Advisory Opinions

Requests for interpretations and other rulings under Title 1 of ERISA are handled by the Office of Regulations and Interpretations under the provisions established by ERISA Procedure 76-1. The office answers inquiries from individuals and organizations in the form of advisory opinions, which apply the law to a specific set of facts, or information letters, which merely call attention to well established principles or interpretations.

Data Dictionary

Start Date

Select Reference

**1999**
AO/ Date/ Reference	Recipient	Description of Request
1999-14A 11/10/1999 606	Mr. Pieter J. Doerr COBRA Compliance Systems, Inc. 15 E. Washington Street P.O. Box 889 Coldwater, Michigan 49036-0889	Regarding the continuation coverage provisions applicable to group health plans under Part 6 of Title I of ERISA.
1999-13A 09/29/1999 206(d)(3)	Brian G. Belisle Oppenheimer Wolff & Donnelly LLP Plaza VII 45 South Seventh Street, Suite 3400 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402-1609	Regarding how a plan administrator should treat domestic relations orders the plan administrator has reason to believe are "sham" or "questionable" in nature.
1999-12A 09/22/1999 404(a)	Theodore M. Lieverman, Esq. Tomar, Simonoff, Adourian, O’Brien, Kaplan, Jacoby & Graziano Tomar Plaza 20 Brace Road Cherry Hill, New Jersey 08034-0379	Whether the Sheet Metal Workers International Association National Pension Fund may honor a side bar agreement with the Welfare Funds to pay the Welfare Funds certain monies received in settlement of litigation, with respect to which the Welfare Funds and the National Pension Fund were co-plaintiffs, without contravening Title I of ERISA.
1999-11A 08/20/1999 PTE 84-14	Michael A. Lawson, Esq. Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, LLP 300 South Grand Avenue Los Angeles, California 90071-3144	Whether LaSalle Advisors Limited Partnership, which previously satisfied the financial requirements of a "qualified professional asset manager" as set forth in section V(a)(4) of PTE 84-14, continues to satisfy those requirements after merging with and into a newly formed corporation.
1999-10A 07/26/1999 3(32)	Susanne K. Reed, Esq. Assistant General Counsel School and Legal College Services Sonoma County Office of Education 5340 Skylane Boulevard Santa Rosa, California 95403	Whether participation by twenty-eight employees of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges in the California Public Employees' Retirement System would adversely affect the status of CalPERS as a "governmental plan" within the meaning of section 3(32) of ERISA.
1999-09A 05/21/1999 406 408(b)	Patricia A. Shlonsky Ulmer & Berne, LLP Bond Court Building 1300 East Ninth Street, Suite 900 Cleveland, Ohio 44114-1583	Whether the Fund would engage in a prohibited transaction under section 406 of ERISA if it retained and compensated, for the purpose of constructing an addition to the Fund’s training facility, a general contractor or subcontractor that employs or is owned by a plan fiduciary.
1999-08A 05/20/1999 401(b)	Mr. Thomas W. Meagher Actuarial Sciences Associates, Inc. 270 Davidson Avenue Somerset, New Jersey 08873	Concerning the application of Title I of ERISA to a special purpose trust established on behalf of Michigan Consolidated Gas Co., a wholly-owned subsidiary of MCN Energy Group, Inc. Specifically, whether assets contributed to the Trust would constitute assets of an employee welfare benefit plan for purposes of Title I of ERISA.
1999-07A 05/19/1999 3(32)	Mr. Thomas E. Hayes Office of City Attorney 800 City Hall 200 East Wells Street Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202-3551	Whether the Employees' Retirement System of the City of Milwaukee "governmental plan" status would be adversely affected if the Plan implements a city charter ordinance that provides for continued accrual of benefits by certain former governmental employees whose employment has been transferred to a private enterprise as part of an arrangement regarding operation of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District.
1999-06A 04/06/1999 3(32)	Mr. Richard Tanner Executive Director Kentucky Magistrates and Commissioners Association 400 King’s Daughters Drive Frankfurt, Kentucky 40601-4106	Whether the status of CERS as a "governmental plan" within the meaning of section 3(32) and section 4(b)(1) of Title I of ERISA would not be adversely affected if employees of KMCA were permitted to participate in CERS.
1999-05A 02/22/1999 401(b)	Laraine S. Rothenberg, Esq. Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson One New York Plaza New York, New York 10004	Regarding the application of the "plan assets" regulation issued under ERISA to certain mortgage pool certificates offered by Farmer Mac. Specifically, that guaranteed mortgage-backed certificates issued by Farmer Mac are "guaranteed governmental mortgage pool certificates" within the meaning of 29 C.F.R. 2510.3-101(i)(2).