Disclosures About Another Actuary's Work
I'm confused about the required disclosures for another actuary's work.
In 2016 Spring 20a, the acceptable answers for disclosures about another actuary's work in the OPINION section are: the name of the actuary, the affiliation of the other actuary, that the AA reviewed the other actuary's work, and the extent of that review.
The wiki (and TIA's outline, for that matter) states that disclosing the other actuary's credential is a required disclosure, but the examiner's report specifically listed the credentials and qualifications as a common incorrect answer.
I referred to the COPLFR reading directly, and found this (page 48 - https://www.actuary.org/files/publications/PC_Loss_Reserve_Practice_Note_2017.pdf)
4.10 Use of the work of another
According to the NAIC Instructions,
"If the Appointed Actuary has made use of the analysis of another actuary not within the
Appointed Actuary’s control (such as for pools and associations, for a subsidiary or for
special lines of business) for a material portion of the reserves, the other actuary must be
identified by name, credential and affiliation within the OPINION paragraph. If the
Appointed Actuary has made use of the work of a non-actuary (such as for modeling) for
a material portion of the reserves, that individual must be identified by name and
affiliation and a description of the type of analysis performed much be provided."
Section 5 of the Instructions also requires that, if an actuary has used the work of another actuary for a
material portion of the reserves, he or she must provide that other actuary’s name, credentials and
affiliation in the opinion. In 2016 the Instructions were expanded to include the use of the work of a nonactuary, which is consistent with the phraseology in ASOP No. 36.
What gives, CAS? Was that question appealed, or were there changes since 2016 Spring?