C.F.R. » Title 42 » CHAPTER IV—CENTERS FOR MEDICARE & MEDICAID SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES › SUBCHAPTER B—MEDICARE PROGRAM › PART 405—FEDERAL HEALTH INSURANCE FOR THE AGED AND DISABLED › Subpart I—Determinations, Redeterminations, Reconsiderations, and Appeals Under Original Medicare (Part A and Part B)

42 C.F.R. § 405.980

Reopening of initial determinations, redeterminations, reconsiderations, decisions, and reviews

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) General rules. (1) A reopening is a remedial action taken to change a binding determination or decision that resulted in either an overpayment or underpayment, even though the binding determination or decision may have been correct at the time it was made based on the evidence of record. That action may be taken by—

(i) A contractor to revise the initial determination or redetermination;

(ii) A QIC to revise the reconsideration;

(iii) An ALJ or attorney adjudicator to revise his or her decision; or

(iv) The Council to revise the ALJ or attorney adjudicator decision, or its review decision.

(2) If a contractor issues a denial of a claim because it did not receive requested documentation during medical review and the party subsequently requests a redetermination, the contractor must process the request as a reopening.

(3) Notwithstanding paragraph (a)(4) of this section, a contractor must process clerical errors (which includes minor errors and omissions) as reopenings, instead of as redeterminations as specified in § 405.940. If the contractor receives a request for reopening and disagrees that the issue is a clerical error, the contractor must dismiss the reopening request and advise the party of any appeal rights, provided the timeframe to request an appeal on the original denial has not expired. For purposes of this section, clerical error includes human or mechanical errors on the part of the party or the contractor such as—

(i) Mathematical or computational mistakes;

(ii) Inaccurate data entry; or

(iii) Denials of claims as duplicates.

(4) When a party has filed a valid request for an appeal of an initial determination, redetermination, reconsideration, ALJ or attorney adjudicator decision, or Council review, no adjudicator has jurisdiction to reopen an issue on a claim that is under appeal until all appeal rights for that issue are exhausted. Once the appeal rights for the issue have been exhausted, the contractor, QIC, ALJ or attorney adjudicator, or Council may reopen as set forth in this section.

(5) The contractor's, QIC's, ALJ's or attorney adjudicator's, or Council's decision on whether to reopen is binding and not subject to appeal.

(6) A determination under the Medicare secondary payer provisions of section 1862(b) of the Act that Medicare has an MSP recovery claim for services or items that were already reimbursed by the Medicare program is not a reopening, except where the recovery claim is based upon a provider's or supplier's failure to demonstrate that it filed a proper claim as defined in part 411 of this chapter.

(b) Time frames and requirements for reopening initial determinations and redeterminations initiated by a contractor. A contractor may reopen an initial determination or redetermination on its own motion—

(1) Within 1 year from the date of the initial determination or redetermination for any reason.

(2) Within 4 years from the date of the initial determination or redetermination for good cause as defined in § 405.986.

(3) At any time if there exists reliable evidence as defined in § 405.902 that the initial determination was procured by fraud or similar fault as defined in § 405.902.

(4) At anytime if the initial determination is unfavorable, in whole or in part, to the party thereto, but only for the purpose of correcting a clerical error on which that determination was based.

(5) At any time to effectuate a decision issued under the coverage appeals process.

(c) Time frame and requirements for reopening initial determinations and redeterminations requested by a party. (1) A party may request that a contractor reopen its initial determination or redetermination within 1 year from the date of the initial determination or redetermination for any reason.

(2) A party may request that a contractor reopen its initial determination or redetermination within 4 years from the date of the initial determination or redetermination for good cause in accordance with § 405.986.

(3) A party may request that a contractor reopen its initial determination at any time if the initial determination is unfavorable, in whole or in part, to the party thereto, but only for the purpose of correcting a clerical error on which that determination was based. Third party payer error does not constitute clerical error. See § 405.986(c).

(4) A party may request that a contractor reopen an initial determination for the purpose of reporting and returning an overpayment under § 401.305 of this chapter.

(d) Time frame and requirements for reopening reconsiderations, decisions and reviews initiated by a QIC, ALJ or attorney adjudicator, or the Council. (1) A QIC may reopen its reconsideration on its own motion within 180 calendar days from the date of the reconsideration for good cause in accordance with § 405.986. If the QIC's reconsideration was procured by fraud or similar fault, then the QIC may reopen at any time.

(2) An ALJ or attorney adjudicator may reopen his or her decision, or the Council may reopen an ALJ or attorney adjudicator decision on its own motion within 180 calendar days from the date of the decision for good cause in accordance with § 405.986. If the decision was procured by fraud or similar fault, then the ALJ or attorney adjudicator may reopen his or her decision, or the Council may reopen an ALJ or attorney adjudicator decision, at any time.

(3) The Council may reopen its review decision on its own motion within 180 calendar days from the date of the review decision for good cause in accordance with § 405.986. If the Council's decision was procured by fraud or similar fault, then the Council may reopen at any time.

(e) Time frames and requirements for reopening reconsiderations, decisions, and reviews requested by a party. (1) A party to a reconsideration may request that a QIC reopen its reconsideration within 180 calendar days from the date of the reconsideration for good cause in accordance with § 405.986.

(2) A party to an ALJ or attorney adjudicator decision may request that an ALJ or attorney adjudicator reopen his or her decision, or the Council reopen an ALJ or attorney adjudicator decision, within 180 calendar days from the date of the decision for good cause in accordance with § 405.986.

(3) A party to a Council review may request that the Council reopen its decision within 180 calendar days from the date of the review decision for good cause in accordance with § 405.986.

[70 FR 11472, Mar. 8, 2005, as amended at 70 FR 37703, June 30, 2005; 74 FR 65334, Dec. 9, 2009; 81 FR 7684, Feb. 12, 2016; 82 FR 5108, Jan. 17, 2017]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 2010–2026 · leading case: RANDALL D. WOLCOTT, MD, PA v. Sebelius
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
RANDALL D. WOLCOTT, MD, PA v. Sebelius (2011) ca5 · cites it 3× “See 42 C.F.R. § 405.980 (a). We find that Wolcott has sufficiently alleged that the defendant has a nondiscretionary duty to issue payment for a successfully appealed claim and that there is no adequate alternative remedy.”
Palomar Medical Center v. Kathleen Sebelius (2012) ca9 · cites it 11× “See 42 C.F.R. § 405.980 . Early Medicare regulations on reopening generally incorporated Social Security regulations on reopening.”
D&G Holdings v. Becerra (2022) ca5 · cites it 3× “” 42 CFR § 405.980 (a)(1). 5 Case: 20-30732 Document: 00516151466 Page: 6 Date Filed: 01/03/2022 No.”
St. Francis Hospital v. Sebelius (2014) nyed · cites it 12× “C. § 405 (h)’s bar to federal question jurisdiction would place Plaintiff’s federal questions completely beyond review.”
MORTON PLANT HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION, INC. v. Sebelius (2010) flmd · cites it 12× “Introduction In this case, the Court has been called upon to address a finite Medicare issue: the reviewability for “good cause” of a Recovery Audit Contractor’s reopening of a claim after the passage of one year from the initial or revised determination. As will be discussed in…”
St. Francis Hospital v. Sebelius (2012) nyed · cites it 4× “¶ 25 (citing 42 C.F.R. § 405.980 (b)).) Plaintiff claims that none of the claims were reopened within a year of the initial determination, and that in some cases they were reopened more than four years after the fact.”
American Hospital Association v. Sebelius (2014) dcd “See 42 C.F.R. §§ 405.980 , 405.1130; Def. MTD & Opp.”
American Hospital Association v. Sebelius (2014) dcd · cites it 2× “904 (initial determinations of benefits are ap-pealable), with 42 C.F.R. §§ 405.980 (a)(5), 405.926(1) (decisions whether to “reopen” claims are not appealable).”
Bello v. Azar (In re Bello) (2018) mieb “§ 1395ff(b)(1)(G) (statutory authorization for reopening Medicare claims); *46 42 C.F.R. § 405.980 . After reopening, and if the contractor revises the initial determination regarding the claims, the supplier can then appeal the revised determination.”
Dominion Ambulance, L.L.C. v. Alex Azar, Secretary (2020) ca5 · cites it 10× “6 Third, it may request a de novo hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ).”
First United Methodist Church v. Becerra (2022) ned · cites it 7× “42 C.F.R. § 405.980 (c)(1)–(4). 3 A QIC is an “entity which contracts with the Secretary in accordance with section 1869 of the Act to perform reconsiderations under § 405.”
In re: IHN Podiatry Services, PLLC (2026) flmb · cites it 4× “371 (authorizing CMS to suspend, offset, or recoup Medicare payments after overpayment decision is made); 42 C.F.R. § 405.980 (establishing procedures for reopening initial determinations, redeterminations, reconsiderations, decisions, and reviews).”
Show all 21 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.