CRSC Contradiction

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?
 
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?
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
 
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?

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]...."
 
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]...."

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
 
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

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!
 
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!


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....
 
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....

What does combat zone give you?
 
What does combat zone give you?
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.)
 
Top