Judges: WINSTON BRYANT, Attorney General
Filed Date: 4/24/1991
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 7/5/2016
Mr. Bill A. Shirron, Executive Director Teacher Retirement System #3 Capitol Mall Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
Dear Mr. Shirron:
This is in response to your request for an opinion on four questions concerning newly adopted Act 497 of 1991. You note that this act opens up a six month window period for active members of the Arkansas Public Employees' Retirement System ("APERS") to purchase prior service in the Teacher Retirement System which has never been reported to the Teacher Retirement System, but which would otherwise have constituted qualified service. Your four questions refer to the nature of the payment which is necessary to purchase this credited service.
The act provides in pertinent part as follows:
On or after July 1, 1991, until December 31, 1991, an active member of Arkansas Public Employees' Retirement System may contract with the board of the Teacher Retirement System to receive credited service for periods to which the employee would have otherwise qualified for service rendered prior to July 1, 1984, during the employ of a preceding state employer upon his paying to the reciprocal system1 as defined in A.C.A. §
24-2-401 the prescribed contribution plus interest from the date of the previous service to the date of repayment.For the purpose of this act, ``prescribed contribution' means the contribution in effect to purchase credited service with the reciprocal system at the time period of service rendered with the preceding employer prior to July 1, 1984. [Emphasis added.]
You note as background information that Act 493 of 1979, which is codified at A.C.A. §
In addition to the forfeited credited service, the active member of a reciprocal system shall receive credit for his previous employment with a public employer upon his paying the prescribed employee and employer contributions based upon the rate in effect during the previous employment, together with regular interest from the dates for the previous service to the date of repayment. [Emphasis added.]
A.C.A. §
The enactment of this provision was apparently the first time a purchase of credited service in a "reciprocal" system was authorized by law.2 Other provisions had authorized only a regaining of "forfeited" credited service.3
Your first question, bearing these facts in mind, is as follows:
Because the law governing payment under reciprocity of back contributions has been in effect since March 21, 1979 [the effective date of A.C.A. §
24-2-402 (2)(B)] does the definition in Act 497 of 1991 of ``prescribed contribution' refer to the method which has been used since that date, i.e., payment of both employee and employer contributions, plus interest, as prescribed in Sec.24-2-402 (2)(B)?
It is my opinion, although the terms used in Act 497 of 1991 are ambiguous, that the answer to your first question is "yes."
Your question arises from the language used in the newly adopted Act 497 of 1991. That language defines the "prescribed contribution" to purchase credited service as "the contribution in effect to purchase credited service . . . at the time period of service rendered with the preceding employer." Thus, the act requires the employee to pay the contribution that would have been required to purchase credited service at the time period when the employee worked for that employer. It does not, however, state whether this contribution is to include both the employee and employer contributions plus interest, or some other contribution.
The exact nature of this "prescribed contribution" is ambiguous under the act. To determine what the prescribed contribution is, one must look to the provisions in effect at the time of the prior employment. But which provisions? On one hand, the act only applies to purchases of credited service in the Teacher Retirement System by current APERS members. The act refers, more than once, however, to "reciprocal systems" and "preceding state employers," terms which appear to apply to systems and employers other than the Teacher Retirement System. The inclusion of these terms appears to tie the provisions of the act to the provisions of A.C.A. §
On the other hand, the act only applies to employment occurring prior to July 1, 1984. This date is significant because it is the date upon which a member of the Teacher Retirement System was required to pay both the employee and employer contributions to purchase credited service for prior employment as a teacher.See former Ark. Stat. Ann. § 80-1441.3 6.01(a)(ii). Prior to July 1, 1984, such members were only required to pay the employee contributions plus interest. See generally, A.C.A. §
Your first question boils down to an interpretation of Section 1(b) of the new act. When it identifies the "prescribed contribution" as the contribution in effect to purchase credited service with the reciprocal system at the time period of service rendered with the preceding employer prior to July 1, 1984, the act raises the question: The contribution required by who? Does this mean the contribution required for a member of the Teacher Retirement System to purchase credited service in the Teachers' System, or does it mean the contribution required to make areciprocal purchase from one system to another? If the former, only the employee contribution plus interest must be paid. If the latter, both the employee and employer contributions plus interest must be paid.
It is clear, in my opinion, at least with respect to previous employment that occurred between March 21, 1979 and July 1, 1984, that A.C.A. §
It is also my opinion that this is the only provision that can govern previous employment which occurred prior to March 21, 1979, because no other general provision of law authorizes the purchase of credited service in a "reciprocal" system. Act 497 of 1991 continually uses this term. Statutes will be construed so that no word is void, superfluous, or meaningless, and every word in a statute must be given effect, if possible. Locke v. Cook,
There is also another reason for construing the statute in this manner. If construed so as to allow certain members to purchase credited service in this window period and only pay the employee contributions plus interest, the act will, in my opinion, generate constitutional problems. If it is possible to construe an act so that it will pass the test of constitutionality, the courts not only may, but should and will, do so. Love v. Hill,
Because the answer to your first question is "yes," it is unnecessary to address your remaining three questions, which are premised upon a negative answer to the first.
The foregoing opinion, which I hereby approve, was prepared by Assistant Attorney General Elana L. Cunningham.
Sincerely,
WINSTON BRYANT Attorney General
WB:arb