catch-up universal availability failure

Suppose a controlled group has two 401k plans - A and B. The decision makers told both plans not to add super catch-ups. Plan B ignored the direction and added super catch-ups. For sake of argument, decision makers refuse to add super catch-ups to plan A. How does one fix a universal availability failure? Does plan B have to be amended retroactively to remove super catch-up and therefore remove/distribute any super catch-up deferrals? Or is plan A forced to add super catch-ups?

Thanks

I don't believe there is a specific correction set forth anywhere to cover this situation (especially since the super catch-up rule is so new).  However, it seems you could analogize to the situation where a plan did not offer the regular catch up to all of its employees.  In such a case, the plan would be treated as a discriminatory plan and, unless corrected, the qualified status of the plan could be adversely affected.  To correct this type of failure, it would seem that Plan A employer could self-correct under EPCRS generally by:  providing the affected employees with the right to make the catch-up (it would be required as long as Plan B doesn't stop making the catch-up under its plan) and making QNECs to the affected employees to compensate them for their missed deferral opportunity (so likely 50% of the additional catch-up plus earnings).   Otherwise, if Plan B agrees, they could utilize VCP and submit the retroactive amendment to the IRS for its approval.  Note the IRS doesn't usually agree to retroactive amendments unless it increases benefits for plan participants--here, the request would include distributing the benefits of one group from the plan so their benefits will be being reduced.  The client could go to VCP and propose any other correction it can think of... e.g., propose to simply amend Plan B to stop the catch-ups with no distributions.  Here, it is likely the IRS would say no, unless Plan A gives the QNEC.