United Mine Workers of America 1974 Pension Plan, et al. v. Energy West Mining Company

Under the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1980 (MPPAA), an employer who withdraws from an underfunded multiemployer pension plan incurs withdrawal liability, the amount of which ultimately depends on an actuarial determination. The actuary’s determination is “presumed correct” unless the employer proves that “the actuarial assumptions and methods used in the determination were, in the aggregate, unreasonable (taking into account the experience of the plan and reasonable expectations).” 29 U.S.C. § 1401(a)(3)(B)(i). The “employer’s burden to overcome the presumption * * * is simply a burden to show that the combination of methods and assumptions employed in the calculation would not have been acceptable to a reasonable actuary. * * * [I]t is a burden to show something about standard actuarial practice[.]” Concrete Pipe & Prod. of Cal., Inc. v. Constr. Laborers Pension Tr. for S. Cal., 508 U.S. 602, 635 (1993). The question presented is whether the MPPAA overrides standard actuarial practice, such that a court can order an actuary to use a discount-rate assumption that reflects a pension plan’s investment returns even when standard actuarial practice allows an actuary to use a discount-rate assumption that does not reflect the plan’s investment returns.