Fiduciary Duties in Handling QDROs (Posted November 30, 2001) Technical Tip 25: The following question and answer are from the DOL Q&A Session at the 2000 ASPPA Annual Conference: There have been several court cases holding that QDROs need not be as specific as the regulations would require. In an Advisory Opinion (AO 99-13A) based on "sham" QDROs, the DOL said it is not the administrator’s task to "look behind" the QDRO document. Can you give us a little more guidance in this matter? DOL Response: The Advisory Opinion provides that, if the QDRO appears on its face to be valid--and there are no known conflicting facts, then the ERISA Administrator is under no duty to investigate the validity of the DRO, but only to determine if it meets the statutory criteria to be qualified. However, if the ERISA Administrator becomes aware of facts which suggest that the divorce is a sham--or other facts suggesting that the DRO is otherwise invalid, then the ERISA Administrator has an ERISA fiduciary duty to consider and, where appropriate, to investigate those facts. Caveat: The answer was drafted by Fred Reish and Brad Huss, the program moderators, based on their understandings of discussions with four senior officials of the Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration (PWBA) of the U.S. DOL. As a result, it does not represent a formal or binding position statement by the PWBA. View all Tips © 2012 Reish Luftman Reicher & Cohen, a Professional Corporation Important notice: Answers are provided as general guidance on the subjects covered in the question and are not provided as legal advice to the questioner's situation. Any legal issues should be reviewed by your legal counsel to apply the law to the particular facts of your situation.