o $2.298 billion over the next 20 years?The PBGC is also specifically requesting comments on the following questions from plans and other stake holders:Should the top range of permitted interest rates under ERISA Section 4312(a)(2) be lower than the typical minimum funding rate?What should the relationship be, if any, between: (a) the estimated date of plan insolvency, expected investment mix, and/or funded ratio; and (b) permitted withdrawal liability assumptions?Should the final rule specify assumptions or methods other than interest rate assumptions.The PBGC does not appear to be finished issuing guidance yet on the actuarial assumptions that multiemployer plan actuaries may use to calculate withdrawal liability, and we expect more to be coming soon.Comments to the Proposed Rule must be received by November 14, 2022 for agency consideration. We anticipate comments from plans, unions, and participating employers. We will continue to keep you apprised of material updates. Stay tuned. 87 Fed. Reg. 62316 (Oct. 14, 2022); available athttps://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-10-14/pdf/2022-22304.pdf.Id. Id. As quoted from Proposed Rule: “See United Mine Workers of Am. 1974 Pension Plan v. Energy W. Mining Co., No. 20-7054, 2022 WL 2568025 (D.C. Cir. July 8, 2022) (re 4044 rates); Sofco Erectors, Inc. vs. Trs. of Ohio, Operating Eng’rs, Pension Fund, 15 F. 4th 407 (6th Cir. 2021) (re blend of 4044 rates and funding interest rate assumption); GCIU Employer Retirement Fund v. MNG Enterprises, Inc., No. 2:21-cv-00061, 2021 WL 3260079 (C.D. Cal., July 8, 2021) (re 2044 rates), appeals filed, Nos. 21-55864, 21-55923; Manhattan Ford Lincoln, Inc. v. UAW Local 259 Pension Fund, 331 F. Supp. 3d 365 (D.N.J. 2018) (re blended rates), appeal voluntarily dismissed; New York Times Co. V. Newspaper and Mail Deliverers;-Publishers’ Pension Fund, 303 F. Supp. 3d 236 (S.D.N.Y. 2018) (re blended rates), appeals voluntarily dismissed. In the cross-appeals for the New York Times decision, PBGC participated as amicus cu