UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

JERRY DUNCAN, et al., ┐ Plaintiffs, │ │ CHARLES T. EVANS; DAVID MCBRIDE; RONALD E. │ FARLEY; LARRY J. SIMPSON; ROBERT B. BONDS; STEVE │ HINCH, │ Plaintiffs-Appellants, > No. 17-5389 │ v. │ │ LEONARD J. MUZYN, et al., │ │ Defendants, │ TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY RETIREMENT SYSTEM; │ TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY, │ Defendants-Appellees. │ ┘

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee at Nashville. No. 3:10-cv-00217—Aleta Arthur Trauger, District Judge.

Argued: January 31, 2018

Decided and Filed: March 16, 2018

Before: MOORE, THAPAR, and LARSEN, Circuit Judges. _________________

COUNSEL ARGUED: Michael J. Wall, BRANSTETTER, STRANCH & JENNINGS, PLLC, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellants. Edmund S. Sauer, BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS LLP, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee Tennessee Valley Authority Retirement System. Edward C. Meade, TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY, Knoxville, Tennessee, for Appellee Tennessee Valley Authority. ON BRIEF: Michael J. Wall, James G. Stranch, III, R. Jan Jennings, Michael G. Stewart, BRANSTETTER, STRANCH & JENNINGS, PLLC, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellants. Edmund S. Sauer, BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS LLP, Nashville, Tennessee, James S. Christie, Jr., BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS LLP, No. 17-5389 Duncan, et al. v. Muzyn, et al. Page 2

Birmingham, Alabama, for Appellee Tennessee Valley Authority Retirement System. Edward C. Meade, James S. Chase, Frances Regina Koho, TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY, Knoxville, Tennessee, for Appellee Tennessee Valley Authority.

THAPAR, J., delivered the opinion of the court in which LARSEN, J., joined. MOORE, J. (pp. 10–18), delivered a separate dissenting opinion. _________________

OPINION _________________

THAPAR, Circuit Judge. Underfunded public pensions are a vexing public-policy issue. See generally Jack M. Beermann, The Public Pension Crisis, 70 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 3 (2013). One answer is to cut benefits, see id. at 31, 86, but unsurprisingly, that often proves controversial. So it was here. Jerry Duncan and a class of pension-plan participants sued their employer and its pension system when the system cut their benefits. Their suit has already produced one appeal before this court. Duncan v. Muzyn, 833 F.3d 567 (6th Cir. 2016). They now pursue the second.

I.

The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) provides funding for the Tennessee Valley Authority Retirement System (“the Plan”). A seven-member board (“the Board”) administers the Plan and manages its assets. And the Plan, in turn, provides defined benefits to participants. That means the Plan, by way of the TVA’s contributions, pays a pension benefit