VA Disability Rating for Aphakia and Lens Dislocation (DC 6029)
Diagnostic Code 6029 · 38 CFR §4.79
What Is It?
Diagnostic Code 6029 assigns exactly one figure: a minimum of 30 percent, unilateral or bilateral. The entry in 38 CFR 4.79 reads "Aphakia or dislocation of crystalline lens: Evaluate based on visual impairment, and elevate the resulting level of visual impairment one step." followed by a single line, "Minimum (unilateral or bilateral) — 30." There is no ladder of tiers under this code. Anything above 30 percent comes from the visual-impairment tables after the one-step elevation has been applied, and it is written under those codes rather than under 6029. Two mechanics do the work here, and they operate in sequence. First, evaluate visual impairment normally — corrected distance acuity under 38 CFR 4.76, visual fields under 4.77, muscle function under 4.78, scored against DCs 6061 through 6066, 6080, 6081 and 6090. Second, take the level of visual impairment that produces and elevate it one step. Only then is the result compared against the 30 percent floor, and the higher of the two applies. Losing sight of the order is how veterans end up comparing an unelevated acuity figure against the minimum and concluding the minimum is all there is. Aphakia is the absence of the eye's natural crystalline lens — most often after cataract extraction without an implant, or after traumatic loss. Dislocation of the lens (ectopia lentis) is displacement of the lens from its normal position, which distorts vision severely even when the lens is still present. In veterans both commonly follow blast injury, penetrating ocular trauma, or surgical complication. The reason the schedule treats aphakia as inherently disabling is that an eye without its lens cannot accommodate at all: it has no ability to change focus between distance and near, so a single spectacle correction can never serve both. One distinction decides whether this code applies to you at all. If a replacement lens is present — pseudophakia, meaning an intraocular lens implant — DC 6027, cataract, directs evaluation under the General Rating Formula for Diseases of the Eye instead. DC 6027's own words are that if there is no replacement lens, evaluate based on aphakia under diagnostic code 6029. So the presence or absence of an implant, not the original surgery, is what routes the claim. Visual-field testing also changes with it: 38 CFR 4.77(a) requires the Goldmann III/4e target for phakic individuals and for pseudophakic or aphakic individuals well adapted to correction, but the larger IV/4e target for aphakic individuals not well adapted to contact lens correction.
Rating Criteria
| Rating | Criteria |
|---|---|
| 30% | Minimum evaluation for aphakia or dislocation of the crystalline lens, unilateral or bilateral. The schedule first directs VA to evaluate visual impairment and elevate the resulting level one step; the 30 percent minimum applies where that elevated result would otherwise be lower. Where the elevated result is higher than 30 percent, the higher evaluation applies and is assigned under the visual-impairment codes (DCs 6061-6066, 6080, 6081, 6090). |
Evidence Needed
The threshold document is an ophthalmology record stating plainly whether the eye is aphakic or pseudophakic, because that one word decides whether DC 6029 or DC 6027 governs. Add the operative report for the lens extraction or the trauma records for a traumatic loss or dislocation, best-corrected distance acuity for each eye measured under 38 CFR 4.76, and formal perimetry recording which Goldmann target size was used. Slit-lamp findings documenting lens position are what establish dislocation as opposed to simple cataract. Where complications have followed — retinal detachment, secondary glaucoma, corneal decompensation, cystoid macular oedema — bring those records too, since each is separately ratable rather than absorbed into this evaluation.
C&P Exam Tips
Make sure the examination report uses the word aphakic and not merely post-cataract-surgery. Post-operative describes a history; aphakic describes the current anatomy, and the rating turns on the latter. Ask the examiner to state whether an intraocular lens is present. Have best-corrected distance acuity measured properly, and if the correcting lens for the poorer eye differs by more than three dioptres from the better eye, say so — 38 CFR 4.76(b)(1) then allows the poorer eye to be evaluated uncorrected where that yields better combined acuity, which is a rule written for exactly this situation. For visual fields, confirm which Goldmann target the technician used; an aphakic eye poorly adapted to contact lens correction is supposed to be tested at IV/4e. Describe the functional consequence in accommodation terms — that you cannot see distance and near through one correction — rather than as generic blurring.
How to File
File under DC 6029 with the record establishing aphakia or lens dislocation and its service-connected cause. The 30 percent minimum is a floor, not a target: check the decision to confirm the rater evaluated visual impairment, elevated that level one step, and then compared the elevated figure against 30. A decision that recites the minimum without showing the elevation has skipped the step that produces every figure above it. File retinal detachment, secondary glaucoma, and corneal decompensation as their own claims rather than as symptoms of the lens loss.
Common Mistakes
The most common error is not knowing the one-step elevation exists, which turns 6029 into a flat 30 percent code in the claimant's mind and removes any reason to argue about acuity. The second is arriving at the wrong code entirely: veterans with a lens implant file under 6029 when DC 6027 governs pseudophakia, and the claim is decided under a formula counting treatment visits rather than one about lens loss. A third is treating the 30 percent as bilateral-dependent — the schedule says unilateral or bilateral in the same breath, so one aphakic eye reaches the minimum on its own. Finally, complications get folded into the lens claim instead of being filed. Retinal detachment and secondary glaucoma each carry their own codes, and an eye that has lost its lens is at genuinely elevated risk of both.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is 30 percent the most DC 6029 can pay?
No — it is the least. The schedule calls 30 percent the minimum, unilateral or bilateral. Above it, VA evaluates visual impairment, elevates the resulting level one step, and assigns that higher figure if it exceeds 30. Those higher evaluations are written under the visual-impairment codes rather than under 6029, which is why the code itself shows only one number.
What does elevate one step actually mean?
It means moving the result up one level on the visual-impairment scale before assigning it — not adding ten percentage points and not rounding. Determine the level of visual impairment the eye actually has, take the next step up the table, and assign that. It is a deliberate acknowledgement that an eye with no lens performs worse in practice than its measured acuity suggests.
I have an intraocular lens implant. Does DC 6029 apply?
Generally no. DC 6027 says that where a replacement lens is present — pseudophakia — the eye is evaluated under the General Rating Formula for Diseases of the Eye, and that DC 6029 applies where there is no replacement lens. So the implant, not the surgery, decides the code. Lens dislocation is different: the lens is present but displaced, and that stays under 6029.
Why does the VA treat aphakia as disabling if my glasses correct my vision?
Because a lens-free eye cannot accommodate. The natural lens changes shape to shift focus between distance and near; without it, one spectacle correction serves one distance only. Corrected distance acuity can look normal on the chart while near work remains unusable without a second correction, and the schedule's minimum plus one-step elevation is how it accounts for that gap.
Does the three-dioptre rule help me?
It can. Under 38 CFR 4.76(b)(1), when the lens required to correct distance vision in the poorer eye differs by more than three dioptres from the better eye — and the difference is not congenital or developmental refractive error — the poorer eye may be evaluated on either its corrected or uncorrected acuity, whichever produces better combined acuity. Aphakia routinely creates a difference that large, so raise it explicitly.
What complications should I claim separately?
Retinal detachment (DC 6008), glaucoma (DCs 6012 and 6013), corneal decompensation, and cystoid macular oedema are the usual ones. Each has its own evaluation path and none is absorbed into the aphakia rating. Filing them as part of the same narrative rather than as separate claims is a frequent way for a real, ratable complication to go unevaluated.