administrator is a statutorily defined position. See 29 U.S.C. § 1002(16)(A). However, a person, even an outsider, may function as a fiduciary under subsection (iii) even if not a “named” plan administrator. In some circumstances, subsection (i) and subsection (iii) can have overlapping coverage. The Second Circuit has noted that “[s]ubsection one imposes fiduciary status on those who exercise discretionary authority, regardless of whether such authority was ever granted, [while] [s]ubsection threé describes those individuals who have actually been granted discretionary authority, regardless of whether such authority is ever exercised.” Bouboulis v. Transp. Workers Union of Am., 442 F.3d 55, 63 (2d Cir.2006) (quoting Olson v. E.F. Hutton & Co., Inc., 957 F.2d 622, 625 (8th Cir.1992)) (<HOLDING>). The Supreme Court has interpreted the term
holding that plan language giving plan administrator power to determine which employees are eligible to participate in the plan and providing all parties dealing with the plan an interpretation of plan provisions on request indicates deferential standard of review of trustee eligibility decisions holding that one who is named in documents as plan administrator signs documents as plan administrator and assumes discretionary authority in the administration of the pension plan is a fiduciary holding that because no plan document granted discretion to the plan administrator and because the fiduciaries had not expressly delegated their discretionary authority to the plan administrator the district court properly employed the de novo standard of review holding that a labor union was a functional fiduciary to a plan under subsection iii due to its position as plan administrator and its authority to decide whether participants could appeal adverse decisions on their claims recognizing that plan participants should be able to access information about the plan administrators fiduciary duties from the plan administrators counsel