29 U.S.C. § 1242

Enrollment by Board; standards and qualifications; suspension or termination of enrollment

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 29 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) The Joint Board shall, by regulations, establish reasonable standards and qualifications for persons performing actuarial services with respect to plans in which this chapter applies and, upon application by any individual, shall enroll such individual if the Joint Board finds that such individual satisfies such standards and qualifications. With respect to individuals applying for enrollment before January 1, 1976, such standards and qualifications shall include a requirement for an appropriate period of responsible actuarial experience relating to pension plans. With respect to individuals applying for enrollment on or after January 1, 1976, such standards and qualifications shall include—(1) education and training in actuarial mathematics and methodology, as evidenced by—(A) a degree in actuarial mathematics or its equivalent from an accredited college or university,(B) successful completion of an examination in actuarial mathematics and methodology to be given by the Joint Board, or(C) successful completion of other actuarial examinations deemed adequate by the Joint Board, and(2) an appropriate period of responsible actuarial experience.Notwithstanding the preceding provisions of this subsection, the Joint Board may provide for the temporary enrollment for the period ending January 1, 1976, of actuaries under such interim standards as it deems adequate.(b) The Joint Board may, after notice and an opportunity for a hearing, suspend or terminate the enrollment of an individual under this section if the Joint Board finds that such individual—(1) has failed to discharge his duties under this chapter, or(2) does not satisfy the requirements for enrollment as in effect at the time of his enrollment.The Joint Board may also, after notice and opportunity for hearing, suspend or terminate the temporary enrollment of an individual who fails to discharge his duties under this chapter or who does not satisfy the interim enrollment standards.(Pub. L. 93–406, title III, § 3042, Sept. 2, 1974, 88 Stat. 1002.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

This chapter, referred to in subsecs. (a) and (b), was in the original “this Act”, meaning Pub. L. 93–406, known as the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. Titles I, III, and IV of such Act are classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1001 of this title and Tables.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1977–2026 · leading case: Sol Tabor v. Jt. Bd. for the Enrollment of Actuaries, 566 F.2d 705 (D.C. Cir. 1977).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Sol Tabor v. Jt. Bd. for the Enrollment of Actuaries, 566 F.2d 705 (D.C. Cir. 1977). · cites it 2× “BAZELON, Chief Judge: This appeal involves regulations promulgated by the Joint Board for Enrollment of Actuaries (Board) that implement section 3042 of the Employment Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S. C.A. § 1242 (1975). Appellants, experienced actuaries…”

Fernandez v. Brock, 840 F.2d 622 (9th Cir. 1988). “” 29 U.S.C. § 1242 (a). Thus, at best, the farmworkers’ argument *633 can be accepted only to show some ambiguity in sections 1053(b)(2)(C) and 1054(b)(3)(D).”

Goldstein v. Hawai'i Med. Serv. Ass'n, 297 F. Supp. 2d 1259 (D. Haw. 2003). “HMSA further argues that federal common law preemption requires federal subject matter jurisdiction, as do the Employment Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1242 (2000), and other federal laws.”

William Drummond v. S. Co. Servs., Inc. (11th Cir. 2026). “” 29 U.S.C. § 1242 (a). And affording respect to an executive branch interpretation is “especially warranted” when it “was issued roughly contempo- raneously with enactment of the statute and remained consistent over time.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.