38 C.F.R. § 19.22

Substantive Appeal

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

A Substantive Appeal consists of a properly completed VA Form 9, “Appeal to Board of Veterans' Appeals,” or correspondence containing the necessary information. If the Statement of the Case and any prior Supplemental Statements of the Case addressed several issues, the Substantive Appeal must either indicate that the appeal is being perfected as to all of those issues or must specifically identify the issues appealed. The Substantive Appeal should set out specific arguments relating to errors of fact or law made by the agency of original jurisdiction in reaching the determination, or determinations, being appealed. To the extent feasible, the argument should be related to specific items in the Statement of the Case and any prior Supplemental Statements of the Case. The Board will construe such arguments in a liberal manner for purposes of determining whether they raise issues on appeal, but the Board may dismiss any appeal which fails to allege specific error of fact or law in the determination, or determinations, being appealed. The Board will not presume that an appellant agrees with any statement of fact contained in a Statement of the Case or a Supplemental Statement of the Case which is not specifically contested. Proper completion and filing of a Substantive Appeal are the last actions the appellant needs to take to perfect an appeal.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 2900-0085) (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 7105(d)(3)-(5) (2016)) [57 FR 4109, Feb. 3, 1992, as amended at 61 FR 20450, May 7, 1996. Redesignated and amended at 84 FR 177, 178, Jan. 18, 2019]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2022–2026 · leading case: Mark Freund & Mary S. Mathewson v. Denis McDonough (Vet. App. 2022).
Mark Freund & Mary S. Mathewson v. Denis McDonough (Vet. App. 2022). “"); see 38 C.F.R. § 19.22 (2022) ("A Substantive Appeal consists of a properly completed VA Form 9, 'Appeal to Board of Veterans' Appeals,' or correspondence containing the necessary information.”
Gary L. Ferko v. Denis McDonough (Vet. App. 2024). “Although recognizing that it could implicitly or explicitly waive the timeliness of a Substantive Appeal, the Board deemed an untimely NOD to be "a jurisdictional bar to appellate consideration," which "may not be waived.”
Hamill v. Collins (Fed. Cir. 2026). “” 38 C.F.R. § 19.22 . Now, under the AMA regime, a veteran dissatisfied with a VA decision has a broader range of options to choose from based on his needs.”
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.