# 

, +' 

.I > 

&/BOO~~? 

B 

t Pens ion Benefit Guaranty Corporation 

m PBGC u%-- 1200 K street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005-4026 

N 

May 13, 2004 

Re: 1 

Massey Combines Corp Retirement Salaried Plan (the 

"Plan") PBGC case 126383 

The Appeals Board has reviewed your appeal of PBGC's 

determination that is not entitled to a benefit. As 

explained below, we are granting your appeal. 

PBGC's Determination 

PBGC's October 5, 2001 letter stated earned less 

than the 10 years of service needed for a vested benefit. 

Your Appeal 

In your November 9, 2001 appeal, you asserted is 

vested, making the folYowing factual claims: 

You stated Massey-Ferguson established Landmark Equipment 

Company ("Landmark") as a separate corporation for its Des 

Moines retail store effective December 16, 1985. You 

submitted a December 1985 Massey-Ferguson letter supporting 

your statement. 

The Board examined the documents you submitted and other 

documents in PBGC's files. PBGC ' 9 f i.les show Landmark 

became a 100%-owned Massey Combines Corporation ("MCC") 

subsidiary in November 1985. 

You noted the December 1985 Massey-Ferguson letter 

described a Plan provision called Contingent Vesting. 

Contingent Vesting would allow to earn Plan 

vesting service working at Landmark. You also enclosed an 

August 1987 MCC letter stating had become vested 

under Contingent Vesting. 

See the Discussion below. 

You stated: was hired by Massey-Ferguson on 

April 1, 1976, -1 Massey-Fer son employment 

terminated December 16, 1985, (3) worked 

continuously at Massey-Ferguson for 9 years 9 months, and 
(4) became a Landmark employee on December 16, 

1985. 

The Board decided: (1) to use an April 5, 1976 hire date in 

PBGC1s records, (2) to use December 15, 

last day as a Massey-Ferguson employee, (3) 

Ferguson employee, and (4) 

earned 9 years 8 full months ension service as a Massey- rppl continued working at 

Landmark into 1987. 

You enclosed May 5, 1989 and August 31, 1987 MCC letters 

stating would receive a benefit under Contingent 

vesting. MCC calculated his benefit as $174.27 per month 

($18.50 accrual rate x 9.42 years service) if paid as a 

Straight Life Annuity starting at age 65. 

Discussion 

The Plan's vesting service includes employment at 

Affiliates, including at any subsidiary at least 80% MCC-owned. 

Thus, Landmark employment was affiliated service for vesting 

while MCC continued to own 80% or more of Landmark. The Board 

found the Plan administrator's actions vesting as 

evidence the Landmark subsidiary continued as an MCC Affiliate 

until became vested in May 1986. Thus, the Board 

decided 

are consistent with all 

Plan 

the Plan 

assets were insufficient 

administrator's 

relevant facts 

actions 

to 

and 

pay 

to 

Plan 

all 

100% 

benefits, 

provisions. 

vest 71

and the 

law places limits on PBGC's guarantee. Therefore, PBGC must now 

calculate PBGC-payable benefit. 

Decision 

Having applied Plan provisions and the law to the facts in 

your case, we are granting your appeal. is 100% 

vested in his Plan benefit. His Plan benefit service is 9 years 

8 months. 

PBGC's 

PBGC 

Insurance Operations Department 

benefit based on this decision. 

will 

He will 

determine 

be given 

1 

45 days to appeal any new issues in PBGC's new determination. 

When PBGC's new determination becomes final, he may seek court 

review of this decision. 

We thank you and for your patience during this 

careful review of your 1 appea f has any questions 
.. about his new benefit determination, he may contact pBGC1s 

#! ." Technical Services Division at 1-800-400-7242. 

4 

.., Sincerely, 

William E. Ellis 

Appeals Board Member 

cc: