Apparently, Accudraft's volume submitter only provides for a 3% top heavy minimum, and not the 5% required for a cross tested gateway. They have a stand alone model amendment to fix it.

What approach are you taking to this:

1. you had all cross tested plans adopt it < 12/31/02?
2. you are including it with all new cross tested documents currently, and will go back and add it to previously restated plans?
3. You'll handle it on a case by case basis, since it's not that common for actives in a x-tested plan to drop < 1000 hours and so it really doesn't arise that much?
4. You could do the same thing with a 401a4 (11g) corrective amendment?
5. Is a plan without this correction (but in no true need of it since no one is getting t/h only) somehow "deficient" or unqualifiable?

Sorry for the babbling but its difficult to imagine all the permutations to come up with the "best" answer. What are you doing?

We use Accudraft as well, so I am familiar with your predicament. Your document is not deficient. There just may be situations where you need to provide the gateway minimum and the document does not allow for it. It is correctable under 1.401(a)(4)-11(g).

We are including the amendment with documents going forward. I feel there is only a need to address the documents already completed on a case-by-case situation as needed. A safe harbor 401(k) plan will be the main cause of failure in this situation coupled with the top heavy issue you mention.