s assets
available to pay benefits under section
4044 of ERISA, determinations on
allocating assets to benefits in the six
priority categories depend on the value
of benefits in each priority category and
the plan assets available to pay benefits
in a particular priority category in the
prescribed sequence. Such
determinations are incorporated into
other benefit-specific determinations
that PBGC regularly issues that are
subject to the appeals process, such as
those issued under § 4003.1(b)(7)
(determinations under section 4022(a)
or (c) of ERISA with respect to benefit
entitlement of participants and
beneficiaries under covered plans) and
§ 4003.1(b)(8) (determinations under
section 4022(b) or (c) or section 4022B
of ERISA of the amount of benefits
payable to participants and beneficiaries
under covered plans).
Participants and their beneficiaries
may appeal the initial determinations of
their benefit entitlements and amounts
of benefits payable, as provided in their
individual benefit determinations.
Determinations of benefit entitlements
and amounts of benefits payable depend
on PBGC’s assignment and valuation of
benefits and the allocation of assets
available to pay benefits to the priority
categories to which those benefits are
assigned and the extent to which assets
are allocated to non-guaranteed benefits
in certain priority categories pursuant to
section 4044(a) of ERISA and PBGC’s
regulation on Allocation of Assets in
Single-Employer Plans (29 CFR part
4044).
Consistent with PBGC’s long-standing
practice, PBGC proposes to clarify in
new § 4003.1(e)(2) that the right to
appeal an individual benefit
determination necessarily includes the
right to appeal a participant’s or
beneficiary’s benefit entitlement and the
amount of benefit payable based on the
value of the benefits assigned to specific
priority categories and PBGC’s
allocation of assets available to pay
benefits to those categories under the
method prescribed by section 4044(a) of
ERISA. PBGC proposes to remove the
current § 4003.1(b)(4) and create a new
§ 4003.1(d)(2)(iv), to continue to subject
determinations involving the
distribution of residual assets under
section 4044(d) of ERISA to the
reconsideration process. PBGC also
proposes to revise the description of
individual benefit determinations
subject to appeal in current
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
§ 4003.1(b)(7) and (8) and reorganize
these provisions in new § 4003.1(e)(2)
and (3).
Administrative Review Procedures
Assistance With Obtaining Information
Section 4003.3 of the administrative
review regulation provides that a person
may request PBGC’s assistance in
obtaining relevant information in the
possession of a third party. The
regulation is silent about obtaining
information in PBGC’s possession. The
preamble to the 1979 rule explains that
this omission was intentional because
‘‘a party to an appeal who wishes to
examine PBGC documents need only
file a request pursuant to [PBGC’s FOIA
regulation].’’ 5
It has come to PBGC’s attention
through the Office of the PBGC
Participant and Plan Sponsor Advocate
that participants seeking administrative
review are often unaware of their ability
to request relevant information under
the FOIA and Privacy Act by using
PBGC procedures at 29 CFR parts 4901
and 4902, respectively. While parts
4901 and 4902 provide straightforward
processes for requesting and obtaining
such materials from PBGC’s Disclosure
Division, some participants learn of
them only after contacting another
PBGC office and ultimately being
referred to the Disclosure Division and
instructed to follow such procedures.
PBGC aims to avoid confusing
participants in their efforts to identify
the appropriate point of contact and
steps to obtain relevant information.
To make the information-gathering
process more efficient and transparent
for persons seeking administrative
review, PBGC proposes to reorganize
§ 4003.3 and to clarify that persons may
request information using PBGC’s
procedures for FOIA and Privacy Act
requests. Paragraph (a) would contain
the section’s scope, paragraph (b) would
provide a description concerning
information not in the possession of
PBGC, and paragraph (c) would provide
a description concerning information in
the possession of PBGC including a
cross-reference to PBGC’s FOIA and
Privacy Act regulations.
PBGC proposes additional language in
§ 4003.3(b) concerning a request for
PBGC’s assistance in obtaining materials
not in the possession of PBGC to clarify
that such a request must be submitted
to the Appeals Board or the department
responsible for reviewing the initial
determination. The section refers
persons requesting PBGC’s assistance
5 See 44 FR 42181, 42185 (July 19, 1979) and 29
CFR part 4901.
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 193 / Friday, October 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules
with a reconsideration to § 4003.33 and
with an appeal to § 4003.54.
Extension of Time
PBGC proposes deleting § 4003.4(b)
concerning requests for extensions of
time related to disaster relief and
reorganizing the section to contain a
single paragraph concerning a request
for an extension of time when a
document is required to be filed within
a certain period. PBGC published a
notice describing how it changed its
announcement of relief from filing
deadlines and penalties when a disaster
occurs and that PBGC’s disaster relief
will be available at the same time the
Internal Revenue Service issues disaster
relief to taxpayers.6
PBGC proposes including language
that provides that requests for extension
of time for the submission of appeals
should be sent to the Appeals Board
while requests for extension of the
submission of requests for
reconsideration should be sent to the
department that issued the initial
determination.
Form and Contents of Request for
Reconsideration
PBGC proposes to reorganize
§ 4003.34 to clarify the form and content
requirements that a request for
reconsideration must include.
Decision on Request for Reconsideration
The proposed rule would add new
§ 4003.35(c) to clarify that a decision on
a request for reconsideration constitutes
a final PBGC action, which is binding
on all persons who participated in the
request. This language is consistent with
the language in § 4003.59(b) that a
decision of the Appeals Board
constitutes final agency action by PBGC.
Applicability
The amendments in this proposed
rule would be applicable to initial
determinations that are subject to this
part and issued after December 3, 2019.
Compliance With Rulemaking
Guidelines
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and
13771
PBGC has determined that this
rulemaking is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under Executive
Order 12866 and Executive Order
13771. Accordingly, this proposed rule
is exempt from Executive Order 13771,
and the Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed the proposed
rule under Executive Order 12866.
6 See
83 FR 30991, 30991 (July 2, 2018).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Oct 03, 2019
Jkt 250001
Executive Order 12866 directs
agencies to assess all costs and benefits
of available regulatory alternatives and,
if regulation is necessary, to select
regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health
and safety effects, distributive impacts,
and equity).
Although this is not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order
12866, PBGC has examined the
economic implications of this proposed
rule and has concluded that there will
be no significant economic impact as a
result of the proposed amendments to
PBGC’s regulation. Most of the proposed
amendments merely clarify existing
PBGC practices and neither the public
nor PBGC is likely to assume any
additional costs due to these
amendments and revisions.
Section 6 of Executive Order 13563
requires agencies to rethink existing
regulations by periodically reviewing
their regulatory program for rules that
‘‘may be outmoded, ineffective,
insufficient, or excessively
burdensome.’’ These rules should be
modified, streamlined, expanded, or
repealed as appropriate. PBGC has
identified the proposed amendments to
the administrative review regulation
and the clarifications and improvements
to this regulation as consistent with the
principles for review under Executive
Order 13563. PBGC believes this
provides clearer guidance to the public.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act 7
imposes certain requirements with
respect to rules that are subject to the
notice-and-comment requirements of
section 553(b) of the Administrative
Procedure Act and that are likely to
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Unless an agency determines that a
proposed rule is not likely to have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities,
section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act requires that the agency present an
initial regulatory flexibility analysis at
the time of the publication of the
proposed rule describing the impact of
the rule on small entities and seek
public comment on such impact. Small
entities include small businesses,
organizations, and governmental
jurisdictions.
Small Entities
For purposes of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act requirements with
respect to this proposed rule, PBGC
75
PO 00000
U.S.C. 601 et seq.
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
53087
considers a small entity to be a plan
with fewer than 100 participants. This
is substantially the same criterion PBGC
uses in other regulations 8 and is
consistent with certain requirements in
title I of ERISA 9 and the Internal
Revenue Code (Code),10 as well as the
definition of a small entity that the
Department of Labor has used for
purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act.11
Thus, PBGC believes that assessing
the impact of the final rule on small
plans is an appropriate substitute for
evaluating the effect on small entities.
The definition of small entity
considered appropriate for this purpose
differs, however, from a definition of
small business based on size standards
promulgated by the Small Business
Administration 12 under the Small
Business Act. Therefore, PBGC requests
comments on the appropriateness of the
size standard used in evaluating the
impact of small entities of the
amendments in this proposed rule on
small entities.
Based on its proposed definition of
small entity, PBGC certifies under
section 605(b) of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act that the amendments in
this proposed rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The amendments clarify existing PBGC
practices and will have a neutral cost
impact. Accordingly, as provided in
section 605 of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, sections 603 and 604 do not apply.
Paperwork Reduction Act
PBGC’s Form 723, Request for
Additional time to file an Appeal of a
PBGC Benefit Termination and Form
724, Appeal of a PBGC Benefit
Determination, are used by aggrieved
persons to assist them with filing an
appeal. The collection of information
with respect to administrative appeals is
approved under control number 1212–
0061 (expires August 31, 2019).
The proposed rule would not require
changes to the forms used for appeals.
The proposed rule would eliminate the
requirement for an appellant to provide
the names and addresses of persons who
8 See, e.g., special rules for small plans under part
4007 (Payment of premiums).
9 See., e.g., ERISA section 104(a)(2), which
permits the Secretary of Labor to prescribe
simplified annual reports for pension plans that
cover few than 100 participants.
10 See, e.g., Code section 430(g)(2)(B), which
permits plans with 100 or fewer participants to use
valuation dates other than the first day of the plan
year.
11 See., e.g., DOL’s final rule on Prohibited
Transaction Exemption Procedures, 76 FR 66,644
(Oct. 27, 2011).
12 See, 13 CFR 121.201.
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
53088
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 193 / Friday, October 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules
the appellant believes may be aggrieved
if PBGC provides the relief sought. As
few, if any, appellants provide this
information, PBGC does not expect that
this proposed change would impact the
hour burden and cost burden for the
information collection with respect to
appeals.
The administrative review regulation
requires that a request for
reconsideration include specified
information. The collection of
information with respect to filings for
reconsideration is approved under
control number 1212–0063 (expires
September 30, 2019).
The proposed rule would make
clarifications to the information
required to be submitted for a request
for reconsideration, including copies of
any documentation that supports the
requestor’s claim or assertions
concerning the request. PBGC expects
that this proposed clarification would
make the process more efficient and
would not impact the hour burden and
cost burden for the information
collection with respect to
reconsideration.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.
List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 4003
Administrative practice and
procedure, Organization and functions
(Government agencies), Pension
insurance.
In consideration of the foregoing,
PBGC proposes to amend 29 CFR part
4003 as follows.
PART 4003—RULES FOR
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW OF
AGENCY DECISIONS
1. The authority citation for part 4003
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1302(b)(3).
2. Amend § 4003.1 by:
a. Removing the phrase ‘‘paragraph
(b)’’ and adding in its place ‘‘paragraphs
(d) and (e)’’ in the first sentence of
paragraph (a);
■ b. Removing the phrase ‘‘paragraphs
(b)(1) through (b)(5)’’ and adding in its
place ‘‘paragraph (d)’’ in the fourth
sentence of paragraph (a);
■ c. Removing the phrase ‘‘paragraphs
(b)(6) through (b)(11)’’ and adding in its
place ‘‘paragraph (e)’’ in the fifth
sentence of paragraph (a);
■ d. Revising paragraph (b); and
■ e. Adding paragraphs (d) and (e).
The revision and additions read as
follows:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
■
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Oct 03, 2019
Jkt 250001
§ 4003.1
Purpose and scope.
*
■
*
*
*
*
(b) Scope. This part applies to the
initial determinations made by PBGC
that are listed in paragraphs (d) and (e)
of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Determinations subject to
reconsideration. Any person aggrieved
by an initial determination of PBGC
listed in this paragraph (d) may request
reconsideration, subject to the terms of
this part.
(1) Determinations with respect to
premiums, interest and late payment
penalties pursuant to section 4007 of
ERISA;
(2) Determinations with respect to
voluntary terminations under section
4041 of ERISA, including any of the
following:
(i) A determination that a notice
requirement or a certification
requirement under section 4041 of
ERISA has not been met,
(ii) A determination that the
requirements for demonstrating distress
under section 4041(c)(2)(B) of ERISA
have not been met,
(iii) A determination with respect to
the sufficiency of plan assets for benefit
liabilities or for guaranteed benefits, and
(iv) A determination with respect to a
plan terminating under section 4041(b)
of ERISA or with respect to the
distribution of residual assets under
section 4044(d) of ERISA;
(3) Determinations with respect to
penalties under section 4071 of ERISA.
(e) Determinations subject to appeal.
Any person aggrieved by an initial
determination of PBGC listed in this
paragraph (e) may file an appeal, subject
to the terms of this part.
(1) Determinations that a plan is or is
not covered under section 4021 of
ERISA;
(2) Determinations of a participant’s
or beneficiary’s benefit entitlement and
the amount of benefit payable under a
covered plan under sections 4022,
4022B, and 4044 of ERISA (other than
a determination described in paragraph
(d)(2)(iv) of this section);
(3) Determinations that a domestic
relations order is or is not a qualified
domestic relations order under section
206(d)(3) of ERISA and section 414(p) of
the Code;
(4) Determinations of the amount of
money subject to recapture pursuant to
section 4045 of ERISA;
(5) Determinations of the amount of
liability under sections 4062(b)(1), 4063,
or 4064 of ERISA;
(6) Determinations with respect to
benefits payable by PBGC under section
4050 of ERISA and part 4050 of this
chapter.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
3. Revise § 4003.3 to read as follows:
§ 4003.3 PBGC assistance in obtaining
information.
(a) General. A person may request
PBGC’s assistance in obtaining
information if the person lacks
information necessary—
(1) To file a request for review
pursuant to subpart C or D of this part,
or to decide whether to seek review; or
(2) To participate in an appeal
pursuant to § 4003.57, or to decide
whether to participate in an appeal.
(b) Information not in PBGC’s
possession. A person may request
PBGC’s assistance in obtaining
information in the possession of a party
other than PBGC. The request must —
(1) Be in writing;
(2) State or describe the missing
information, the reason why the person
needs the information, and the reason
why the person needs the assistance of
PBGC in obtaining the information; and
(3) Be submitted to the Appeals Board
or the department that is responsible for
reviewing the initial determination
under this part. If the determination is
subject to reconsideration, see § 4003.33
for information on where to submit the
request for assistance. If the
determination is subject to review by
appeal, see § 4003.53 for information on
where to submit the request.
(c) Information in the possession of
PBGC. A person may request
information in the possession of PBGC
pursuant to the Freedom of Information
Act and part 4901 of this chapter or the
Privacy Act and part 4902 of this
chapter, as applicable. See parts 4901
and 4902 of this chapter for additional
information. Nothing in this paragraph
4003.3(c) limits or amends the
requirements under parts 4901 or 4902
of this chapter.
■ 4. Revise § 4003.4 to read as follows:
§ 4003.4
Extension of time.
When a document is required under
this part to be filed within a prescribed
period of time, an extension of time to
file will be granted only upon good
cause shown and only when the request
for an extension is made before the
expiration of the time prescribed. The
request for an extension must be in
writing and state why additional time is
needed and the amount of additional
time requested. The filing of a request
for an extension will stop the running
of the prescribed period of time.
Requests for extension of the time to
submit an appeal should be sent to the
Appeals Board; requests for extension of
the time to submit a request for
reconsideration should be sent to the
department that issued the initial
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
53089
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 193 / Friday, October 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules
determination. When a request for an
extension is granted, PBGC will notify
the person requesting the extension, in
writing, of the amount of additional
time granted. When a request for an
extension is denied, PBGC will notify
the person requesting the extension in
writing, and the prescribed period of
time will resume running from the date
of denial.
§ 4003.7
[Amended]
5. Amend § 4003.7 by removing ‘‘a
determination’’ and adding in its place
‘‘an initial determination’’.
■
§ 4003.21
[Amended]
6. Amend § 4003.21 by adding
‘‘initial’’ before ‘‘determinations’’ and
removing ‘‘of the ‘‘determination’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘of the initial
determination’’.
■ 7. Amend § 4003.22 by removing ‘‘a
determination’’ and adding in its place
‘‘an initial determination’’ in the second
sentence of paragraph (a) and revising
paragraph (b).
The revision reads as follows:
■
§ 4003.22
Effective date of determinations.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Exception. Except for initial
determinations listed in § 4003.1(e)(2),
(3), and (6), PBGC may, in its discretion,
order that the initial determination in a
case is effective on the date it is issued.
When PBGC makes such an order, the
initial determination will state that it
constitutes the final agency action
effective on the date of issuance, there
is no right to request review under
subpart C and subpart D, and any
person aggrieved by the initial
determination has exhausted all
administrative remedies.
§ 4003.31
[Amended]
8. Amend § 4003.31 by adding
‘‘initial’’ before ‘‘determination’’ at the
end of the section.
■
§ 4003.33
[Amended]
9. Amend § 4003.33 by removing
‘‘reconsideration of a determination
described in § 4003.1(b)(3)(ii)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘reconsideration of
an initial determination described in
§ 4003.1(d)(2)(ii)’’.
■ 10. Revise § 4003.34 to read as
follows:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
■
16:19 Oct 03, 2019
Jkt 250001
[Amended]
15. Amend § 4003.59 by adding
‘‘initial’’ before ‘‘determination’’ in
paragraph (b).
■
§ § 4003.1, 4003.2, 4003.5, 4003.6, 4003.7,
4003.8, 4003.9, 4003.10, 4003.22, 4003.31,
4003.33, 4003.35, 4003.54, 4003.55, 4003.57,
4003.59, and 4003.60 [Amended]
16. Remove the words ‘‘the PBGC’’
and add, in their place, the word
‘‘PBGC’’ in the following sections:
■ a. § 4003.1(a) and (c);
■ b. § 4003.2;
■ c. § 4003.5;
■ d. § 4003.6;
■ e. § 4003.7;
■ f. § 4003.8;
■ g. § 4003.9;
■ h. § 4003.10;
■ i. § 4003.22(a);
■ j. § 4003.31;
■ k. § 4003.33;
■ l. § 4003.35(a);
■ m. § 4003.54(b);
■ n. § 4003.55(c);
■ o. § 4003.57(a)(6);
■ p. § 4003.59(b); and
■ q. § 4003.60.
■
§ § 4003.32 and 4003.52
[Amended]
17. Remove the words ‘‘the PBGC’s’’
and add in their place the word
‘‘PBGC’s’’ wherever they occur in
§§ 4003.32 and 4003.52.
■
§ § 4003.2, 4003.21, 4003.22, 4003.56,
4003.57, 4003.58, 4003.59, and 4003.60
[Amended]
*
■
*
*
*
*
(c) The decision on a request for
reconsideration constitutes the final
agency action by PBGC with respect to
the initial determination that was the
subject of the request for
reconsideration and is binding on all
persons who participated in the request
for reconsideration.
§ 4003.55
[Amended]
12. Amend § 4003.55 by removing
‘‘1200 K Street NW, Washington, DC
20005–4026’’ and adding in its place ‘‘as
listed on PBGC’s website,
www.pbgc.gov’’ in paragraph (c).
■
§ 4003.57
[Amended]
13. Amend § 4003.57 by adding
‘‘initial’’ before ‘‘determination’’ in
paragraph (a)(6).
■
[Amended]
14. Amend § 4003.58 by adding
‘‘initial’’ before ‘‘determination’’ in the
last sentence of paragraph (b)
introductory text and adding ‘‘initial’’
before ‘‘determination’’ in paragraph
(b)(1)(ii).
■
A request for reconsideration must—
(a) Be in writing;
(b) Be clearly designated as a request
for reconsideration;
§ 4003.59
§ 4003.35 Decision on request for
reconsideration.
§ 4003.58
§ 4003.34 Contents of request for
reconsideration.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
(c) Specifically explain why PBGC’s
determination is wrong and the result
the requestor is seeking;
(d) Describe the relevant information
the requestor believes is known by
PBGC and summarize any other
information that is relevant to the
request for reconsideration; and
(e) Include copies of any
documentation that supports the
requestor’s claim or assertions.
■ 11. Amend § 4003.35 by:
■ a. Revising the section heading;
■ b. Removing ‘‘Department Director’’
wherever it appears and adding in its
place ‘‘Director of a department’’,
removing ‘‘final’’ before ‘‘decision’’, and
removing ‘‘a determination other than
one described in § 4003.1(b)(3)(ii)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘an initial
determination other than one described
in § 4003.1(d)(2)(ii)’’ in paragraph (a)(1);
■ c. Removing ‘‘final decision’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘decision’’ and
removing ‘‘a determination described in
§ 4003.1(b)(3)(ii)’’ and adding in its
place ‘‘an initial determination
described in § 4003.1(d)(2)(ii)’’ in
paragraph (a)(2);
■ d. Removing ‘‘final decision’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘decision’’ in
paragraph (b); and
■ e. Adding paragraph (c).
The revision and addition read as
follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
18. Remove the word ‘‘shall’’ and add
in its place the word ‘‘will’’ wherever it
occurs in the following sections:
■ a. § 4003.2;
■ b. § 4003.21;
■ c. § 4003.22(a);
■ d. § 4003.56(c);
■ e. § 4003.57(a);
■ f. § 4003.58(b);
■ g. § 4003.59(a) and (c); and
■ h. § 4003.60.
§ § 4003.6, 4003.8, 4003.33, 4003.53, and
4003.54 [Amended]
19. Remove the word ‘‘shall’’ and add
in its place the word ‘‘must’’ wherever
it occurs in the following sections:
■ a. § 4003.6;
■ b. § 4003.8;
■ c. § 4003.33;
■ d. § 4003.53; and
■ e. § 4003.54(a) and (b).
■
Issued in Washington, DC.
Gordon Hartogensis,
Director, Pension Benefit Guaranty
Corporation.
[FR Doc. 2019–21495 Filed 10–3–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7709–02–P
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 193 (Friday, October 4, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 53084-53089]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-21495]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY CORPORATION
29 CFR Part 4003
RIN 1212-AB35
Administrative Review of Agency Decisions
AGENCY: Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation is amending its
regulation on Rules for Administrative Review of Agency Decisions. The
proposed rule would clarify and make changes to the review process for
certain agency determinations and the procedures for requesting
administrative review.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before December 3, 2019 to be
assured of consideration.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
Email: [email protected]. Refer to RIN-1212-AB35 in
the subject line.
Mail or Hand Delivery: Regulatory Affairs Division, Office
of the General Counsel, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K
Street NW, Washington, DC 20005-4026.
All submissions must include the agency's name (Pension Benefit
Guaranty Corporation, or PBGC) and the RIN for this rulemaking (RIN
1212-AB35). All comments received will be posted without change to
PBGC's website, https://www.pbgc.gov, including any personal information
provided. Copies of comments may also be obtained by writing to
Disclosure Division, Office of the General Counsel, Pension Benefit
Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K Street NW, Washington, DC 20005-4026. For
more information on how to submit a written request, please call 202-
326-4040 during normal business hours. (TTY users may call the Federal
relay service toll-free at 800-877-8339 and ask to be connected to 202-
326-4040.)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen B. Levin ([email protected]),
Attorney, Regulatory Affairs Division, Office of the General Counsel,
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K Street NW, Washington, DC
20005-4026; 202-326-4400, extension 3559. (TTY users may call the
Federal Relay Service toll-free at 800-877-8339 and ask to be connected
to 202-326-4400, extension 3559.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
Purpose and Authority
This proposed rule would amend PBGC's regulation on rules for
administrative review of agency decisions to clarify, simplify, and
make other editorial changes to the language, and codify PBGC
practices.
PBGC's legal authority for this action comes from section
4002(b)(3) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
(ERISA) which authorizes PBGC to issue regulations to carry out the
purposes of title IV of ERISA.
Major Provisions
The proposed rulemaking would:
Subject all coverage determinations to appeal.
Subject all determinations concerning the allocation of a
trusteed plan's assets upon plan termination to appeal, except for
determinations concerning the distribution of residual assets, which
would remain subject to reconsideration.
Clarify that, consistent with PBGC's long-standing
practice, when PBGC makes an initial determination effective on the
date of issuance, a person aggrieved by the initial determination has
no right to request reconsideration or appeal of the determination.
Clarify where to send requests for extensions on appeals
and extensions for reconsideration.
Clarify that persons seeking administrative review may
request information in PBGC's possession by using PBGC's procedures for
requests under the Freedom of Information Act and the Privacy Act.
Background
The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) administers two
insurance programs for private-sector defined benefit pension plans
under title IV of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
(ERISA): A single-employer plan termination insurance program and a
multiemployer plan insolvency insurance program. The amendments
proposed in this rulemaking only apply to the single-employer program.
PBGC is committed to the ongoing retrospective review of its
regulations.
[[Page 53085]]
This practice ensures that PBGC provides clear and helpful guidance,
minimizes burdens and maximizes benefits, and addresses ineffective and
outdated rules. In the course of PBGC's regulatory review, PBGC has
identified opportunities to improve its regulation on Rules for
Administrative Review of Agency Decisions (29 CFR part 4003) by making
it more transparent, simplifying language, and codifying policies. The
proposed rule also makes clarifications and other editorial changes to
part 4003.
A detailed discussion of the proposed regulatory changes follows.
PBGC invites comments on these proposals.
Review Process for Agency Determinations
PBGC's administrative review regulation provides procedures so that
persons who are aggrieved by PBGC determinations have an opportunity to
present their positions to PBGC before a final decision is made by the
agency. When PBGC first promulgated its rules on administrative review
of agency decisions in 1979 (the ``1979 rule''), it emphasized the
competing interests of providing ``fair and effective administrative
review'' and ``keep[ing] to a minimum the time and cost entailed in
obtaining PBGC review of its decisions.'' \1\ To balance these
interests, PBGC developed an administrative review system with two
separate processes: Reconsideration and appeal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See 44 FR 42181, 42181 (July 19, 1979).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under reconsideration, aggrieved persons generally raise their
concerns and make their cases directly to a higher-level official
within the same department that issued the initial determination. Most
requests for reconsideration are filed by the designated payor \2\
under Sec. 4003.1(b)(2) and relate to premiums, interest, and late
payment penalties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See section 4007 of ERISA (designated payor is defined as a
contributing sponsor or plan administrator in the case of a single-
employer plan).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the appeals process, the decisionmaker reviewing the initial
determination is not within the same department that issued the initial
determination. Rather, the PBGC Appeals Board, which is located within
the Office of the General Counsel, provides an independent review of
the initial determination. Decisions by the Appeals Board may be made
either by a three-member panel or by an individual member. Originally,
a decision on appeal was always decided by a three-member PBGC Appeals
Board. The appeals process changed in 2002 when the administrative
review regulation was amended to expedite the appeals process,
authorizing a single member of the PBGC Appeals Board to decide routine
appeals instead of the three-member PBGC Appeals Board.\3\ All non-
routine appeals are decided by a three-member panel. Most appeals are
filed by individuals (participants, beneficiaries, and alternate
payees) in connection with benefit entitlement or amounts, although
sponsors can, and sometimes do, file appeals of termination liability
assessments and coverage denials.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See 67 FR 47694, 47694 (July 22, 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart A of the regulation provides a list of initial
determinations made by PBGC, with each determination subject to either
the reconsideration procedures described in subpart C or the appeals
procedures described in subpart D. PBGC proposes to reorganize the list
in Sec. 4003.1(b) into two new paragraphs by moving and reorganizing
the list of initial determinations subject to reconsideration to Sec.
4003.1(d) and the list of initial determinations subject to appeal to
Sec. 4003.1(e). These changes would simplify references to the types
of determinations subject to each type of administrative review and
improve the readability of this section.
Subpart B of the regulation provides rules for the form and
contents of initial determinations and specifies that initial
determinations will not become effective until the time for filing a
request for reconsideration under subpart C or an appeal under subpart
D has elapsed.
Under an exception in Sec. 4003.22(b), PBGC may in its discretion
order that an initial determination is effective on the date of
issuance. As an example, when PBGC makes an initial determination under
section 4042 of ERISA that the statutory criteria for termination are
met, the initial determination states that it is effective on the date
of issuance. When PBGC makes an order that an initial determination is
effective on the date of issuance, any person aggrieved by the initial
determination has exhausted all available administrative remedies and
may seek judicial review of PBGC's determination in an appropriate
court under section 4003(f)(2) of ERISA.
PBGC proposes to clarify the exception under Sec. 4003.22(b) by
providing that the exception does not apply to initial determinations
related to a participant's or beneficiary's benefit entitlement and the
amount of benefit payable under a covered plan, to whether a domestic
relations order is or is not qualified, and to whether benefits are
payable under section 4050 of ERISA and part 4050, as listed
respectively in proposed Sec. 4003.1(e)(2), (3), and (6). PBGC
proposes to further clarify Sec. 4003.22(b) by providing that when
PBGC issues an order making an initial determination effective on the
date of issuance, a person aggrieved by the initial determination has
no right to request review under subparts C and D, consistent with
PBGC's long-standing practice, and has exhausted all administrative
remedies.
Coverage Determinations
PBGC insures plans described in section 4021(a) of ERISA that do
not fall within one of the exemptions from coverage listed in section
4021(b)(1)-(13) of ERISA. If a question arises about whether a plan is
covered under title IV, PBGC may make a coverage determination.
The current language in the administrative review regulation
provides that coverage determinations under section 4021 of ERISA are
subject to different review procedures. An initial determination that a
plan is covered under section 4021 is subject to reconsideration by the
PBGC department that issued the original determination. An initial
determination that a plan is not covered is subject to appeal to the
PBGC Appeals Board. Based on internal data gathered by PBGC from fiscal
years 2013 through 2017, there were few requests for reconsideration of
coverage determinations (a total of 18) and even fewer requests for
appeal of coverage determinations (one in 2017). The data indicates
that the total amount of time and agency resources used to close
requests for reconsideration and appeals of coverage determinations are
similar.
As originally designed, case resolution under the appeals process
generally took longer and put a greater burden on PBGC's administrative
resources than the reconsideration process. The movement to single
member decisions for routine cases and other process improvements have
largely mitigated these issues. In light of these improvements, for the
sake of consistency, PBGC is proposing to make all coverage
determinations subject to appeal to the PBGC Appeals Board. In cases in
which the Appeals Board is considering granting a plan sponsor's appeal
by finding that a plan is not covered, the Appeals Board would make
reasonable efforts to notify plan participants of the decision under
consideration and permit them an opportunity to present matters as a
potential aggrieved party to the appeal under Sec. 4003.57(a). PBGC
proposes to remove the current Sec. 4003.1(b)(1) and proposes
additional language in new
[[Page 53086]]
Sec. 4003.1(e)(1), to subject all coverage determinations to the
appeals process.
Asset Allocation Determinations
Section 4044 of ERISA requires that when an underfunded pension
plan terminates, PBGC must assign benefits payable to each participant
to one or more of six priority categories and allocate the plan's
assets to the benefits in each category in a prescribed sequential
order (i.e., priority categories 1 through 6). To accomplish the
allocation process in a terminated plan, PBGC first values the benefits
in each of a terminated plan's six priority categories and the
terminated plan's assets as of the plan's termination date. After
valuing the benefits and assets, PBGC allocates the assets available to
pay benefits to the benefits assigned to each priority category,
beginning with the highest priority category, i.e., priority category
1, and continuing in sequential order until the assets satisfy all
benefits in all priority categories or until the assets are
insufficient to pay all benefits within a particular category.
In substantially all plans that terminate in a distress or
involuntary (PBGC-initiated) termination, the plan's assets do not
satisfy all benefits assigned to the six priority categories and the
assets will be insufficient to satisfy all benefit liabilities, as
defined under section 4001(a)(16) of ERISA. PBGC typically becomes the
statutory trustee of these plans and pays guaranteed benefits to
participants and beneficiaries up to statutory limits. Some
participants may receive more than their statutorily guaranteed benefit
depending upon the priority category to which their benefit is assigned
and the extent to which (if any) assets are sufficient to pay all
benefits in that category. Such plans rarely have residual assets.
In an employer-initiated standard termination of a sufficient plan,
a plan's assets must satisfy and may exceed all benefit liabilities
under the plan. Section 4044(d) of ERISA describes the circumstances
under which any residual assets of a single-employer plan may be
distributed to the employer or participants and beneficiaries.
The current language in the administrative review regulation
provides that PBGC's asset allocation determinations are subject to the
reconsideration process, describing them in Sec. 4003.1(b)(4) as
``determinations with respect to allocation of assets under section
4044 of ERISA, including distribution of excess assets under section
4044(d).'' \4\ This language could be read to imply that PBGC issues
standalone determinations with respect to asset allocations. Although
PBGC's processing of a trusteed plan includes an allocation of the
plan's assets available to pay benefits under section 4044 of ERISA,
determinations on allocating assets to benefits in the six priority
categories depend on the value of benefits in each priority category
and the plan assets available to pay benefits in a particular priority
category in the prescribed sequence. Such determinations are
incorporated into other benefit-specific determinations that PBGC
regularly issues that are subject to the appeals process, such as those
issued under Sec. 4003.1(b)(7) (determinations under section 4022(a)
or (c) of ERISA with respect to benefit entitlement of participants and
beneficiaries under covered plans) and Sec. 4003.1(b)(8)
(determinations under section 4022(b) or (c) or section 4022B of ERISA
of the amount of benefits payable to participants and beneficiaries
under covered plans).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Note, section 4044(d) of ERISA uses the word ``residual''
instead of ``excess.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Participants and their beneficiaries may appeal the initial
determinations of their benefit entitlements and amounts of benefits
payable, as provided in their individual benefit determinations.
Determinations of benefit entitlements and amounts of benefits payable
depend on PBGC's assignment and valuation of benefits and the
allocation of assets available to pay benefits to the priority
categories to which those benefits are assigned and the extent to which
assets are allocated to non-guaranteed benefits in certain priority
categories pursuant to section 4044(a) of ERISA and PBGC's regulation
on Allocation of Assets in Single-Employer Plans (29 CFR part 4044).
Consistent with PBGC's long-standing practice, PBGC proposes to
clarify in new Sec. 4003.1(e)(2) that the right to appeal an
individual benefit determination necessarily includes the right to
appeal a participant's or beneficiary's benefit entitlement and the
amount of benefit payable based on the value of the benefits assigned
to specific priority categories and PBGC's allocation of assets
available to pay benefits to those categories under the method
prescribed by section 4044(a) of ERISA. PBGC proposes to remove the
current Sec. 4003.1(b)(4) and create a new Sec. 4003.1(d)(2)(iv), to
continue to subject determinations involving the distribution of
residual assets under section 4044(d) of ERISA to the reconsideration
process. PBGC also proposes to revise the description of individual
benefit determinations subject to appeal in current Sec. 4003.1(b)(7)
and (8) and reorganize these provisions in new Sec. 4003.1(e)(2) and
(3).
Administrative Review Procedures
Assistance With Obtaining Information
Section 4003.3 of the administrative review regulation provides
that a person may request PBGC's assistance in obtaining relevant
information in the possession of a third party. The regulation is
silent about obtaining information in PBGC's possession. The preamble
to the 1979 rule explains that this omission was intentional because
``a party to an appeal who wishes to examine PBGC documents need only
file a request pursuant to [PBGC's FOIA regulation].'' \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See 44 FR 42181, 42185 (July 19, 1979) and 29 CFR part 4901.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It has come to PBGC's attention through the Office of the PBGC
Participant and Plan Sponsor Advocate that participants seeking
administrative review are often unaware of their ability to request
relevant information under the FOIA and Privacy Act by using PBGC
procedures at 29 CFR parts 4901 and 4902, respectively. While parts
4901 and 4902 provide straightforward processes for requesting and
obtaining such materials from PBGC's Disclosure Division, some
participants learn of them only after contacting another PBGC office
and ultimately being referred to the Disclosure Division and instructed
to follow such procedures. PBGC aims to avoid confusing participants in
their efforts to identify the appropriate point of contact and steps to
obtain relevant information.
To make the information-gathering process more efficient and
transparent for persons seeking administrative review, PBGC proposes to
reorganize Sec. 4003.3 and to clarify that persons may request
information using PBGC's procedures for FOIA and Privacy Act requests.
Paragraph (a) would contain the section's scope, paragraph (b) would
provide a description concerning information not in the possession of
PBGC, and paragraph (c) would provide a description concerning
information in the possession of PBGC including a cross-reference to
PBGC's FOIA and Privacy Act regulations.
PBGC proposes additional language in Sec. 4003.3(b) concerning a
request for PBGC's assistance in obtaining materials not in the
possession of PBGC to clarify that such a request must be submitted to
the Appeals Board or the department responsible for reviewing the
initial determination. The section refers persons requesting PBGC's
assistance
[[Page 53087]]
with a reconsideration to Sec. 4003.33 and with an appeal to Sec.
4003.54.
Extension of Time
PBGC proposes deleting Sec. 4003.4(b) concerning requests for
extensions of time related to disaster relief and reorganizing the
section to contain a single paragraph concerning a request for an
extension of time when a document is required to be filed within a
certain period. PBGC published a notice describing how it changed its
announcement of relief from filing deadlines and penalties when a
disaster occurs and that PBGC's disaster relief will be available at
the same time the Internal Revenue Service issues disaster relief to
taxpayers.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See 83 FR 30991, 30991 (July 2, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PBGC proposes including language that provides that requests for
extension of time for the submission of appeals should be sent to the
Appeals Board while requests for extension of the submission of
requests for reconsideration should be sent to the department that
issued the initial determination.
Form and Contents of Request for Reconsideration
PBGC proposes to reorganize Sec. 4003.34 to clarify the form and
content requirements that a request for reconsideration must include.
Decision on Request for Reconsideration
The proposed rule would add new Sec. 4003.35(c) to clarify that a
decision on a request for reconsideration constitutes a final PBGC
action, which is binding on all persons who participated in the
request. This language is consistent with the language in Sec.
4003.59(b) that a decision of the Appeals Board constitutes final
agency action by PBGC.
Applicability
The amendments in this proposed rule would be applicable to initial
determinations that are subject to this part and issued after December
3, 2019.
Compliance With Rulemaking Guidelines
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13771
PBGC has determined that this rulemaking is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order
13771. Accordingly, this proposed rule is exempt from Executive Order
13771, and the Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed the
proposed rule under Executive Order 12866.
Executive Order 12866 directs agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and equity).
Although this is not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866, PBGC has examined the economic implications of
this proposed rule and has concluded that there will be no significant
economic impact as a result of the proposed amendments to PBGC's
regulation. Most of the proposed amendments merely clarify existing
PBGC practices and neither the public nor PBGC is likely to assume any
additional costs due to these amendments and revisions.
Section 6 of Executive Order 13563 requires agencies to rethink
existing regulations by periodically reviewing their regulatory program
for rules that ``may be outmoded, ineffective, insufficient, or
excessively burdensome.'' These rules should be modified, streamlined,
expanded, or repealed as appropriate. PBGC has identified the proposed
amendments to the administrative review regulation and the
clarifications and improvements to this regulation as consistent with
the principles for review under Executive Order 13563. PBGC believes
this provides clearer guidance to the public.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act \7\ imposes certain requirements
with respect to rules that are subject to the notice-and-comment
requirements of section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act and
that are likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Unless an agency determines that a proposed
rule is not likely to have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, section 603 of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act requires that the agency present an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis at the time of the publication of the proposed
rule describing the impact of the rule on small entities and seek
public comment on such impact. Small entities include small businesses,
organizations, and governmental jurisdictions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small Entities
For purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility Act requirements with
respect to this proposed rule, PBGC considers a small entity to be a
plan with fewer than 100 participants. This is substantially the same
criterion PBGC uses in other regulations \8\ and is consistent with
certain requirements in title I of ERISA \9\ and the Internal Revenue
Code (Code),\10\ as well as the definition of a small entity that the
Department of Labor has used for purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See, e.g., special rules for small plans under part 4007
(Payment of premiums).
\9\ See., e.g., ERISA section 104(a)(2), which permits the
Secretary of Labor to prescribe simplified annual reports for
pension plans that cover few than 100 participants.
\10\ See, e.g., Code section 430(g)(2)(B), which permits plans
with 100 or fewer participants to use valuation dates other than the
first day of the plan year.
\11\ See., e.g., DOL's final rule on Prohibited Transaction
Exemption Procedures, 76 FR 66,644 (Oct. 27, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thus, PBGC believes that assessing the impact of the final rule on
small plans is an appropriate substitute for evaluating the effect on
small entities. The definition of small entity considered appropriate
for this purpose differs, however, from a definition of small business
based on size standards promulgated by the Small Business
Administration \12\ under the Small Business Act. Therefore, PBGC
requests comments on the appropriateness of the size standard used in
evaluating the impact of small entities of the amendments in this
proposed rule on small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See, 13 CFR 121.201.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on its proposed definition of small entity, PBGC certifies
under section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act that the
amendments in this proposed rule would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The amendments
clarify existing PBGC practices and will have a neutral cost impact.
Accordingly, as provided in section 605 of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, sections 603 and 604 do not apply.
Paperwork Reduction Act
PBGC's Form 723, Request for Additional time to file an Appeal of a
PBGC Benefit Termination and Form 724, Appeal of a PBGC Benefit
Determination, are used by aggrieved persons to assist them with filing
an appeal. The collection of information with respect to administrative
appeals is approved under control number 1212-0061 (expires August 31,
2019).
The proposed rule would not require changes to the forms used for
appeals. The proposed rule would eliminate the requirement for an
appellant to provide the names and addresses of persons who
[[Page 53088]]
the appellant believes may be aggrieved if PBGC provides the relief
sought. As few, if any, appellants provide this information, PBGC does
not expect that this proposed change would impact the hour burden and
cost burden for the information collection with respect to appeals.
The administrative review regulation requires that a request for
reconsideration include specified information. The collection of
information with respect to filings for reconsideration is approved
under control number 1212-0063 (expires September 30, 2019).
The proposed rule would make clarifications to the information
required to be submitted for a request for reconsideration, including
copies of any documentation that supports the requestor's claim or
assertions concerning the request. PBGC expects that this proposed
clarification would make the process more efficient and would not
impact the hour burden and cost burden for the information collection
with respect to reconsideration.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 4003
Administrative practice and procedure, Organization and functions
(Government agencies), Pension insurance.
In consideration of the foregoing, PBGC proposes to amend 29 CFR
part 4003 as follows.
PART 4003--RULES FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW OF AGENCY DECISIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 4003 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1302(b)(3).
0
2. Amend Sec. 4003.1 by:
0
a. Removing the phrase ``paragraph (b)'' and adding in its place
``paragraphs (d) and (e)'' in the first sentence of paragraph (a);
0
b. Removing the phrase ``paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(5)'' and adding
in its place ``paragraph (d)'' in the fourth sentence of paragraph (a);
0
c. Removing the phrase ``paragraphs (b)(6) through (b)(11)'' and
adding in its place ``paragraph (e)'' in the fifth sentence of
paragraph (a);
0
d. Revising paragraph (b); and
0
e. Adding paragraphs (d) and (e).
The revision and additions read as follows:
Sec. 4003.1 Purpose and scope.
* * * * *
(b) Scope. This part applies to the initial determinations made by
PBGC that are listed in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section.
* * * * *
(d) Determinations subject to reconsideration. Any person aggrieved
by an initial determination of PBGC listed in this paragraph (d) may
request reconsideration, subject to the terms of this part.
(1) Determinations with respect to premiums, interest and late
payment penalties pursuant to section 4007 of ERISA;
(2) Determinations with respect to voluntary terminations under
section 4041 of ERISA, including any of the following:
(i) A determination that a notice requirement or a certification
requirement under section 4041 of ERISA has not been met,
(ii) A determination that the requirements for demonstrating
distress under section 4041(c)(2)(B) of ERISA have not been met,
(iii) A determination with respect to the sufficiency of plan
assets for benefit liabilities or for guaranteed benefits, and
(iv) A determination with respect to a plan terminating under
section 4041(b) of ERISA or with respect to the distribution of
residual assets under section 4044(d) of ERISA;
(3) Determinations with respect to penalties under section 4071 of
ERISA.
(e) Determinations subject to appeal. Any person aggrieved by an
initial determination of PBGC listed in this paragraph (e) may file an
appeal, subject to the terms of this part.
(1) Determinations that a plan is or is not covered under section
4021 of ERISA;
(2) Determinations of a participant's or beneficiary's benefit
entitlement and the amount of benefit payable under a covered plan
under sections 4022, 4022B, and 4044 of ERISA (other than a
determination described in paragraph (d)(2)(iv) of this section);
(3) Determinations that a domestic relations order is or is not a
qualified domestic relations order under section 206(d)(3) of ERISA and
section 414(p) of the Code;
(4) Determinations of the amount of money subject to recapture
pursuant to section 4045 of ERISA;
(5) Determinations of the amount of liability under sections
4062(b)(1), 4063, or 4064 of ERISA;
(6) Determinations with respect to benefits payable by PBGC under
section 4050 of ERISA and part 4050 of this chapter.
0
3. Revise Sec. 4003.3 to read as follows:
Sec. 4003.3 PBGC assistance in obtaining information.
(a) General. A person may request PBGC's assistance in obtaining
information if the person lacks information necessary--
(1) To file a request for review pursuant to subpart C or D of this
part, or to decide whether to seek review; or
(2) To participate in an appeal pursuant to Sec. 4003.57, or to
decide whether to participate in an appeal.
(b) Information not in PBGC's possession. A person may request
PBGC's assistance in obtaining information in the possession of a party
other than PBGC. The request must --
(1) Be in writing;
(2) State or describe the missing information, the reason why the
person needs the information, and the reason why the person needs the
assistance of PBGC in obtaining the information; and
(3) Be submitted to the Appeals Board or the department that is
responsible for reviewing the initial determination under this part. If
the determination is subject to reconsideration, see Sec. 4003.33 for
information on where to submit the request for assistance. If the
determination is subject to review by appeal, see Sec. 4003.53 for
information on where to submit the request.
(c) Information in the possession of PBGC. A person may request
information in the possession of PBGC pursuant to the Freedom of
Information Act and part 4901 of this chapter or the Privacy Act and
part 4902 of this chapter, as applicable. See parts 4901 and 4902 of
this chapter for additional information. Nothing in this paragraph
4003.3(c) limits or amends the requirements under parts 4901 or 4902 of
this chapter.
0
4. Revise Sec. 4003.4 to read as follows:
Sec. 4003.4 Extension of time.
When a document is required under this part to be filed within a
prescribed period of time, an extension of time to file will be granted
only upon good cause shown and only when the request for an extension
is made before the expiration of the time prescribed. The request for
an extension must be in writing and state why additional time is needed
and the amount of additional time requested. The filing of a request
for an extension will stop the running of the prescribed period of
time. Requests for extension of the time to submit an appeal should be
sent to the Appeals Board; requests for extension of the time to submit
a request for reconsideration should be sent to the department that
issued the initial
[[Page 53089]]
determination. When a request for an extension is granted, PBGC will
notify the person requesting the extension, in writing, of the amount
of additional time granted. When a request for an extension is denied,
PBGC will notify the person requesting the extension in writing, and
the prescribed period of time will resume running from the date of
denial.
Sec. 4003.7 [Amended]
0
5. Amend Sec. 4003.7 by removing ``a determination'' and adding in its
place ``an initial determination''.
Sec. 4003.21 [Amended]
0
6. Amend Sec. 4003.21 by adding ``initial'' before ``determinations''
and removing ``of the ``determination'' and adding in its place ``of
the initial determination''.
0
7. Amend Sec. 4003.22 by removing ``a determination'' and adding in
its place ``an initial determination'' in the second sentence of
paragraph (a) and revising paragraph (b).
The revision reads as follows:
Sec. 4003.22 Effective date of determinations.
* * * * *
(b) Exception. Except for initial determinations listed in Sec.
4003.1(e)(2), (3), and (6), PBGC may, in its discretion, order that the
initial determination in a case is effective on the date it is issued.
When PBGC makes such an order, the initial determination will state
that it constitutes the final agency action effective on the date of
issuance, there is no right to request review under subpart C and
subpart D, and any person aggrieved by the initial determination has
exhausted all administrative remedies.
Sec. 4003.31 [Amended]
0
8. Amend Sec. 4003.31 by adding ``initial'' before ``determination''
at the end of the section.
Sec. 4003.33 [Amended]
0
9. Amend Sec. 4003.33 by removing ``reconsideration of a determination
described in Sec. 4003.1(b)(3)(ii)'' and adding in its place
``reconsideration of an initial determination described in Sec.
4003.1(d)(2)(ii)''.
0
10. Revise Sec. 4003.34 to read as follows:
Sec. 4003.34 Contents of request for reconsideration.
A request for reconsideration must--
(a) Be in writing;
(b) Be clearly designated as a request for reconsideration;
(c) Specifically explain why PBGC's determination is wrong and the
result the requestor is seeking;
(d) Describe the relevant information the requestor believes is
known by PBGC and summarize any other information that is relevant to
the request for reconsideration; and
(e) Include copies of any documentation that supports the
requestor's claim or assertions.
0
11. Amend Sec. 4003.35 by:
0
a. Revising the section heading;
0
b. Removing ``Department Director'' wherever it appears and adding in
its place ``Director of a department'', removing ``final'' before
``decision'', and removing ``a determination other than one described
in Sec. 4003.1(b)(3)(ii)'' and adding in its place ``an initial
determination other than one described in Sec. 4003.1(d)(2)(ii)'' in
paragraph (a)(1);
0
c. Removing ``final decision'' and adding in its place ``decision'' and
removing ``a determination described in Sec. 4003.1(b)(3)(ii)'' and
adding in its place ``an initial determination described in Sec.
4003.1(d)(2)(ii)'' in paragraph (a)(2);
0
d. Removing ``final decision'' and adding in its place ``decision'' in
paragraph (b); and
0
e. Adding paragraph (c).
The revision and addition read as follows:
Sec. 4003.35 Decision on request for reconsideration.
* * * * *
(c) The decision on a request for reconsideration constitutes the
final agency action by PBGC with respect to the initial determination
that was the subject of the request for reconsideration and is binding
on all persons who participated in the request for reconsideration.
Sec. 4003.55 [Amended]
0
12. Amend Sec. 4003.55 by removing ``1200 K Street NW, Washington, DC
20005-4026'' and adding in its place ``as listed on PBGC's website,
www.pbgc.gov'' in paragraph (c).
Sec. 4003.57 [Amended]
0
13. Amend Sec. 4003.57 by adding ``initial'' before ``determination''
in paragraph (a)(6).
Sec. 4003.58 [Amended]
0
14. Amend Sec. 4003.58 by adding ``initial'' before ``determination''
in the last sentence of paragraph (b) introductory text and adding
``initial'' before ``determination'' in paragraph (b)(1)(ii).
Sec. 4003.59 [Amended]
0
15. Amend Sec. 4003.59 by adding ``initial'' before ``determination''
in paragraph (b).
Sec. Sec. 4003.1, 4003.2, 4003.5, 4003.6, 4003.7, 4003.8, 4003.9,
4003.10, 4003.22, 4003.31, 4003.33, 4003.35, 4003.54, 4003.55, 4003.57,
4003.59, and 4003.60 [Amended]
0
16. Remove the words ``the PBGC'' and add, in their place, the word
``PBGC'' in the following sections:
0
a. Sec. 4003.1(a) and (c);
0
b. Sec. 4003.2;
0
c. Sec. 4003.5;
0
d. Sec. 4003.6;
0
e. Sec. 4003.7;
0
f. Sec. 4003.8;
0
g. Sec. 4003.9;
0
h. Sec. 4003.10;
0
i. Sec. 4003.22(a);
0
j. Sec. 4003.31;
0
k. Sec. 4003.33;
0
l. Sec. 4003.35(a);
0
m. Sec. 4003.54(b);
0
n. Sec. 4003.55(c);
0
o. Sec. 4003.57(a)(6);
0
p. Sec. 4003.59(b); and
0
q. Sec. 4003.60.
Sec. Sec. 4003.32 and 4003.52 [Amended]
0
17. Remove the words ``the PBGC's'' and add in their place the word
``PBGC's'' wherever they occur in Sec. Sec. 4003.32 and 4003.52.
Sec. Sec. 4003.2, 4003.21, 4003.22, 4003.56, 4003.57, 4003.58,
4003.59, and 4003.60 [Amended]
0
18. Remove the word ``shall'' and add in its place the word ``will''
wherever it occurs in the following sections:
0
a. Sec. 4003.2;
0
b. Sec. 4003.21;
0
c. Sec. 4003.22(a);
0
d. Sec. 4003.56(c);
0
e. Sec. 4003.57(a);
0
f. Sec. 4003.58(b);
0
g. Sec. 4003.59(a) and (c); and
0
h. Sec. 4003.60.
Sec. Sec. 4003.6, 4003.8, 4003.33, 4003.53, and 4003.54 [Amended]
0
19. Remove the word ``shall'' and add in its place the word ``must''
wherever it occurs in the following sections:
0
a. Sec. 4003.6;
0
b. Sec. 4003.8;
0
c. Sec. 4003.33;
0
d. Sec. 4003.53; and
0
e. Sec. 4003.54(a) and (b).
Issued in Washington, DC.
Gordon Hartogensis,
Director, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.
[FR Doc. 2019-21495 Filed 10-3-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7709-02-P