Appeals Council Review: Stage 3 of the Disability Appeal Process

Key Takeaways

• The Appeals Council is the third stage of the disability appeal process, following the initial application, reconsideration, and ALJ hearing.
• You have 60 days from the date of your ALJ’s written decision to request Appeals Council review.
• The Appeals Council reviews your case on paper. There is no new hearing, no testimony, and no in-person review. The AC reads the ALJ’s written decision, the hearing record, and any new evidence that meets their submission rules.
• Four outcomes are possible: grant review and issue a new decision, remand to a new ALJ hearing, deny review, or dismiss your request.
• A remand is not a denial. It means the AC sends your case back to an ALJ for a new hearing with specific instructions about what was done wrong. Remand is often the best realistic outcome at this stage.
• If the AC denies your request, you have 60 days to file in Federal District Court.

What Is the Appeals Council?

The Appeals Council is an administrative review body within SSA’s Office of Hearings Operations (OHO) that examines decisions made by Administrative Law Judges.

The Appeals Council does not conduct hearings. It does not take new testimony, see you in person, or evaluate your credibility. It is a paper review: a panel of Administrative Appeals Judges reads the ALJ’s written decision, the complete hearing record including all evidence submitted, and any new evidence you submit that meets their submission standards.

The AC review has a specific legal purpose. It is not simply a second opinion on whether you’re disabled. The AC looks for legal errors: whether the ALJ followed SSA’s proper procedures, correctly applied the five-step sequential evaluation, properly weighed medical opinion evidence, and adequately explained the basis for the RFC finding. If the ALJ made factual errors that contradict the record, those can also be grounds for review.

In the disability appeal sequence: Stage 1 is reconsideration, Stage 2 is the ALJ hearing, Stage 3 is this Appeals Council review, and Stage 4 is Federal District Court. For the full four-stage overview, see our disability appeal process guide.

How to Request an Appeals Council Review

Requesting AC review is procedurally straightforward. What matters is not just filing the request but filing it with a well-argued brief that identifies specific legal errors in the ALJ’s decision.

Step 1: File Within the 60-Day Deadline

You have 60 days from the date on your ALJ’s written decision to file your request for review. The deadline runs from the date printed on the decision, not the date you receive it. SSA adds five days for mail delivery to the window, but the practical advice is to file immediately after receiving the decision.

You file using Form HA-520 (Request for Review of Hearing Decision/Order). You can file online through SSA’s AC iAppeal Online portal, by mail, or in person at your local SSA field office.

Step 2: Write a Brief Explaining Why the ALJ Was Wrong

The most consequential part of your AC request is not the form itself but the written brief that explains the specific legal errors the ALJ made. The AC is far more likely to grant review when you identify concrete errors than when you simply express disagreement with the outcome.

Common grounds for AC review include:

• The ALJ ignored or improperly dismissed treating physician medical opinions without adequate explanation
• The ALJ failed to properly assess the claimant’s credibility using SSA’s required two-step framework
• The ALJ’s RFC finding is not supported by substantial evidence in the record
• The ALJ posed inadequate hypothetical questions to the vocational expert that didn’t include all established limitations
• The ALJ failed to resolve conflicts between VE testimony and the Dictionary of Occupational Titles
• The ALJ did not follow SSA regulations or the correct sequential evaluation process

Each alleged error should be tied to a specific page of the hearing transcript or exhibit in the record. Writing this brief effectively requires legal expertise, which is one of the strongest arguments for attorney representation at the AC stage.

Step 3: Submit New Evidence (If It Meets the Rules)

New evidence submitted to the AC is subject to strict rules that changed significantly in 2017. See the dedicated section below on new evidence rules for full detail.

Step 4: Wait for the AC’s Decision

There is no hearing. After filing your request, the AC assigns your case for review and issues a written decision. The typical processing time is 6 to 12 months, though some cases take longer.

What Happens During an Appeals Council Review?

The AC review process happens internally at SSA’s headquarters in Falls Church, Virginia. Here is what occurs after you file your request.

1. AC staff screens your request. Staff first reviews whether your request was timely filed and whether the proper form was used. If the request is untimely and you cannot show good cause for the delay, the AC may dismiss it without review.
2. The AC decides whether to grant review. The AC has discretion. It does not review every case. It grants review when there appears to be an error of law, the decision is not supported by substantial evidence, SSA’s policies or procedures were not followed, or the case involves a broad policy issue.
3. If review is granted, an Administrative Appeals Judge (AAJ) reviews the full record. The AAJ reads the ALJ’s written decision, the complete hearing transcript, all exhibits, and any new evidence you submitted that meets the submission rules. No new testimony is taken.
4. The AC issues a written decision. The decision states whether the AC is denying review, granting review, remanding, or issuing its own decision. If the AC denies review, the ALJ’s decision becomes the final agency action.

The critical insight: the AC is not re-evaluating whether you’re disabled based on the medical facts. It is reviewing whether the ALJ applied the law and procedures correctly. Framing your brief around legal and procedural errors, not just disagreement with the outcome, is what gives AC review requests the best chance of success.

The 4 Possible Outcomes of an Appeals Council Review

The most common outcome is denial of review. The most consequential realistic outcome is a remand, which gives you a new hearing and a fresh opportunity before a different ALJ.

What Does “Remand” Mean?

Remand is one of the most misunderstood terms in the disability appeal process. Many claimants who receive a remand decision assume it means they’ve been denied again. It is the opposite.

A remand means the Appeals Council is sending your case back to an Administrative Law Judge for a new hearing. The AC has found specific legal or procedural errors in how the ALJ handled your case and is instructing the ALJ to address those errors in a new proceeding.

What specifically happens after a remand:

• Your case is reassigned to an ALJ, typically a different one than who handled your original hearing
• A new hearing is scheduled, and you appear again (in person or by video) to testify
• The ALJ must specifically address the errors the AC identified in its remand order
• You can submit new evidence and your attorney can again cross-examine the vocational expert
• A new written decision is issued after the hearing

The SSA does not publish approval rates on remand. They may be higher than at the original hearing because the AC has already identified weaknesses in the denial. The ALJ knows exactly what issues to address, and your attorney knows exactly what the AC found problematic in the prior decision.

A remand is not a guarantee of approval. But it is a substantive second opportunity, and it means the system agreed that something went wrong at your hearing. For preparation guidance for a remand hearing, see our disability hearing guide.

Can You Submit New Evidence to the Appeals Council?

Yes, but the rules governing new evidence changed significantly in January 2017 under 20 CFR 404.970. New evidence submitted to the AC must satisfy four conditions simultaneously:

1. The evidence must relate to the period on or before the ALJ’s decision date. Evidence about your condition after the ALJ’s decision date generally cannot be considered at the AC level. It may, however, support a new disability application for the period after the ALJ’s decision.
2. You must show good cause for not submitting the evidence to the ALJ. You must explain why the evidence wasn’t available at the time of the ALJ hearing, or why you had good reason not to submit it earlier. Acceptable good cause includes: you didn’t know about the evidence until after the hearing, the evidence didn’t exist until after the hearing, or you submitted it and the ALJ failed to consider it.
3. The evidence must be material. It must have a reasonable probability of changing the outcome of the ALJ’s decision. Evidence that is merely cumulative of what was already in the record, or that doesn’t address the reasons for the denial, does not satisfy this standard.
4. Reasonable probability of a changed decision. There must be a reasonable probability that the evidence would change the outcome of the decision

All four conditions must be met. Evidence that meets only one or two of them generally will not be considered by the AC.

Practical implication: if you have substantial new medical evidence that demonstrates your disability but it doesn’t meet these four conditions, submitting it to the AC may not help your case at this stage. In that situation, a new disability application may be the better path for capturing evidence about your condition going forward, while the AC review addresses the legal errors in the prior decision. For more on the new application process, see our how-to-apply guide.

Your attorney can assess whether new evidence in your possession meets the AC’s standards and advise on the most strategic path forward.

How Long Does an Appeals Council Review Take?

The AC review is a paper review with no hearing to schedule. The timeline depends entirely on the AC’s administrative processing capacity.

• Typical processing time: 6 to 12 months from the date you file your request to the date the AC issues its written decision.
• Status checks: You can check the status of your AC request online through your my Social Security account or by calling SSA at 1-800-772-1213.
• No news is not bad news: The AC does not communicate interim updates. Silence during the review period is normal and not an indicator of the likely outcome.

The AC review period extends the total disability case timeline substantially. From initial application denial through AC review, a contested case can take two to three years or more. This is one of the reasons applying early and building the strongest possible case at each stage matters: every stage that requires re-work or additional proceedings adds months to the total timeline.

What Are the Chances of Success at the Appeals Council?

The AC grant rate, meaning the percentage of requests where the AC actually reviews the case and issues a favorable or remand decision, is low.

Most AC requests result in a denial of review, meaning the ALJ’s decision stands. The AC grants review in a relatively small fraction of submitted requests, and of those, remand is more common than an outright grant of benefits.

This honest assessment does not mean AC review is pointless. It serves two essential purposes:

• It is a required step to reach Federal Court. You generally cannot file a civil action in Federal District Court without first exhausting administrative remedies, including the AC review. Skipping the AC typically prevents you from accessing federal court.
• It can correct genuine legal errors. When the ALJ made a clear, identifiable legal mistake, the AC is the appropriate body to address it. Attorney-written briefs that identify specific legal errors have meaningfully better outcomes than pro se requests that simply express dissatisfaction.

Frame for claimants: the Appeals Council is not where most cases are won. But pursuing it is almost always right because it is the gateway to Federal Court and because a well-argued brief occasionally produces a remand that results in approval at a new hearing.

Appeals Council Review vs. Filing a New Application

Claimants who receive an unfavorable ALJ decision face a practical choice: request AC review or file a new disability application. In almost every case, pursue the AC review. Here is why.

• AC review preserves your original filing date. Filing a new application loses your original application date and all back pay tied to your established disability onset date. A remand from the AC that results in approval at a new hearing preserves the original back pay going back to your onset date.
• AC review is required to access Federal Court. If you skip the AC and file a new application instead, you generally lose the ability to challenge the prior ALJ decision in federal court. The two paths are procedurally separate.
• The exception: substantial new evidence that doesn’t meet AC rules. If you have new medical evidence developed after the ALJ’s decision date that doesn’t satisfy the AC’s good cause and materiality requirements, a new application may be the better vehicle for presenting that evidence while the AC review runs in parallel on the prior period.

In situations where both paths seem viable, discuss them with your attorney before acting. Filing a new application while an AC review is pending is sometimes strategically appropriate but requires careful coordination. For the full overview of the appeal vs. reapply question, see our disability appeal process guide.

What Happens If the Appeals Council Denies Your Review?

A denial of review by the AC means the Council has declined to examine your case. The ALJ’s written decision becomes the final administrative decision of SSA and has the same legal effect as if the AC had affirmed it.

You have 60 days from the date of the AC’s denial notice to file a civil action in U.S. District Court.

Federal District Court is the final stage of the disability appeal process. A federal judge reviews the complete administrative record for legal errors, procedural violations, and whether the ALJ’s decision is supported by substantial evidence. No new evidence is introduced at this stage. The court reviews what already exists in the administrative record.

At the federal court stage, the quality of the legal arguments made in your AC brief becomes important. Courts frequently look at whether the claimant raised the same legal arguments at the administrative level that they are now raising in federal court. This is another reason the AC brief must be thorough and legally precise.

For more on the federal court appeal process, see our federal court guide. [LINK: /appeals/federal-court/] If you’ve received an AC denial and are approaching the federal court deadline, call us immediately at (501) 481-8923. For immediate help after a denial at any stage, see our disability claim denied page.

Do You Need a Lawyer for an Appeals Council Review?

You don’t need a lawyer to file an AC review request. But the effectiveness of your request depends almost entirely on the quality of the written brief you submit. A brief that simply states “I disagree with the ALJ” or “the evidence shows I’m disabled” does not give the AC grounds for review. The AC is looking for specific, identifiable legal errors in the ALJ’s decision.

Here is what changes when an attorney writes your AC brief:

• The brief targets specific legal errors the AC actually acts on. Experienced disability attorneys know which types of ALJ errors are most likely to result in a grant or remand: failure to properly weigh treating physician opinions, inadequate hypothetical questions to the VE, insufficient explanation of the RFC. The brief is structured around those specific grounds.
• The brief cites specific evidence. Every alleged error is tied to a page number in the hearing transcript or an exhibit number in the record. The AC needs to see that the error exists in the record, not just in the claimant’s characterization of what happened.
• The attorney assesses new evidence strategically. Your attorney determines whether new evidence meets the three-part AC standard and whether it should be submitted to the AC or reserved for a new application or federal court proceeding.
• The brief preserves issues for Federal Court. Legal arguments not raised at the administrative level may be waived in federal court. An attorney’s brief raises all arguable errors, protecting your rights through every subsequent stage.

The contingency fee structure means there is no upfront cost to getting legal help at the AC stage. For more on how ADAG approaches AC reviews and federal court cases, see our disability lawyer page.

Frequently Asked Questions About the Appeals Council