Joseph V. Fisher v. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation

Summary

The D.C. Circuit held that the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) properly denied a lump-sum pension payment under 29 C.F.R. § 4044.3(b), which prohibits distributions made "in anticipation of plan termination." The court found the regulation to be a permissible construction of ERISA under Chevron step two, rejecting the argument that ERISA's post-notice-of-intent-to-terminate annuity requirement precluded PBGC from regulating pre-notice lump-sum distributions. The court also determined that PBGC's 2016 decision on remand was a new agency action, not an impermissible post hoc rationalization, and that PBGC's application of the regulation's factors was not arbitrary or capricious.

Holdings

1. The district court properly remanded because the 2011 decision was inadequately explained, and the 2016 Remand Decision was a new agency action, not a post hoc rationalization, because PBGC chose to deal with the problem afresh.
2. Section 4044.4(b) is a permissible construction of ERISA under Chevron step two because ERISA is silent on pre-NOIT lump-sum distributions, and the regulation promotes ERISA's purpose by preventing abuse during the period when plan termination is anticipated.
3. PBGC's application was not arbitrary and capricious because it reasonably considered the facts and circumstances, including the deteriorating funding status, Fisher's unique benefit increase, and the fact that not all factors need to be satisfied.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court erred in remanding to PBGC, and whether the 2016 Remand Decision is an impermissible post hoc rationalization.
2. Whether 29 C.F.R. § 4044.4(b) is consistent with ERISA under Chevron review.
3. Whether PBGC's application of § 4044.4(b) to Fisher's lump-sum request was arbitrary and capricious.

Disposition

affirmed