When appointing investment managers under ERISA Section 3(38), which is NOT a criterion for consideration?

When appointing investment managers under ERISA Section 3(38), it's crucial to understand the standards that govern fiduciary responsibility and the specific qualifications for investment managers. The correct choice highlights a criterion that is not essential in the context of ERISA specifications.

The plan naming an investment manager establishes the formal relationship and responsibility for managing the plan's assets. This criterion is important because it ties the manager directly to the plan and establishes fiduciary accountability. Also, the investment manager being a bank can indicate a level of professionalism and regulatory oversight typically associated with such institutions, making it a relevant consideration.

Furthermore, the requirement for the investment manager to acknowledge fiduciary status is vital because it ensures that the manager understands and accepts the legal responsibilities to act in the best interest of the plan participants. This acknowledgment is necessary to maintain the integrity of the fiduciary role.

In contrast, whether an investment manager appears on a bank's approved list is not a fundamental criterion under ERISA 3(38). While being on such a list might demonstrate a level of credibility or trust from the bank, it is not a requirement under the law to qualify as a 3(38) investment manager. The primary focus for ERISA criteria revolves around fiduciary responsibility, competency,