SSA does not have a precise programmatic definition for the phrase “within a few days to a few months.” The word “few” should be defined using its ordinary meaning, e.g., a small number. Generally, SSA considers a few days to a few months to mean a period not to exceed six months.

To decide the first part of the test, ALJs will assess whether the claimant reaches or will reach the next higher age category within a few days to a few months after the:

• •

  Date of adjudication;

• •

  Date last insured;

• •

  End of disabled widow(er)'s benefit prescribed period;

• •

  End of child disability re-entitlement period; or

• •

  Date of cessation of disability.

As previously stated, if using the higher age category does not affect the outcome of the decision, a borderline age situation does not exist, and the ALJ will use the claimant's chronological age to adjudicate the case. However, if the other criteria is met and using the higher age category does affect the outcome of the decision, a borderline age situation does exist, and the ALJ will use the procedures outlined in HALLEX HA 01220.042 C below.

The ALJ will first determine the time period under review. For example, under a particular fact scenario, the time under review may be a “few days to a few months” between the date of adjudication and the date the claimant attains age 55 and would be found disabled under a direct application of the medical-vocational rules. The closer in time the claimant is to the next higher age category, the more disadvantageous the claimant's age.

The ALJ will consider all other factor(s) relevant to the case (e.g., residual functional capacity combined with age, education, and work experience as explained in 20 CFR 404.1563, 416.963, and Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 2) for each of the medical-vocational rules for chronological age and the higher age category. The ALJ will consider whether an adjudicative factor(s) is relatively more adverse under the criteria of each rule, or whether there is an additional element(s) present that seriously affects a claimant's ability to adjust to other work. Examples of situations where certain factors may impact the case can be found in POMS DI 25015.006E.

ALJs must be careful not to double-weigh a factor if the medical-vocational rule for the higher age category already incorporates the factor. For example, if the applicable medical-vocational rule for the higher age category already considers illiteracy (such as a younger individual age 44 years and 9 months who has a reduced sedentary residual functional capacity, and the adjudicator is considering applying the higher age category (45-49) medical-vocational rule 201.17), then there would need to be factors other than illiteracy to justify application of the higher age category.

The ALJ will take a “sliding scale” approach when determining which age category to use. To support the use of the higher age category, the evidence must show that the factor(s) have a progressively more adverse impact on the claimant's ability to adjust to other work as the period between the claimant's actual age and attainment of the next higher age category lengthens.

If all of the factors support using the higher age category, the ALJ will find the claimant disabled with an established onset date corresponding to the:

• •

  Date of adjudication;

• •

  Date last insured;

• •

  End of disabled widow(er)'s benefit prescribed period;

• •

  End of child disability re-entitlement period; or

• •

  Date of cessation of disability.

If there is no support for the use of the higher age category (e.g., the factors present do not negatively affect or have a more adverse impact on the case), ALJs will use the claimant's chronological age, even when the period under consideration is only a few days.

The ALJ will explain in the decision that the ALJ considered the borderline age situation, state whether the ALJ applied the higher age category or the chronological age, and note the specific factor(s) the ALJ considered.