This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-10-181T 
entitled 'Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation: Workers and Retirees 
Experience Delays and Uncertainty when Underfunded Plans Are 
Terminated' which was released on October 29, 2009. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part 
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every 
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of 
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text 
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the 
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided 
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed 
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic 
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail 
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this 
document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately. 

Testimony: 

Before the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, 

U.S. Senate: 

United States Government Accountability Office: 

GAO: 

For Release on Delivery Expected at 10:00 a.m. EDT: 

Thursday, October 29, 2009: 

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation: 

Workers and Retirees Experience Delays and Uncertainty when Underfunded 
Plans Are Terminated: 

Statement of Barbara D. Bovbjerg, Director: 

Education, Workforce, and Income Security: 

PBGC: 

GAO-10-181T: 

GAO Highlights: 

Highlights of [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-10-
181T], a testimony before the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 
and Pensions, U.S. Senate. 

Why GAO Did This Study: 

Under the single-employer insurance program, the Pension Benefit 
Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) may become the trustee of underfunded plans 
that are terminated and assume responsibility for paying benefits to 
participants as they become due, up to certain legal limits. From its 
inception in 1974 through the end of fiscal year 2008, PBGC has 
terminated and trusteed a total of 3,860 single-employer plans covering 
some 1.2 million workers and retirees. Since 2008, the economic 
downturn has brought a new influx of pension plan terminations to PBGC, 
and more are expected to follow. 

The committee asked GAO to discuss our recent work on PBGC. 
Specifically, this testimony describes: (1) PBGC’s process for 
determining the a; and (2) PBGC’s recoupment process when the estimated 
benefit provided is too high and a retiree receives an overpayment that 
must be repaid. 

To address these objectives, GAO relied primarily on a recent report 
titled Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation: More Strategic Approach 
Needed for Processing Complex Plans Prone to Delays and Overpayments 
(GAO-09-716, Aug. 2009). In that report, GAO made numerous 
recommendations. PBGC generally agreed and is taking steps to address 
the concerns raised. No new recommendations are being made in this 
testimony. 

What GAO Found: 

Most participants must wait about 3 years for PBGC to complete the 
benefit determination process and provide their finalized benefit 
amounts, but the vast majority are not affected by overpayments or the 
recoupment process (see figure). Nevertheless, long delays and 
uncertainty over final benefit amounts make it difficult for workers to 
plan for retirement, and for retirees who may have come to depend on a 
certain level of monthly income. 

Figure: PBGC Processing Time: 

[Refer to PDF for image: pie graph] 

Time elapsed from trusteeship...until issuance of benefit determination 
letter: 

0 years(minimum[A])-9.2 years(maximum): Average 2.5 years.

Determinations completed, no recoupment needed: 76%; 
Determinations pending: 22%; 
Determinations competed with recoupment: 2%. 

Until February 2009, for cases still pending: 

4 months(minimum)-9.3 years(maximum): Average 3.3 years.

During the benefit determination process, key points of contact with 
workers and retirees include: 

Source: GAO analysis of PBGC data on the participants in plans 
terminated and trusted, fiscal years 2000-2008. 

[A] In two atypical cases, PBGC made benefit determinations prior to 
trusteeship. 

[End of figure] 

* Initial notification: PBGC’s first communication with participants is 
generally a letter informing them that their pension plan has been 
terminated and that PBGC has become the plan trustee. 

* Estimated benefits: For retirees, PBGC continues payments after plan 
termination, but adjusts the amounts to reflect limits set by law. 
These payments are based on estimates, so overpayments can occur. 

* Finalized benefit amounts: Once the benefit determination process is 
complete, PBGC notifies each participant of the final benefit amount 
through a “benefit determination letter.” 

A small percentage of participants have incurred overpayments to be 
repaid through the recoupment process. But for those affected, the news 
can still come as a shock, especially when several years have elapsed 
since their benefits were reduced to comply with legal limits. Their 
frustration may be compounded if they cannot understand the 
explanations provided by PBGC. As the influx of large, complex plan 
terminations continues, improvements in PBGC’s processes are urgently 
needed. 

View [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/ GAO-10-181T] or key 
components.
For more information, contact Barbara Bovbjerg at (202) 512-7215 or 
bovbjergb@gao.gov. 

[End of section] 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: I am pleased to be here 
today to present information about what happens when underfunded 
pension plans are terminated and trusteed by the Pension Benefit 
Guaranty Corporation (PBGC). Under PBGC's single-employer insurance 
program,[Footnote 1] if a company's defined benefit pension plan has 
inadequate assets to pay all promised benefits, plan sponsors meeting 
certain criteria may voluntarily terminate the plan through a 
"distress" termination, or PBGC may decide to terminate the plan 
involuntarily to protect the plan's assets. If the plan's assets are 
insufficient to pay benefits currently due, then PBGC must terminate 
the plan. In all these situations, PBGC generally becomes the trustee 
of the plan and assumes responsibility for paying benefits to the 
participants, up to certain legal limits.[Footnote 2] From its 
inception in 1974 through the end of fiscal year 2008, PBGC terminated 
and trusteed a total of 3,860 single-employer plans covering some 1.2 
million workers and retirees. Since 2008, the economic downturn has 
brought a new influx of pension plan terminations to PBGC, and more are 
expected to follow. 

Today I will provide a description, from the workers' and retirees' 
perspective, of what happens when a plan is terminated and trusteed by 
PBGC. Specifically, I will describe (1) PBGC's process for determining 
the amount of benefits to be paid, and (2) PBGC's recoupment process 
when the estimated benefit provided is too high and a retiree receives 
an overpayment that must be repaid. This testimony is based primarily 
on a report we issued on August 17, 2009, titled Pension Benefit 
Guaranty Corporation: More Strategic Approach Needed for Processing 
Complex Plans Prone to Delays and Overpayments.[Footnote 3] In 
developing that report, we reviewed PBGC policies and procedures, 
analyzed automated data, and interviewed PBGC officials knowledgeable 
about various stages of the benefit determination process. We focused 
our study on participants of plans terminated and trusteed during 
fiscal years 2000 through 2008, and spoke with personnel from employee 
associations and advocacy groups involved in some of these plan 
terminations. We conducted this work between October 2008 and August 
2009, in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 
standards.[Footnote 4] 

Background: 

PBGC was created as a government corporation by the Employee Retirement 
Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA)[Footnote 5] to help protect the 
retirement income of U.S. workers with private-sector defined benefit 
plans by guaranteeing their benefits up to certain legal limits. PBGC 
receives no funds from general tax revenues. Operations are financed by 
insurance premiums set by Congress and paid by sponsors of defined 
benefit plans, recoveries from the companies formerly responsible for 
the plans, and investment income of assets from pension plans that PBGC 
trustees. Under current law, other than statutory authority to borrow 
up to $100 million from the Treasury Department,[Footnote 6] no 
substantial source of funds is available to PBGC if it runs out of 
money. In the event that PBGC were to exhaust all of its holdings, 
benefit payments would have to be drastically cut unless Congress were 
to take action to provide support.[Footnote 7] 

In 2003, GAO designated PBGC's single-employer program as high-risk, 
and PBGC has remained high-risk with each subsequent update, including 
our most recent update in 2009. This means that the program still needs 
urgent congressional attention and agency action. We specifically noted 
PBGC's prior-year net deficit, as well as the risk of the termination 
among large, underfunded pension plans, as reasons for the program's 
high-risk designation. Over the last 6 years or so, the assets and 
liabilities that PBGC accumulated from trusteeing plans have increased 
rapidly. This is largely due to the termination, typically through 
bankruptcies, of a number of very large, underfunded plan sponsors. 
Last May, PBGC reported that unaudited financial results through the 
second quarter of fiscal year 2009 showed its deficit tripling since 
the end of fiscal year 2008, from about $11 billion to about $33.5 
billion. Since then, the influx of large plan terminations has 
continued. For example, in August 2009, PBGC assumed responsibility for 
six Delphi pension plans, covering about 70,000 workers and retirees, 
and underfunded by a total of about $7.0 billion. PBGC estimated that 
it would be liable for about $6.7 billion of this underfunding. 

PBGC's Benefit Determination Process Generally Takes about 3 Years to 
Complete: 

Our review of plans terminated and trusteed between fiscal years 2000 
and 2008 found that PBGC completed most participants' benefit 
determinations in less than 3 years, but required more time--up to 9 
years--to process determinations for complex plans, plans with missing 
data, and plans with large numbers of participants. As some pension 
advocacy groups and union representatives have noted, long delays and 
uncertainty over final benefit amounts make it difficult for workers to 
plan for retirement, and especially for retirees who have come to 
depend on a certain level of monthly income. At the same time, the 
benefit determination process requires many steps to be complete. It 
requires gathering extensive data on plans and each individual's work 
and personnel history, and identifying who is eligible for benefits 
under the plan. This can be particularly complicated if the company or 
plan has a history of mergers, an elaborate structure, or missing data. 
It requires calculating each participant's benefit amount based on 
provisions that vary from plan to plan, applying the legal limits on 
guaranteed benefit amounts in each case, and valuing plan assets and 
liabilities to determine if some or all of the nonguaranteed benefit 
amount can still be paid. Also, the larger the plan, the heavier the 
workload for PBGC. While the average number of participants per plan is 
slightly fewer than 1,000, we found that some plans have many more-- 
nearly 93,000 in the case of Bethlehem Steel. PBGC's benefit 
determination process is illustrated in figure 1. The key points of 
contact with workers and retirees that occur during this process are 
described in detail below. 

Figure 1: PBGC's Benefit Determination Process: 

[Refer to PDF for image: text box: information on top pointing downward 
each level] 

Predetermination: 
* Monitor underfunded plans
* Work with plans that face distress terminations

Initial Trusteeship(Termination): 
* Obtain agreement on plan trusteeship
* Initial Notification: Notify participants and request information 
from retirees
* Estimated Benefits: Ensure retirees receive payments and estimated 
payments are reduced to reflect statutory limits; 

Audit: 

* Gather needed plan documents and participant data
* Define plan population; build and audit participant database
* Audit plan assets
* Determine employer liability; 

Benefit Valuation: 
* Calculate individual benefits, in accordance with statutory and 
regulatory requirements
* Determine PBGC’s overall benefit liability; 

Notification: 
* Determine if estimated benefits being paid retirees are correct and 
reconcile any differences: 

For underpaid benefits: PBGC provides payment (with interest); 
For overpaid benefits: PBGC takes steps to recoup the overpaid funds 
(but does not charge retiree interest)

* Finalized Benefit Amounts: Notify participants of final benefit 
amount by sending “benefit determination letter”
* Process participants’ appeals

Postvaluation Administration(Ongoing): 
* Process address changes and death notices
* As nonretired participants enter retirement, calculate benefit based 
on actual retirement and place participants in pay status
* Respond to participants’ requests regarding their benefits

Key point of contact with participants.

Source: GAO analysis of PBGC documents

[End of figure] 

Initial Notification: 

PBGC's first communication with participants is generally a letter 
informing them that their pension plan has been terminated and that 
PBGC has become the plan trustee.[Footnote 8] Shortly thereafter, this 
letter is generally followed by a more detailed letter with a packet of 
materials, including a DVD with an introduction to PBGC and answers to 
frequently-asked questions about how the benefit determination process 
works. PBGC officials refer to this as a "welcome" package. 
Additionally, for large plans likely to have many participants affected 
by the legal limits on guaranteed benefits, PBGC will hold on-site 
information sessions shortly after plan termination. PBGC also operates 
a customer service center with a toll-free number that participants can 
call if they have questions, provides a Web site for workers and 
retirees with detailed information about plans and benefits, and sends 
participants a newsletter with information about PBGC once or twice per 
year.[Footnote 9] 

Nearly all pension advocacy groups and union representatives with whom 
we spoke[Footnote 10] praised PBGC's efforts to hold information 
sessions with the larger plans. One union representative commended PBGC 
staff for going out into the field to talk with participants and answer 
questions even though participants are likely to be angry. Other union 
representatives commented that they have been impressed by PBGC's staff 
for staying at these sessions until they have answered every 
participant's questions. While these sessions are generally viewed as 
helpful, some pension rights advocates noted that the information 
presented is difficult for participants to understand and apply to 
their own situations. Comments about PBGC's customer service center and 
Web site were also mixed. 

Estimated Benefits: 

If the participant is already retired, or retires before the benefit 
determination process is complete, PBGC makes payments to the retiree 
based on an estimate of what the final benefit amount will be. 
According to PBGC, most participants of terminated plans are entitled 
to receive the full amount of benefits they earned under their plans. 
In such cases, the calculation of an estimated benefit is 
straightforward. However, some participants may have their benefits 
reduced to comply with certain limits, specified under ERISA and 
related regulations. These limits include the phase-in limit, the 
"accrued-at-normal" limit, and the maximum limit (see fig. 2). In these 
cases, the calculation of an estimated benefit is more complicated. 
PBGC does not systematically track the number of participants affected 
by the limits on guaranteed benefits or how much these l; however, PBGC 
has conducted two studies on the impact of these limits in a sample of 
large plans. The first study, issued in 1999, found 5.5 percent of 
participants; and the second study, issued in 2008, found that 15.9 
percent were affected.[Footnote 11] 

Figure 2: Determining If a Participant's Guaranteed Benefit Is Subject 
to Legal Limits: 

[Refer to PDF for image: flowchart] 

Is the full amount of my benefit guaranteed? 

Was your benefit increased in the last 5 years? 

Yes: 

The “phase-in” limit will likely reduce your guaranteed benefit.

The portion of a benefit increase that is guaranteed is reduced for 
each year it was not in effect during the last 5 years. 

Summary of legal provisions: 

Phase-in limit: The guaranteed benefit cannot include any benefit 
increase implemented through a plan amendment that was made within 1 
year of the date of the plan termination. For benefit improvements that 
became effective more than1 year but less than 5 years prior to the 
plan’s termination, the guaranteed amount is the larger of 20 percent 
of the benefit increase or $20 per month of the increase for each full 
year the increase was in effect. 29 U.S.C. § 1322(b)(1)and (7); 29 
C.F.R. § 4022.25 (2009) 

No: 

Did you receive any supplemental benefits? 

Yes: 

The “accrued-at-normal”limit will likely reduce your guaranteed 
benefit. 

Supplemental benefits that exceed the retirement benefit provided at 
normal retirement age are not guaranteed. 

Summary of legal provisions: 

Accrued-at-normal” limit: The monthly guaranteed benefit cannot be 
greater than the monthly benefit provided as a straight-life annuity 
(that is, a periodic payment for the life of the retiree, with no 
additional payments to survivors) available at the plan’s normal 
retirement age. The portion of any combined early retirement benefit 
and supplemental benefit that exceeds the normal retirement age 
straight life annuity is eliminated by this provision. 29 C.F.R. § 
4022.21 (2009).

No: 

Is your benefit amount greater than the maximum set by law for your age 
at retirement and type of benefit? 

Yes: 

The “maximum”limit will likely reduce your guaranteed benefit.

The level of guaranteed benefits is limited by an amount set by law.It 
is also lower for those retiring before age 65 or those with a survivor 
benefit. 

Summary of legal provisions: 

Maximum limit: The guaranteed benefit cannot exceed the statutory 
maximum, adjusted annually, at the time the plan terminates. In 2009, 
the maximum is $54,000 per year for a person retiring at age 65 and 
with no survivor benefit (that is, a single-life annuity). The maximum 
is lower for those retiring under age 65 or with a survivor benefit. 29 
U.S.C. § 1322(b)(3); and 29 C.F.R.§ 4022.23 (2009).

No: 

Your benefit is likely to be fully guaranteed. 

Source: GAO analysis od ERISA, PBGC's implementing regulations and 
related documents. 

[End of figure] 

Following the termination of their plans, those who are already retired 
may continue to receive their same plan benefit amount as an estimated 
benefit for several months--or even years--before the estimate is 
adjusted to reflect the legal limits on guaranteed benefits. When plans 
are terminated at the sponsor's request as distress terminations, the 
sponsors are required to impose these limits themselves so that 
participants' benefits are reduced as of the date of termination. 
However, when plans are terminated involuntarily, there can sometimes 
be lengthy delays before PBGC reduces estimated benefits to reflect 
these limits. Not only must PBGC estimate the possible impact of 
applying the guarantee limits to the participant's benefit, PBGC must 
also estimate whether there might be sufficient plan assets or 
recoveries of company assets to pay all or part of the nonguaranteed 
portion of the participant's benefit.[Footnote 12] According to PBGC 
officials, when it is unclear how much a plan's assets or recoveries 
will be able to contribute toward the nonguaranteed portion of a 
retiree's benefit, it can be difficult to calculate an accurate benefit 
amount until the benefit determination process is complete. We found 
cases where estimated benefits were adjusted within 9 months of 
termination, while in other cases, more than 6 years elapsed before 
estimated benefits were adjusted. 

Finalized Benefit Amounts: 

Once the benefit determination process is complete, PBGC notifies each 
participant of the final benefit amount with a "benefit determination 
letter." From the time of its initial contact with plan participants 
until the benefit determination process is complete, PBGC generally 
does not communicate with participants. In some cases, this period can 
stretch into years.[Footnote 13] Some of the pension advocacy groups 
and union representatives we spoke with said that these long periods 
without communication are problematic for participants for several 
reasons. For example, retirees whose benefits are subject to the 
guarantee limits but who continue to receive their higher plan-level 
benefits for long periods of time may come to depend on these higher 
amounts and believe that the this payment level is permanent. They are 
surprised when--years later--their benefits are suddenly reduced. Even 
for participants who are not yet receiving benefits, the lack of 
communication about the likely amount of their final benefits makes it 
difficult to plan for retirement. 

In addition, PBGC's benefit determination letters generally provide 
only limited explanations for why the amount may be different from the 
amount provided under their plan. In complex plans, when benefit 
calculations are complicated, the letters often do not adequately 
explain why benefits are being reduced. Although benefit statements are 
generally attached, the logic and math involved can be difficult even 
for pension experts. Some pension advocates and union representatives 
we spoke with said that they found the explanations in these letters to 
be too vague and generic, and that the letters did not provide enough 
information specific to the individual's circumstances to be helpful. 
At the same time, they were generally sympathetic to the difficulty of 
communicating such complicated information. As one advocate 
acknowledged, for the letters to be accurate,; this may just be "the 
nature of the beast." 

PBGC officials have taken steps to shorten the benefit determination 
process, although their initiatives have focused on ways to expedite 
processing of straightforward cases instead of the more difficult cases 
prone to delays. PBGC has also developed more than 500 letter formats-
-in both English and Spanish--to address the myriad of situations that 
may arise in the benefit determination process. Nevertheless, PBGC 
officials acknowledged that their standard letter formats may not 
always meet the needs of participants, especially those with complex 
plans and complicated benefit calculations. PBGC recently undertook a 
project to review and update their letters to try to better meet 
participant needs. 

PBGC's Recoupment Process Affects Only a Small Percentage of Terminated 
Plan Participants: 

The vast majority of participants in terminated plans are not affected 
by overpayments or PBGC's recoupment process. Overpayments generally 
occur when a retiree receives estimated benefits while PBGC is in the 
process of making benefit determinations and the final benefit amount 
is less than the estimated benefit amount. However, we found that of 
the 1,057,272 participants in plans terminated and trusteed during 
fiscal years 2000 through 2008, more than half were not yet retired 
and, therefore, did not receive estimated benefits before the benefit 
determination process was complete. Moreover, for most who were 
retired, the estimated benefit amount received did not change when 
finalized. As shown in figure 3, of the 6.5 percent with benefits that 
did change when finalized, about half received a benefit amount that 
was greater, and half received a benefit amount that was less (about 3 
percent of total participants in these plans, overall). In cases with a 
final benefit greater than the estimated amount, retirees are likely 
due a backpayment for having been underpaid, which PBGC repays in a 
lump sum, with interest. In cases with a final benefit that is less, 
the retirees are likely to have received an overpayment, which they 
then must repay to PBGC, with no added interest. 

Figure 3: Proportion of Participants with Estimated Benefits that 
Differ from Final Benefits: 

[Refer to PDF for image: Pie graph] 

No estimated benefit: 54.9%; 
No change: 28.4%; 
Final benefit pending: 10.2%; 
Final benefit greater: 3.1; 
Final benefit less: 3.4. 

Source: GAO analysis of PBGC data on participants of plans terminated 
and trusteed during fiscal years 2000 through 2008. 

[End of figure] 

Overpayments can occur for two basic reasons: (1) there is a period of 
time when the retiree's estimated benefit has not yet been reduced; and 
(2) the retiree's estimated benefit is adjusted to reflect applicable 
limits, but the estimate is still greater than the benefit amount that 
is ultimately determined to be correct. In general, the longer the 
delay before a retiree's estimated benefit is adjusted to reflect the 
correct amount, the larger the overpayment, and the greater the amount 
that will need to be recouped from future monthly benefit payments. 

When an overpayment occurs, retirees typically repay the amount owed by 
having their monthly benefits reduced by some fraction until the debt 
is repaid. According to PBGC data, 22,623 participants in plans 
terminated and trusteed during fiscal years 2000 through 2008 (2.1% of 
the total) were subject to such recoupment.[Footnote 14] The total 
overpayment amounts varied widely--from less than $1 to more than 
$150,000--but our analysis of PBGC data suggests that most owed less 
than $3,000.[Footnote 15] Since in most cases PBGC recoups overpayments 
by reducing a participant's final benefit by no more than 10 percent 
each month,[Footnote 16] recoupment is amortized over many years and 
the impact on the participant's benefit is limited. Per individual, we 
found that the median benefit reduction due to recoupment was about $16 
a month, or about 3 percent of the monthly payment amount, on average. 
The effect of receiving an overpayment of estimated benefits on one 
retiree's monthly payment is illustrated in figure 4. The total amount 
of this retiree's overpayment was $5,600. His monthly payment was 
ultimately reduced by nearly one-half, but this was primarily due to 
the application of the guarantee limits. The amount of the benefit 
reduction for recoupment of the overpayment is $38 per month, to be 
paid until 6/1/2020. 

Figure 4: The Effect of Plan Termination and Recoupment on One 
Retiree's Monthly Payment: 

[Refer to PDF for image: vertical bar graph] 

2003 estimated monthly benefits; 
Payment amount: $700; 
Payment reduction to recoup overpayment: [Empty]; 
Portion of payment amount that is an overpayment: $821. 

7/1/04 estimated benefit reduced due to limits; 
Payment amount: [Empty]; 
Payment reduction to recoup overpayment: [Empty]; 
Portion of payment amount that is an overpayment: $821. 

2005 estimated monthly benefit; 
Payment amount: [Empty]; 
Payment reduction to recoup overpayment: [Empty]; 
Portion of payment amount that is an overpayment: $821. 

2006 estimated monthly benefit; 
Payment amount: [Empty]; 
Payment reduction to recoup overpayment: [Empty]; 
Portion of payment amount that is an overpayment: $821. 

12/17/07 first monthly benefit; 
Payment amount: [Empty]; 
Payment reduction to recoup overpayment: [Empty]; 
Portion of payment amount that is an overpayment: $821. 

3/13/08 benefit adjusted due to overpayment; 
Payment amount: [Empty]; 
Payment reduction to recoup overpayment: $38; 
Portion of payment amount that is an overpayment: $783. 

Final benefit determination amount: $821.  

Source: GAO analysis of PBGC data. 

[End of figure] 

Participants are warned at the beginning of the process that their 
benefits may be reduced due to the legal limits on guaranteed benefits, 
and retirees are notified of possible overpayments when they begin to 
receive estimated payments. However, these warnings may not have the 
same meaning for participants when talked about in generalities as when 
they later receive notices concerning their specific benefit amounts. 
It can still come as a shock when--perhaps years later--they receive a 
final benefit determination letter with this news. Their frustration 
may be compounded if they fail to understand the explanations provided 
in the benefit determination letters. Some pension advocates and union 
representatives we spoke with said that this is often the case in 
complex cases involving large benefit reductions. They noted that they 
did not think most participants would be able to understand the 
accompanying benefit statements without additional information and 
assistance. In the participant files we reviewed, the benefit 
statements that accompanied the letters ranged in length from 2 to 8 
pages. In some cases, there were as many as 20 to 30 different line 
items that required making comparisons between the items to understand 
the logic of the calculations.[Footnote 17] 

Participants may appeal the results of the benefit determination 
process within 45 days of receiving a final benefit 
determination.[Footnote 18] Appeals are accepted if they raise a 
question about how the plan was interpreted, how the law was 
interpreted, or the practices of the plan's sponsor, but not if they 
are based only on hardship. Although some appellants have successfully 
used the appeals process to increase their benefits, less than 20 
percent of appeals docketed since fiscal year 2003 have resulted in 
appellants receiving higher benefit amounts. We found that a lack of 
understanding on the part of participants about how their benefits are 
calculated may engender unnecessary appeals, and that PBGC is not 
readily providing key information that would be helpful to participants 
in deciding whether or not to pursue an appeal. 

Participants may request hardship waivers for overpayments, but only in 
cases that do not involve an ongoing payment. PBGC policy stipulates 
that in cases with an ongoing payment, recoupment of an overpayment may 
not be waived unless the monthly reduction would be less than 
$5.[Footnote 19] By comparison, federal agencies such as the Social 
Security Administration and the Office of Personnel Management 
generally pursue repayment at a faster rate with larger reductions to 
benefits when recouping overpayments, but their policies also give 
greater prominence to waivers. 

Conclusions and Recommendations: 

To address the concerns of workers and retirees in terminated plans who 
stand to lose as much as one-half or more of their long-anticipated 
retirement income, and who will likely have to make painful financial 
adjustments, PBGC needs a more strategic approach for processing 
complex plans prone to delays and overpayments. The failure to 
communicate more often and clearly with participants awaiting a final 
determination can be disconcerting--especially when participants 
receive the news that their final determination is "surprisingly" less 
than they anticipated, or when retirees learn that the estimated 
interim benefit they had been receiving was too high and that they owe 
money. More frequent and clearer communication with plan participants, 
including more timely adjustments to estimated benefits, more 
information about how their benefits are calculated, and where to find 
help if they wish to appeal, would better manage expectations, help 
people plan for their future, avoid unnecessary appeals, and earn good 
will during a trying time for all. 

In our recently issued report, we recommended that PBGC develop a 
better strategy for processing complex plans in order to reduce delays, 
minimize overpayments, improve communication with participants, and 
make the appeals process more accessible. After reviewing the draft 
report, PBGC generally agreed with our recommendations, noting the 
steps it would take to address GAO's concerns. For example, PBGC said 
that it had started to track and monitor tasks associated with 
processing large, complex plans, and would continue to look for other 
ways to improve its processes. A complete discussion of our 
recommendations, PBGC's comments, and our evaluation are provided in 
our recently issued report. As PBGC's financial challenges continue to 
mount and dramatic increases to PBGC's workload appear imminent, 
improvements to PBGC's processes are urgently needed. 

Mr. Chairman, this completes my prepared statement. I would be happy to 
respond to any questions you or other Members of the Committee may 
have. 

For further information regarding this testimony, please contact me at 
(202) 512-7215. Individuals making key contributions to this testimony 
include Blake L. Ainsworth (Assistant Director), Margie K. Shields, 
Kristen W. Jones, James Bennett, Susan C. Bernstein, and Craig W. 
Winslow. 

[End of section] 

Footnotes: 

[1] PBGC administers two separate insurance programs for private-sector 
defined benefit plans: a single-employer program and a multiemployer 
program. The single-employer program covers about 34 million 
participants in about 28,000 defined benefit plans. 29 U.S.C. §§ 1322 
and 1322a. The multiemployer program covers about 10 million 
participants in about 1,500 collectively-bargained defined benefit 
plans that are maintained by two or more unrelated employers. 

[2] The termination of a fully funded plan is called a standard 
termination. Plan sponsors typically purchase a group annuity contract 
from an insurance company to pay benefits to the participants, and PBGC 
does not become the trustee. 29 U.S.C. § 1341(b). 

[3] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-09-716] 
(Washington, D.C.: August 2009). 

[4] Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to 
obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis 
for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We 
believe the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our 
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. For further 
details on our methodology, see GAO, Pension Benefit Guaranty 
Corporation: More Strategic Approach Needed for Processing Complex 
Plans Prone to Delays and Overpayments GAO-09-716 (Washington, D.C.: 
August 2009), p. 7 and appendixes I and II. 

[5] Pub. L. No. 93-406, tit. IV, 88 Stat. 829, 1003-1035 (codified as 
amended at 29 U.S.C. §§ 1301-1461). 

[6] 29 U.S.C. § 1305(c). 

[7] 29 U.S.C. § 1302(g)(2). 

[8] Prior to termination, plan sponsors are required to notify 
participants if the plan is significantly underfunded and warn them 
that if the plan is terminated, their benefits must be cut back based 
on the guarantee limits as of the plan termination date. 29 U.S.C. § 
1021(f). 

[9] PBGC produces an annual newsletter for retirees and a biannual 
newsletter for future retirees. 

[10] For a list of the organizations contacted, see [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-09-716], appendix II. 

[11] PBGC, PBGC's Guarantee Limits--an Update (Washington, D.C.: 
September 2008). This document summarizes the results from both the 
1999 and 2008 studies. 

[12] The process for determining how the plan's assets are distributed 
among the plan's participants is specified in ERISA. 29 U.S.C. §§ 
1322(c) and 1344. For a description of the allocation process, see our 
recent report, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-09-
716], appendix III. 

[13] However, if a participant applies to start benefit payments during 
this time, communications would be exchanged between PBGC and the 
participant about the participant's current status, eligibility, and 
benefit amount, based on the requested retirement date. 

[14] Retirees who receive a final benefit that is less than their 
estimated benefit do not always end up with an overpayment that is 
recouped through monthly benefit reductions. For example, estimated 
benefit amounts may fluctuate over time, so that an overpayment may be 
offset by an underpayment resulting in no amount due. Alternatively, in 
some cases, it may be determined that the retiree is not eligible to 
receive an ongoing benefit payment, so there is no payment to be 
reduced for recoupment. PBGC refers to these as recovery cases rather 
than recoupment cases. 

[15] Data reliability issues prevented us from conducting a more 
definitive analysis of total overpayment amounts. For a more detailed 
discussion of these data limitations, see our recent report, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-09-716], appendix I. 
We were, however, able to verify that the person with the largest 
amount to be recouped was an LTV plan participant who owed a total of 
$152,194, and was to have $181 deducted each month from his payment of 
$1,812 until 2/1/2078 (at which point he would be over 138 years of 
age). In general, we found that large overpayments tended to occur in 
cases where there were lengthy delays before estimated benefits were 
adjusted to reflect the guarantee benefit limits, but that in some 
cases, they occurred due to disputes regarding claims from ex-spouses 
(referred to as "qualified domestic relations orders"). 

[16] PBGC regulations generally limit benefit reductions to the greater 
of (a) 10 percent of the participant's monthly benefit, or (b) the 
amount in excess of the participant's "maximum guaranteeable benefit." 
29 C.F.R. § 4022.82(a)(2) (2009). 

[17] For an example of a benefit determination letter and benefit 
statement, see [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-09-
716], appendix VII. 

[18] 29 C.F.R. §§ 4003.1(b)(7) and 4003.52 (2009). 

[19] In addition, in the last month that benefits are to be reduced to 
repay an overpayment, PBGC policy allows the final monthly reduction 
amount to be waived if the remaining balance due is less than the 
normal monthly reduction amount. 29 C.F.R. § 4022.82(a)(5) (2009).

[End of section] 

GAO's Mission: 

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting 
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance 
and accountability of the federal government for the American people. 
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding 
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core 
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony: 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each 
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and 
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly 
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] 
and select "E-mail Updates." 

Order by Phone: 

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and
white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s Web site, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm]. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card,
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional 
information. 

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs: 

Contact: 

Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]: 
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov: 
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470: 

Congressional Relations: 

Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4400: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7125: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

Public Affairs: 

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4800: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7149: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: