Thanks for the clarification. (I have mistakenly looked at "non-elective" term from the ER point of view.)
I may be mixing apples and 401ks here, but I thought that anyone "benefitting" under the plan would get Gateway. (For instance, a person receiving 3% SH 401k QNEC would be eligible for Gateway, even if they were not eligible for a regular contribution.) If I am correct, then wouldn't this apply to the "otherwise excludible": if they got some of the initial non-elective, they would be benefitting; so they could get Gateway too. "All or nothing" approach?
QUOTE (Tom Poje @ Jan 2 2007, 01:15 PM)

if you have a non-401k plan, the only type of contributions you have are nonelective contributions. (unless you had after tax contributions), so your one comment makes no sense. non elective simply means one had no choice, (made no election, if you will) as opposed to deferrals where you 'elect' to puit $ in the plan, hence the term elctive contribution.
you could have the following:
profit sharing plan (cross tested) with immediate eligibility.
a person will either receive a contribution or not, based on allocation conditions. (this includes top-heavy, which may be less than through the formula)
anyone who does not receive a contribution can not get the gateway.
anyone who receives a contribution will get the gateway (unless the individual could be treated as an 'otherwise excludable' and the non discrim testing is run disaggregating the groups. that person would simply receive the initial nonelective)
there is still no 'fail-safe' or picking or choosing unless one indeed chooses to test otherwise excludables separately. but once that has been determined, there is no further 'adding' people, or choosing who to give extra to.
hope that helps