Citation Nr: A19002091 Decision Date: 10/18/19 Archive Date: 10/18/19 DOCKET NO. 190513-5554 DATE: October 18, 2019 ORDER Whether the Veteran filed a timely substantive appeal to a February 2014 statement of the case that denied of entitlement to service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), a low back condition, a heart condition, and psychosis. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran filed a timely substantive appeal, via fax, following the February 2014 statement of the case. CONCLUSION OF LAW A timely substantive appeal was received following a February 2014 statement of the case that denied service connection for PTSD, a low back condition, a heart condition, and psychosis. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.32, 19.33, 19.34, 20.201, 20.302 (b).   REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Board notes that the Regional Office (RO) determination on appeal was issued in June 2017. In May 2019, the Veteran elected the modernized review system. 84 Fed. Reg. 138, 177 (Jan. 18, 2019) (to be codified at 38 C.F.R. § 19.2(d)). The Veteran had qualifying active duty service from February 1974 to August 1991. The March 2019 AMA rating decision considered the evidence of record as of March 21, 2019. The Veteran timely appealed the March 2019 rating decision to the Board and requested direct review of the evidence considered by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ). This appeal has been advanced on the Board’s docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900. 38 U.S.C. § 7107 (a)(2). 1. Whether a timely substantive appeal was received following the February 2014 SOC The Veteran asserts that she timely filed a substantive appeal and response to a February 2014 statement of the case, which denied claims of entitlement to service connection for PTSD, a low back condition, a heart condition, and psychosis. In support, the Veteran submitted a Declaration by Kenneth L. LaVan, Esq., which indicated that review of records kept in the ordinary course of business showed that the prior representative filed a VA Form 9, substantive appeal with the February 2014 SOC on March 12, 2014. Except in the case of simultaneously contested claims, a substantive appeal must be filed within 60 days from the date that the agency of original jurisdiction mails the statement of the case to the appellant, or within the remainder of the 1-year period from the date of mailing of the notification of the determination being appealed, whichever period ends later. 20 C.F.R. § 302 (b). In a January 2012 rating decision, VA denied entitlement to service connection for PTSD, a low back condition, a heart condition, and psychosis. On January 20, 2012, the VA mailed notice of its determination to the Veteran, clearly identifying each of these denials. In March 2012, the Veteran timely submitted a notice of disagreement with all issues in the decision. In a February 2014 statement of the case, VA denied the claims. On February 26, 2014, VA mailed notice of its determination to the Veteran, clearly identifying each of these denials. The pertinent evidence shows the Veteran’s representative filed a VA Form 9 Appeal to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals dated March 10, 2014. A fax header on the substantive appeal indicates that the appeal was sent to the VA on March 12, 2014 at 8:16 AM. The Board further notes that the date shown in the fax header is consistent with the Declaration made by Kenneth L. LaVan, Esq., which indicated that the business records showed the appeal was submitted to the VA on March 12, 2014. The second page of the Form 9 Appeal, however, is stamped received by the VA Mailroom for the St. Petersburg Regional Office. This date stamp shows that the substantive appeal was received by the VA on June 16, 2014, after the expiration of the time in which a substantive appeal must be filed in the claim. Based upon the evidence of record, and resolving any reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Board finds that she, through her prior representative, submitted a valid Form 9 substantive appeal to the VA on March 12, 2014. Thus, her appeal of the February 2014 statement of the case, was timely, as it was received within 60 days of her receipt of proper notice regarding the denial of her claims, and to that extent only, her appeal regarding the timeliness of her 2014 VA Form 9 is granted. In light of the favorable decision, the May 2019 request for a Board hearing on the matter of timeliness is considered moot. D. JOHNSON Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Lauritzen, Associate Counsel The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential, and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.