Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 

Protecting America's Pensions 1200 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005-4026 

May 14,2010 

Re: Case # 20002500, Golden Casting Corporation Hourly Plan (the 

"GC Plan") 

Dear 

We are responding to your appeal ofPBGC's February 27,2009 determination of your 

benefit under the GC Plan. For the reasons given below, we are denying your appeal. 

. PBGC's Benefit Determination and Your Appeal 

PBGC's February 27, 2009 determination letter stated you are entitled to a monthly 

benefit of $211.17 based on your benefit starting on May 1, 2004 in the form of a SLA. The 

letter also stated that, since the estimated amount you have been receiving ($298.51) is more than 

the amount you are entitled to, you have been overpaid ($4,803.70 as May 1, 2009) and that 

PBGC would reduce the $211.17 by $21.12 per month (10.0%) until the overpayment amount 

has been repaid. PBGC enclosed a benefit statement that shows your benefit and the data used in 

the calculation. . 

On March 17, 2009, we received your appeal of the February 27, 2009 determination 

letter. Your appeal enclosed a PBGC letter dated April 1, 2005 that stated that PBGC had 

received your Payee Information Form and that "no further action is required at this time." You 

also said, in part: 

"I received your letter on 3/2/09 and was very disappointed that you think that I 

should be penalized for making an honest mistake .. .I can't understand why I was 

told my pension would not be cut; after I signed up. There is no way I would 

have signed up, if I thought there *as a chance of that happening .... Something I 

would like to bring up is that nothiAg is ever brought up about the 5 to 6 thousand 

dollars of vacation money that was never paid to me ... 

r. But, I chose to work as 

long as I can ... The result I am see~ing, I guess would be to back up from the time 

I signed up until I turned 58, approx. 6 mos. Then resume $298.00. As a result of 

my error, there are people with much less time than me getting their full 

retirement. ... " 
Background 

History ofthe Plan Sponsor and Pension Plan 

The sponsor of the GC Plan, Golden Casting Corporation ("Golden Casting"), operated a 

foundry in Columbus, Indiana, that produced castings, primarily for heavy duty diesel engines. 

Golden Casting was a subsidiary of American Bailey, Inc., who had purchased the foundry from 

. its previous owner, Textron Corporation ("Textron"), on September 8, 1990. The GC Plan 

covered Golden Casting's hourly (unionized) employees. 

Prior to the foundry's sale, Textron operated the business through the Golden Operations 

Division ("Golden Operations"), a division of Textron's CWC Casting Division. Golden 

, Operations hourly einployees participated in the Golden Operations Hourly Pension Plan 

("Golden Operations . Plan"), which provided them with pension benefits based on their service 

with Golden Operations up to the date of the sale. Sometime after the sale, Textron merged the· 

Golden Operations Plan with another Textron plan, and the merged plan is currently ongoing. 

Also, effective October 1, 1990, Golden Casting established the GC Plan. The benefit 

structure of the GC Plan, which provides a benefit based on service with both companies, mirrors 

the structure of the Golden Operations Plan. GC Plan's benefit formula further provides for an 

offset (referred to as the "Textron offset") for the benefit under the Golden Operations Plan. 

Golden Casting filed a Chapter 11 Bankruptcy petition on May 14, 2003. PBGC entered 

into an agreement with Golden Casting effective January 1, 2005 that terminated the GC Plan, 

appointed PBGC as its trustee, and established September 30,2003 as the GC Plan's termination 

date. . 

The GC Plan's Provisions 

Section 3.01 of the formal GC Plan Document,l titled "Normal Retirement Benefits," 

provides that the pension benefit payable at Normal Retirement is as follows: 

3.01 Normal Retirement Benefits. The Monthly Retirement income of each 

Participant, hereunder, shall be equal to: 

(i) (a) $20.00 for Participants whose Severance 

from Service occurs prior to June 12, 1994, or 

* * * 

(d). $23.50 for Participants whose Severance from 

Service occurs after June 25, 1998; or 

I The formal GC Plan document that applies to your benefits is the "Golden Castings Corporation Hourly Pension 

Plan Amended and Restated Generally Effective as of October I, 1997" ("GC Plan Document"). In Enclosure I, we 

provide a copy of the GC Plan Document's provisions that relate to your appeal. 

2 
(e) $24.00 for Participants whose Severance from 

Service occurs after December 14, 2002; 

* * * 

multiplied by 

(ii) the Participant's Credited Service; 

and for a Participant who was a Participant of the [Golden Operations] Plan on or 

before September 8, 1990, reduced and offset by the accrued benefit under said 

Prior Plan as of September 8, 1990. 

Section 1.29 of the GC Plan Document, which is titled ''Normal Retirement Date," is the 

only provision in that document that specifically addresses benefit eligibility based on 30 years 

of Credited Service. Section 1.29 provides as follows: 

1.29 "Normal Retirement Date" shall mean the Participant's 65th 

birthday or the Participant's 58th birthday, so long as·he has completed 30 years of 

Credited Service, if earlier. 

As is discussed further below, section 1.29 is of central importance regarding the issue raised in 

your appeal. 

With the exception of the 30-Y ear benefit and the disability retirement benefit, a GC Plan 

participant cannot start receiving an unreduced benefit before age 65.2 Section3.03(a) of the GC 

. Plan Document provides that a Participant may elect an Early Retirement Benefit if he has 

attained_his Early Retirement Date. Section 1.14 provides that the Early Retireme~t Date is "the 

Participant's 50th birthday, provided he has completed 10 Years of Service." If the Early 

Retirement Benefit commences before age 65, the benefit amount is "reduced by Y2 of 1 % for 

each complete calendar month by which the Participant is under Age 65 at the date his early 

retirement benefit commences.,,3 GC Plan Document, section 3.03(a)(2). 

Similarly, if a vested participant terminates employment before qualifying for a Normal, 

Early or Disability retirement benefit, the participant may receive either: (1) a deferred benefit 

starting on his Normal Retirement Date; or (2) an immediate or deferred benefit, as the case may 

be, starting upon the later of employment termination or age 50, which is "reduced by Y2 of 1 % 

for each complete calendar month by which the Participant is under Age 65 at the date his vested 

termination benefit commences." GC Plan Document, section 3.06. 

2 The disability retirement benefit is available to a participant who has attained age 40, completed 15 or more years 

of service, is permanently and totally disabled, and terminates employment before his or her Normal Retirement 

Date. The disability retirement benefit is payable immediately upon termination of employment in an unreduced . 

amount. GC Plan Document, sections 1.13 and 3.05. 

3 Section 3.03(b) of the GC Plan Document also provides that, if a participant has completed the lO-year service 

requirement for early retirement but separates from employment before age 50, he is entitled to a benefit upon 

attaining age 50 in the amount described in section 3.03(a) . 

3 
Discussion 

The GC Plan terminated without sufficient assets to provide all benefits PBGC 

guarantees under Title IV of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA"), and 

PBGC became its trustee. The terms of the plan, the provisions of ERISA, and PBGC 

regUlations and policies determine your entitlement, if any, to a guaranteed benefit. Because of 

legal limits under ERISA and PBGC's regulations, the benefits that PBGC guarantees may be 

less than the benefits a pension plan would otherwise pay. 

1. The Former Plan Administrator Erred in Calculating Your Benefit 

PBGC records establish that you had more than 30 years of Credited Service and were 

age 56 when the GC Plan terminated on September 30, 2003, which is also the date when Golden 

Casting ceased business operations. Before PBGC took over responsibility for the Plan, you 

applied for a benefit with Golden Casting, who was the former Plan Administrator. On a GC 

Plan form that is dated April 7, 2004, you and your wife waived the GC Plan's Joint and 

Survivor Annuity benefit. Golden Casting further completed the paperwork for you to receive a 

monthly benefit of $298.51 starting on 2004. You have received this $298.51 monthly 

arnount continuously since March 1,2004. 

The records PBGC obtained from Golden Casting contain a one-page document titled 

"Golden Castings Corporation Pension Calculation," which we are providing as Enclosure 2. 

This docunient shows that Golden Casting calculated your monthly benefit as $298.51 before the 

reduction for the GC Plan's Qualified Pre-Retirement Survivor Annuity ("QPSA"). The 

document also shows that, after the deduction for the QPSA, your monthly benefit is $277.61. It 

is unclear why the GC Plan paid you the $298.51 amount, rather than $277.61. The GC Plan 

document requires a reduction for the QPSA unless QPSA coverage is waived by the participant. 

We found no document indicating that you waived the QPSA. 

Your GC Plan calculation form shows that your type of benefit is Early Retirement. 

Also, in calculating your benefit, Golden Casting used an Early Retirement factor 0.55 to take 

into account that you were age 57 and 6 months (rather than age 65) when you started your 

benefit. This early retirement factor of 0.55 is the correct reduction, as provided under section 

3.03(a)(2) of the GC Plan Document, for an early retirement benefit starting at age 57 and 6 

months. . 

Unfortunately, Golden Casting made an error, which had a substantial effect, in 

calculating the Textron offset to your· benefit. The normal retirement amount that Golden 

. Casting used for the Textron offset ($450.00) is close to the actual amount of your Golden 

Operations Plan benefit as calculated by Textron ($456.60). Golden Casting, however, used an 

incOl:rect calculation method in adjusting the $450.00 Textron amount for your early retirement 

date. In effect, the Textron offset decreased your benefit by only $136.12 as of your early 

retirement date ( _ ,2004). If the Textron offset had been correctly calculated, the reduction 

to your benefit as a result of the $450.00 Textron offset would have been $247.50. 

4 
based on your actual retirement date of 2004 and is payable in the SLA form. We 

decided that your appeal provides no basis to change that amount. 

2. Calculation of Your PBGC Benefit 

PBGC correctly used a benefit rate of $23.50 in calculating your guaranteed beriefit. 

Although the GC Plan increased the benefit rate to' $24.00 for participants who terminated 

employment after December 14, 2002, PBGC is unable to guarantee the increase to $24.00 

because the increase occurred less than one year before the GC Plan terminated. 4 

The records PBGC obtained from Golden Casting show that you had 35.9 years of 

Credited Service' based on your employment with both Golden Casting and Golden Operations. 

Thus, based on Section 3.01 of the GC Plan Document, your guaranteed benefit at Normal 

Retirement and before the Textron offset is $843.65 [$23.50 x 35.9 = $843.65]. This is the 

amount PBGC calculated, which the Appeals Board did not change. 

In its benefit calculations, PBGC applied an offset of $456.60 for your Textron benefit. 

Documents the Appeals Board obtained from Textron (Enclosure 3) also show that your Textron 

benefit amount is $456.60. 

Thus, your guaranteed GC Plan benefit after the Textron offset is $387.05 [$843.65 -

$456.60 = $387.05]. Next, based on the GC Plan's terms, your $387.05 benefit amount is 

multiplied by 0.55 to take into account that your benefits began at age 57 and 6 months (rather 

than at age 65, your normal retirement date). Thus, after the early retirement adjustment, your 

guaranteed GS Plan benefit is $212.87 [$387.05 x 0.55.= $212.87]. 

Additionally, PBGC must adjust your benefit for the GC Plan's Qualified Pre-Retirement 

Survivor Annuity ("QPSA"). . Consistent with the GC Plan's terms, your benefit amount is 

multiplied by 0.99 to take into account the QPSA. Thus, your guaranteed GC Plan benefit at 

your actual retirement date in the SLA form is $210.75 [$212.87 x 0.99 = $210.75]. 

Finally, as provided in section 4022(c) of ERISA, PBGC will pay a portion of your GC 

Plan benefits that are not guaranteed by PBGC. The amount PBGC may pay under ERISA 

section 4022(c) reflects PBGC's recoveries on its legal claims against pension plans sponsors. In 

your case, the section 4022( c) amount ($.42) increases your monthly PBGC benefit at Normal 

Retirement to $211.17 in the SLA fo~. 

The Benefit Statement PBGC provided with its revised determination shows that, as of 

your 2004 "Actual Retirement Date," you are entitled to a benefit of $211.17 payable as a 

SLA. The Appeals Board found no basis to change that amount. 

4 See 29 U.S.C; § 4022(b)(1), (7) and 29 C.F.R. § 4022.25, which describe the limitation to PBGC's guarantee that 

is referred to as the "Phase-in Rule." 

5 
3. Your Contention That You Could Have Received a Much Larger Benefit at Age 58 

In your appeal, you express a belief that your benefit would have been much larger if you 

had waited until age 58 to start receiving payments, rather than beginning your payments at age 

57 and 6 months. This is based on your apparent understanding that a participant with 30 or 

more years of service could start receiving a benefit at age 58 that would not be reduced for early 

retirement. You request that PBGC continue to pay you $298.51 because the "only mistake" you 

made was starting your benefits before age 58. 

As is explained below, however, the Appeals Board decided that your benefit would be 

reduced for early retirement even if your payments had begun at age 58. 

a. The Critical Question Concerning the Right to an Unreduced Benefit at Age 58 

. As stated above under "Plan Provisions," section 1.29 of the GC Plan Document states: 

"Normal Retirement Date" shall mean the Participant's 65th birthday or the Participant's 58th 

birthday, so long as he has completed 30 years of Credited Service, if earlier." As is discussed 

below, whether or not you would have been entitled to an unreduced benefit starting at age 58 

depends upon which of the following two interpretations of the GC Plan's 30-year benefit 

provision is correct: 

Interpretation 1: a GC Plan participant with 30 years of Credited Service cannot 

start receiving an unreduced benefit before age 65 unless he or she terminates 

employment after attaining age 58; or 

Interp;etation 2: a GC Plan participant with 30 years of Credit~d Service could 

terminate employment before age 58 and (after deciding to delay his benefits) 

. apply for and receive an unreduced benefit starting at age 58. 

PBGC's November 7,2008 determination is based on Interpretation 1, while your appeal asserts 

you could have qualified for an unreduced benefit based on Interpretation 2. 

The interpretation of the GC Plan's 30-year benefit provision is crucial to resolving this 

issue because, under ERISA, PBGC's guarantee is limited to benefits that are "nonforfeitable" as 

of the pension plan'S termination date ("DOPT,,).5 This means that, for PBGC to guarantee a 

5 ERISA defines a "nonforfeitable benefit" as: 

a benefit for which a participant has satisfied the conditions for entitlement under the plan or the 

requirements of . . . [ERISA] (other than submission of a formal application, retirement, 

completion of a required waiting period, or death in the case of a benefit which returns all or a 

portion of a participant's accumulated mandatory employee contributions upon the participant's 

death). . 

ERISA § 4001(a)(8). See also 29 Code of Federal Regulations ("CFR") § 4001.2 (definition of "nonforfeitable 

benefit"). . . 

PBGC regulations further provide that a guaranteed benefit, among other conditions, must be nonforfeitable as of 

the plan's termination date. 29 CFR § 4022.3. Additionally, 29 CFR § 4022.4(a)(3) provides that "in the case of a 

6 
particular type of benefit under a pension plan, the participant must meet the conditions for that 

type of benefit as of DOPT. Accordingly, if Interpretation 1 applies, PBGC cannot guarantee an 

unreduced benefit starting at age 58 because you did not, and could not, meet the condition at 

DOPT of terminating Golden Casting employment at age 58 or later. 6 . 

ERISA and PBGC regulations, however, permit a benefit to be guaranteed if the only 

condition not satisfied at DOPT is a "required waiting period." See ERISA section 4001(a)(8), 

which is quoted in footnote 5. Thus, under Interpretation 2, PBGC . would guarantee an 

unreduced 30-year Benefit for you because, as ofDOPT, the only condition you had.not satisfied 

would be the requirement to wait until age 58 before starting your unreduced benefit payments. 

For the reasons discussed below, the Appeals Board decided that Interpretation 1 (rather 

than Interpretation 2) is correct, and thus PB9C in your case cannot guarantee an unreduced 30-

year benefit. 

b. Analysis of the GC Plan's 30-Year Benefit Provision 

Based onits experience with terminated pension plans, the Appeals Board observes that it 

is fairly common for a pension plan to offer an immediate, unreduced benefit to participants who 

have earned 30 or more years of service. In some plans, there is no age requirement, and thus an 

immediate benefit is paid regardless of the participant's age when he or she terminates 

employment with 30 or more years of service. In other plans, however, the participant must 

satisfy an age requirement in addition to earning 30 years service, or the participant's age and 

service (when added together) must exceed.a certain specified amount. 

Usually, when the 30-year benefit provision includes an age requirement, the participant 

must meet both the service and age requirement before terminating employment to qualify for an 

unreduced benefit. Interpretation 1 ( discussed above) is an example of such a benefit provision. 

There is nothing to prevent a pension plan, however, from providing a 30-year benefit under 

which the participant need only meet the service requirement before terminating employment. 

The participant then could meet the age requirement and start an unreduced benefit at a later 

date. Interpretation 2 is an example of this second type of benefit provision. 

While the second type of a 30-year benefit is not common, some pension plans have 

structured benefits this way. Thus, it is necessary to examine carefully the pension plan's written 

provisions to determine the requirements for the benefit. 

As stated above, section 1.29 of the GC Plan Document states that the participant's 

Normal Retirement Date is "the Participant's 65th birthday or the Participant's 58th birthday, so 

long as he has completed 30 years of Credited Service, if earlier." This is the only provision in 

the GC Plan Document that addresses the entitlement to a GC Plan benefit based on 30 years of 

Credited Service. 

6 PBGC regulations (which implement the above-discussed ERISA's requirements) provide that PBGC cannot 

consider the service that you earned, or could have earned, after the pension plan's termination date for purposes of 

determining your entitlement to a guaranteed benefit. See 29 C.F.R. § 4022.3 and § 4022.4(a)(3). 

7 
the GC Plan Document that addresses the entitlement to a GC Plan benefit based on 30 years of 

Credited Service. 

The definition of "Nomal Retirement Date" in section 1.29 does not specifically link 

eligibility for an unreduced 30-year benefit to the participant's age when he or she terminates 

employment. On the other hand, this definition could be intended to refer to the date when a 

participant ordinarily· would become entitled to an immediate unreduced benefit upon 

termination of employment.7 Under this reading, a vested participan~ would not attain his 

Normal Retirement Date unless he terminated employment at either (1) age 65, or (2) at an age 

between age 58 and age 65 with at least 30 years of Credited Service. Thus, we concluded that 

the language in Section 1.29 does not conclusively establish whether Interpretation 1 or 

Interpretation 2 is correct. 

Additionally, if the drafters of the GC Plan Document had intended that a participant with 

30 years of Credited Service could terminate employment before age 58 and then start an 

unreduced benefit at age 58, we would expect that they would also provide the participant with 

an immediate early retirement benefit that is reduced for each month before age 58. The GC 

Plan, however, clearly provides that the reduction for any non-disability benefit that starts before 

age 58 is reduced from age 65. See GC Plan Document Sections 3.03 and 3.06. We concluded 

that it ~s unlikely that the drafters of the GC Plan Document intended to structure benefits in this 

way. This, in turn, leads us to question whether Interpretation 2 reflects the drafter's intent. 

In an attempt to clarify the meaning of the GC Plan Document, we sought a copy of the 

GC Plan's Summary Plan Description ("SPD"), which possibly would contain an explanation of 

the 30-year benefit provision. We were unable to locate an SPD, however, from the Department 

of Labor or from other sources. If you (or another person) provide us with a SPD, we would 

consider reopening your appeal, if the SPD would provide a basis for changing our decision. 

We also examined the language of the GC Plan's, Collective Bargaining Agreements 

("CBAs"). We obtained a copy of the 1992-1995 CBA, and another appellant provided a page 

from an earlier CBA.8 Both CBAs, in Article 14 (titled "Pension Plan"), contain the following 

identical language: 

Employees with ten (10) years ormore of credited service who are fifty (50) years 

of attained age may retire early (with actuarial reduction). Employees with thirty 

7 As stated above under "Background," the GC Plan Document provides a right to an immediate umeduced benefit 

upon employment termination in only two instances - upon the participant's attainment of his ''Normal Retirement 

Date" or his "Disability Retirement Date." On a third date that is defmed in the GC Plan Document - the "Early 

Retirement Date" - a participant is entitled upon employment termination to an irmnediate benefit reduced for early 

commencement. Thus, all three "dates;' can be read as referring to when a participant is entitled to an immediate 

benefit upon termination of employment. . 

8 IIi Enclosure 4, we provide the CBA page another appellant provided with his appeal. IIi Enclosure 5, we provide 

relevant pages from the 1992-1995 CBA. . 

I 

8 
(30) years of credited service and age fifty-eight (58) or above may retire early 

with full pension benefits (no actuarial reduction). 

The Appeals Board concluded that this CBA provlSlon i$ unclear as to whether 

Interpretation 1 or Interpretation 2 is correct. First, it is unclear whether the word "employees" 

in the CBA applies only to active employees, or whether it also applies to participants who had 

. terminated employment with pension rights. Also, the term "retire early" is ambiguous, since it 

could apply either to (1) when the participant terminates employment with the right to an 

immediate pension benefit, or (2) to a date (possibly after termination of employment) when the 

participant elects to begin receiving a pension benefit. Thus, the CBA could be read as requiring 

a participant to retire from employment at age 58 (or above) with 30 years credited service to 

qualify for an unreduced benefit, which would be consistent with Interpretation 1. It also could 

be read as allowing a participant with 30 years of credited service to qualify for an unreduced 

pension starting at age 58, which would be consistent with Interpretation 2. 

Finally, the Appeals Board looked at the provisions of the formal document for the 

Golden Operations Plan as restated effective July 14, 1989 ("GO Plan Document,,).9 As 

discussed above, the Golden Operations Plan: (1) covers pension benefit before the 1990 sale of 

the foundry, and (2) has a benefit structure that basically is the same as the GC Plan. Moreover, 

the "Purchase and Sale Agreement" between Textron and Golden Casting required the creation 

of a "substantially identical" plan (see Enclosure 7).10 This documents states: 

(c) Golden Hourly Plan; Adoption of an Hourly Plan. Effective from and after 

the Closing Date, Purchaser shall adopt a defined benefit pension plan (the "New 

Plan") which is substantially identical to the current Golden Operations Hourly· 

Pension Plan (the "Old Plan"), except that Purchaser shall bethe sponsor of the 

New Plan and that benefits due under the New Plan shall be offset by the 

corresponding benefits due under the Old Plan. The New Plan shall credit all 

service of participants under the Old Plan for all purposes under the New Plan. 

The GO Plan Document, in contrast to GC Plan Document, clearly provides that a 

participant must terminate employment at age 58 or later to qualify for an unreduced benefit 

based on 30 or more years of Credited Service. 11 This is evident from Article IV, Section 1 of 

the GO Plan Document, which states: 

Normal Retirement. An Employee who attains age 65 or who completes 

30 years of Credited Service and attains age 58, if earlier, while employed by the 

Employer shall have a non-forfeitable right to a normal Retirement Benefit. 

9 In Enclosure 6, we provide relevant pages from the GO Plan Document. 

\0 The Appeals Board obtained Enclosure 7, which is the section of the "Purchase and Sale Agreement:' that relates 

to pension obligations, from Textron. 

11 The SPD for the Golden Operations Plan dated January 1, 1987 (excerpts provided in Enclosure 8) similarly is 

clear on this point, sinceit states: ''Normal retirement benefits are payable if your employment with the Textron 

Companies ends at or after the earlier of (i) your sixty-fifth birthday or (ii) at age 58 and the completion of 30 years 

of Credited Service. This is your normal retirement age under the plan." 

9 
Furthennore, under the GO Plan Document, a vested participant who does not qualify for either 

an age-58 Nonnal Retirement benefit or a disability benefit receives either a benefit that is 

unreduced starting at age 65, or that is reduced by Yz of 1% per month for each month before age 

65. Thus, the GO Plan Document's provisions clearly are consistent with Interpretation 1, rather 

than Interpretation 2. 

Since the GC Plan, as required under the Purchase and Sale Agreement, mirrors the 

provisions of the Golden Operations Plan, the Appeals Board found it likely that the drafters of 

the GC Plan Document intended that the substantive requirements for the 30-year benefit would 

be same under GC Plan as under the Golden Operations Plan. Indeed, if a change had been , 

intended, we would expect that there would be a document that explicitly explained the change, 

or that the change would be evident in plan practice. We have found no explanation of a change, 

. nor (as discussed below) does plan practice indicate that a change had occurred. Thus, we 

concluded that the most likely explanation is that the drafters of GC Plan Document, in writing 

the provision titled "Nonnal Retirement Date," unintentionally modified· the GO Plan 

Document's language in a way that created an ambiguity concemingthe requirements for the 30-

year benefit. 

c. The GC Plan's Practice 

When pension plan provisions are ambiguous, the Appeals Board often will examine the 

plan's practice, which may provide evidence of how the plan's provisions have been interPreted. 

The Board therefore searched PBGC's records to identify any GC Plan participant who had 30 or 

more years of Credited Service and who tenninated employment before age 58. We found the 

following infonnation concerning three, individuals who had tenninated employment before the 

GC Plan's tennination date ("DOPT"): 

• For one participant, who retired one month before DOPT, the fonner Plan 

administrator indicated on the GC Plan's "Pension Calculation" fonn that he qualified 

for "Early" retirement, rather than for "58-30" retirement. The fonner Plan 

administrator also had calculated and paid an early retirement benefit that was reduced ' 

from age 65; 

• Another participant tenninated employment five months before DOPT with more than 

30 years service. He had not yet attained age 58 and was not in pay status at DOPT. 

Near the time he tenninated employment, the GC Plan had provided him with a 

"Statement of Benefits" that showed: (1) his nonnal retirement date is at age 65; and 

(2) he could start benefits at a reduced amount anytime after age 50. There is nothing 

in his records to indicate that the fonner Plan administrator had considered this 

participant entitled to an unreduced benefit starting at age 58; and 

• A third participant had tenninated employment in 2000 with more than 30 years 

service, but at DOPT he had not yet attained age 58 and was not in pay status. 

Infonnation in the records PBGC obtained from Golden Casting show that this 

participant is listed in the GC Plan's 2002 actuarial valuation as "LIFE DEFERRED" 

and that his Benefit Commencement Date is at age 65. There is nothing in the records 

10 
participant is listed in the GC Plan's 2002 actuarial valuation as "LIFE DEFERRED" 

and that his Benefit Commencement Date is at age 65. There is nothing in the records 

to indicate that the former Plan administrator had considered this participant to be 

entitled to an unreduced benefit starting at age 58. 

Additionally, PBGC records contain several benefit calculation worksheets completed by 

the fOllller Plan administrator for participants who were actively employed at DOPT. These 

forms are similar to the one fo~ the first participant discussed above. On those forms, 

participants with 30 or more years Credited Service and who were under age 58 had benefits 

calculated as "Early" retirees, rather than as "58-30" retirees. You are one of the participants 

with such a form, which is the document in Enclosure 2. 

The Appeals Board did not accord great weight to the above-described plan practice, 

which occurred over a limited time period that was long after the applicable GC Plan provisions 

were drafted. Nevertheless, we concluded that this practice is consistent with Interpretation 1, 

rather than Interpretation 2. 

Based on our analysis of relevant pension plan documents and of the GC Plan's practice, 

the Appeals Board therefore decided that Interpretation 1 (rather than Interpretation 2) applies to 

the GC Plan's participants. Accordingly, even if PBGC were to allow you to change your 

benefit start date to age 58, your guaranteed benefit amount still would contain a reduction for 

early retirement. 

4. Other Matters Raised in Your Appeal 

Your appeal points out that PBGC, after receiving your "Payee Information Form," 

informed you in April 2005 that "no further action is required at this time." You consider it 

unfair that PBGC did not notify you until 2009 that your benefits would be reduced. 

As with all other trusteed plans, PBGC had to collect and audit the data and records it 

needed to determine for all Plan participants the benefits it can legally pay under the Plan. This 

is often a complex and time-consuming task. To minimize hardship on participants, PBGC 

continue<;l to pay you, and other retirees of the Plan, benefit amounts on an estimated basis until 

PBGC could complete its review and determine the benefits payable under ERISA and PBGC 

regulations. 

It is unfortunate that the former Plan administrator had put you into pay status with an 

incorrectly-calculated benefit amount. It also is regrettable that PBGC was unable to notify you 

of the correct amount of your PBGC benefits until 2009. There is nothing in PBGC's regulations 

or policies, however, that allows for relief in your situation, which involves PBGC's revision of 

an estimated benefit amount after PBGC discovers an error by the former Plan administrator. 

You also expressed concern about how a reduction in your monthly amount would cause 

hardship. You detailed how your battles with cancer have impaired your health. While the 

Appeals Board is sympathetic to your situation, financial hardship is not a basis upon which the 

Board may grant relief. 

11 
5. Recoupment of Overpayments 

PBGC's determination included a statement showing that you were overpaid $4,803.70 

as of May 1, 2009. The $4,803.70 amount does not include the additional amounts you have 

been overpaid while your appeal has been pending with the Appeals Board. Even though the 

$4,803.70 overpayment amount has increased, PBGC will limit the monthly benefit reduction for 

the repayment of your overpayments to 10% of the correct benefit amount. . 

Under law and regulation, PBGC must "recoup" benefit overpayments by reducing 

participants' future guaranteed benefit payments.12 While PBGC cannot pay you more than his 

guaranteed benefit amount, PBGC's method of recoupment is advantageous because: 

• PBGC is recouping only by reducing future benefit payments and is not demanding 

immediate repayment. 

• PBGC generally limits its reductions to 10% for recoupment, and is doing so here. 

• PBGC is not charging interest on overpayment balances. 

• PBGC will not seek to collect any remaining overpayment balance from your estate. 

Decision 

Having applied the law, regulations, and Plan provisions to the facts of your case, the 

Appeals Board has denied your appeal. This is PBGC's final action in your case and you may, if 

you wish, seek court review of this decision. If you need other information from PBGC, please 

call the Customer Contact Center at 1-800-400-7242. 

Charles W. Vernon 

Chair, Appeals Board 

(8) Enclosures 

1) Excerpts from the 10/111997 Golden Casting Corporation Hourly Pension Plan ( 16 pages) 

2) Golden Casting Plan benefit calculation by the former Plan administrator (1 page) 

3) Golden Operations Participant information obtained from Textron (3 pages) 

4) Excerpt from the Golden Casting Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) another 

appellant provided in his appeal (1 page) 

5) Excerpts from the 1992-1995 Golden·Casting CBA (5 pages) 

6) Excerpts from the 1989 Golden Operations Hourly Pension Plan (7 pages) 

7) Excerpts from the Purchase and Sale Agreement ( 4 pages) 

8) Excerpts from Golden Operations Plan SPD dated 111187(4 pages) 

12 See 29 C.F.R. sections 4022.81 and 4022.82(a)(2)(i). 

12