What is the VA rating for Scars?

DC 7803 (unstable scars) was removed from the schedule effective October 23, 2008 (73 FR 54710). Its unstable-scar criteria were folded directly into DC 7804, which now covers both unstable and painful scars together.

• This was confirmed independently via two sources: the eCFR's own editorial-history table, and a Federal Register proposed rule for DC 7804 that separately narrates the same 2008 removal and merge.
• Stale cross-references to "DC 7803" still appear in several unrelated skin-disease sections of the current 2026 schedule text -- a vestigial artifact, not something to build around.
• If your records or a prior decision cite DC 7803, that finding is now evaluated under DC 7804 instead.

Records to review: Federal Register rulemaking history; eCFR editorial-history table.

DC 7800's Note (2) states: rate tissue loss of the auricle under DC 6207 (loss of auricle), and anatomical loss of the eye under DC 6061 or DC 6063, as appropriate. Confirmed via two independent sources (Cornell LII, govinfo.gov official CFR text) during this session's research pass -- previously undisclosed in this hub.

• A documented tissue loss of the auricle (outer ear) is not counted toward DC 7800's own disfigurement tiers -- it is rated separately under DC 6207.
• Anatomical loss of the eye is similarly redirected to DC 6061 (anatomical loss of both eyes) or DC 6063 (anatomical loss of one eye), as appropriate, rather than DC 7800's own tiers.
• RatingScope's Eye Conditions hub already builds DC 6061-6066's combined visual-acuity tables, including these anatomical-loss tiers.
• DC 6207 (loss of auricle) is not yet built as its own hub in this repository -- if your records document auricle tissue loss, that finding should be evaluated under DC 6207 directly, not estimated from this hub's DC 7800 tiers.

Records to review: treatment records documenting auricle or eye tissue loss; ENT or ophthalmology records.

For DC 7801 and DC 7802, Note (2) allows a separate evaluation for each affected zone of the body (each extremity, anterior trunk, or posterior trunk), combined via section 4.25 -- or, alternatively, a single evaluation summing the areas across zones, whichever provides the higher rating. RatingScope does not automate this comparison.

• This only matters when scarring genuinely affects more than one of the six zones at once; single-zone scarring is fully covered by this hub's DC 7801/7802 tables directly.
• RatingScope discloses this as a known, deferred gap rather than guessing which of the two approaches (per-zone combination vs. summed single evaluation) would yield the higher result.
• This is the same treatment given to Peptic Disease and Crohn's/IBD's section 4.114 predominant-disability-picture rule -- a genuinely open-ended comparison, not a lookup table.

Records to review: treatment records documenting affected body zones; area measurements per zone.

38 CFR 4.118(b) states that two or more skin conditions may be combined via section 4.25 only if separate areas of skin are involved; if the same area of skin is involved, only the highest evaluation is used. RatingScope does not automate this rule.

• This matters when a veteran has more than one of DC 7800/7801/7802/7804 documented at once -- for example, facial disfigurement under DC 7800 together with separately painful scars under DC 7804.
• Note (3) under DC 7804 confirms scars evaluated under DC 7800, 7801, 7802, or 7805 may also separately receive a DC 7804 evaluation, when applicable -- but whether that combines or is superseded by the highest-only rule depends on whether the same area of skin is involved.
• RatingScope discloses this as a known, deferred gap rather than guessing whether two documented findings affect the same or separate areas of skin.
• DC 7800's own Note (4) similarly instructs that other disabling effects (pain, instability, muscle or nerve injury residuals) associated with head/face/neck scars be separately evaluated and combined via section 4.25 -- the same open, unautomated combination question.

Records to review: treatment records documenting each finding's affected area; clinician assessment of same-area vs. separate-area involvement.

DC 7805 is a pure cross-reference instruction: evaluate any disabling effect not already considered under DC 7800, 7801, 7802, or 7804 under whatever other diagnostic code actually applies. Confirmed via two independent sources (RSCH-054), DC 7805 has no table of its own -- selecting it in this hub returns an explicit disclosure, never a guessed number.

• This is genuinely open-ended -- the "appropriate diagnostic code" depends entirely on what the residual effect actually is, which could be any body system.
• RatingScope discloses this rather than guessing which other diagnostic code would apply.
• If your records document a disabling effect from a scar not captured by DC 7800/7801/7802/7804 (for example, a documented functional limitation of an underlying joint or muscle), that finding should be evaluated under its own specific diagnostic code, not this hub.
• This gap was closed in RSCH-054/COND-046: DC 7805 was previously entirely absent from this hub's intake flow (not selectable at all). Five Skin Conditions (COND-045) dispatch rows that named DC 7805 as a rating destination had left this dependency open -- it now resolves to an honest disclosure instead of an unbuilt unknown.

Records to review: treatment records documenting the specific residual effect.

RIN 2900-AS37, published September 29, 2025 (90 FR 46542-46544), proposes adding a Note to DC 7804 clarifying that objective evidence of pain is required to assign a compensable evaluation for a painful scar. The public comment period closed November 28, 2025. As of this hub's current sourcing (2026-08-04), this remains a proposed rule -- it has not been finalized.

• VA's own proposal describes this as a clarification of existing practice rather than a substantive change: the preamble states VA has 'always required' objective evidence of pain to assign a compensable DC 7804 evaluation, even before this proposed Note existed.
• RatingScope does not assume whether or when this rule is finalized, or whether its final text matches the proposed text.
• This hub will be revisited if the rule is finalized, rather than guessing its eventual effect on DC 7804's tiers now.

Records to review: Federal Register rulemaking history.

Scars evidence is strongest when different records describe the same confirmed pattern consistently across which finding applies, area or feature counts, and stability/pain findings.

• Medical records can document diagnosis, area measurements, characteristic counts, and stability/pain findings.
• The Scars/Disfigurement DBQ (updated December 2025) organizes all four codes' findings directly, including the 8 disfigurement characteristics as checkboxes and unstable/painful scar counts using DC 7804's exact tier breaks.
• Unretouched color photographs are specifically called out in DC 7800's Note (3) as relevant evidence.
• No single record automatically determines a percentage; the confirmed, documented pattern across the applicable code's specific findings matters.

Records to review: medical records; Scars/Disfigurement DBQ; unretouched color photographs.

The public Scars/Disfigurement DBQ, updated December 2025, maps closely to all four rateable codes.

• Its disfigurement-characteristic checkboxes map directly onto DC 7800's 8 listed characteristics.
• Its painful/unstable scar-count fields use DC 7804's exact tier breaks (1-2/3-4/5-or-more) and ask about the both-unstable-and-painful finding directly.
• Its six-zone area-measurement tables match DC 7801/7802's Note (1) zone definitions precisely.
• The examiner gathers evidence; the examiner does not issue the final benefits decision.

Records to review: Scars/Disfigurement DBQ; C&P examination; treatment history.