Advisory Opinions

Whether the Bay Commission’s employee benefit arrangement for its employees who do not participate in Rhode Island’s retirement system constitutes a governmental plan excluded from title I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.

Whether Santa Fe Southern Pacific Corporation (SFSP) received by the Southern Pacific Company Stock Purchase and Savings Plan (the Plan). in exchange for stock in the Southern Pacific Company and Santa Fe Industries, Inc, constitutes "qualifying employer securities" within the meaning of section 407(d)(5) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.

Whether the Pension Fund of Local One, Amalgamated Lithographers of America (the Local One Plan) and the ALA-Lithographic Industry Pension Plan (the ALA Plan) constitute a single employee benefit plan for the purposes of title I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act).

Whether the Department of Labor will deem The Southern Company (Southern) to have established an employee pension benefit plan within the meaning of section 3(2) of title I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 by partnering with The First National Bank of Atlanta to offer Individual Retirement Accounts that invest in Sothern’s Common Stock.

Whether the relief from prohibited transactions provided by the Department of Labor’s Prohibited Transaction Exemption 83-1 will be available for certain transactions involving mortgage pools which consist of the Bank of America National Trust and Savings Association (the Bank) new form of Short-Term Mortgage Loan, and whether the placement of principal prepayment amounts in Bank deposit accounts will be exempt from the prohibited transaction provisions of section 406 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) by virtue of section 408(b)(4) of ERISA.

Whether the Iron County Medical Care Facility, also known as County Infirmary’s provision of life insurance for its employees is a governmental plan within the meaning of section 3(32) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) and, thus, is not subject to title I of ERISA.

Whether the Department of Labor will update its Advisory Opinion 82-50A, which held that the Realtors Group Insurance Trust (Trust) was not an employee welfare benefit plan within the meaning of section 3(1) of title I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), to confirm that REGIT, a non-stock corporation assuming the obligations of the Trust, is not an employee welfare benefit plan within the meaning of section 3(1) of title I of ERISA.

Whether PTE 79-60 permits Glen-Wahlberg & Co. and the Sistrunk Insurance Agency, subsidiaries of Wetterau, Inc whose employees participate in the Wetterau, Inc. Group Insurance Plan (the Plan) to sell insurance to the Plan and to receive commissions thereon, if the conditions of the class exemption are met.

Whether the Florida Health Care Association Group Trust (the Trust) is an employee welfare benefit plan within the meaning of section 3(1) of title I of the of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.

Whether certain equity interests in real properties acquired in 1982 by John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company (the Company) for both its general account and a separate account (holding assets of the Employee’s Retirement and Benefit Plan of Schenley Industries, Inc. for which the Company is a fiduciary) are “held pursuant to a binding contract in effect on July 1, 1974” under 414(c)(2) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) because the interests were acquired in a foreclosure auction that resulted from defaults on pre-1974 mortgages.