KJ2

Thank you both for the replies. Also, CuseFan, appreciate the details and example. I was definitely merging both of those issues together as I considered this situation which resulted in my confusion.

It seems that most (all?) prototype/volume submitter plan documents that I have seen explicitly reference the 410(b)(6)(C) transition rule as either a default in the basic plan document or an election within the adoption agreement. As a result of this practicality; I have always assumed that, in order to take advantage of the 410(b)(6)(C) transition rule, it must be explicitly stated in the terms of the plan document. I am now confronted with a prospective client's plan that is being spun-off from an individually designed MEP. The MEP document does not reference 401(b)(6)(C) or the transition rule at all but the sponsor of the MEP claims that "while the plan document does not specifically reference the rule, the plan covers it." My gut reaction was to "call BS" on that but, being a careful person, I thought I should try to look for some actual support for my position. Unfortunately, I came up with nothing. Any thoughts, guidance or insight (or even better a citation) that anyone can offer regarding whether it is necessary for an individually designed plan to include explicit reference to the 410(b)(6)(C) transition rule in order for the sponsor to take advantage of it? Thanks.