38 U.S.C. § 7464

Disciplinary Appeals Boards

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 38 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) The Secretary shall from time to time appoint boards to hear appeals of major adverse actions described in section 7462 of this title. Such boards shall be known as Disciplinary Appeals Boards. Each board shall consist of three employees of the Department, each of whom shall be of the same grade as, or be senior in grade to, the employee who is appealing an adverse action. At least two of the members of each board shall be employed in the same category of position as the employee who is appealing the adverse action. Members of a board shall be appointed from individuals on the panel established under subsection (d).(b)(1) In appointing a board for any case, the Secretary shall designate one of the members to be chairman and one of the members to be secretary of the board, each of whom shall have authority to administer oaths.(2) Appointment of boards, and the proceedings of such boards, shall be carried out under regulations prescribed by the Secretary. A verbatim record shall be maintained of board hearings.(c)(1) Notwithstanding sections 5701 and 7332 of this title, the chairman of a board, upon request of an employee whose case is under consideration by the board (or a representative of that employee) may, in connection with the considerations of the board, review records or information covered by those sections and may authorize the disclosure of such records or information to that employee (or representative) to the extent the board considers appropriate for purposes of the proceedings of the board in that case.(2) In any such case the board chairman may direct that measures be taken to protect the personal privacy of individuals whose records are involved. Any person who uses or discloses a record or information covered by this subsection for any purpose other than in connection with the proceedings of the board shall be fined not more than $5,000 in the case of a first offense and not more than $20,000 in the case of a subsequent offense.(d)(1) The Secretary shall provide for the periodic designation of employees of the Department who are qualified to serve on Disciplinary Appeals Boards. Those employees shall constitute the panel from which board members in a case are appointed. The Secretary shall provide (without charge) a list of the names of employees on the panel to any person requesting such list.(2) The Secretary shall announce periodically, and not less often than annually, that the roster of employees on the panel is available as described in paragraph (1). Such announcement shall be made at Department medical facilities and through publication in the Federal Register. Notice of a name being on the list must be provided at least 30 days before the individual selected may serve on a Board or as a grievance examiner. Employees, employee organizations, and other interested parties may submit comments to the Secretary concerning the suitability for service on the panel of any employee whose name is on the list.(3) The Secretary shall provide training in the functions and duties of Disciplinary Appeals Boards and grievance procedures under section 7463 of this title for employees selected to be on the panel.(Added Pub. L. 102–40, title II, § 203(a), May 7, 1991, 105 Stat. 206.)Editorial NotesPrior Provisions

Provisions similar to those in this subchapter were contained in section 4110 of this title prior to the repeal of that section as part of the complete revision of chapter 73 of this title by Pub. L. 102–40.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1995–2024 · leading case: Athey v. United States, 132 Fed. Cl. 683 (Fed. Cl. 2017).
Athey v. United States, 132 Fed. Cl. 683 (Fed. Cl. 2017). · cites it 2× “§ 7453 (c), and as comparably provided to physician assistants and EFDAs pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 7464 (a); (5) ‘additional pay for night, Friday and Saturday hours for individually designated ‘hybrid’ employees prior to January 1, 2002 pursuant to 38 U.”
Earl P. Dick v. Dep't of Vets. Affairs, 290 F.3d 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2002). “§ 7425 (b), a DVA physician has no right of appeal if such appeal would be “inconsistent” with the Disciplinary Appeals Board procedure, the separate grievance system set up for such employees under 38 U.S.C. § 7464 . See Cochran v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 67 M.”
Robert Bonner v. Dep't of Vets. Affairs Pittsburgh Healthcare Sys., 477 F.3d 1343 (Fed. Cir. 2007). “If the case involves a question of professional conduct or competence, 3 and a major adverse action 4 is taken, the employee has an appeal to a Disciplinary Appeals Board appointed by the Secretary in accordance with 38 U.S.C. § 7464 . 38 U.S.C. § 7461 (b)(1).”
Demons v. United States, 119 Fed. Cl. 345 (Fed. Cl. 2014). “In this case, there are over 1,000 potential individual claims that share the common issue of being owed backpay under 38 U.S.C. § 7464 (b)(3). Compl. ¶20. The Government argues that “[c]ertifying the proposed class would inundate this Court with a thousand claims.”
Jeffrey Dubnow v. Denis R. McDonough, 30 F.4th 603 (7th Cir. 2022). “§ 7461 (b)(1), and the VA’s Deputy Under Secretary for Health for Operations and Management appointed a Disciplinary Appeals Board (DAB) comprised of three senior VA physi- cians to consider the appeal, see 38 U.S.C. § 7464 (a). The DAB conducted a three-day hearing during which…”
Elizabeth Schacht v. Steven Lieberman, 103 F.4th 794 (D.C. Cir. 2024). “See 38 U.S.C. § 7464 (a). In June 2019 the Chairman of the Board scheduled a hearing on Dr.”
Meyers v. Dep't of Vets. Affairs, 33 F. App'x 523 (Fed. Cir. 2002). “Meyers cites 38 U.S.C. § 7464 , which states that “[a]t least two of the members of each [Disciplinary Appeals Bjoard shall be employed in the same category of position as the employee who is appealing the adverse action.”
Gergans v. Brown, 911 F. Supp. 308 (N.D. Ill. 1995). “38 U.S.C. § 7464 (a). Moreover, members of the Board must be found qualified to serve by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, and may be required to undergo training.”
Harishankar Lal Sanghi v. Mississippi Emp. Sec. Comm'n (Miss. 1995). “Sanghi is correct in citing to 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 7464 and 7462(a)(1), which give jurisdiction to a disciplinary appeals board to decide matters of professional conduct and competence in a disciplinary proceeding.”
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.