#'% Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 5-& 1200 K Street, N.W., Washinglon, D.C. 200054026 

(formerly 94-0383); Modulus 

Employees' Pension Plan ("Plan") 

Dear 71 

The Appeals Board agreed to re-open your previous appeal (94- 

0383, now 97-0980) of PBGC's determination that you are entitled to 

a lump sum of $2,937. We appreciate your patience while your appeal 

has been pending and apologize for the delay. 

For the reasons stated below, the Board changed PBGC's 

determination by increasing the lump-sum amount to $3.162.00. plus 

interest. The Board noted that, instead of the lump sum, you may 

choose an annuity starting at your normal retirement date equal to 

$201.69 per month if paid with no survivor benefits. PBGC files 

contain your annuity election dated May 20, 2002. 

PBGC's May 6, 1994 determination stated you are entitled to a 

lump sum of $2,937, plus interest for the full months between the 

Plan termination date (December 31, 1983) and the date PBGC pays 

you. PBGC explained that you would receive a lump sum, and not a 

future annuity, because the present value of your pension as of the 

Plan termination date was less than $3,500.00 (now $5,000.00). 

Your June 12, 1994 appeal disagreed with the January 9, 1967 

hire date and credited service listed on the Benefit Statement 

included with your PBGC determination letter. You stated that 

Modulus first hired you on January 10, 1964, you left employment in 

June of 1966 and Modulus rehired you on January 9, 1967. You 

asserted you were informed you would receive credit for your 

service prior to January 9, 1967. Bser COPY AVARABLE 

As a preliminary matter, the Appeals Board's June 27, 1995 

decision letter (Appeal 94-0383) upheld PBGC's determination of 

your benefit and explained in detail the basis of our findings. 

However, we gave you an additional time to present evidence or 

argument showing that the time during the period you questioned 

(1964 to 1966) should be bridged, for pension purposes, with your 

post-January 9, 1967 employment. Your July 21, 1995 letter 

requested more time so you could find the necessary evidence. That 

letter also provided two new documents: one with information you 
had received from the Social Security Administration ("SSA"); the 

other showing you were divorced at the time your Modulus employment 

ended. We granted you more time, and because you provided no other 

evidence in the extended 30-day period, we closed your first appeal 

(94-0383) effective September 21, 1995. 

On October 16, 1995 we received additional correspondence 

from you, which included 2 pages from the Plan Summary. This 

submission was based on your telephone conversation with the Clerk 

of the Appeals Board on October 5, 1995, during which the Clerk 

agreed to ask the Board to reconsider your closed appeal if you 

could provide evidence that provided a basis for changing PBGC's 

determination. 

Record and Discussio~ 

The primary issue in your appeal is whether your benefit 

should be greater than PBGC determined by adding credit for the 

period January of 1964 to June of 1966, which is not reflected in 

the records PBGC received'following the Plan's termination. With 

your authorization we obtained a report of your earnings for that 

period from the Social Security Administration ("SSA Report"). 

The SSA Report shows you worked for a company named AMPCOPittsburgh Corporation ("AMPCO") beginning during the 4th quarter 

of 1964 and ending in the third quarter of 1966. In a conversation 

with the analyst reviewing your appeal you stated that you did not 

recognize that company name. You also stated that in 1964 you were 

hired by Gary Screw and Bolt Company, a part of the Screw and Bolt 

Corporation of America ("SBCA"). This information does not explain 

the connection with AMPCO. The record available to the Appeals 

Board shows that the SBCA became the Modulus Corporation and that 

Modulus was first sold to Raymark Friction Company, who in turn 

sold it to RBS Industries. Inc. 

Your PBGC file contains a copy of a retirement calculation by 

Pamela Liggins, the former RBS Personnel Manager, which lists your 

employment date as January 9, 1967, the same date on your PBGC 

Benefit Statement. The Board's June 27, 1995 decision included a 

copy of this calculation, explained in detail why your January 9, 

1967 hire date was not being changed to increase your credited 

service, and gave you another 30 days to provide additional 

evidence to the contrary. PBGC may rely on a former plan 

administrator's calculations to determine the amount PBGC will pay 

where data is uncertain or plan documents are not available. 

Two key pieces of information you sent the Appeals Board were: 

(i) SSA records that showed the Employer Identification Number 

("EIN") for AMPCO and SBCA are one and the same, and (ii) a copy of 

a divorce decree showing you were divorced before your employment 

ended in September of 1982. 
Page 22 of the Plan Summary you sent PBGC states: 'Screw and 

Bolt Corporation of America, the predecessor of Modulus, is 

considered a Participating Employer for years prior to August 29, 

1968." Because the SSA document you sent us shows that AMPCO and 

SBCA share the same EIN, for the purpose of resolving this appeal 

we will consider the AMPCO data as if it were with SBCA. Your SSA 

Report, however, shows earnings from AMPCO beginning during the 4th 

quarter (October through December) of 1964, which is not consistent 

with the January 10, 1964 hire date you stated. Data on the SSA 

report is consistent with a first termination of employment in June 

of 1966, as you stated, and your rehire in January of 1967. 

It is not clear whether the Plan in effect at the time of your 

termination and rehire recognized service before your rehire date. 

Indeed, the Modulus Plan Summary you provided seems to suggest that 

the recognition of prior service was new to the 1975 Plan. Thus, 

your termination in 1966 would mean that you were treated as a new 

employee when you were rehired in 1967. Because the Modulus Plan 

Summary (as no Plan document is available) provided no information 

on breaks in service, and because the former Plan Administrator did 

not recognize your prior period of employment, the Appeals Board 

decided to continue to use the dates as provided by the Plan 

Administrator. Thus, the Board found that your service for pension 

purposes commences on January 9, 1967. 

The record available to the Board does not contain the Plan 

document in effect from 1964 to 1966, although efforts have been 

made to do so. Therefore, the Board applied the pertinent 

provisions of the Plan as amended and restated effective November 

1, 1975 to decide your case. See Enclosure 1. 

Further, as you provided evidence showing you were divorced at 

the time you terminated your employment, the Appeals Board found 

that your benefit is properly payable in the form of a Straight 

Life Annuity, the normal form of benefit for a single participant, 

pursuant to Section 7.l(a) of the Plan. Additionally, the Board 

adjusted upwards the salary figures for 1975 and 1982 to correspond 

with the amounts listed on the SSA Report. See Enclosure 2. 

The Plan uses different calculations of compensation for 

service prior to January 1, 1975, and for service after January 1, 

1975. For service prior to January 1, 1975, compensation is base 

pay at January 1, 1975. For service after January 1, 1975, 

compensation is total remuneration excluding fringe benefits such 

as the cost of the pension plan and life insurance. The SSA 

records show W-2 earnings up to the maximum compensation limit for 

Social Security purposes. Therefore, while the SSA Report can be 

used to determine your benefit accruals after January 1, 1975, the 

earnings in 1975 cannot be used to determine your benefit accrued 

up to January 1, 1975. The former Plan Administrator determined 

that your 1975 base pay is $9,984.00, and the Appeals Board 
accepted and used this figure in the absence of any documentary 

evidence that it does not equal your base pay at January 1, 1975. 

Having applied the provisions of the Plan and the law to the 

facts in your case, the Appeals Board changed PBGC's determination 

of your benefit by increasing your lump-sum amount to $3,162.00, 

plus interest. The Board noted that, per current PBGC policy, you 

may elect a monthly benefit of $201.69 beginning on your Normal 

Retirement Date and if paid as a Straight Life Annuity. The change 

is due to a different annuity form and greater salary amount for 

1975 and 1982 than PBGC used to calculate your benefit. As noted 

above the Board found no basis for changing the years of service 

used to calculate your benefit. 

This is the agency's final action regarding your appeal. You 

have exhausted your administrative remedies with respect to this 

matter and may, if you wish, seek court review of this decision. 

We will forward a copy of this decision to the Insurance Operations 

Department ('IOD"), the office responsible for making PBGC 

determinations and payments. The IOD staff will update the PBGC 

files to reflect this decision along with your election to receive 

your pension as an annuity instead of a lump sum. 

Sincerely, 

Harriet D. Verburg 

Chair, Appeals Board 

u 

Enclosures (21