TN 9 (04-24)
GN 04001.070 Do Not Reopen Correct Determinations — Operating Policy
A determination which was correct when it was made is still correct even if there
is subsequently a change in the factual situation. New and material evidence (GN 04010.030) can only be used to reopen and revise incorrect determinations, i.e., determinations
which were never correct, but appeared to be correct based on the evidence before
the adjudicator at the time the determination was made.
EXAMPLE:Correct Determination
An individual is entitled to mother's benefits on their deceased spouse's record because
they have a child in their care. The entitlement notice is sent in March 1987. They
are between age 60 and 65 when the child turns 16 in July 1988. Their mother's benefits
terminate the month the child turns 16 as there is no automatic conversion from mother's
benefits to widow's benefits. Therefore, the individual receives a termination notice
in June 1988. A widow's application must be filed. Four months later, in October 1988,
the individual files an application for widow's benefits. Their first month of entitlement
to widow's benefits is October 1988 (since the application cannot be retroactive).
We cannot reopen the initial determination dated June 1988, which terminated their
benefits, and begin paying their widow's benefits effective July 1988. The determination
of June 1988 to terminate their mother's benefits was correct as the child attained
age 16. They were not entitled to widow's benefits for June through September 1988
because no unadjudicated application for widow's benefits has been filed. And where
correct determinations have previously been made, we do not reopen such determinations.
(See GN 04001.040 A. for an additional example of a correct determination.)
EXAMPLES: Correct Determination
A claimant filed for retirement benefits on 04/15/2007 and was denied for failure
to establish proof of age. The claimant did not provide a birth certificate or any
acceptable proof. Their claim was later denied and a notice was sent on 06/15/2007.
They later come into the office and file another retirement claim on 02/25/2008. They
meet the new tolerance rules (see GN 00302.030) that were effective 02/11/2008 and
ask that their prior claim denied on 06/15/2007 be reopened and revised based on this
new policy established on 02/11/2008.
The prior claim denied 06/15/2007 was a correct determination based on established
policy at that time. We do not reopen correct determinations simply because there
is a change of facts, a different rule of law can now be applied, or a different inference
can now be drawn from the evidence (see GN 04010.020.C.).
Since the new policy wasn't established until 02/11/2008, the prior determination
is considered to be correct and cannot be reopened based on this change of position
(see GN 04001.100).
NOTE: If this claimant later provides an acceptable document establishing their proof of
age (i.e. birth certificate), we can reopen and revise the prior 06/15/2007 determination
based on new and material evidence (see GN 04010.030). This new and material evidence would have to be provided within 4 years of their
denial notice (06/15/2007) or before 06/15/2011.
EXAMPLE:Incorrect Determination
A claimant who is age 62 in February 1988, files for RIB on February 26, 1988. Their
spouse dies on February 27, 1988. SSA issues a notice of initial determination on
their RIB application on February 28, 1988. They file for widow's benefits on March
1, 1988. We may reopen the initial determination dated February 28, 1988 and pay their
widow's benefits (which are higher than their RIB) based on their February 26, 1988
application because they were a widow at the time that we issued our notice of determination.
EXAMPLE:Incorrect Determination
A claimant files for RIB and alleges they are age 62 in August 1988. Based on the
5 pieces of evidence which they submit, we determine that they are only age 61, and
we deny them on September 1, 1988. Within 4 years, they bring in a birth certificate
which shows they were age 62 in August 1988. Therefore, we can reopen and revise our
determination of September 1, 1988 and entitle them to benefits effective August 1988
on the basis of new and material evidence. Even though the determination of September
1, 1988 was correct on the basis of the evidence in file at the time it was made,
new and material evidence shows that the decision was actually incorrect. Had the
new and material evidence been in the file when the September 1, 1988 determination
was made, it would have resulted in a conclusion different from that originally reached.
EXCEPTION:When a claim is disallowed for lack of insured status and the qualifying quarter of
coverage is earned after the initial determination of disallowance but assigned to
a calendar quarter preceding the initial determination of disallowance, we can reopen
the determination (even though it was correct when made) and pay using the application.
The wording of the statute makes it clear that Congress intended the claimant to derive
insured status at a point earlier than the claimant actually earned it. If after reviewing
at the Earnings Record, it's not apparent whether SSA or RRB had these earnings in
possession at the time of the initial determination, it should be assumed in favor
of the beneficiary that SSA or RRB did have these earnings in possession at the time
the initial determination was made.