"[T]he PBGC does not consider 'actuarial value' when assessing whether a new form of benefit will result in increased payments relative to a prior one, as Congress instructed; rather, it ignores that factor altogether and simply assumes that the mere potential for increased benefits is enough to keep a domestic relations order from being qualified. Because that policy, and thus the Appeals Board decision, disregards a basis of comparison required by Congress, it is both arbitrary and capricious, and contrary to the agency's statutory mandate." [Dullea v. PBGC, No. 16-147 (D.D.C. Mar. 20, 2017)]