1409(a) not 1409 (c) was ammended
No. Although that may be the source of the interpretation and technical problem. It was redesignated (c) and the language was in an earlier version of Sec. 309 but with different applicability provisions and all that was changed was the designation and the application date. Which as you point out earlier makes no sense with a November 1986 effective date but that appears to be what the statute says.
The applicable effective date clause cited above applies to all amendments to Sec. 1409.
CPA's typically do great statutory legal work, why would I be surprised.