SCARS OTHER NOT OF HEAD FACE OR NECK

Summary

The veteran, who served in the U.S. Marine Corps from August 1968 to June 2002, appeals a March 2025 rating decision that reduced the evaluation for his service-connected left lower extremity (LLE) scar from 10 percent to noncompensable, effective August 16, 2024. The veteran contended that this reduction was improper and sought restoration of the prior 10 percent rating. The Board reviewed the evidence, noting that the LLE scar was initially granted service connection at 10 percent in July 2021, based on an April 2022 examination finding it "slightly painful to palpation." However, subsequent August 2024 VA examinations, conducted as part of an increased rating claim for a knee condition, indicated improvement. The August 2024 scar examination found the scar to be well-healed, not painful, not unstable, and not associated with underlying soft tissue damage. The Board found that the scar's symptoms, including slight pain, had dissipated, and it did not interfere with the veteran's ability to function. The Board also noted that the reduction did not affect the veteran's overall 90 percent combined disability rating, thus not triggering special procedural requirements for reductions. Consequently, the Board denied the veteran's claim for restoration of the prior 10 percent rating, finding the reduction proper based on the evidence of improvement.

Rationale

Reduction proper as scar improved; Scar no longer painful or unstable; No interference with function

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: A26035056
Decision Date: 04/15/26	Archive Date: 04/15/26

DOCKET NO. 251219-616638
DATE: April 15, 2026

ORDER

1. The rating reduction from 10 percent to noncompensable, effective August 16, 2024, for service-connected left lower extremity (LLE) scar was proper; the claim for restoration of the prior 10 percent rating is denied. 

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. The rating reduction of the Veteran's LLE scar did not result in a reduction of total compensation.  

2. The evidence of record resulting in the reduction of the Veteran's LLE scar rating showed actual improvement of the disability under ordinary conditions of life.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

The reduction of the rating for service-connected LLE scar from 10 percent to noncompensable effective August 19, 2024, was proper. 38 U.S.C. § 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102, 3.105(e), 3.344, 4.1, 4.2, 4.10, 4.12, 4.118, Diagnostic Codes 7802, 7804. 

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Marine Corps from August 1968 to June 2002.  

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2025 higher-level review rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO), the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ).  

In the December 2025 VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement), the Veteran elected the Direct Review docket.

Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the October 2024 AOJ rating decision, which was subsequently subject to higher-level review. 38 C.F.R. § 20.301. If evidence was submitted during the period after the AOJ issued the decision, which was subsequently subject to higher-level review the Board did not consider it in its decision. 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.300, 20.301, 20.801. 

If the Veteran would like VA to consider any evidence that was submitted that the Board could not consider, the Veteran may file a Supplemental Claim (VA Form 20-0995) and submit or identify this evidence. 38 C.F.R. § 3.2501. If the evidence is new and relevant, VA will issue another decision on the claim[s], considering the new evidence in addition to the evidence previously considered. Id. Specific instructions for filing a Supplemental Claim are included with this decision. 

The Board has thoroughly reviewed all evidence in the claims file. The analysis below focuses on the most salient and relevant evidence and on what this evidence shows, or fails to show, on the claim, and the Board's reasons for rejecting evidence favorable to the Veteran. The Veteran must not assume the Board has overlooked evidence not explicitly discussed herein.  

Neither the Veteran nor the Veteran's representative has raised any other issues not addressed herein, to include regarding the duty to notify or the duty to assist, nor have any other issues been reasonably raised by the record.  

1. Evaluation of painful scar, left lower extremity, which is currently 0 percent disabling, is continued.

In an October 2024 rating decision, the RO decreased the evaluation assigned to the Veteran's service-connected scar of the left lower extremity (hereafter LLE) from 10 percent to noncompensable effective August 16, 2024, based on an examination conducted on that date.  See October 2024 Rating Decision - Narrative, at 1. The Veteran contends that the rating reduction was improper, and a 10 percent rating should be restored. 

Upon review of all pertinent evidence of record, the Board finds that the reduction in this case was proper, and restoration of the 10 percent evaluation for service-connected LLE painful scar should be denied.

A rating reduction is the result of a course of action taken by VA, and not a claim by the Veteran. When the propriety of a rating reduction is at issue, the focus is on the actions of the RO in effectuating the reduction, both in terms of compliance with the special due process considerations applicable to reductions, and in terms of whether the evidence at the time of the decision reducing the rating supported the reduction. In most cases, violations of the due process considerations applicable to rating reductions, or failure of the evidence to meet the standards for reducing a rating, render the underlying reduction void ab initio, rather
 reduction in this case was proper, and restoration of the 10 percent evaluation for service-connected LLE painful scar should be denied.

A rating reduction is the result of a course of action taken by VA, and not a claim by the Veteran. When the propriety of a rating reduction is at issue, the focus is on the actions of the RO in effectuating the reduction, both in terms of compliance with the special due process considerations applicable to reductions, and in terms of whether the evidence at the time of the decision reducing the rating supported the reduction. In most cases, violations of the due process considerations applicable to rating reductions, or failure of the evidence to meet the standards for reducing a rating, render the underlying reduction void ab initio, rather than merely voidable. The burden is on VA to justify a reduction in a rating. See Brown v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 413 (1993).

There are specific procedural requirements applicable to rating reductions. If a reduction in the rating is considered warranted and the lower rating would result in a reduction or discontinuance of the compensation payments currently being made, the RO must issue a rating decision proposing the reduction and set forth all material facts and reasons. 38 C.F.R. § 3.105 (e). A period of 60 days is then allowed for response. Id. The RO must notify the beneficiary that he or she will be given 60 days to present evidence to show that compensation payments should be continued at the present level. Id. Additionally, the beneficiary must be notified as to the right to a predetermination hearing.  38 C.F.R. § 3.105 (i). Furthermore, the effective date of the reduction will be the last day of the month in which a 60-day period from the date of notice to the beneficiary of the final rating action expires. 38 C.F.R. § 3.105 (e).

Although no reduction notification procedures were undertaken in this case, none were required. The reduction in rating of the service-connected LLE painful scar did not result in a reduction in the amount of compensation payable to the Veteran. Indeed, the Veteran's combined rating remained at 90 percent. As there was no reduction in the overall compensation paid to the Veteran, the special procedural requirements outlined in 38 C.F.R. § 3.105(e) are therefore not applicable in this case. See VAOPGCPREC 71-91 (Nov. 7, 1991); Stelzel v. Mansfield, 508 F.3d 1345, 1347-49 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (holding that provisions of § 3.105(e) do not apply when there is no change in the overall disability rating).

The Board notes that the criteria governing rating reductions for service-connected disabilities are found in 38 C.F.R. § 3.344. The provisions of 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.344 (a) and (b) apply to ratings that have continued for five years or more. A rating in effect at the same level for less than five years may be reduced if there is a re-examination showing improvement in the disability. 38 C.F.R. § 3.344(c). 

Turning to the relevant procedural history, a July 2021 rating decision initially granted service connection for the Veteran's LLE painful scar with an evaluation of 10 percent effective June 2, 2021. See July 2021 Rating Decision - Narrative, at 2. Following receipt of an April 2024 VA Form 21-526EZ seeking increased ratings for a lower leg/knee condition only (i.e., not scar), the October 2024 rating decision incidentally reduced the assigned disability rating for the Veteran's LLE painful scar from 10 percent to noncompensable effective August 16, 2024.  Thus, the rating in question in this matter was in effect for less than five years and may be reduced based on examination showing improvement in the disability.  38 C.F.R. § 3.344(c).

There are several general VA regulations that apply to all rating reductions, regardless of how long the disability rating at issue has been in effect. See Brown v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 413, 420-21 (1993). Specifically, 38 C.F.R. § 4.1 requires that each disability be viewed in relation to its history. It further requires that for application of the rating schedule, accurate and fully descriptive medical examinations are required, with emphasis upon the limitation of activity imposed by the disabling condition.  As to interpretation of examination reports, 38 C.F.R. § 4.2 requires that if the examination report does not contain sufficient detail, it is incumbent on the rating board to return the report as inadequate for evaluation purposes.
 that apply to all rating reductions, regardless of how long the disability rating at issue has been in effect. See Brown v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 413, 420-21 (1993). Specifically, 38 C.F.R. § 4.1 requires that each disability be viewed in relation to its history. It further requires that for application of the rating schedule, accurate and fully descriptive medical examinations are required, with emphasis upon the limitation of activity imposed by the disabling condition.  As to interpretation of examination reports, 38 C.F.R. § 4.2 requires that if the examination report does not contain sufficient detail, it is incumbent on the rating board to return the report as inadequate for evaluation purposes. The Court has also stated that examination reports on which the reduction are based must be adequate. See Tucker v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 201 (1992). Also, 38 C.F.R. § 4.13 provides that the rating agency should assure itself that there has been an actual change in the condition, for better or worse, and not merely a difference in the thoroughness of the examination or in use of descriptive terms. Additionally, in order for a rating reduction to be proper, the evidence must not only show that an improvement in a disability has actually occurred, but also, that such improvement reflects improvement in the ability to function under ordinary conditions of life and work. Id.; see also 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.2, 4.10. In addressing whether improvement is shown, the comparison point generally is the last examination on which the rating at issue was assigned or continued. See Hohol v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 169 (1992).

The record reflects that Veteran filed an increased rating claim for left knee strain with injury affecting dorsiflexion (Group XII) of foot/left lateral compartmental release due to exertional compartment syndrome, with residual leg and ankle pain and patellar enthesopathy in April 2024. See April 2024 VA Form 526-EZ, at 13. As part of the development for the Veteran's increased rating left knee claim, he underwent VA examinations that incidentally revealed an improvement in his LLE scar condition. The reduction is based on August 2024 VA examinations conducted as part of this claim.

Notably, for all periods relevant to this appeal, the Veteran's LLE scar has been rated based upon an LLE scar with an area or areas less than 144 square inches (929 sq. cm.) (not associated with underlying soft tissue damage) pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 4.118, Diagnostic Code (DC) 7802. 

Under DC 7802, a 10 percent rating is warranted for burn scars or scars due to other causes, not of the head, face, or neck, with an area of 144 square inches (929 sq. cm.) or greater (not associated with underlying soft tissue damage).  DC 7804 provides a 10 percent rating for one or two scars that are unstable or painful. 38 C.F.R. § 4.118, DCs 7802, 7804

In August 2024, the Veteran underwent a VA knee conditions examination as part of his increased rating claim. Here, the VA examiner indicated that the Veteran does not have any scars or disfigurement of the skin related to any conditions or the treatment of his service-connected knee condition. See August 2024 Knee C&P, at 11.  The Veteran also underwent a VA muscle injury examination as part of his increased rating claim. Here, the VA examiner indicated that the Veteran has a scar from a fasciotomy done on his left lower leg in 2001. See August 2024 Muscle C&P, at 6.  The examiner did not indicate that this scar was in any way painful, unstable, or that it was associated with underlying soft tissue damage.

In connection with the knee and muscle injury examinations, the Veteran also underwent a VA scar examination as part of his increased rating claim. Here, the VA examiner indicated that the Veteran has a single scar from a fasciatome done on his left lower leg in 2001. See August 2024 Scar C&P, at 2. The Veteran's scar measured 14 cm in length and 1 cm in width.  The examiner described it as a lateral left lower leg scar, post-surgery.  The course was described as "well healed with no complications."  The VA examiner indicated that the Veteran's LLE scar is not painful.  It was not found to be unstable, with frequent loss of covering of the skin over the scar.  There was no indication of underlying soft tissue damage associated with the scar.  

As noted above, a July 2021 rating decision initially
 examiner indicated that the Veteran has a single scar from a fasciatome done on his left lower leg in 2001. See August 2024 Scar C&P, at 2. The Veteran's scar measured 14 cm in length and 1 cm in width.  The examiner described it as a lateral left lower leg scar, post-surgery.  The course was described as "well healed with no complications."  The VA examiner indicated that the Veteran's LLE scar is not painful.  It was not found to be unstable, with frequent loss of covering of the skin over the scar.  There was no indication of underlying soft tissue damage associated with the scar.  

As noted above, a July 2021 rating decision initially granted service connection for the Veteran's LLE painful scar with an evaluation of 10 percent effective June 2, 2021. This was based on an April 2022 VA scar examination indicating that the Veteran's LLE scar was "slightly painful to palpation."  By way of history, additional earlier examinations, which the Board acknowledges are outside of the service connection period but do provide insight into the long-term severity of the scar itself, showed occasional pain in the scar.  For example, in September 2015, his scar was found to be "intermittently painful" without any skin breakdown in a muscle injuries examination, but a related knee examination conducted at the same time stated that the scar was nether painful nor unstable.  In October 2018, his scar was not found to be painful or unstable and there was no sign of underlying tissue damage.   

The Board has reviewed the available medical treatment records during the period in question and finds no indication that his scar was worse than described in the August 2024 examination report.  Indeed, the severity of his scar is not discussed at all in those records.  

Based on the medical evidence of record, the Board finds that the Veteran's scar has been generally found to be normal without pain or instability under the ordinary conditions of life.  His scar has not been found to result in any sort of interference with his ability to function in normal society, to include work or social interaction.  He has not required treatment for his scar, nor has he complained of any specific symptoms of pain or instability during the period in question.  In short, there are no symptoms found at this time which would warrant a compensable rating, and to the extent that his scar was previously slightly painful to palpation, that symptom has dissipated.  

The Board has considered whether any other evidence of record might result in the restoration of his 10 percent rating but finds none that would support such a change.  Specifically, although the Veteran has appealed the rating for a "painful" scar, that appears to be a reference to the disability as it is described in the rating decisions and does not actually indicate that the Veteran's scar is actually painful.  Indeed, the Veteran has provided no statements or testimony as to the actual symptoms he experiences around his scar, which the Board could use to consider whether or not actual improvement has not been found.  Neither has he provided any statements or testimony calling into question the adequacy of the examinations in question.  Absent further evidence that the condition has not actually improved, as shown in the August 16, 2024, examination, the Board must conclude that it reflects the actual severity of his disability, which shows improvement under the ordinary conditions of life.  

(Continued on the next page)

?

Based on the foregoing, the Board finds that the reduction of the rating for service-connected LLE scar from 10 percent disabling to noncompensable, effective August 16, 2024, was proper based on the Veteran's LLE scar being non-painful, stable, and having an area of less than 144 square inches.  Accordingly, the Veteran's claim for restoration of the prior rating is denied.

 

 

M. Pryce

Acting Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Loy, T.

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.