DL expiration date and post-change filing cycle

[SavingsRUS]

I think this has come up before but can't seem to find anything definitive/official regarding what to do when a plan sponsor has a cycle-changing event and its determination letter expires before its next applicable cycle.

Example: Plan sponsor has EIN ending in 8 so its plan is Cycle C, with an EGTRRA RAP deadline of 1/31/2009. In 2008 the plan sponsor changes its EIN to one that ends in 0. This means the plan is now a Cycle E plan with an EGTRRA RAP deadline of 1/31/2011. Under Section 11.03(3) of Rev. Proc. 2007-44, because both Cycle C (pre-change cycle) and Cycle E (post-change cycle) are still open as of the EIN change in 2008, the plan may (but is not required to) treat the pre-change cycle as the applicable cycle until the pre-change cycle ends. The plan submits a Cycle C determination letter application by 1/31/2009. When the IRS issues the favorable DL, it issues it to the plan sponsor under its new EIN ending in 0 and specifies a DL expiration date of 1/31/2011, which is the EGTRRA RAP deadline for Cycle E. But the next filing deadline is 1/31/2016, which is the post-EGTRRA RAP deadline for Cycle E.

Based on Rev. Proc. 2007-44, it seems that a plan in this situation has a gap between the expiration date of its pre-change cycle DL and the deadline for its post-change cycle DL. In the example above, there is a full 5-year gap between the DL expiration date and the next Cycle E filing deadline. How is the plan sponsor supposed to handle this when it comes time to submit the Cycle E DL application by 1/31/2016?

I know some people say you need to submit another DL application again before the DL expiration date so you don't have a gap, but that would mean a plan sponsor has to do two DL applications in a single 5-year cycle, and that doesn't really make sense. The ERISA Outline Book talks about how the IRS does not provide an example for this scenario and states that it would not make sense for a plan to have to be restated and reviewed twice in the same RAP cycle. That certainly sounds reasonable, but how is this actually happening when the IRS is reviewing the DL applications in these scenarios and there is a gap in the DL coverage? Is anyone getting pushback because the DL expired before they next submitted a DL application? Is there anything more definitive from the IRS about this?

[SavingsRUS]

Bumping this topic in the hopes that someone - anyone? - has personal experience with this issue with the IRS that they can relay for the benefit of the forum.