CRSC Contradiction

Y

Yaya21

PEB Forum Regular Member
Registered Member
Hey everyone!
Hopefully someone can help me. I just got my IPEB results back. I should be getting CRSC but theres confusion on one of the documents i got back. I have no code and a NO for if its instrument of war, etc.. but in the additional comments section it says YES to if my injuries were in a combat related zone with the secretary of defense blah blah. Can anyone help?
 
Yaya21 said:
Hey everyone!
Hopefully someone can help me. I just got my IPEB results back. I should be getting CRSC but theres confusion on one of the documents i got back. I have no code and a NO for if its instrument of war, etc.. but in the additional comments section it says YES to if my injuries were in a combat related zone with the secretary of defense blah blah. Can anyone help?
Click to expand...
Many disabilities can occur in a combat zone that might not be combat related.

One example: While inside the wire in Afghanistan, SGT Jones runs two miles each day to remain fit. One day he stumbles over a rock and breaks an arm. That injury and resulting complications (if any) would not be considered combat related for CRSC.

See THIS LINK <—- for more examples.

Ron
 
Yaya21 said:
Hey everyone!
Hopefully someone can help me. I just got my IPEB results back. I should be getting CRSC but theres confusion on one of the documents i got back. I have no code and a NO for if its instrument of war, etc.. but in the additional comments section it says YES to if my injuries were in a combat related zone with the secretary of defense blah blah. Can anyone help?
Click to expand...

The distinction of "where" a disability was incurred is important for those who are separated vice retired for their disabilities. No tax for separation pay for those who are separated based on unfitting conditions incurred in a combat zone. If retired, the importance of this issue goes away for tax purposes.
 
I got the form number. So its AF form 356. I got a 9F as NO- Combat related determination as defined in 26 USC 104- thats where you enter the code for armed conflict or instrument of war. But the for additional findings 10E i got a YES- Disability was incurred in a combat zone or during the the performance of duty in combat related operations as designated by the sec def. Anyone have any thoughts?
 
What was your ultimate finding? What conditions were unfitting, what was the combined DoD rating, and what was the recommended disposition? I.e., unfit for the following conditions [x,y.z], rated at [n%], and that the member be "[separated][retired]...."
 
Jason Perry said:
What was your ultimate finding? What conditions were unfitting, what was the combined DoD rating, and what was the recommended disposition? I.e., unfit for the following conditions [x,y.z], rated at [n%], and that the member be "[separated][retired]...."
Click to expand...

Temp reitriement 70%
VA 100%
70% for both were for PTSD
 
What was the stressor(s) found by the MEB and/or the PEB (or even the VA) for your PTSD?
 
On my IRILO/Narsum it said combat related multiple times by my provider. On my 356 it says my symptoms were associated with participation from drone strikes and a mishap when i was deployed
 
Yaya21 said:
On my IRILO/Narsum it said combat related multiple times by my provider. On my 356 it says my symptoms were associated with participation from drone strikes and a mishap when i was deployed
Click to expand...

Drone strikes. That might be the issue. Most times, they (meaning the AF) will avoid and deny finding drone strikes/remote viewing as a "Combat Related" stressor.

I think this is a very interesting legal issue. It has not been explored/fought out enough, in my opinion.

If the PTSD is based on viewing the effects of drone strikes, I suspect they will deny the CRSC. I don't agree this is legally correct. I suspect that fighting it out will take a lot of time and money. I also think that for that reason, it will likely take a lot of time until either the rule-makers change their mind, or that the courts properly address this issue.

The first step to seeing what shakes out is to apply for CRSC. Best of luck!
 
Jason Perry said:
Drone strikes. That might be the issue. Most times, they (meaning the AF) will avoid and deny finding drone strikes/remote viewing as a "Combat Related" stressor.

I think this is a very interesting legal issue. It has not been explored/fought out enough, in my opinion.

If the PTSD is based on viewing the effects of drone strikes, I suspect they will deny the CRSC. I don't agree this is legally correct. I suspect that fighting it out will take a lot of time and money. I also think that for that reason, it will likely take a lot of time until either the rule-makers change their mind, or that the courts properly address this issue.

The first step to seeing what shakes out is to apply for CRSC. Best of luck!
Click to expand...


Thanks! I just dont understand why theres 2 separate parts that have the same phrasing. Idk what to do, as in should i rebut before i sign anything?
 
Yaya...your situation was near identical to mine. I was put on temp retirement, combat zone, NOT combat related. Once retired, I applied for CRSC after doing my research and was awarded. Bottom line as far as I was told, for drone operators that develop PTSD at home station, they will NOT be awarded CRSC. However, for those operators that develop PTSD while downrange or due to their deployment, the CRSC MIGHT be awarded. All depends on the circumstances....and documentation. Mine was much more involved/much more...crazy (for lack of a better term) than what most RPA crews experience. I had commander statements, DO statements, pilots I flew with, EPRS, LOEs, awards, decs, med records, mental health narsum, PEB findings, deployment orders, dd214, all in my CRSC package. Give them zero option to deny it. ....and don't ever thing you're alone....
 
Wally3430 said:
Yaya...your situation was near identical to mine. I was put on temp retirement, combat zone, NOT combat related. Once retired, I applied for CRSC after doing my research and was awarded. Bottom line as far as I was told, for drone operators that develop PTSD at home station, they will NOT be awarded CRSC. However, for those operators that develop PTSD while downrange or due to their deployment, the CRSC MIGHT be awarded. All depends on the circumstances....and documentation. Mine was much more involved/much more...crazy (for lack of a better term) than what most RPA crews experience. I had commander statements, DO statements, pilots I flew with, EPRS, LOEs, awards, decs, med records, mental health narsum, PEB findings, deployment orders, dd214, all in my CRSC package. Give them zero option to deny it. ....and don't ever thing you're alone....
Click to expand...

What does combat zone give you?
 
Yaya21 said:
What does combat zone give you?
Click to expand...
Combat zone - Tax purposes as far as I know. A "combat related" finding from the peb doesn't mean you'll get CRSC, just that the PEB found it was combat related. Makes it easier to get CRSC when you apply.
 
The point of being in the combat zone is (as a drone operator or someone in the "kill chain") is to push the issue and make the service state a reason.

There are a lot of legal issues and concepts and legal arguments that could come into play when fighting out this issue of whether folks not directly exposed to personal danger should be awarded CRSC. This issue has not been well fought expressed by the law, it has not been well addressed by regulations, and I think it is ripe for being addressed.

(There are a lot of concepts on the strictly traditional law side that I think are implicated- including a case that every lawyer came across in first year torts class- Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co. - Wikipedia. , and the concept of "zone of danger." Zone Of Danger - FindLaw . Hpwever, there are a lot of ideas that have not been explored or fought out. I can think of many situations that challenge the idea that drone operators who are remote from the horrible events should not be compensated. Many folks who are personally at the site of events get CRSC for their PTSD. What about a sniper who is several kilometers away from his kill shot? He is not in the zone of danger, but would most likely be granted CRSC based on his/her being in combat. Or the Chaplain who sees the result of remote combat action and has PTSD. Is that not as a "direct" result of combat? There are many issues that should and could be fought out.)
 
Hey team, I know this is a super dated thread, but as someone who is potentially facing a MEB in the not so near future I needed to mention something relating to drones and ptsd related to them, as that's what I have.

So, I'm not sure about other branches besides the AF, but, anyone who is medically retired for MH for being within the AFDCGS enterprise should probably be qualifying for CRSC by all definitions.

Why? The AFDCGS is less commonly known by its true name... AN/GSQ-272 SENTINEL. Which is classified as a weapon system... Straight from the Air Force site even.

I know it's potentially a long shot still, but anyone working within the AFDCGS which developed any MH issues from within and was medically retired should qualify for CRSC, since it's a weapon system it 100% meets the criteria for "instrumentality of war".

"A determination that a disability is the result of an instrumentality of war may be made if the disability was incurred in any period of service as a result of such diverse causes as wounds caused by a military weapon..."

I know, it's probably still an uphill battle, but reading through it all it is pretty black and white that if you suffer from MH issues working within the AFDCGS and were medically retired, you qualify for CRSC.
 
Yes, drones are instruments of war. Yes, PTSD has been granted CRSC for specific documented events. Cumulative PTSD is not a productive approach to CRSC.
 
chaplaincharlie said:
Yes, drones are instruments of war. Yes, PTSD has been granted CRSC for specific documented events. Cumulative PTSD is not a productive approach to CRSC.
Click to expand...
Well, I would obviously argue that point? Cumulative or not, it's still PTSD.

Specific documented events? I can specifically talk about absolutely horrifying stuff, I won't here given it's pretty dark.

But because it happened over the course of my service rather than one quick action it's harder to get approved for? I find that completely hog wash and contradictory.

Drones and operations around such is just how modern combat is. And it is time that is accepted and time for folks to get what they deserve, especially how many people I know personally that have mental health issues from serving within the DCGS enterprise. FMV and High Alt both.
 
Moonbear said:
Well, I would obviously argue that point? Cumulative or not, it's still PTSD.

Specific documented events? I can specifically talk about absolutely horrifying stuff, I won't here given it's pretty dark.

But because it happened over the course of my service rather than one quick action it's harder to get approved for? I find that completely hog wash and contradictory.

Drones and operations around such is just how modern combat is. And it is time that is accepted and time for folks to get what they deserve, especially how many people I know personally that have mental health issues from serving within the DCGS enterprise. FMV and High Alt both.
Click to expand...
I’m sure most people on the forum will agree with you. I know I do. The way CRSC is adjudicated at a board though is it has to be correlated to something specific. It’s not a cumulative thing. I mean you could say the PACT Act presumptive things are kind of cumulative considering burn pits and such might be encompassing what has occurred over someone’s entire service history.

I applied for CRSC twice. I thought the first time it was going to be simple and it would be approved for PTSD be cause I had a lot of medical documentation backing it up. I had to reapply for the PTSD portion because my service wanted to see what specific event caused my PTSD. I had to submit award narratives and such. Again I agree with you. The Air Force may be different though.
 
chaplaincharlie said:
Yes, drones are instruments of war. Yes, PTSD has been granted CRSC for specific documented events. Cumulative PTSD is not a productive approach to CRSC.
Click to expand...
Hello,


cc: @chaplaincharlie

Chaplain Charlie did not state cumulative PTSD is not real. I believe his comment was to indicate “cumulative” is more difficult to prove. Whether one believes that or not is a personal choice.

Regards,
Ron
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top