Dewey Tomblin appeals the district court’s order affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision to deny him Social Security Disability and Supplemen *182 tal Security Income benefits. On appeal, Tomblin asserts that he was denied the right to counsel before the administrative law judge. Although Tomblin was represented by counsel in the district court, he did not raise this issue either before the administrative forum or the lower court.

It is well-settled law that issues raised for the first time on appeal generally are not considered by this court. See Muth v. United States, 1 F.3d 246, 250 (4th Cir. 1993) (holding that issues raised for the first time on appeal are generally waived absent exceptional circumstances); Pleasant Valley Hosp., Inc. v. Shalala, 32 F.3d 67, 70 (4th Cir. 1994) (“it is inappropriate for courts reviewing appeals of agency decisions to consider arguments not raised before the administrative agency involved”). Here, Tomblin submitted a counseled brief in the district court that did not raise this issue. Accordingly, we conclude that Tomblin has waived this claim. We therefore affirm the district court’s order. Tomblin v. Barnhart, No. CA-03-286-3 (S.D.W.Va. Sept. 30, 2004). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED