.h ' 

U 

w 4 -=& 1lp950ao u 

9 

;I 

d% Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 

? p-aBs. 1200 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 2000.54026 

I MAR 0 '4 2004 I 

!A. L 

Re: 1 

Case 194024, Trans World Airlines, Inc. (TWA) Retirement 

Plan for Pilots (the Plan) 

The Appeals ~oard reviewed the appeal you filed for 1 1 B of PBGC's October 31, 2003 letter1, which determined that 

is not entitled to a benefit from the Plan. For the 

reasons stated below, the Board decided that we must deny the 

appeal. 

Determination and Appeal 

PBGC determined that is not entitled to a survivor 

benefit under the Plan because she consented in writing to her late 

husband's waiver of the Plan's Joint and Survivor Annuity, the 

normal benefit form for married participants. 

Your appeal letter claims that PBGC has 

"chosen to ignore the exhibits which substantiate position on this 

matter. documents such as: 

a. September 1, 1991. Retirement Plan Benefit Election Foml signed by 

land herdeceased husband designating her a 50% Joint 

and Survivorship Annuity 

b. September 7, 1991, TWA emits to 'change' his selection to 

Single Life Annuity without knowledge or consent. 

c. September 13,1991. one has to assume TWA advised he needed 

si nature so all monetary benefits would go to him and him alone. He 

hands -'la folded piece of paper where it clearly stated: 'once your 

retirement date has occurred, your election cannot be changed', however NVA, on& 

Although your appeal letter said you were baaing your appeal on PBaC's 

December 15, 2003 letter. 'Chat.letter was addressed to Senator Dianne Feinstein. 

October 

PBGC'B October 

15, 2003 

31, 

letter 

,2003 

to 

letter 

PBGC4s 

to 

Executive 

wae 

Director. 

in response 

The content 

to 71 

of PBGCts 

October 31, 2003 letter is essentiallythe same as that of PBGC's December letter 

to Senator Feinstein. We note that PBOC's Office of the General Counsel also 

responded to~ctober 15, 2003 letter in a letter dated February 5, 

2004. 
again chose to ignore ERISA and accepted and processed form/request. 

d. July 26,1995, through many letters and hone calls, Jan Thompson confirms 

in writing to me TWA failed to counsel y~regarding her rights under ERISA. 

Not only does this violate ERISA, this is orie of the main reasons the [Retirement] 

Equity Act, as amended, came to pass." 

Your appeal letter goes on to say: 

."This case is extremely clear! I am surein your line of work most sbouses simply 

give up and o awa or do not have any documents to substantiate their position. 

Please sho JpYylthe respect she has earned, cease and desist from whip 

sawing this case in your letters. I-was never counseled she would have 

no way of knowing her rights, especially when she was a 'stay at home mom.' The 

documents presented speak for themselves." 

1. Annuity Election Form 

Pages 1 and 2 of Enclosure 1 are copies of the front and back 

of the only annuity election form we found in personal 

PBGC file. Althou h our 'appeal letter (in paragraph "a") 

sugges led that y-1 had "si g ned" an election form on 

September 1, 1991 in which had elected the Joint and 

Survivor Annuity, please note that the only place on the form for 

is on the back of the form. On the back of . 

consent. towaiver of the 

Joint and Survivor Annuity form of benefit or consent to the naming 

of a beneficiary other than herself. In other words; if71 

had actively elected the Joint and Survivor Annuity on September 1, 

1991, there would have been no place on the form for to 

sign .. 

The Appeals Board notes that there may have been some 

confusion caused by the layout of the election form. That is, when 

TWA sent the form to for his election, the -front of the 

form showed listed as the "Joint Annuitant" even though 

elected 

there would 

the Single 

be no joint 

Life Annuity. 

annuitant 

We 

in 

regret 

the event 

any 

that 

confusion 

71 

that 

TWA's layout of the front page may have caused71 

It is certainly true that if had not elected to 

receive his benefit as a "Single Life Annuity payable for Member's I Life On if had not signed the written consent to 

"waiver of the Joint and Survivor ~nnuity;" then the 

benefit that would have become payable wouldhave been the Joint 

and Survivor Annuity with as the Joint Annuitant. 
~bwever, the completed form reveals that .did elect the 

Annuity and did consent in writing to 

waiver of the Joint and SurvivorAnnuity. 

2. The Timing of 1 Consent to 

that Waiver 

Items "b" and "c" of your appeal suggest that TWA violated the 

provisions of the Plan and the Employee Retirement Income Security 

Act of 1974, as amended '(ERISA) when TWA accepted.71 

election of th: Single Life Annuit on September 7, , 1991 and 

ylwritten consent toryplwaiver of the Joint and 

Survivor Annuit on September 13, 1991 because both events occurred 

afterLl September 1, 1991 "Retirement Date." 

ERISA subsection 205(c) (3) (A) 'provides that: "Each plan shall. 

provide to each participant within a reasonable period of .time 

before the annuity starting date (and consistent with such 

regulations as the Secretary of the Treasury may prescribe) a 

written explanation of. ; (i) the terms and conditions of the 

qualified joint and survivor annuity, (ii) the participant's right 

to make, and the effect of, an election . . . to waive the joint 

and survivor annuity form of benefit, (iii) the rights of the 

participant's spouse . . ., and (iv) the right to make, and the 

effect of, a revocation of an election. . . ." 

retired 

The 

provided 

Treasury regulations 

that: "A plan must 

that were 

provide participants 

in effect when 71

with. the 

written explanation of the QJSA . . . no less than 30 days and no 

more than 90 days before the annuity starting date. Written 

consent of the participant and the participant's spouse to the 

distribution must be made not more than 90 days before the annuity 

starting date .'" 

The record shows that TWA did not mail the election form to 

until August 20, 1991. It appears that TWA then .waited 

the required 30-day period before' starting the payment of 

retirement benefit, thereby allowing him the chance to 

make' his election. 

While some plan 'administrators would have required a 

participant to return all forms before the effective retirement 

Both 1 election and written consent' to 

waiver of the Joint and Survivor Annuity were delivered 

to TWA on Skpteder 16, 1991. within that PO-day period., hd TWA 

.did not start paying his annuity. until October 10, 1991, 

after TWA had receive Qh 1 1 election form and 

consent to 1 wazver . 
date, the Appeals Board found that TWA violated neither ERISA nor 

the Treasury regulations by. making a retroactive payment after 

receiving the completed election form from -. . 

3. The Consent to Waiver signed byl 

The last item (Item "d") of jrour appeal suggested that the 

of 1984, amended (REA), required that TWA 

with counseling before .she 'consented to 

the Joint'and Survivor Amiuity. 

As noted above, however, ERISA, as amended by REA, requires 

only that a written explanation be provided to the participant. 

Thus, TWA was under no obligation under ERISA to provide71 

with counseling. 

All ERISA required with respect tois thatconsented in writing to election of the Single Life 

Annuity, that the written consent-acknowledged the effect of such 

election, and that it was witnessed "by a plan representative or a 

notary 

signed met 

public. 

all the requirements 

Given that the 

of 

election 

ERISA, 

form 

we find no reason 

that 71 

in the 

documents we have before us to find it invalid. 

Decision 

Having applied the law and PBGC!s rules to the facts in this 

case, the Appeals Board found that we must deny the appeal. 

This decision is the agency's final action .regarding the 

appeal.has exhausted her administrative remedies with 

respect to this matter. 

Sincerely, 

~ichel Louis 

Appeals Board Member 

Enclosure (2 pages) 

cc: