Termination, Retirement and SMP Experience Study for the Public Service Pension Plan
|
|
- Sybil Johnson
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Termination, Retirement and SMP Experience Study for the Public Service Pension Plan June 2015 Risk. Reinsurance. Human Resources
2 Table of Contents Executive Summary... 1 Section 1: Introduction... 2 Section 2: Termination Rates... 5 Section 3: Retirement Rates Section 4: Seniority, Merit and Promotion Rates Appendix A: Current and Proposed Termination Rate Assumptions Appendix B: Current and Proposed Retirement Rate Assumptions Appendix C: Seniority, Merit and Promotion Rate Assumptions Appendix D: Overview of the 2014 Mortality Study Aon Hewitt 2015 Aon Hewitt Inc. All Rights Reserved. This document contains confidential information and trade secrets protected by copyrights owned by Aon Hewitt. The document is intended to remain strictly confidential and to be used only for your internal needs and only for the purpose for which it was initially created by Aon Hewitt. No part of this document may be disclosed to any third party or reproduced by any means without the prior written consent of Aon Hewitt Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved
3 Executive Summary Aon Hewitt has been engaged by the Public Service Pension Board ( PSP Board ) to perform an actuarial study of the experience of the (the PSPP ) in respect of, termination rates, retirement rates and seniority/merit/promotion increases. This experience study, together with the 2014 study conducted in relation to the PSPP s mortality experience, provides: important insight into how the PSPP s demographic experience is trending; and proposals for updates to the major demographic assumptions (i.e. mortality, termination, retirement and seniority/merit/promotion) that should be made for future actuarial valuations, notably the December 31, 2014 actuarial valuation. This report focuses on the study conducted on the PSPP s termination, retirement and seniority/merit/promotion rates and summarizes the results and recommendations forthcoming from the analysis. Overall, we are proposing changes to the PSPP s termination, retirement and seniority/merit/promotion rates as follows: minor refinements to the termination rates combined with a strengthening of the proportion of terminating members who elect a commuted value; minor refinements to retirement rates for members who retire on or before their earliest unreduced retirement date combined with extending retirement rates to age 70 and a corresponding reduction in retirement rates following the earliest unreduced retirement date; minor refinements to seniority/merit/promotion increases prior to age 35 combined with a reduction in rates between 35 and 48 and an increase in rates from 48 to age 55. The combined impact on PSPP funding at December 31, 2013 of adopting these new rates would have been as follows: accrued liabilities decrease by $32 million; and current service cost increases by approximately $5.3 million For reference, an overview of the key results and recommendations of the mortality experience study conducted in 2014 is included as Appendix D. Respectfully Submitted Donald L. Ireland, FSA, FCIA Partner Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 1
4 Section 1: Introduction Purpose Aon has been engaged by the PSP Board to conduct a study of experience rates for the PSPP. The purposes of the study are: to determine the actual rates of termination of employment, retirement and increase in pensionable earnings due to seniority, merit and promotion ("SMP") that have been experienced by plan members; to compare these actual rates with the corresponding actuarial valuation assumptions, and to recommend changes, if any, that should be made for future valuation assumptions. While the assumptions as to rates of termination, retirement and SMP affect the actuarial valuation, the actual cost of a pension plan is not determined by the actuarial assumptions. Rather, the actuarial assumptions are simply an estimate of the future experience of the plan. The plan's future experience will determine the actual cost of the plan. Data In order to conduct the study, relevant member data as at December 31 for years from 2002 through 2013 were assembled. This data was obtained as at each December 31 from the PSPP's administrator, Alberta Pension Services Corporation ("APSC"), and compiled annually. The data were reviewed for completeness and were found generally to be acceptable and appropriate for the purposes of this study. Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 2
5 Experience Rates Termination and Retirement In developing termination and retirement experience rates, it is necessary to determine both the age at which each decrement occurs, as well as the total number of members who are exposed to the risk of decrement for that age for the entire period of the study. For each age, the experience rate is equal to the total number of decrements at that age, divided by the total exposure to that decrement at that age. The exposure is the total number of participants subject to the particular decrement for a given age. Valuation data as at December 31 for each of years 2002 through 2013 were used. Consistent with our actuarial valuation methodology, the age of each active member at each valuation date is determined as the member's nearest integral age at the applicable year-end date. Accordingly, an individual whose actual age is between and is deemed to be age 52 (this is called "age nearest birthday"). Should that individual terminate in the next year, he / she is considered to be a termination at age 52 (the integral age at the beginning of the calendar year). The exposure for age 52 for this individual is set at 1.0 full year, regardless of whether he/she terminates during the year. The experience termination rates that result are then directly comparable to the valuation actuarial assumptions for termination rates, as they are also based on the age nearest birthday method and are applied at the beginning of each year. Termination exposure, expected terminations and actual terminations for each age are tracked separately by gender and by each of the first five years of PSPP service, consistent with the actuarial valuation assumptions. The same methods are used for retirement rates. Retirement exposure, expected retirements and actual retirements for each age are tracked separately by gender and by years of PSPP service. Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 3
6 Experience Rates Seniority, Merit and Promotion In order to determine the experience rates of pensionable earnings adjustments for seniority, merit and promotion (SMP), we worked from the premise that the rates are directly related to attained age (calculated as age nearest birthday), which is consistent with the basic assumption underlying the SMP rates used in the valuation. For each of the year-ends from 2002 to 2013, we calculated the average pensionable earnings paid for all members at a given age. For members with less than a full year of service in any year, their reported pensionable earnings were annualized before calculating the averages. Members with no pensionable earnings were excluded from the study. The rate of increase for seniority, merit and promotion for any given age is determined as the average pensionable earnings at the next age divided by the average pensionable earnings at the given age, all within the same year-end, converted to a percentage increase or decrease. The resulting experience rates for each yearend were then averaged to obtain experience rates over the duration of the study, and these averaged rates were compared to the valuation assumption. Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 4
7 Section 2: Termination Rates The current valuation assumption uses separate termination rates by gender. These rates also use a 5-year select period, meaning that separate rates apply at a particular age for each of the first 5 years of PSPP service while the ultimate (i.e. for service over 5 years) rates are based only on age. Termination Data For purposes of the study, terminations were determined as those participants under the age of 55 whose status changed from active or suspended (i.e., with Combined Pensionable Service -CPS) at the beginning of the year, to deferred, hold-on-deposit (HOD) or paid-out during the year. Furthermore: termination does not include any participant who left active status at age 55 or older; and members whose subsequent year s status was unknown were presumed to be terminations -- this may include some members who died in service. Termination Experience For reviewing termination experience, the primary focus is the seven-year period 2007 through Experience across the full data set (i.e through 2013) was also examined to further validate trends that have emerged since the last termination experience study (which covered the seven-year period 2003 through 2009) was performed. The following table summarizes the actual number of terminations during the study period and the number expected based on the valuation assumption. Period Actual Expected Actual-to-Expected Male 6,743 6, % Female 16,479 15, % Total 23,222 21, % Male 9,740 9, % Female 23,409 22, % Total 33,149 31, % Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 5
8 Overall, actual termination rates have slightly exceeded the assumed rate over the period 2007 to 2013 as illustrated by actual-to-expected ratios that exceed 100%. By comparing the results to the period 2003 to 2013, the trend towards higher termination rates in recent years is evident. Female Rates The graphs on the following pages compare in detail the actual female termination rates with the valuation rates for the period 2007 to The graphs also indicate the proposed changes to the current assumption (the red line). The general observations from these graphs and the analysis conducted are as follows: For all service cohorts, across virtually all ages, the actual termination rates have exceeded the valuation rates. The most significant overall underestimation rests with the shorter service cohorts; however, for the 3-4 and 4-5 year service cohorts, a noticeable underestimation is observed across most ages 40 through 50. Goodness of fit tests designed to statistically validate the extent to which the current assumption reflects the actual rates have produced mixed results by both age and service. These results would suggest that refinements to the current assumption would improve the fit of the assumption to the actual experience. The proposed changes to the current assumption align better with the actual experience as illustrated in the graphs and significantly improve the goodness of fit tests that have been applied for virtually all ages and service cohorts. Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 6
9 Graph 1 35% 30% 25% Female Termination Rates Service: Less than 1 Year Experience Changes to Current Assumption Current Assumption Rates 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Age Graph 2 Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 7
10 Graph 3 Graph 4 Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 8
11 Graph 5 Graph 6 The following table compares the actual-to-expected ratios for each of the female service cohorts and select age groups. As can be seen from this table, the actual-to-expected ratio under the proposed assumption (labelled P in the table) moves closer to 100% in most instances compared to the current assumption (labelled C in the table). As a result, the proposed assumption provides a better fit between the assumption and actual experience. Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 9
12 Age Cohort Total Service <1 C 106% 121% 131% 122% 129% 138% 140% 123% P 106% 102% 111% 109% 107% 107% 109% 106% 1-2 C 107% 119% 125% 136% 121% 117% 108% 119% P 107% 105% 111% 109% 103% 101% 108% 106% 2-3 C 108% 111% 111% 110% 114% 124% 122% 113% P 108% 104% 103% 101% 114% 111% 122% 106% 3-4 C 116% 121% 109% 124% 143% 146% 132% 123% P 111% 112% 109% 113% 100% 115% 132% 111% 4-5 C 97% 112% 103% 102% 145% 158% 135% 117% P 97% 112% 103% 102% 109% 119% 102% 107% >=5 C 91% 120% 103% 118% 130% 110% 105% 112% P 91% 120% 103% 108% 114% 110% 105% 108% Total C 107% 118% 113% 119% 128% 121% 112% 117% P 107% 106% 107% 107% 109% 109% 108% 108% Male Rates The graphs on the following pages compare in detail the actual male termination rates with the valuation rates for the period 2007 to The graphs also indicate the proposed changes to the current assumption (the red line). The general observations from these graphs and the analysis conducted are as follows: For service cohorts other than service between four and five years and across virtually all ages, the actual termination rates have exceeded the valuation rates. For the service cohort between four and five years, the actual termination rates have aligned quite well with the current valuation assumption. Overall, the actual termination rates for males are more closely aligned with the current valuation assumption than that observed for females. Goodness of fit tests designed to statistically validate the extent to which the current assumption reflects the actual rates suggest that only minor refinements are required to the current valuation rates. Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 10
13 Graph 7 Graph 8 Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 11
14 Graph 9 Graph 10 Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 12
15 Graph 11 Graph 12 Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 13
16 The following table compares the actual-to-expected ratios for each of the male service cohorts and select age groups. As can be seen from this table, the actual-to-expected ratio under the proposed assumption (labelled P in the table) moves closer to 100% in most instances compared to the current assumption (labelled C in the table). As a result, the proposed assumption provides a better fit between the assumption and actual experience. Age Cohort Total Service <1 C 101% 114% 129% 118% 129% 134% 146% 118% P 101% 97% 115% 104% 113% 134% 146% 107% 1-2 C 101% 104% 98% 103% 104% 121% 122% 104% P 101% 104% 98% 103% 104% 111% 111% 103% 2-3 C 102% 117% 114% 114% 113% 115% 152% 116% P 94% 104% 105% 114% 113% 115% 152% 108% 3-4 C 161% 132% 101% 100% 115% 118% 121% 114% P 161% 121% 101% 100% 93% 118% 121% 109% 4-5 C 254% 148% 106% 89% 116% 163% 103% 119% P 254% 148% 106% 89% 116% 163% 103% 119% >=5 C 101% 112% 86% 110% 110% 114% 118% 108% P 101% 112% 98% 110% 110% 114% 118% 111% Total C 105% 115% 103% 107% 113% 121% 122% 111% P 104% 107% 103% 105% 109% 119% 121% 108% Lump Sum Settlement vs. Deferred Pension Experience As part of the analysis of termination rates, the experience of members electing a lump sum settlement versus a deferred pension on termination was also examined. Given the current low interest rate environment, a higher proportion of members electing a lump sum settlement on termination will result in an increase in liabilities. The current assumption is based on rates that vary by service (80% of members with less than five years of service are assumed to elect a lump sum settlement while 50% of members with five or more years of service are assumed to elect a lump sum settlement). Our review of the experience concluded that a service-based assumption continues to provide the best fit to the actual experience. Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 14
17 Based on the experience over the period 2007 through 2013, the following graph illustrates the proportion of members electing a lump sum settlement. The increased trend of members electing a lump sum settlement is undeniable and likely driven by the low interest rate environment over the period of the study. Graph 13 Recommendation Termination Rates Based on the results of the experience study, it is recommended that the current valuation rates be changed to the proposed rates shown in the tables in Appendix A. These proposed rates would be considered as best estimate. Proportion Electing a Lump Sum Settlement Over the period 2007 through 2013, it is evident that a greater proportion of members are opting for a lump sum settlement over a deferred pension. Given the current low interest rates used to calculate lump sum settlements, lump sum settlement values will generally be higher than the going-concern value of the deferred pension option. Consequently, the proportion of members electing a lump sum settlement should be increased to reflect actual experience more closely. In the future, should interest rates rise and the value of lump sum settlements decline, this trend could reverse itself and an adjustment to the proportion electing a Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 15
18 lump sum settlement would change. For now, however, we would recommend the following assumption for the proportion electing a lump sum settlement: Years of Service at Termination Proportion Assumed to Elect a Lump Sum Settlement Less than 5 80% Between 5 and 15 50% Between 15 and 20 60% Between 20 and 25 70% More than 25 75% Effect on Valuation Results Applying the proposed rates in place of the current termination rates, as well as updating the assumption regarding election of lump sum settlements, would have had the following effects on PSPP funding valuation results at December 31, 2013: accrued liabilities increase by approximately $45 million most of which is attributed to the proposed change in the proportion electing a lump sum settlement; and current service cost increases approximately $2 million or approximately 0.08% of pensionable earnings. Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 16
19 Section 3: Retirement Rates Retirement Data For purposes of the study, retirements were determined as those participants (including CPS members) who retired from active service. Retirements during each year were identified by using the retirement date in the pensioner data. Retirement Experience For reviewing retirement experience, the primary focus is the seven-year period 2007 through Experience across the full data set (i.e through 2013) was also examined to further validate trends that have emerged since the last retirement experience study (which covered the seven-year period 2003 through 2009) was performed. Generally, the actual retirement rates are observed to vary significantly by gender, age and service. The analysis examined retirement rates by these three variables based on: measuring the actual number of retirements at each gender / age / service combination against that assumed by the current retirement assumption; assessing the significance of the observed differences between actual and expected experience; and identifying adjustments to the current assumption that would improve the goodness of fit of the retirement assumption to actual experience. Consistent with the structure of the current retirement assumption, the analysis confirmed three distinct levels of retirement rates: generally lower levels for periods prior to members earliest unreduced retirement date; increased levels at the time the earliest unreduced retirement date is reached with a particular spike in retirement rates at age 65; and further increased levels after members have reached their earliest unreduced retirement date. Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 17
20 For purposes of presentation, the results of the analysis have been aggregated into these three categories. The analysis and resulting proposed assumption, however, is built on a more comprehensive examination of retirement rates across the full spectrum of the gender, age and service variables. As such, in some limited instances, the fit of the current assumption may not appear optimal when only the aggregate data is examined. Female Rates The graphs on the following pages compare the actual female retirement rates with the current valuation rates for the period 2007 to The graphs also indicate the proposed changes to the current assumption. The general observations from these graphs and the analysis conducted are as follows: Graph 14: The actual-to-expected ratios have generally been less than 100% (meaning members are retiring later than assumed) across most age and service cohorts. Graph 15: When the difference between the actual and assumed retirements is examined, however, the difference between actual and expected experience is not overly significant. The noticeable exception being for members upon reaching their earliest unreduced retirement date between ages 62 and 65 for whom actual retirement rates are materially lower than expected. This observation, combined with no apparent trend towards retiring before the earliest unreduced date, suggests that members are delaying retirement beyond that assumed by the current assumption. Graph 16: Of particular note is a material delay in retirement beyond age 65. Under the current assumption, if members have not retired before age 65, they are assumed to retire at 65. Graphs 17, 18 and 19: The primary adjustments to the current retirement assumption being proposed would result in relatively minor refinements to the current assumption prior to age 63 with reduced retirement rates thereafter to reflect actual experience. In any event, members are assumed to retire no later than age 70. While not captured explicitly in the graphs, the current retirement assumption assumes that members will retire regardless of age once they have accrued 36 years of eligible service. While there is experience to suggest that some members retire with more than 36 years of eligibility service, the volume of experience is limited and likely attributed to individuals who have earned less than 35 years of pensionable service. For this reason, the current assumption of 100% retirement once 36 years of eligibility service is attained was maintained. Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 18
21 Graph 14 Graph 15 Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 19
22 Graph 16 Graph 17 Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 20
23 Graph 18 Graph 19 Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 21
24 Male Rates The graphs on the following pages compare the actual male retirement rates with the current valuation rates for the period 2007 to The graphs also indicate the proposed changes to the current assumption. The general observations from these graphs and the analysis conducted are as follows: Graph 20: The actual-to-expected ratios have generally been less than 100% (meaning members are retiring later than assumed) across most age and service cohorts. The differences; however, are not as pronounced as for female members. Graph 21: When the difference between the actual and assumed retirements is examined, however, the difference between actual and expected experience is not overly significant. Graph 22: Consistent with female retirement rates, there is a noticeable delay in retirement beyond age 65 for males. Graphs 23, 24 and 25: The primary adjustments to the current retirement assumption being proposed would result in relatively minor refinements to the current assumption prior to age 63 with reduced retirement rates thereafter to reflect actual experience. In any event, members are assumed to retire no later than age 70. While not captured explicitly in the graphs, the current retirement assumption assumes that members will retire regardless of age once they have accrued 36 years of eligible service. While there is experience to suggest that some members retire with more than 36 years of eligibility service, the volume of experience is limited and likely attributed to individuals who have earned less than 35 years of pensionable service. For this reason, the current assumption of 100% retirement once 36 years of eligibility service is attained was maintained. Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 22
25 Graph 20 Graph 21 Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 23
26 Graph 22 Graph 23 Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 24
27 Graph 24 Graph 25 Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 25
28 Recommendation Based on the results of the experience study, we propose that adjustments be made to the current retirement assumption as set out in the tables in Appendix B. These adjustments have been derived based on their ability to improve the fit of the assumption to the actual experience as well as to maintain a reasonably smooth progression of retirement rates across age and service cohorts. Applying the proposed rates in place of the current rates would have had the following effects on PSPP funding valuation results at December 31, 2013: accrued liabilities decrease by approximately $88 million; and current service cost increases by approximately $2.9m or approximately 0.12% of pensionable earnings. The increase in current service cost is attributed to a large number of older members who, under the proposed assumption, are assumed to retire later and hence earn service throughout a greater proportion of the year following the valuation date. The additional service that is expected to be accrued by these individuals more than offsets the marginal decline in current service cost for younger members that is realized by changing assumptions. Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 26
29 Section 4: Seniority, Merit and Promotion Rates Seniority, Merit and Promotion (SMP) increases represent increases in pensionable earnings that are in addition to general wage increases that reflect inflation and productivity. The current valuation SMP assumption is comprised of declining rates by age until age 55 at which time SMP increases are assumed to be nil. Actual experience would tend to suggest that SMP increases after age 54 are negative; however, after the earliest retirement eligibility date, membership movements can lead to a distortion in the actual SMP rates. For that reason, SMP rates after age 54 have been set to nil. SMP Data For purposes of the study, SMP rates were determined from the pensionable earnings data for active members (including CPS members) at December 31, 2007 through This data was then stratified by age. SMP Experience For reviewing the SMP experience, the primary focus is the seven-year period 2007 through Experience across the full data set (i.e through 2013) was also examined to further validate trends that have emerged since the last SMP experience study (which covered the period 2003 through 2009) was performed. Generally, the actual SMP rates observed were reasonably well represented by the current SMP assumption for ages up to and including age 35. After age 35, however, a general downward shift in SMP rates compared to the previous experience study is observed for ages 36 through 47 and a gradual upward shift after age 48. Consequently, we have constructed a new SMP assumption to reflect this trend and improve the overall fit of the experience to the assumption. The following graphs illustrate the average experience rates by age compared to the current assumption and the proposed assumption. Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 27
30 Graph 26 Graph 27 Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 28
31 Graph 28 Recommendations Based on the results of the experience analysis, we recommend that the alternative SMP rates as set out in Appendix C be adopted for PSPP valuations. Applying the proposed rates in place of the current rates would have had the following effects on PSPP funding valuation results at December 31, 2013: accrued liabilities increase approximately $11 million; current service cost increases approximately $0.4 million or approximately 0.02% of pensionable earnings. Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 29
32 Appendix A: Current and Proposed Termination Rate Assumptions Less than 1 yr service Current Female Termination Rates At least 1 but not 2 yrs service At least 2 but not 3 yrs service Service At least 3 but not 4 yrs service At least 4 but not 5 yrs service At least 5 yrs service Age <21 25% 24% 17% 14% 11% 10% 21 25% 23% 17% 14% 11% 10% 22 25% 22% 17% 14% 11% 10% 23 25% 21% 16% 14% 11% 10% 24 25% 20% 15% 12% 11% 10% 25 20% 19% 14% 12% 11% 9% 26 19% 18% 14% 12% 11% 9% 27 18% 17% 14% 12% 11% 9% 28 18% 16% 14% 12% 11% 9% 29 18% 15% 14% 12% 11% 9% 30 17% 15% 13% 11% 11% 8% 31 17% 15% 13% 11% 11% 8% 32 17% 14% 13% 11% 11% 8% 33 17% 13% 13% 11% 11% 8% 34 17% 12% 13% 11% 11% 8% 35 16% 12% 12% 10% 9% 6% 36 16% 12% 12% 10% 9% 6% 37 16% 12% 12% 10% 9% 6% 38 16% 12% 12% 10% 9% 6% 39 16% 12% 12% 10% 9% 6% 40 15% 12% 10% 7% 6% 4% 41 15% 12% 10% 7% 6% 4% 42 15% 12% 10% 7% 6% 4% 43 15% 12% 10% 7% 6% 4% 44 15% 12% 10% 7% 6% 4% 45 14% 12% 9% 7% 6% 4% 46 14% 12% 9% 7% 6% 4% 47 14% 12% 9% 7% 6% 4% 48 14% 12% 9% 7% 6% 4% 49 14% 12% 9% 7% 6% 4% 50 14% 12% 8% 7% 6% 4% 51 14% 12% 8% 7% 6% 4% 52 14% 12% 8% 7% 6% 4% 53 14% 12% 8% 7% 6% 4% 54 14% 12% 8% 7% 6% 4% Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 30
33 Less than 1 yr service Current Male Termination Rates Service At least 1 At least 2 At least 3 At least 4 but not 2 but not 3 but not 4 but not 5 yrs yrs yrs yrs service service service service At least 5 yrs service Age <21 27% 26% 20% 12% 10% 9% 21 27% 26% 20% 12% 10% 9% 22 27% 25% 20% 12% 10% 9% 23 27% 20% 15% 12% 10% 9% 24 27% 20% 15% 12% 10% 9% 25 21% 20% 15% 11% 9% 8% 26 20% 20% 15% 11% 9% 8% 27 19% 20% 15% 11% 9% 8% 28 19% 18% 15% 11% 9% 8% 29 19% 18% 12% 11% 9% 8% 30 16% 16% 12% 11% 9% 8% 31 16% 16% 12% 11% 9% 8% 32 16% 16% 12% 11% 9% 8% 33 16% 16% 12% 11% 9% 8% 34 16% 16% 12% 11% 9% 8% 35 14% 13% 10% 9% 9% 5% 36 14% 13% 10% 9% 9% 5% 37 14% 13% 10% 9% 9% 5% 38 14% 13% 10% 9% 9% 5% 39 14% 13% 10% 9% 9% 5% 40 14% 12% 8% 7% 7% 4% 41 14% 12% 8% 7% 7% 4% 42 14% 12% 8% 7% 7% 4% 43 14% 12% 8% 7% 7% 4% 44 14% 12% 8% 7% 7% 4% 45 11% 11% 7% 7% 6% 3% 46 11% 11% 7% 7% 6% 3% 47 11% 11% 7% 7% 6% 3% 48 11% 11% 7% 7% 6% 3% 49 11% 11% 7% 7% 6% 3% 50 11% 10% 7% 6% 5% 3% 51 11% 10% 7% 6% 5% 3% 52 11% 10% 7% 6% 5% 3% 53 11% 10% 7% 6% 5% 3% 54 11% 10% 7% 6% 5% 3% Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 31
34 Less than 1 yr Proposed Female Termination Rates Service At least 1 but not 2 yrs At least 2 but not 3 yrs At least 3 but not 4 yrs At least 4 but not 5 yrs Age <21 25% 23% 17% 14% 11% 10% 21 25% 23% 17% 14% 11% 10% 22 25% 22% 17% 14% 11% 10% 23 25% 21% 16% 14% 11% 10% 24 25% 20% 15% 13% 11% 10% 25 24% 20% 15% 13% 11% 9% 26 23% 20% 15% 13% 11% 9% 27 22% 20% 15% 13% 11% 9% 28 21% 19% 15% 13% 11% 9% 29 20% 18% 15% 13% 11% 9% 30 20% 17% 14% 11% 11% 8% 31 20% 16% 14% 11% 11% 8% 32 20% 15% 14% 11% 11% 8% 33 20% 15% 14% 11% 11% 8% 34 20% 15% 14% 11% 11% 8% 35 18% 15% 13% 11% 9% 7% 36 18% 15% 13% 11% 9% 7% 37 18% 15% 13% 11% 9% 7% 38 18% 15% 13% 11% 9% 6% 39 18% 15% 13% 11% 9% 6% 40 18% 14% 10% 10% 8% 5% 41 18% 14% 10% 10% 8% 5% 42 18% 14% 10% 10% 8% 5% 43 18% 14% 10% 10% 8% 4% 44 18% 14% 10% 10% 8% 4% 45 18% 14% 10% 10% 8% 4% 46 18% 14% 10% 10% 8% 4% 47 18% 14% 10% 10% 8% 4% 48 18% 14% 10% 7% 8% 4% 49 18% 14% 10% 7% 8% 4% 50 18% 12% 8% 7% 8% 4% 51 18% 12% 8% 7% 8% 4% 52 18% 12% 8% 7% 8% 4% 53 18% 12% 8% 7% 8% 4% 54 18% 12% 8% 7% 8% 4% At least 5 yrs Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 32
35 Less than 1 yr Proposed Male Termination Rates At least 1 but not 2 yrs At least 2 but not 3 yrs At least 3 but not 4 yrs At least 4 but not 5 yrs Age <21 27% 26% 20% 12% 10% 9% 21 27% 26% 20% 12% 10% 9% 22 27% 25% 20% 12% 10% 9% 23 27% 20% 17% 12% 10% 9% 24 27% 20% 17% 12% 10% 9% 25 25% 20% 17% 12% 9% 8% 26 24% 20% 17% 12% 9% 8% 27 23% 20% 17% 12% 9% 8% 28 22% 18% 17% 12% 9% 8% 29 21% 18% 13% 12% 9% 8% 30 18% 16% 13% 11% 9% 7% 31 18% 16% 13% 11% 9% 7% 32 18% 16% 13% 11% 9% 7% 33 18% 16% 13% 11% 9% 7% 34 18% 16% 13% 11% 9% 7% 35 16% 13% 10% 9% 9% 5% 36 16% 13% 10% 9% 9% 5% 37 16% 13% 10% 9% 9% 5% 38 16% 13% 10% 9% 9% 5% 39 16% 13% 10% 9% 9% 5% 40 16% 12% 8% 9% 7% 4% 41 16% 12% 8% 9% 7% 4% 42 16% 12% 8% 9% 7% 4% 43 16% 12% 8% 9% 7% 4% 44 16% 12% 8% 7% 7% 4% 45 11% 12% 7% 7% 6% 3% 46 11% 12% 7% 7% 6% 3% 47 11% 12% 7% 7% 6% 3% 48 11% 12% 7% 7% 6% 3% 49 11% 12% 7% 7% 6% 3% 50 11% 11% 7% 6% 5% 3% 51 11% 11% 7% 6% 5% 3% 52 11% 11% 7% 6% 5% 3% 53 11% 11% 7% 6% 5% 3% 54 11% 11% 7% 6% 5% 3% At least 5 yrs Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 33
36 Appendix B: Current and Proposed Retirement Rate Assumptions Current Female Retirement Rates Age Service % 3.0% 3.0% 3.5% 5.5% 8.0% 6.5% 6.5% 7.5% 19.0% 3 3.5% 3.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.5% 8.5% 6.5% 6.5% 7.5% 19.0% 4 3.5% 3.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.5% 8.5% 6.5% 6.5% 7.5% 19.5% 5 3.5% 3.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.5% 8.5% 6.5% 6.5% 8.0% 19.5% 6 3.5% 3.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.5% 8.5% 7.0% 7.0% 8.0% 20.0% 7 4.0% 3.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.5% 9.0% 7.0% 7.0% 8.0% 20.5% 8 4.0% 3.0% 3.5% 4.0% 6.0% 9.0% 7.0% 7.0% 8.0% 20.5% 9 4.0% 3.5% 3.5% 4.0% 6.0% 9.0% 7.0% 7.0% 8.5% 21.0% % 3.5% 3.5% 4.0% 6.0% 9.5% 7.0% 7.0% 8.5% 21.0% % 3.5% 3.5% 4.5% 6.0% 9.5% 7.5% 7.5% 8.5% 21.5% % 3.5% 3.5% 4.5% 6.0% 9.5% 7.5% 7.5% 8.5% 21.5% % 3.5% 3.5% 4.5% 6.0% 9.5% 7.5% 7.5% 9.0% 22.0% % 3.5% 3.5% 4.5% 6.5% 10.0% 7.5% 7.5% 9.0% 22.5% % 3.5% 3.5% 4.5% 6.5% 10.0% 7.5% 7.5% 9.0% 22.5% % 3.5% 3.5% 4.5% 6.5% 10.0% 8.0% 8.0% 9.0% 23.0% % 3.5% 4.0% 4.5% 6.5% 10.0% 8.0% 8.0% 9.0% 23.0% % 3.5% 4.0% 4.5% 6.5% 10.5% 8.0% 8.0% 9.5% 23.5% % 4.0% 4.0% 5.0% 7.0% 10.5% 8.0% 8.0% 9.5% 23.5% % 4.0% 4.0% 5.0% 7.0% 10.5% 8.5% 8.0% 9.5% 24.0% % 4.0% 4.0% 5.0% 7.0% 10.5% 8.5% 8.0% 9.5% 52.5% % 4.0% 4.0% 5.0% 7.0% 11.0% 8.5% 8.5% 27.0% 35.5% % 4.0% 4.0% 5.0% 7.0% 11.0% 8.5% 16.0% 8.5% 36.0% % 4.0% 4.0% 5.0% 7.0% 11.0% 23.5% 11.5% 11.5% 36.5% % 4.0% 4.0% 5.0% 7.5% 24.5% 10.0% 10.0% 10.5% 37.0% % 4.0% 4.0% 5.0% 11.0% 11.0% 11.0% 11.0% 11.0% 37.0% % 4.0% 4.5% 10.0% 10.0% 10.5% 10.0% 10.5% 10.5% 37.5% % 4.0% 12.0% 12.5% 13.0% 13.5% 13.0% 13.5% 13.5% 38.0% % 12.5% 12.5% 12.5% 13.0% 13.5% 13.0% 13.5% 13.5% 38.5% % 13.5% 13.5% 13.5% 14.0% 14.5% 14.0% 14.5% 14.5% 39.0% % 14.5% 14.5% 14.5% 15.0% 16.0% 15.0% 15.5% 15.5% 39.5% % 13.0% 13.0% 13.5% 13.5% 14.5% 14.0% 14.0% 14.0% 39.5% % 12.5% 12.5% 13.0% 13.0% 13.5% 13.0% 13.5% 13.5% 40.0% % 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 11.0% 10.5% 10.5% 10.5% 40.5% % 19.0% 19.0% 19.5% 19.5% 20.5% 20.0% 20.0% 20.5% 41.0% Rates are set at 100% for ages over 64 years and for service over 35 years. Green shading indicates exactly 85 points. Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 34
37 Current Male Retirement Rates Age Service % 3.5% 3.5% 3.5% 4.5% 6.5% 5.5% 6.5% 6.5% 14.5% 3 3.5% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5% 4.5% 6.5% 6.0% 6.5% 6.5% 15.0% 4 3.5% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5% 5.0% 6.5% 6.0% 6.5% 6.5% 15.0% 5 3.5% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5% 5.0% 6.5% 6.0% 6.5% 6.5% 15.0% 6 3.5% 3.5% 3.5% 4.0% 5.0% 6.5% 6.0% 6.5% 6.5% 15.5% 7 3.5% 3.5% 4.0% 4.0% 5.0% 7.0% 6.0% 7.0% 7.0% 15.5% 8 3.5% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 5.0% 7.0% 6.0% 7.0% 7.0% 16.0% 9 3.5% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 5.0% 7.0% 6.5% 7.0% 7.0% 16.0% % 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 5.0% 7.0% 6.5% 7.0% 7.0% 16.5% % 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 5.5% 7.0% 6.5% 7.0% 7.0% 16.5% % 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 5.5% 7.5% 6.5% 7.5% 7.5% 17.0% % 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 5.5% 7.5% 6.5% 7.5% 7.5% 17.0% % 4.0% 4.0% 4.5% 5.5% 7.5% 7.0% 7.5% 7.5% 17.0% % 4.0% 4.5% 4.5% 5.5% 7.5% 7.0% 7.5% 7.5% 17.5% % 4.0% 4.5% 4.5% 5.5% 7.5% 7.0% 7.5% 7.5% 17.5% % 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 6.0% 8.0% 7.0% 8.0% 8.0% 18.0% % 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 6.0% 8.0% 7.0% 8.0% 8.0% 18.0% % 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 6.0% 8.0% 7.0% 8.0% 8.0% 18.5% % 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 6.0% 8.0% 7.5% 8.0% 8.0% 18.5% % 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 6.0% 8.0% 7.5% 8.0% 8.0% 29.0% % 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 6.0% 8.5% 7.5% 8.5% 17.5% 27.5% % 4.5% 4.5% 5.0% 6.0% 8.5% 7.5% 25.0% 8.5% 28.0% % 4.5% 5.0% 5.0% 6.5% 8.5% 17.0% 7.5% 8.0% 28.5% % 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 6.5% 16.5% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 28.5% % 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 9.5% 8.5% 8.0% 8.5% 8.5% 29.0% % 5.0% 5.0% 15.5% 9.0% 9.5% 9.5% 9.5% 9.5% 29.5% % 5.0% 9.0% 8.5% 8.5% 9.0% 8.5% 9.0% 9.0% 29.5% % 12.5% 8.5% 8.5% 8.5% 9.0% 9.0% 9.0% 9.0% 30.0% % 11.5% 11.5% 11.5% 11.5% 12.5% 12.0% 12.0% 12.0% 30.0% % 11.5% 11.5% 11.5% 11.5% 12.5% 12.0% 12.0% 12.0% 30.5% % 11.5% 11.5% 11.5% 12.0% 12.5% 12.0% 12.0% 12.5% 31.0% % 12.5% 12.5% 13.0% 13.0% 13.5% 13.0% 13.5% 13.5% 31.0% % 15.0% 15.0% 15.0% 15.5% 16.0% 15.5% 16.0% 16.0% 31.5% % 24.0% 24.0% 24.5% 24.5% 26.0% 25.0% 25.5% 25.5% 32.0% Rates are set at 100% for ages over 64 years and for service over 35 years. Green shading indicates exactly 85 points. Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 35
38 Proposed Female Retirement Rates Age Service % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 1 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 2 2.0% 2.0% 3.0% 3.5% 5.5% 7.5% 5.0% 6.5% 6.5% 10.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 3 2.0% 2.0% 3.0% 3.5% 5.5% 7.5% 5.0% 6.5% 6.5% 15.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 4 2.0% 2.0% 3.0% 3.5% 5.5% 7.5% 5.0% 6.5% 6.5% 15.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 5 2.0% 2.0% 3.0% 3.5% 5.5% 7.5% 5.0% 6.5% 6.5% 15.0% 20.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 6 2.0% 2.0% 3.0% 3.5% 5.5% 7.5% 5.0% 6.5% 6.5% 15.0% 20.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 7 2.0% 2.0% 3.0% 3.5% 5.5% 7.5% 5.0% 6.5% 6.5% 15.0% 30.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 8 2.0% 2.0% 3.5% 3.5% 6.0% 7.5% 5.0% 6.5% 6.5% 15.0% 30.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 9 3.5% 3.0% 3.5% 3.5% 6.0% 7.5% 5.0% 6.5% 6.5% 15.0% 30.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.0% 3.5% 3.5% 6.0% 7.5% 5.0% 6.5% 6.5% 15.0% 30.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.0% 3.5% 3.5% 6.0% 7.5% 5.0% 6.5% 6.5% 25.0% 30.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.0% 3.5% 3.5% 6.0% 7.5% 5.0% 6.5% 6.5% 25.0% 30.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.0% 3.5% 3.5% 6.0% 7.5% 5.0% 6.5% 6.5% 25.0% 30.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.0% 3.5% 3.5% 6.5% 7.5% 5.0% 6.5% 6.5% 25.0% 30.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.0% 3.5% 3.5% 6.5% 7.5% 5.0% 6.5% 6.5% 25.0% 35.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.0% 3.5% 3.5% 6.5% 7.5% 5.0% 6.5% 6.5% 25.0% 35.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.0% 4.0% 3.5% 6.5% 7.5% 5.0% 6.5% 6.5% 25.0% 35.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.0% 4.0% 3.5% 6.5% 7.5% 6.5% 6.5% 9.5% 25.0% 35.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.0% 4.0% 3.5% 7.0% 7.5% 6.5% 6.5% 9.5% 25.0% 35.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.0% 4.0% 3.5% 7.0% 7.5% 6.5% 6.5% 9.5% 25.0% 50.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.0% 4.0% 3.5% 7.0% 7.5% 6.5% 6.5% 15.0% 25.0% 50.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.0% 4.0% 3.5% 7.0% 7.5% 6.5% 12.5% 15.0% 27.5% 50.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.0% 4.0% 3.5% 7.0% 11.0% 17.5% 17.5% 12.5% 27.5% 50.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 7.0% 20.0% 17.5% 12.5% 10.0% 27.5% 50.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.0% 4.0% 7.5% 12.5% 20.0% 12.5% 12.5% 10.0% 27.5% 50.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.0% 4.0% 12.5% 12.5% 11.0% 12.5% 12.5% 10.0% 27.5% 50.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.0% 12.5% 12.5% 10.0% 10.5% 12.5% 12.5% 10.0% 27.5% 50.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 12.5% 12.5% 10.0% 10.0% 13.5% 10.0% 10.0% 7.5% 27.5% 50.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 12.5% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 13.5% 10.0% 10.0% 7.5% 27.5% 50.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 14.5% 10.0% 10.0% 7.5% 27.5% 50.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 12.5% 16.0% 10.0% 10.0% 7.5% 27.5% 50.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 12.5% 14.5% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 27.5% 50.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 12.5% 13.5% 10.0% 15.0% 15.0% 27.5% 50.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 11.0% 10.0% 15.0% 12.5% 27.5% 50.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 15.0% 10.0% 19.5% 19.5% 20.5% 10.0% 20.0% 12.5% 27.5% 50.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Rates are set at 100% for ages 70 and over and for service over 35 years. Green shading indicates the earliest age / service combination at which unreduced retirement is available. Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 36
39 Proposed Male Retirement Rates Age Service % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 1 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 2 2.5% 3.0% 3.0% 3.5% 4.5% 6.5% 5.0% 6.5% 7.0% 14.5% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 3 2.5% 3.0% 3.0% 3.5% 4.5% 6.5% 5.0% 6.5% 7.0% 15.0% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 4 2.5% 3.0% 3.0% 3.5% 5.0% 6.5% 5.0% 6.5% 7.0% 15.0% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 5 2.5% 3.0% 3.0% 3.5% 5.0% 6.5% 5.0% 6.5% 7.0% 15.0% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 6 2.5% 3.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.5% 5.0% 6.5% 7.0% 15.5% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 7 2.5% 3.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 7.0% 5.0% 7.0% 7.0% 15.5% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 8 2.5% 3.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 7.0% 5.0% 7.0% 7.0% 16.0% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 9 2.5% 3.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 7.0% 5.0% 7.0% 7.0% 16.0% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 7.0% 5.0% 8.0% 7.0% 16.5% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.5% 3.0% 4.0% 5.5% 7.0% 5.0% 8.0% 7.0% 16.5% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.5% 3.0% 4.0% 5.5% 7.5% 5.0% 8.0% 7.0% 17.0% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.5% 3.0% 4.0% 5.5% 7.5% 5.0% 8.0% 7.0% 17.0% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.5% 3.0% 4.5% 5.5% 7.5% 7.0% 8.0% 7.0% 17.0% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.5% 3.0% 4.5% 5.5% 7.5% 7.0% 8.0% 7.0% 17.5% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.5% 3.0% 4.5% 5.5% 7.5% 7.0% 8.0% 7.0% 17.5% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.5% 3.0% 4.5% 6.0% 7.5% 7.0% 8.0% 7.0% 18.0% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.5% 3.0% 4.5% 6.0% 7.5% 7.0% 8.0% 7.0% 18.0% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.5% 3.0% 4.5% 6.0% 7.5% 7.0% 8.0% 7.0% 18.5% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.5% 3.0% 4.5% 6.0% 7.5% 7.5% 8.0% 7.0% 18.5% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.5% 3.0% 4.5% 6.0% 7.5% 7.5% 8.0% 15.0% 20.0% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.5% 3.0% 4.5% 6.0% 12.0% 7.5% 8.0% 10.0% 27.5% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.5% 3.0% 5.0% 6.0% 12.0% 7.5% 20.0% 15.0% 28.0% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 3.5% 3.0% 5.0% 6.5% 12.0% 15.0% 20.0% 15.0% 28.5% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 10.0% 20.0% 7.0% 20.0% 10.0% 28.5% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 5.0% 5.0% 10.0% 10.0% 8.0% 8.0% 10.0% 10.0% 29.0% 45.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 5.0% 15.0% 10.0% 7.5% 8.0% 9.5% 10.0% 10.0% 29.5% 45.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 15.0% 15.0% 7.5% 7.5% 8.0% 8.5% 10.0% 10.0% 29.5% 45.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 15.0% 10.0% 7.5% 7.5% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0% 10.0% 30.0% 45.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 10.0% 10.0% 7.5% 7.5% 11.0% 12.0% 10.0% 10.0% 30.0% 45.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 10.0% 10.0% 7.5% 7.5% 11.0% 12.0% 10.0% 10.0% 30.5% 45.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 10.0% 10.0% 7.5% 15.0% 11.0% 12.0% 10.0% 10.0% 31.0% 45.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 10.0% 15.0% 7.5% 15.0% 13.5% 13.0% 15.0% 20.0% 31.0% 45.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 10.0% 15.0% 15.0% 15.0% 16.0% 15.5% 15.0% 20.0% 31.5% 45.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 25.0% 15.0% 20.0% 15.0% 20.0% 22.5% 20.0% 20.0% 32.0% 45.0% 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Rates are set at 100% for ages 70 and over and for service over 35 years. Green shading indicates the earliest age / service combination at which unreduced retirement is available. Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 37
40 Appendix C: Seniority, Merit and Promotion Rate Assumptions Age Current Rates Proposed Rates under % 7.75% % 7.25% % 6.75% % 5.75% % 5.00% % 4.25% % 3.75% % 3.25% % 3.00% % 2.50% % 2.25% % 2.00% % 1.75% % 1.50% % 1.25% % 1.25% % 1.00% % 0.75% % 0.50% % 0.50% % 0.25% % 0.25% % 0.25% % 0.25% % 0.25% % 0.25% % 0.25% % 0.35% % 0.35% % 0.35% % 0.35% % 0.35% % 0.35% % 0.35% % 0.35% 56 and older 0.00% 0.00% Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 38
41 Appendix D: Overview of the 2014 Mortality Study A study of the PSPP s mortality experience was conducted in 2014 against the backdrop of the Canadian Institute of Actuaries release of its Canadian Pensioner Mortality (CPM) Study, a first of its kind study on the mortality experience of Canadian pensioners. The study reviewed the PSPP s pensioner mortality experience over the period September 1, 2004 to September 1, 2013 with the aim to establish appropriate: base mortality rates reflecting current probabilities of death experienced by PSPP pensioners; and rates of future improvement in mortality rates. Given the currency of the CPM study, the PSPP mortality experience was analyzed in relation to the mortality rate tables published as part of the CPM study. Specifically: the base mortality rates were established by first determining the CPM table that best fit the structure of the PSPP experience and then applying a loading or scaling factor to these published rates to reflect the PSPP s actual level of experience; and the mortality improvement rates published in the CPM study (CPM Scale B) were adopted without adjustment as the volume of PSPP mortality experience was far too insufficient to draw any credible conclusions for such adjustments. The key proposal that the 2014 study put forward was to adopt the following mortality table: Male mortality rates: 100% of the CPM Private table rates; Female mortality rates: 95% of the CPM Private table rates; Future improvement: CPM Scale B. The 2014 study estimated that the going-concern financial impact at December 31, 2012 of adopting this table to be as follows: increase in going-concern liabilities: $279,292,000 (3% increase in liabilities); and increase in current service cost: 0.30% of pensionable earnings. The following charts summarize the PSPP s actual experience over the study period compared to the CPM Private table for both males and females. Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 39
42 Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 40
43 Aon Consulting Inc All Rights Reserved 41
Alberta Federation of Labour (AFL) Coalition on Pensions
Alberta Federation of Labour (AFL) Coalition on Pensions December 31, 2013 Projection of Financial Positions: Local Authorities Pension Plan (LAPP) and Public Service Pension Plan (PSPP) February 27, 2014
More informationAlberta Federation of Labour (AFL) Coalition on Pensions
Alberta Federation of Labour (AFL) Coalition on Pensions Costing of Plan Changes for Local Authorities Pension Plan (LAPP) and Public Service Pension Plan (PSPP) December 20, 2013 Table of Contents Section
More informationActuarial Valuation Report as at December 31, 2017
Actuarial Valuation Report as at December 31, 2017 Lutheran Church - Canada Pension Plan ASP Registration No. 00355610 CRA Registration No. 00355610 March, 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. Actuaries Opinion...
More informationPublic Service Pension Plan Actuarial Valuation as at December 31, Registration number: CRA
Public Service Pension Plan Actuarial Valuation as at December 31, 2016 Registration number: CRA 0208769 Original Date: July 21, 2017 Revised Date: November 10, 2017 Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary
More informationTeachers Pension and Annuity Fund of New Jersey. Experience Study July 1, 2006 June 30, 2009
Teachers Pension and Annuity Fund of New Jersey Experience Study July 1, 2006 June 30, 2009 by Richard L. Gordon Scott F. Porter December, 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE SECTION I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 INTRODUCTION
More informationNEW BRUNSWICK TEACHERS PENSION PLAN
NEW BRUNSWICK TEACHERS PENSION PLAN ACTUARIAL VALUATION REPORT AS AT AUGUST 31, 2016 Report prepared in April 2017 Registration number: Canada Revenue Agency: 0293696 NB Superintendent of Pensions: 0293696
More informationMUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF MICHIGAN APPENDIX TO THE ANNUAL ACTUARIAL VALUATION REPORT DECEMBER 31, 2016
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF MICHIGAN APPENDIX TO THE ANNUAL ACTUARIAL VALUATION REPORT DECEMBER 31, 2016 Summary of Plan Provisions, Actuarial Assumptions and Actuarial Funding Method as
More informationPOLICYHOLDER BEHAVIOR IN THE TAIL UL WITH SECONDARY GUARANTEE SURVEY 2012 RESULTS Survey Highlights
POLICYHOLDER BEHAVIOR IN THE TAIL UL WITH SECONDARY GUARANTEE SURVEY 2012 RESULTS Survey Highlights The latest survey reflects a different response group from those in the prior survey. Some of the changes
More informationMortality of Beneficiaries of Charitable Gift Annuities 1 Donald F. Behan and Bryan K. Clontz
Mortality of Beneficiaries of Charitable Gift Annuities 1 Donald F. Behan and Bryan K. Clontz Abstract: This paper is an analysis of the mortality rates of beneficiaries of charitable gift annuities. Observed
More informationPublic Service Shared Risk Plan Actuarial Valuation Report as at January 1, 2016
Public Service Shared Risk Plan Actuarial Valuation Report as at January 1, 2016 Registration number: Canada Revenue Agency: #0305839 NB Superintendent of Pensions: #0305839 Report prepared July 2016 Table
More informationMUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF MICHIGAN
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF MICHIGAN Summary of Actuarial Assumptions and Actuarial Funding Method as of December 31, 2015 Actuarial Assumptions To calculate MERS contribution requirements,
More informationShared Risk Plan for Certain Bargaining Employees of New Brunswick Hospitals
Shared Risk Plan for Certain Bargaining Employees of New Brunswick Hospitals Actuarial Valuation Report as at December 31, 2016 Registration number:canada Revenue Agency: #0385856 NB Superintendent of
More informationPennsylvania Municipal Retirement System
Pennsylvania Municipal Retirement System Experience Study Results and Recommendations For the period covering January 1, 2009 December 31, 2013 Produced by Cheiron July 2015 Table of Contents Section Page
More informationShared Risk Plan for Certain Bargaining Employees of New Brunswick Hospitals
Shared Risk Plan for Certain Bargaining Employees of New Brunswick Hospitals Actuarial Valuation Report as at December 31, 2015 Registration number:canada Revenue Agency: #0385856 NB Superintendent of
More informationPUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA. Actuarial Experience Study for the period July 1, 2000 through June 30, 2004.
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA Actuarial Experience Study for the period July 1, 2000 through June 30, 2004 Copyright 2005 THE SEGAL GROUP, INC., THE PARENT OF THE SEGAL COMPANY ALL
More informationContents. 1. Summary of Results ($000) Introduction...3 Report on the Actuarial Valuation as at July 1,
Contents 1. Summary of Results ($000)...1 2. Introduction...3 as at July 1, 2003...3 3. Financial Position of the Plan...6 Valuation Results Going-Concern Basis...6 Valuation Results Solvency Basis...7
More informationSimon Fraser University Pension Plan for Administrative/Union Staff
Actuarial Report on the Simon Fraser University Pension Plan for Administrative/Union Staff as at 31 December 2010 Vancouver, B.C. September 13, 2011 Contents Highlights and Actuarial Opinion... 1 Appendix
More informationActuarial Valuation Report for Accounting Purposes on the Saskatchewan Teachers Superannuation Plan as at June 30, 2001
Actuarial Valuation Report for Accounting Purposes on the as at June 30, 2001 Aon Consulting 8 th Floor, Canada Building 105 21 st Street East Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7K 0B3 Phone: (306) 934-8680 Fax:
More informationArticle from: Pension Section News. May 2014 Issue 83
Article from: Pension Section News May 2014 Issue 83 CANADIAN PENSIONERS MORTALITY: A REVIEW OF THE FINAL REPORT By Faisal Siddiqi Faisal Siddiqi, FSA, FCIA, is principal and consulting actuary at Buck
More informationESTIMATED ACCRUAL COSTS EGD PENSION PLANS JUNE 30, 2015
JUNE 30, 2015 Note to reader regarding actuarial valuations and projections: This report may not be relied upon for any purpose other than those explicitly noted in the Introduction, nor may it be relied
More informationReport on the Annual Basic Benefits Valuation of the School Employees Retirement System of Ohio
Report on the Annual Basic Benefits Valuation of the School Employees Retirement System of Ohio Prepared as of June 30, 2018 Cavanaugh Macdonald C O N S U L T I N G, L L C The experience and dedication
More information100 Montgomery Street, Suite 500 San Francisco, CA 94104
City of Los Angeles Fire and Police Pension Plan ACTUARIAL EXPERIENCE STUDY Analysis of Actuarial Experience During the Period July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2013 100 Montgomery Street, Suite 500 San Francisco,
More informationWyoming Retirement System Actuarial Experience Study As of December 31, 2016
Wyoming Retirement System Actuarial Experience Study As of December 31, 2016 January 10, 2018 Board of Trustees Wyoming Retirement System 6101 Yellowstone Road Cheyenne, Wyoming 82002 Subject: Results
More informationFebruary 3, Experience Study Judges Retirement Fund
February 3, 2012 Experience Study 2007-2011 February 3, 2012 Minnesota State Retirement System St. Paul, MN 55103 2007 to 2011 Experience Study Dear Dave: The results of the actuarial valuation are based
More informationPension Plan for Non-Unionized Employees of Quebecor Media Inc. and its Participating Subsidiaries
Pension Plan for Non-Unionized Employees of Quebecor Media Inc. and its Participating Subsidiaries Report prepared on September 20, 2010 Registration number: Ontario and Canada Revenue Agency #1098474
More informationMUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF MICHIGAN APPENDIX TO THE ANNUAL ACTUARIAL VALUATION REPORT DECEMBER 31, 2014
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF MICHIGAN APPENDIX TO THE ANNUAL ACTUARIAL VALUATION REPORT DECEMBER 31, 2014 Summary of Plan Provisions, Actuarial Assumptions and Actuarial Funding Method as
More informationJune 9, Universities Academic Pension Plan. Report on the Actuarial Valuation for Funding Purposes as at December 31, 2004
June 9, 2005 Universities Academic Pension Plan Report on the Actuarial Valuation for Funding Purposes as at December 31, 2004 Contents 1. Summary of Results...1 2. Introduction...2 Report on the Actuarial
More informationReport on the Actuarial Valuation
Report on the Actuarial Valuation as of January 1, 2018 Telecommunication Workers Pension Plan Canada Revenue Agency Registration Number 0397935 Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions Canada
More informationACTUARIAL REPORT. on the Pension Liabilities which CENTRA GAS MANITOBA INC. has as at DECEMBER 31, with respect to the
ACTUARIAL REPORT (for pension expense purposes) on the Pension Liabilities which CENTRA GAS MANITOBA INC. has as at DECEMBER 31, 2011 with respect to the June, 2012 Prepared by: E E & ELLEMENT & ELLEMENT
More informationSubject: Experience Review for the Years June 30, 2010, to June 30, 2014
STATE UNIVERSITIES RE T I R E M E N T S Y S T E M O F I L L I N O I S 201 5 E X P E R I E N C E R E V I E W F O R T H E Y E A R S J U N E 3 0, 2010, T O J U N E 3 0, 2014 January 16, 2015 Board of Trustees
More informationLooking Ahead PROJECTING ONTARIO S PENSION BENEFITS GUARANTEE FUND
Looking Ahead PROJECTING ONTARIO S PENSION BENEFITS GUARANTEE FUND The Pension Benefits Guarantee Fund (PBGF) is governed by the Ontario Pension Benefits Act ( the Act ) and regulations made under the
More informationCalPERS Experience Study and Review of Actuarial Assumptions
California Public Employees Retirement System Experience Study and Review of Actuarial Assumptions CalPERS Experience Study and Review of Actuarial Assumptions CalPERS Actuarial Office December 2013 Table
More informationApril Metropolitan Toronto Police Benefit Fund. Report on the Actuarial Valuation for Funding Purposes as at December 31, 2009
April 2010 Metropolitan Toronto Police Benefit Fund Report on the Actuarial Valuation for Funding Purposes Contents 1. Summary of Results... 2 2. Introduction and Executive Summary... 4 3. Plan Assets...
More informationCity of Sioux Falls Retirement Systems Assumption Study
City of Sioux Falls Retirement Systems Assumption Study February 6, 2013 Copyright 2013 GRS All rights reserved. City of Sioux Falls Retirement Systems Assumption Study Purpose Types of Assumptions Demographic
More informationMERCER Human Resource Consulting
December 2003 THE CONTRIBUTORY PENSION PLAN FOR SALARIED EMPLOYEES OF McMASTER UNIVERSITY INCLUDING McMASTER DIVINITY COLLEGE for Funding Purposes as at July 1, 2003 MERCER Human Resource Consulting ~arrh
More informationCONTENTS. 1-2 Summary of Benefit Provisions 3 Asset Information 4-6 Retired Life Data Active Member Data Inactive Vested Member Data
CITY OF ST. CLAIR SHORES POLICE AND FIRE RETIREMENT SYSTEM 66TH ANNUAL ACTUARIAL VALUATION REPORT JUNE 30, 2015 CONTENTS Section Page 1 Introduction A Valuation Results 1 Funding Objective 2 Computed Contributions
More informationCity of Madison Heights Police and Fire Retirement System Actuarial Valuation Report June 30, 2017
City of Madison Heights Police and Fire Retirement System Actuarial Valuation Report June 30, 2017 Table of Contents Page Items -- Cover Letter Basic Financial Objective and Operation of the Retirement
More informationIf You Offer It, Participants Will Use It
If You Offer It, Participants Will Use It Roth Usage in Defined Contribution Plans May 2016 Risk. Reinsurance. Human Resources. If You Offer It, Participants Will Use It: Roth Usage in Defined Contribution
More informationActuarial Section ARLINGTON COUNTY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM. Arlington County Employees Retirement System
ARLINGTON COUNTY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM Arlington County Employees Retirement System 54 Arlington County Employees Retirement System Actuarial Section 55 Arlington County Employees Retirement System
More informationM INNESOTA STATE PATROL RETIREMENT FUND
M INNESOTA STATE PATROL RETIREMENT FUND 4 - YEAR EXPERIENCE STUDY JULY 1, 2011 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2015 GRS Gabriel Roeder Smith & Company Consultants & Actuaries 277 Coon Rapids Blvd. Suite 212 Coon Rapids,
More informationTHE UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA RETIREMENT PENSION PLAN REPORT ON THE ACTUARIAL VALUATION FOR FUNDING PURPOSES AS AT JANUARY 1, 2014
REPORT ON THE ACTUARIAL VALUATION FOR FUNDING PURPOSES AS AT JANUARY 1, 2014 JUNE 2014 Financial Services Commission of Ontario Registration Number: 0310839 Canada Revenue Agency Registration Number: 0310839
More informationComparison of Defined Benefit and Defined Contribution Pension Plans
Prepared for the SFU Faculty Association Comparison of Defined Benefit and Defined Contribution Pension Plans Prepared by PBI Actuarial Consultants Ltd. Suite 1070, One Bentall Centre 505 Burrard Street,
More informationEl Paso County Retirement Plan
Conduent HR Consulting, LLC El Paso County Retirement Plan Actuarial Valuation Report Prepared as of January 1, 2018 May 2018 May 24, 2018 Board of Retirement El Paso County Retirement Plan 105 E. Vermijo,
More informationShared Risk Plan for CUPE Employees of New Brunswick Hospitals
Shared Risk Plan for CUPE Employees of New Brunswick Hospitals Actuarial Valuation Report as at December 31, 2014 Report prepared in September 2015 Registration number: Canada Revenue Agency #0385849 NB
More informationBBC Pension Scheme. Actuarial valuation as at 1 April June willistowerswatson.com
BBC Pension Scheme Actuarial valuation as at 1 April 2016 30 June 2017 willistowerswatson.com 1 Summary The main results of the Scheme s actuarial valuation are as follows: Technical provisions funding
More informationMemorandum. INTRODUCTION According to subsection 3530 of the Standards of Practice: Demographic Assumptions
Memorandum To: From: All Fellows, Affiliates, Associates, and Correspondents of the Canadian Institute of Actuaries and Other Interested Parties James K. Christie, Chair Actuarial Standards Board Conrad
More informationLocal Government Pension Scheme (England and Wales) Actuarial valuation as at 31 March 2013 Advice on assumptions
Date: 2 February 2015 Authors: Ian Boonin FIA Michael Scanlon FIA Contents page 1 Executive summary 1 2 Introduction 7 3 General considerations 10 4 Pensioner mortality 12 5 Age retirement from service
More informationM I N N E S O T A C O R R E C T I O N A L E M P L O Y E E S R E T I R E M E N T F U N D
M I N N E S O T A C O R R E C T I O N A L E M P L O Y E E S R E T I R E M E N T F U N D 4 - Y E A R E X P E R I E N C E S T U D Y J U L Y 1, 2 0 1 1 T H R O U G H J U N E 3 0, 2 0 1 5 GRS Gabriel Roeder
More informationCity of Boynton Beach Municipal Police Officers Retirement Fund Actuarial Valuation Report as of October 1, 2018
City of Boynton Beach Municipal Police Officers Retirement Fund Actuarial Valuation Report as of October 1, 2018 Annual Employer Contribution for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2020 April 3, 2019
More informationActuarial Section. Actuarial Section THE BOTTOM LINE. The average MSEP retirement benefit is $15,609 per year.
Actuarial Section THE BOTTOM LINE The average MSEP retirement benefit is $15,609 per year. Actuarial Section Actuarial Section 89 Actuary s Certification Letter 91 Summary of Actuarial Assumptions 97 Actuarial
More informationACTUARIAL REPORT. on the
on the PUBLIC SERVICE DEATH BENEFIT ACCOUNT Office of the Chief Actuary Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions Canada 12th Floor, Kent Square Building 255 Albert Street Ottawa, Ontario
More information3-6 Principal Valuation Results 7-8 Expected Termination from Active Employment 9-10 COMMENTS AND CONCLUSION. Data Furnished for Valuation
THE POLICE AND FIRE RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF THE CITY OF DETROIT ANNUAL ACTUARIAL VALUATION OF COMPONENT II JUNE 30, 2014 OUTLINE OF CONTENTS Pages Items 1 Cover letter Valuation Results 3-6 Principal Valuation
More informationCITY OF ST. CLAIR SHORES RETIREE HEALTH CARE PLANS
CITY OF ST. CLAIR SHORES RETIREE HEALTH CARE PLANS ACTUARIAL VALUATION REPORT AS OF JUNE 30, 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section A B C D E Page Number -- 1-2 1 2-4 1-2 1-9 1-2 3-4 1 2-6 7 8-12 13 Cover Letter
More informationA R K A N S A S P U B L I C E M P L O Y E E S R E T I R E M E N T S Y S T E M ( I N C L U D I N G D I S T R I C T J U D G E S
A R K A N S A S P U B L I C E M P L O Y E E S R E T I R E M E N T S Y S T E M ( I N C L U D I N G D I S T R I C T J U D G E S ) G A S B S T A T E M E N T N O S. 6 7 A N D 6 8 A C C O U N T I N G A N D
More informationActuary s Certification Letter (Pension Trust Fund)
Actuarial Actuary s Certification Letter (Pension Trust Fund) May 22, 2015 Board of Trustees Texas Municipal Retirement System ( TMRS or the System ) Austin, Texas Dear Trustees: In accordance with the
More informationSANTA BARBARA COUNTY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM
SANTA BARBARA COUNTY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM REPORT ON THE ACTUARIAL VALUATION AS OF JUNE 30, 2003 p:\wpc\doc\11228\2003\008_val-2003.doc October 10, 2003 Board of Retirement Santa Barbara County Employees
More informationThe City of Cranston Fire and Police Department Pension Plans
The City of Cranston Fire and Police Department Pension Plans Report on the Results of an Experience Study - Revised Period Covering July 1, 2011 June 30, 2014 August 2015 Christopher Kozlow Director,
More informationBCE INC. PENSION PLAN ACTUARIAL VALUATION AS AT DECEMBER 31, FSCO Registration #
BCE INC. PENSION PLAN ACTUARIAL VALUATION AS AT DECEMBER 31, 2016 FSCO Registration #0908061 Robert Marchessault, F.C.I.A., F.S.A. Stéphan Cliche, F.C.I.A., F.S.A. Audrey Lapointe, A.S.A. BCE Inc. 1, Carrefour
More informationReport on the Annual Basic Benefits Valuation of the School Employees Retirement System of Ohio
Report on the Annual Basic Benefits Valuation of the School Employees Retirement System of Ohio Prepared as of June 30, 2011 Cavanaugh Macdonald C O N S U L T I N G, L L C The experience and dedication
More informationT E X A S M U N I C I P A L R E T I R E M E N T S Y S T E M ACTUARIAL E X P E R I E N C E I N V E S T I G A T I O N S T U D Y AS OF D E C E M B E R 3
T E X A S M U N I C I P A L R E T I R E M E N T S Y S T E M ACTUARIAL E X P E R I E N C E I N V E S T I G A T I O N S T U D Y AS OF D E C E M B E R 3 1, 2 0 10 May 20, 2011 Board of Trustees Texas Municipal
More informationMISSOURI STATE EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM - JUDGES
MISSOURI STATE EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM - JUDGES 5 - YEAR EXPERIENCE STUDY JULY 1, 2010 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2015 ACTUARIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT 2010-2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS Item Overview and Economic Assumptions
More informationDALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY STAFF PENSION PLAN REPORT ON THE ACTUARIAL VALUATION AS AT MARCH 31, 2017 NOVEMBER 2017 PREPARED BY:
DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY REPORT ON THE ACTUARIAL VALUATION (REGISTRATION NO. C242297) NOVEMBER 2017 PREPARED BY: 1969 UPPER WATER STREET, SUITE 503 HALIFAX, NOVA SCOTIA B3J 3R7 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE
More informationMarch 26, The purpose of the valuation of the City of Eastpointe Employees Death Benefit Plan as of November 1, 2012 is to:
March 26, 2013 The Board of Trustees Employees Death Benefit Plan Eastpointe, Michigan Dear Board Members: The purpose of the valuation of the Employees Death Benefit Plan as of November 1, 2012 is to:
More informationLaborers & Retirement Board and Employees Annuity and Benefit Fund of Chicago
Laborers & Retirement Board and Employees Annuity and Benefit Fund of Chicago Actuarial Valuation Report for the Year Ending December 31, 2017 May 2018 May 2, 2018 The Retirement Board of the Laborers
More informationJune 19, Compute the City s recommended contribution rate for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2015.
June 19, 2015 The Retirement Board Employees Retirement System Marine City, Michigan Dear Board Members: The purpose of the annual actuarial valuation of the Employees Retirement System as of June 30,
More informationSelect Period Mortality Survey
Select Period Mortality Survey March 2014 SPONSORED BY Product Development Section Committee on Life Insurance Research Society of Actuaries PREPARED BY Allen M. Klein, FSA, MAAA Michelle L. Krysiak, FSA,
More informationREPORT OF THE ANNUAL ACTUARIAL VALUATION AND GAIN/LOSS ANALYSIS
A R K A N S A S S T A T E P O L I C E R E T I R E M E N T S Y S T E M ANNUAL ACTUARIAL VALU A T I O N A N D T H E GAIN/LOSS ANALYSIS O F E X P E R I E N C E JUNE 30, 2016 REPORT OF THE ANNUAL ACTUARIAL
More informationActuarial Valuation Report for the Employees Retirement System of the City of Baltimore
Actuarial Valuation Report for the Employees Retirement System of the City of Baltimore as of June 30, 2015 Produced by Cheiron November 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Transmittal Letter... i Foreword...
More informationGASB STATEMENT NO. 67 REPORT
GASB STATEMENT NO. 67 REPORT FOR THE IOWA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM MEASUREMENT DATE: JUNE 30, 2018 Cavanaugh Macdonald C O N S U L T I N G, L L C The experience and dedication you deserve November
More informationORLANDO UTILITIES COMMISSION PENSION PLAN ACTUARIAL VALUATION REPORT AS OF OCTOBER 1, 2016
ORLANDO UTILITIES COMMISSION PENSION PLAN ACTUARIAL VALUATION REPORT AS OF OCTOBER 1, 2016 ANNUAL EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title
More informationActuarial SECTION. A Tradition of Service
Actuarial SECTION A Tradition of Service We were created by the Michigan Legislature in 1945 with one simple goal: to help municipalities offer affordable, sustainable retirement solutions for their employees.
More informationTeachers Pension Scheme
Teachers Pension Scheme Actuarial valuation as at 31 March 2012 Date: 9 June 2014 Author: Matt Wood and Donal Cormican Contents 1 Executive summary 1 2 Introduction 6 3 General considerations 9 4 Pensioner
More informationActuary s Certification Letter (Pension Trust Fund)
Actuarial Actuary s Certification Letter (Pension Trust Fund) May 19, 2017 Board of Trustees Texas Municipal Retirement System ( TMRS or the System ) Austin, Texas Dear Trustees: In accordance with the
More informationLos Angeles County Employees Retirement Association
Milliman Actuarial Valuation Los Angeles County Employees Retirement Association 2016 Investigation of Experience for Retirement Benefit Assumptions December 2016 Board Meeting Prepared by: Mark C. Olleman,
More informationCity of Kalamazoo Postretirement Welfare Benefits Plan Actuarial Valuation Report as of January 1, 2017
City of Kalamazoo Postretirement Welfare Benefits Plan Actuarial Valuation Report as of January 1, 2017 Section A Page Number -- 1-2 1 2 3 4-6 Table of Contents Cover Letter EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Executive
More informationC ITY OF MADISON HEIGHTS GENERAL OTHER POSTEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS
C ITY OF MADISON HEIGHTS GENERAL OTHER POSTEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS ACTUARIAL VALUATION REPORT AS OF JUNE 30, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Number -- Cover Letter EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1-2 Executive Summary
More informationGASB STATEMENT NO. 68 REPORT FOR THE BASIC BENEFITS VALUATION OF THE SCHOOL EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF OHIO
GASB STATEMENT NO. 68 REPORT FOR THE BASIC BENEFITS VALUATION OF THE SCHOOL EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF OHIO PREPARED AS OF JUNE 30, 2017 Cavanaugh Macdonald C O N S U L T I N G, L L C The experience
More informationUniversity of Toronto Pension Plan. Annual Financial Report. For the Year Ended June 30, 2017
University of Toronto Pension Plan Annual Financial Report For the Year Ended June 30, 2017 University of Toronto Pension Plan 1 Ten-year Review (Canadian $ millions) 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011
More informationGeneral conclusions November Pension Fund Survey Pension plan benefits and their financing
General conclusions November 2009 Pension Fund Survey Pension plan benefits and their financing Executive Summary This Survey covers benefits provided by Swiss pension funds and how they are financed based
More informationJacksonville Police and Fire Pension Fund ACTUARIAL VALUATION REPORT AS OF OCTOBER 1, 2017
Jacksonville Police and Fire Pension Fund ACTUARIAL VALUATION REPORT AS OF OCTOBER 1, 2017 ANNUAL EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2019 January 25, 2018 Board of Trustees
More informationReport to Board of Administration
From: Thomas Moutes, General Manager SUBJECT: Recommendation: Report to Board of Administration Agenda of: OCTOBER 28, 2014 ITEM: CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED ASSUMPTION CHANGES BASED ON ACTUARIAL
More informationReport of the Group Annuity Experience Committee Mortality Experience for
Overview Report of the Group Annuity Experience Committee Mortality Experience for 2001-2002 The Group Annuity Experience Committee performs biennial mortality studies of insurance company annuity experience
More informationFUNDING POLICY STATEMENT
FUNDING POLICY STATEMENT Effective Date: November 10, 2017 Contents Page Background and Purpose... 2 Environment and Risks... 3 Funding Principles... 8 Funding Strategies... 9 Governance... 13 Glossary...
More informationActuarial Valuation Report on the Toronto Fire Department Superannuation and Benefit Fund as of December 31, April 2007
Actuarial Valuation Report on the as of December 31, 2006 April 2007 Prepared for: Committee Attention: Ms. Imma Monardo Manager, Pensions The City of Toronto Pension Section Metro Hall 55 John Street,
More informationTable of Contents Introduction Your Privacy The Plan Administrator Commonly Asked Questions Glossary Joining the Plan Contribution Credited Service
SUMMARY Table of Contents Introduction 1 Your Privacy 3 The Plan Administrator 4 Commonly Asked Questions 4 Glossary 5 Joining the Plan 7 Contribution 7 Credited Service 8 Excess Hours and the Hour Bank
More informationLocal Government Pension Scheme (Scotland) Late Retirement
Late Retirement Date: 26 February 2015 Authors: Ian Boonin FIA Neville Hosegood FIA Contents page 1 Introduction 1 2 The increase in benefits 3 3 Examples 5 Factors 7 Cited Regulations 8 Legislative references
More informationGN11(ROI): RETIREMENT BENEFIT SCHEMES TRANSFER VALUES
GN11(ROI): RETIREMENT BENEFIT SCHEMES TRANSFER VALUES Classification Practice Standard MEMBERS ARE REMINDED THAT THEY MUST ALWAYS COMPLY WITH THE PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT STANDARDS, AND THAT GUIDANCE NOTES
More informationACTUARIAL REPORT 25 th. on the
25 th on the CANADA PENSION PLAN Office of the Chief Actuary Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions Canada 16 th Floor, Kent Square Building 255 Albert Street Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H2 Facsimile:
More informationMETROPOLITAN TORONTO PENSION PLAN REPORT ON THE ACTUARIAL VALUATION FOR FUNDING PURPOSES AS AT DECEMBER 31, 2016 APRIL 2017
GM21.6 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 REPORT ON THE ACTUARIAL VALUATION FOR FUNDING PURPOSES AS AT DECEMBER 31, 2016 APRIL 2017 Financial Services Commission of Ontario Registration Number: 0351577 Canada Revenue
More informationLocal Government Pension Scheme (Scotland)
Late Retirement Date: 23 January 2017 Authors: Ian Boonin FIA James Pepler FIA Contents page 1 Introduction 1 2 The increase in benefits 3 3 Examples 5 Factors 6 Cited Regulations 7 Legislative references
More informationUniversity of Toronto Pension Plan. Annual Financial Report. For the Year Ended June 30, 2016
University of Toronto Pension Plan Annual Financial Report For the Year Ended June 30, 2016 University of Toronto Pension Plan 1 Eleven-year Review (Canadian $ millions) 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010
More informationMilwaukee Board of School Directors Early Retirement Supplement and Benefit Improvement Plan Actuarial Valuation As of July 1, 2017
Appendix F to RFP 1001 Milwaukee Board of School Directors Early Retirement Supplement and Benefit Improvement Plan Actuarial Valuation As of July 1, 2017 Table of Contents Section Page Introduction A
More informationUniversity of Toronto Pension Plans. Annual Financial Report. For the Year Ended June 30, 2013
University of Toronto Pension Plans Annual Financial Report For the Year Ended June 30, 2013 University of Toronto Pension Plan (RPP) Highlights 1 As at July 1, 2013 With Comparative Figures at July 1,
More informationTEACHERS RETIREMENT BOARD. BENEFITS AND SERVICES COMMITTEE Item Number: 5. SUBJECT: Demographic Characteristics of CalSTRS Members
TEACHERS RETIREMENT BOARD BENEFITS AND SERVICES COMMITTEE Item Number: 5 SUBJECT: Demographic Characteristics of CalSTRS Members CONSENT: ACTION: INFORMATION: X ATTACHMENT(S): DATE OF MEETING: /45 mins.
More informationGASB Statement No. 67 Report
GASB Statement No. 67 Report For the Basic Benefits Valuation of the School Employees Retirement System of Ohio Prepared as of June 30, 2017 Cavanaugh Macdonald C O N S U L T I N G, L L C The experience
More informationMay 4, Mr. David Strauss Executive Director Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp K St. NW Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Strauss:
May 4, 2000 Mr. David Strauss Executive Director Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. 1200 K St. NW Washington, DC Dear Mr. Strauss: The American Academy of Actuaries (Academy) and Conference of Consulting Actuaries
More informationACTUARIAL REPORT on the Pension Plan for the CANADIAN FORCES Reserve Force as at 31 March 2015
on the Pension Plan for the CANADIAN FORCES Reserve Force To obtain a copy of this report, please contact: Office of the Chief Actuary Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions Canada 12 th
More informationACTUARIAL VALUATION REPORT
ACTUARIAL VALUATION REPORT as of JUNE 30, 2016 New York State Teachers Retirement System Office of the Actuary July 17, 2017 NEW YORK STATE TEACHERS' RETIREMENT SYSTEM Actuarial Valuation Report as of
More informationCity of Fraser Retiree Health Care Plan Actuarial Valuation Report As of June 30, 2017
City of Fraser Retiree Health Care Plan Actuarial Valuation Report As of June 30, 2017 Table of Contents Section Page Number -- Cover Letter Executive Summary 1 Executive Summary A Valuation Results 1
More informationCITY OF DEARBORN CHAPTER 22 RETIREMENT SYSTEM
CITY OF DEARBORN CHAPTER 22 RETIREMENT SYSTEM 50 TH ANNUAL ACTUARIAL VALUATION JUNE 30, 2016 January 31, 2017 Board of Trustees City of Dearborn Chapter 22 Retirement System Dearborn, Michigan Re: City
More information