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

**1989**
AO/ Date/ Reference	Recipient	Description of Request
1989-10A 07/06/1989 3(1)	Mr. David A. Merline, Jr. Merline & Thomas PO Box 10796 665 North Academy Street Greenville, South Carolina 29603	Whether the Professional Medical Products, Inc., (PMP) Educational Assistance Program is an unfunded scholarship program within the meaning of 29 C.F.R. §2510.3-1(k) and, therefore, not an "employee welfare benefit plan" subject to reporting and disclosure or other requirements applicable to employee benefit plans covered by title I of ERISA.
1989-09A 06/13/1989	Steven J. Sacher, Esq. Johnson & Swanson Columbia Square - 660 West 555 13th Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20004	Whether the reimbursement of the Manville Corporation by the Manville-sponsored employee benefit plans for the direct expenses incurred by Manville, the plan sponsor, in providing administrative and asset management services to such plans would not constitute a prohibited transaction under section 406 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) and section 4975 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
1989-08A 05/08/1989	Mr. Joseph H. Kaplan Kaplan, Sicking & Bloom, P.A. 1951 Northwest 17th Avenue P.O. Drawer 520337 Miami, Florida 33152	Whether the South Florida Carpenters' Joint Apprenticeship and Training Trust Fund, established by the South Florida Carpenters' District Council, AFL-CIO, and various employers of carpenters and associations of employers of carpenters for the purpose of training and educating apprentice and journeyman carpenters, is subject to sections 408(b)(2) and 408(c)(2) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). Whether the payment of $127,597 to purchase a retirement pension for Mr. Bray, the sole full-time employee of the South Florida Carpenters' Joint Apprenticeship and Training Trust Fund, established by the South Florida Carpenters' District Council, AFL-CIO, and various employers of carpenters and associations of employers of carpenters for the purpose of training and educating apprentice and journeyman carpenters, constitutes "compensation" and "compensation for services rendered" for purposes of sections 408(b)(2) and 408(c)(2) of ERISA, respectively.
1989-07A 04/27/1989	Mr. Craig Westbrook Mitchell, Williams, Selig & Tucker 1000 Savers Federal Building Capitol Avenue at Spring Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201	Whether the Union National Bank Incentive Bonus Plan which provides bonuses to employees for work performance is an employee pension benefit plan within the meaning of section 3(2) of title I of ERISA.
1989-06A 04/07/1989	Lisa Klinger, Esq. Littler, Mendelson, Fastiff & Tichy 1925 Century Park East, Fifth Floor Los Angeles, California 90067	Whether the proposed Stouffer Hotel Management Corporation Vacation Pay Plan for certain Hourly Employees is an employee welfare benefit plan within the meaning of section 3(1) of title I of ERISA.
1989-05A 04/05/1989	Mr. Michael P. Sjogren Mr. Lawrence J. Shulman Seward & Kissel Wall Street Plaza New York, New York 10005	Whether any of the transactions as described that occur subsequent to the formation of the partnership would constitute an “acquisition” of an equity interest within the meaning of regulation section 2510.3-101(f)(1) and would trigger a determination of significant equity participation by benefit plan investors.
1989-04A 03/30/1989	Ms. Marjorie A. Dolan Assistant Counsel John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company P.O. Box 111 Boston, MA 02117	Whether the fiduciary responsibility provisions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) would apply to proposed investments by employee benefit plans in Energy Investors Fund (EIF), a limited partnership or would the plan’s assets include only the limited partnership interest in EIF but not any of the underlying assets of the partnership.
1989-03A 03/23/1989	Ms. Maria Stefanis Arthur Young 3000 K Street, NW Washington DC 20007	Whether a purchase of stock by an Individual Retirement Account (IRA) from a corporation would violate section 4975(c)(1)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
1989-02A 03/21/1989 514	Mr. Rodney A. Currin Ward and Smith, P.A. 1001 College Court P.O. Box 867 New Bern, North Carolina 28560	Whether the denial of a claim for an in-service hardship distribution under the terms of the First Citizens Bank & Trust Company Accumulation Plan be subject to the claims procedures requirements of section 503 of ERISA.
1989-01A 02/10/1989 514	Mr. J. Stephen Mikita Office of the Attorney General State of Utah 236 State Capitol Salt Lake City, Utah 84114	Whether the proposed provisions of Utah Code Ann. §58-17-26 (the proposed Utah Act) are preempted under the general preemption provision of section 514(a) of title I of ERISA if it is applies, directly or indirectly, to employee benefit plans covered by title I of ERISA, and does not qualify for the exception established in section 514(b)(8) of ERISA.