Types of Board Actions

What this means

When the Board sends work back to VBA, the action is usually a full grant to implement or a remand requiring specified development or a new decision. VBA must implement grants, decide downstream matters such as evaluation and effective date, and expedite remands. A complete Board denial generally requires no new VBA adjudication because the Board itself issues that decision.

How this may help with a claim

Read the Board order line by line and make a checklist of every directive. For a grant, verify that VBA implemented service connection or the awarded benefit, assigned the correct percentage and effective date, paid any amount due, and sent the right review notice. For a remand, track each records request, examination, and required rationale before the new decision.

What to review in your file

Separate each granted, denied, remanded, and downstream issue in the Board decision.
For a grant, verify implementation, evaluation, effective date, ancillary benefits, award data, and payment.
For a remand, compare every Board directive with completed records development, examinations, and documented deviations.
Check whether VA issued a partial favorable decision instead of delaying implementable grants for unrelated development.
Use the review rights that correspond to the Board action or the new VBA downstream decision.

Important limits

A remand is not a grant, and a Board grant may leave evaluation or effective date for VBA to decide. Review rights differ for the Board's decision and VBA's downstream decisions, so the controlling notice—not this operational section—sets the available next step.

Search terms when useful

Phrases that may help when searching your claim file or this library.

Board remand
Board grant implementation
BVA decision
downstream issue
remand compliance
expedited remand
effective date after Board grant

Original VA guidance

The official VA text of this section

5. Implementing Actions by the Board of Veterans’ Appeals

Introduction

This topic contains information about processing actions of the Board under AMA, including:

types of Board actions
jurisdiction of Board actions
authority to implement Board decisions
review of Board actions
generating decisions, and
decision notices.

Change Date

June 10, 2026

4.5.a. Types of Board Actions

The Board forwards two types of actions to the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) for completion:

Full grants, in which VBA:
implements the Board decision
decides any associated downstream issues, such as effective date and evaluation
inputs the award data
notifies the appellant, and
releases any payment.
Remands, in which the Board directs VBA to perform certain development or adjudicatory actions, and then VBA
completes the appeal by notifying the claimant (38 USC 5104) of any new decision and
provides all the options for subsequent decision review (38 USC 5104C), including an appeal to the Board.

Notes:

VBA takes no adjudicatory action when the Board completely denies an appeal because the Board notifies the appellant of its decision and VBA does not input any new data into a VBA claims processing system.
VBA must expedite Board remands. See 38 CFR 20.802(c).

References: For more information on

Board remands, see 38 CFR 20.802
downstream issues, see M21-5, Chapter 7, Section A, 1.f and M21-5, Chapter 7, Section D, 2.g
issues within the scope of an appeal or claim, see M21-1, Part V, Subpart ii, 3.A.1.a.

4.5.b. Jurisdiction of Board Actions

VBA’s DROCs have jurisdiction over all Board compensation grants and remands. The table below explains the general jurisdictions:

Scroll sideways to see the full table.

Board Decision	Location
AMA Remands	DROC Seattle and DROC St. Petersburg
AMA Full Grants	DROC Seattle and DROC St. Petersburg
Legacy Remands	DROC District of Columbia
Legacy Full Grants	DROC District of Columbia

Board special issue grants and remands will be routed to the appropriate special mission station:

Scroll sideways to see the full table.

Regional Office	Special Mission
Denver	Spina Bifida
Seattle DROC	Radiation
Seattle DROC	Camp Lejeune Contaminated Water
St. Paul	Restricted Access Claims Center
Muskogee	Mustard Gas

Note: VA may temporarily assign work outside of these jurisdictions in accordance with workload considerations, so please consult the most recent operational guidance.

4.5.c. Authority to Implement Board Decisions

The authority to implement Board decisions belongs to Rating Veterans Service Representatives (RVSRs) or Decision Review Officers (DRO) for rating issues and VSRs for non-rating issues.

4.5.d. Review of Board Actions

When VBA receives a Board action, whether a remand or full grant, Caseflow Intake will automatically establish the appropriate EP and claim label based on the following table:

Scroll sideways to see the full table.

Board Action	Caseflow Action
Grant	Caseflow will establish an EP 030 with the appropriate claim label: Board Grant Non-Rating Board Grant Rating Pension Management Center (PMC) Board Grant Non-Rating PMC Board Grant Rating Caseflow will automatically list Board grants as Ready for Decision (RFD) and National Work Queue (NWQ) will route them based on claim label jurisdiction. Note: If development is required before a Board grant can be effectuated, defer the affected issue(s). For multiple issue grants, a partial decision should be rendered to award benefits for issues that do not require development prior to deferring any remaining issues. Confirm and continue the EP 030 at authorization and develop the deferred issues as necessary.
Remand	Caseflow will establish an EP 040 with the appropriate claim label: Board DTA Error Rating Board DTA Error Non-Rating PMC Board DTA Error Rating PMC Board DTA Error Non-Rating Caseflow will automatically place Board remands in Initial Development and NWQ will route them based on claim label jurisdiction for processing. Note: VSRs will complete all development actions based on review of the folder and any Board remand instructions, in accordance with existing M21-1 and M21-5 procedures. When requesting an examination as part of a remand, the request should be stated in neutral, objective terms, without implying the expected result of the examination. When necessary, use the exact remand language (copy and paste) for examination language specifically requested by the Board. Follow the Board's detailed directives when developing evidence for a remand by ensuring all required actions are taken in compliance with the remand. If any action is not undertaken, or is taken in a deficient manner, appropriate corrective action is required. If a deviation from the Board directives is required, the claims processor must prepare a memorandum detailing the facts and circumstances to inform the subsequent reviewers why alternate action was taken (refer to the Deviation from Board Remand Directives Memorandum template). The memorandum is necessary to explain the use of different methods for obtaining the Board's intended result. Requests for clarification of the Board's directives should be routed through the local Quality Review Team (QRT) for guidance. If unable to provide clarification locally, DROC QRT management may submit inquiries through the VBA Feedback Loop SharePoint site. Management from non-DROC offices may send inquiries to OAR Quality & Training at VBAWASOARQUALITYTRN@va.gov. When a Board remand instructs VBA to obtain additional records (for example, military records such as deck logs, unit records, or exposure-related records) claims processors must follow all Board directives and document their efforts in accordance with 38 U.S.C. 5103A. If any action cannot be completed as directed, the claims processor must use the existing Deviation from Board Remand Directives Memorandum template to explain the reason for deviation and detail all development actions taken to achieve the Board's intended result. Development actions may include, but are not limited to: Requests to record repositories (e.g., National Archives, JSRRC, or DPRIS) Follow-ups and responses from official sources Alternative searches for military records such as unit records, deck logs, or exposure records Communications with DoD or other federal agencies regarding record availability Confirmation that all available records have been associated with the claims file or that VBA issued a formal finding of unavailability. The memorandum should certify that all reasonable efforts have been exhausted, and no further development is possible. This approach ensures consistency, compliance with statutory requirements, and proper documentation of all actions taken to satisfy the Board's directive. Example: A Veteran is seeking SC for an injury that occurred during a period of unverified service in 2020. The remand directs VBA to contact the Records Management Center to verify the Veteran's service. Since the Board directive would not fulfill the intent of the remand (the records for a period of service in 2020 may be retrieved from DPRIS, not RMC), the claims processor should detail the facts of why the remand directives were not followed and contact the proper records custodian. After completing all development activity, close all tracked items ensure the claim status has been changed to RFD for rating issues and as Ready to Work for non-rating issues, and refer the EP for assignment based on locally established procedures.

Board Action

Caseflow Action

Grant

Caseflow will establish an EP 030 with the appropriate claim label: Board Grant Non-Rating Board Grant Rating Pension Management Center (PMC) Board Grant Non-Rating PMC Board Grant Rating Caseflow will automatically list Board grants as Ready for Decision (RFD) and National Work Queue (NWQ) will route them based on claim label jurisdiction. Note: If development is required before a Board grant can be effectuated, defer the affected issue(s). For multiple issue grants, a partial decision should be rendered to award benefits for issues that do not require development prior to deferring any remaining issues. Confirm and continue the EP 030 at authorization and develop the deferred issues as necessary.

Remand

Caseflow will establish an EP 040 with the appropriate claim label: Board DTA Error Rating Board DTA Error Non-Rating PMC Board DTA Error Rating PMC Board DTA Error Non-Rating Caseflow will automatically place Board remands in Initial Development and NWQ will route them based on claim label jurisdiction for processing. Note: VSRs will complete all development actions based on review of the folder and any Board remand instructions, in accordance with existing M21-1 and M21-5 procedures. When requesting an examination as part of a remand, the request should be stated in neutral, objective terms, without implying the expected result of the examination. When necessary, use the exact remand language (copy and paste) for examination language specifically requested by the Board. Follow the Board's detailed directives when developing evidence for a remand by ensuring all required actions are taken in compliance with the remand. If any action is not undertaken, or is taken in a deficient manner, appropriate corrective action is required. If a deviation from the Board directives is required, the claims processor must prepare a memorandum detailing the facts and circumstances to inform the subsequent reviewers why alternate action was taken (refer to the Deviation from Board Remand Directives Memorandum template). The memorandum is necessary to explain the use of different methods for obtaining the Board's intended result. Requests for clarification of the Board's directives should be routed through the local Quality Review Team (QRT) for guidance. If unable to provide clarification locally, DROC QRT management may submit inquiries through the VBA Feedback Loop SharePoint site. Management from non-DROC offices may send inquiries to OAR Quality & Training at VBAWASOARQUALITYTRN@va.gov. When a Board remand instructs VBA to obtain additional records (for example, military records such as deck logs, unit records, or exposure-related records) claims processors must follow all Board directives and document their efforts in accordance with 38 U.S.C. 5103A. If any action cannot be completed as directed, the claims processor must use the existing Deviation from Board Remand Directives Memorandum template to explain the reason for deviation and detail all development actions taken to achieve the Board's intended result. Development actions may include, but are not limited to: Requests to record repositories (e.g., National Archives, JSRRC, or DPRIS) Follow-ups and responses from official sources Alternative searches for military records such as unit records, deck logs, or exposure records Communications with DoD or other federal agencies regarding record availability Confirmation that all available records have been associated with the claims file or that VBA issued a formal finding of unavailability. The memorandum should certify that all reasonable efforts have been exhausted, and no further development is possible. This approach ensures consistency, compliance with statutory requirements, and proper documentation of all actions taken to satisfy the Board's directive. Example: A Veteran is seeking SC for an injury that occurred during a period of unverified service in 2020. The remand directs VBA to contact the Records Management Center to verify the Veteran's service. Since the Board directive would not fulfill the intent of the remand (the records for a period of service in 2020 may be retrieved from DPRIS, not RMC), the claims processor should detail the facts of why the remand directives were not followed and contact the proper records custodian. After completing all development activity, close all tracked items ensure the claim status has been changed to RFD for rating issues and as Ready to Work for non-rating issues, and refer the EP for assignment based on locally established procedures.

4.5.e. Generating Decisions

Decisionmakers will use VBMS-Rating (VBMS-R) to generate decisions on rating issues, with the codesheet documenting all issues addressed within the scope of the appeal, including downstream issues.

Decisionmakers for non-rating/administrative issues will use such letter generating tools as the Redesigned Automatic Decision Letter (RADL) in VBMS-Awards and Personal Computer-Generated Letters (PCGL).

Reference: For more information on RADL, please see M21-1, Part VI, Subpart i, 1.B.3.

When effectuating a grant of service-connection (SC), the medical and lay evidence in the claims folder must be reviewed to determine if it is sufficient to establish the appropriate level of disability evaluation for the period of entitlement covered by the grant of benefits. If the evidence is not sufficient to establish a current evaluation, an adequate examination must be obtained. All evidence of record should be reviewed in the event that a staged rating is required.

Note: If the evidence of record is insufficient to establish an appropriate evaluation, service connection should be granted while the issue of evaluation is deferred for an examination, and the End Product (EP) continued.

When a Board remand directs development for an aggravation opinion (including Allen aggravation), the development activity may prepare and order the medical opinion based on the Board instructions. If, however, the development activity recognizes the need for other “complex” medical opinion types described in M21-1, Part IV, Subpart i, 2.A.7.a., development activity must be refer the claim to the rating activity for review as discussed in M21-1, Part IV, Subpart i, 2.A.7.b.

When a specific type of medical professional is not available to conduct the C&P examination and/or medical opinion for VA purposes (for example, rural areas or claimants with a foreign address) as directed by the Board, decisions should include documentation of all efforts taken to obtain an examination specialist and explain why the specialist could not be obtained. If VHA or a contract examiner state that another qualified physician is available to complete the examination and/or medical opinion instead, document this response within the memorandum. Decisionmakers should reference the memorandum of record in the Veteran's file and document the following within the decision:

date(s) of request(s) for the examination specialist,
response from VHA or a contract examiner confirming an examination specialist is not available to conduct the C&P examination and/or medical opinion for VA purposes,
justification from VHA or a contract examiner for why an examination specialist is not available to conduct the C&P examination and/or medical opinion for VA purposes (for example, rural areas or claimants with a foreign address), and confirmation from VHA or a contract examiner that another qualified physician is available to complete the examination and/or medical opinion.

Refer to the Examination Specialist Unavailable Memorandum template.

References: For more information on

requesting examinations for remands, see M21-5, Chapter 7, Section G, 4.c.
determining when an examination is needed, see
38 CFR 3.159(c)(4)
38 CFR 3.326, and
M21-1, Part IV, Subpart i, 2.A.1.f
disability evaluations, see 38 CFR 4.1
determining effective dates for Board grants, see M21-5, Chapter 7, Section G, 1.g, and
partial rating decisions, see M21-1, Part V, Subpart ii, 3.B.1.b.

4.5.f. Decision Notices

VSRs should use RADL to generate the decision notice. If RADL fails to generate a decision notice, then refer to the guidance found in M21-1, Part VI, Subpart i, 1.B.3 to use PCGL to create the notice. Each decision, whether rating or non-rating, must include the notice requirements under AMA.

After VBA complies with the instructions of the remand, it makes a new decision as appropriate and notifies the appellant. VBA should enclose any rating with the decision notice. If the DROC or RO decided any issue downstream of the Board's grant, such as evaluation or effective date, the DROC or RO should also enclose VA Form 20-0998. Otherwise, refer the appellant to the review rights provided by the Board.

Scroll sideways to see the full table.

If you are implementing the Board's Decision and...	Then...
there are no downstream or ancillary issues within the scope of the appeal issue(s) (i.e., VBA made no decisions)	When creating the letter in RADL, suppress the auto-attachment of VA Form 20-0998, Your Right to Seek Review of Our Decision, by selecting the "Suppress Appeal Rights VA Form 20-0998" checkbox. The following text will auto-populate in the notification letter: "Please refer to your Board of Veterans' Appeals Decision for information on how to seek additional review." When creating the letter in PCGL, remove the What You Should Do If You Disagree with Our Decision paragraph and insert the following information: If you are satisfied with the outcome of your appeal, you do not need to do anything. However, if you are not satisfied with the decision of the Board of Veterans’ Appeals, please refer to that decision for detailed information on seeking additional review.
VBA also made decisions on a downstream or ancillary benefit within the scope of appeal	When creating the letter in RADL, then include the following wording as free text under the “Your Benefit Information” section as the last bullet (prior to the monthly entitlement amount): Please note: Options for further review differ between VBA decisions and the Board of Veterans’ Appeals decisions. If you are not satisfied with the Board’s decision, please refer to that decision for detailed information on how to seek additional review. This letter addresses options for further review of VBA decisions. When creating the letter in PCGL, include the following wording in the letter: Please note: Options for further review differ between VBA decisions and the Board of Veterans’ Appeals decisions. If you are not satisfied with the Board’s decision, please refer to it for detailed information on how to seek additional review. This letter addresses options for further review of VBA decisions. You can visit va.gov/decision-reviews to learn more about how the decision review process works. If you would like to obtain or access evidence used in making this decision, please contact us by telephone, email, or letter as noted below letting us know what you would like to obtain. Some evidence may be obtained online by visiting VA.gov.

If you are implementing the Board's Decision and...

Then...

there are no downstream or ancillary issues within the scope of the appeal issue(s) (i.e., VBA made no decisions)

When creating the letter in RADL, suppress the auto-attachment of VA Form 20-0998, Your Right to Seek Review of Our Decision, by selecting the "Suppress Appeal Rights VA Form 20-0998" checkbox. The following text will auto-populate in the notification letter: "Please refer to your Board of Veterans' Appeals Decision for information on how to seek additional review." When creating the letter in PCGL, remove the What You Should Do If You Disagree with Our Decision paragraph and insert the following information: If you are satisfied with the outcome of your appeal, you do not need to do anything. However, if you are not satisfied with the decision of the Board of Veterans’ Appeals, please refer to that decision for detailed information on seeking additional review.

VBA also made decisions on a downstream or ancillary benefit within the scope of appeal

When creating the letter in RADL, then include the following wording as free text under the “Your Benefit Information” section as the last bullet (prior to the monthly entitlement amount): Please note: Options for further review differ between VBA decisions and the Board of Veterans’ Appeals decisions. If you are not satisfied with the Board’s decision, please refer to that decision for detailed information on how to seek additional review. This letter addresses options for further review of VBA decisions. When creating the letter in PCGL, include the following wording in the letter: Please note: Options for further review differ between VBA decisions and the Board of Veterans’ Appeals decisions. If you are not satisfied with the Board’s decision, please refer to it for detailed information on how to seek additional review. This letter addresses options for further review of VBA decisions. You can visit va.gov/decision-reviews to learn more about how the decision review process works. If you would like to obtain or access evidence used in making this decision, please contact us by telephone, email, or letter as noted below letting us know what you would like to obtain. Some evidence may be obtained online by visiting VA.gov.

Reference: For more information on the AMA notice requirements, including review rights, see 38 CFR 3.103(f).