CRSC Issue related to PTSD being combat related.

Status
Not open for further replies.

tonyfromnj

PEB Forum Regular Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
[Thread closed.

Forum members are invited to post their CRSC comments and questions in new threads in the CRSC forum.
Path for CRSC Forum: LINK <----

Ron
Moderator
7 September 2019]
——————

I was recently denied on my first application to get CRSC benefits for my VA rating (100%) for PTSD. They sent me the denial letter saying that I didn't provide them with enough evidence to indicate that I obtained the PTSD from combat or a combat related event.

Now correct me if I am wrong, but if I got PTSD from my tour in Iraq, isn't that proof enough that it was combat related!? I have all over my VA documents/records notes indicated that I got PTSD from my tour in Iraq.

Also it says on my VA rating documents that my PTSD is combat related.

I obviously appealed this and sent them actual psychologist notes from Iraq indicating that I have PTSD, and then also notes from after I got back from Iraq, indicating that I couldn't attend specific training because of my PTSD that was incurred in Iraq, and so forth.

Does anyone else have any further advice or insight on this? Why would I have gotten denied int he first place? Does PTSD have to be associated with ONE specific event? Or can it be okay just to associate it with my entire tour there? I am in a unique situation, in that my PTSD was related to me being in the medical field and was incurred because I worked as a surgical technician and ended up seeing many people die in front of me on the surgical table, and also due to all the death/dying and also mangled bodies, faces and so forth that I dealt with.

There is only so much death that one can deal with. In addition to that, I worked in the morgue for a couple of months as well. That all said, although I didn't develop the PTSD while fighting/engaging the enemy, it was combat-related as I was in Iraq and was due to combat as I was treating soldiers/civilians who came in with combat-related injuries.

Lastly, we did take enemy fire on the base as well, so its not like I wasn't in a combat zone...or at risk at all as people did get injured/die on the post.

Can anyone please advise?
 

Ed Mercanti

PEB Forum Regular Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
CRSC is for people disabled in combat, in the simulation of combat, or as an instrumentality of war.

You weren't in combat or simulating combat. Is your PTSD any more combat related than someone who has PTSD from working in the ER or morgue in Chicago?
 

No Slack Bayonet

PEB Forum Regular Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
2nd with Brother Ed, CRSC is for injuries incurred by combat action or simulation of or as an instrument of war. From what you've stated you wouldn't qualified. Now that being stated ill give you the example. I have 7 combat related injuries one being PTSD as well. My PTSD began with me being hit with an RPG and when i say hit i mean physically just no explosion, then with a continuos year of daily TIC's and loss of soldiers in the unit and named missions. No ones saying you don't have PTSD nor that you don't deserve whats coming to you but CRSC is very specific in how its awarded. Best of luck to you brother and all my hopes for you and your family.
 

tonyfromnj

PEB Forum Regular Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
2nd with Brother Ed, CRSC is for injuries incurred by combat action or simulation of or as an instrument of war. From what you've stated you wouldn't qualified. Now that being stated ill give you the example. I have 7 combat related injuries one being PTSD as well. My PTSD began with me being hit with an RPG and when i say hit i mean physically just no explosion, then with a continuos year of daily TIC's and loss of soldiers in the unit and named missions. No ones saying you don't have PTSD nor that you don't deserve whats coming to you but CRSC is very specific in how its awarded. Best of luck to you brother and all my hopes for you and your family.
I don't agree with either of those situations/claims you're referring to. PTSD was incurred because of what happened to me while in a combat zone, as an "instrumentality of war." That is clearly what it is referring to when they say an instrumentality of war. You don't develop PTSD from a specific injury necessarily, but from emotional/psychological scars and wounds. So although a specific situation where you receive a gunshot wound or something could lead to PTSD, I believe being exposed to repeated situations where I had people die in my hands or while performing CPR or witnessing multiple soldiers, children and other civilians with their limbs blown off or other parts of their bodies...or because I was asked to do things in surgery like holding eyeballs, or holding pieces of someone's skull...or brain or any combination of the above...those are things that are very traumatic and to this day still haunt me and cause significant problems in my life every day. So yes, that is an instrumentality of war, and that I believe is exactly what that phrasing was intended when it was added as a rationale for being eligible for this compensation/benefit.
 

No Slack Bayonet

PEB Forum Regular Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
What Is a Combat-Related Injury?
You will need to submit evidence to show that your disability was caused by combat-related service. Combat-related service includes training that simulates war, hazardous duty, using an instrument of war, or armed conflict. The Department of Veteran's Affairs (VA) will also consider disability caused by exposure to Agent Orange, chemical exposure in the Gulf, and other hazards as combat-related for the purposes of this program.

Training that Simulates War
To be considered combat-related under simulated war, your disability must have happened while you were on active duty during training that simulated war. This includes such activities as weapons practice, hand-to-hand combat training, war games, and more. Your injury must directly result from these activities. Training that simulates war does not include routine physical training exercises.

Hazardous Duty
Hazardous duty means activities such as diving, parachuting, or flying. You have to be able to show that your injury occurred while you were involved in the hazardous activity. Unlike service-connected disability, it will not be enough to show the disability arose just while you were on active duty. In other words, injuries that did not arise directly from your engagement in the hazardous activity (for example, a car accident while on your way to the airfield) will not qualify as combat-related.

Instrument of War
Your disability didn't have to happen during an active period of war if it arose from directly from an “instrumentality of war.” An instrumentality of war includes equipment used for military purposes. Qualifying disabilities would include an accident in a military vehicle, an injury caused by a weapon, or an illness caused by chemical materials. The “instrumentality” must have been in use by the military and intended for military use at the time of the injury to qualify as combat-related.

Armed Conflict
Your disability is combat-related if it was caused by armed conflict while you were engaged in armed conflict. It isn’t enough if your disability was caused while you were serving during a period of war or near armed conflict. You must be able to specifically show that your injury or illness was directly caused by your involvement in the armed conflict.

In addition to being actively engaged in combat, armed conflict includes an occupation, raid, or other action against a hostile nation. Likewise it includes being a POW or being detained by the enemy.

Maybe this bit will help you buddy, best of luck to you. Merry Christmas
 

chaplaincharlie

Super Moderator
Staff Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Lifetime Supporter
Registered Member
CRSC is for people disabled in combat, in the simulation of combat, or as an instrumentality of war.

You weren't in combat or simulating combat. Is your PTSD any more combat related than someone who has PTSD from working in the ER or morgue in Chicago?
Ed, as always I learn something from you. I did not fully understand the nuances of CRCS and now I think I am little closers to understanding. Would it be correct then to believe that secondary exposure (dealing with patients blown up in the war) by nurses, doctors, medics,.... would normally NOT be eligible for CRCS? Thank you for bring your expertise to this forum. Mike
 

Ed Mercanti

PEB Forum Regular Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
I remember a CRSC appeal where the applicant was retreating (walking backwards while returning fire) at Chosen Reservoir. He fell backwards down a hill and sustained multiple fractures. He had been denied CRSC. I recommended denial of his case stating that if a blast had knocked him down the hill it would have been combat related. However, his fall and resultant fractures were NOT caused by enemy action.

Secondary exposure, as you refer to it, is arguable Chaplaincharlie. But I wouldn't consider it combat related because, as I said, it is no different from an ER in Chicago or LA.
 

GreatDaen

PEB Forum Regular Member
Registered Member
How long would I find out From my CRSC ? whats the timeline.I know u guys mention CAB or CIB this makes a difference?
 

brandonmihalik0805

PEB Forum Regular Member
Registered Member
I received an email from the Army AHRC CRSC Department at Ft. know a few days ago, informing me that the total turnaround time from receiving the application for CRSC to making a determination for benefits, takes 140 days. Hope this helps brother and good luck.
 

GreatDaen

PEB Forum Regular Member
Registered Member
Just Got my approval letter from CRSC they granted me 50%. now just wait for the configuration and when they actually pay me
 

crash5437

New Member
Registered Member
I remember a CRSC appeal where the applicant was retreating (walking backwards while returning fire) at Chosen Reservoir. He fell backwards down a hill and sustained multiple fractures. He had been denied CRSC. I recommended denial of his case stating that if a blast had knocked him down the hill it would have been combat related. However, his fall and resultant fractures were NOT caused by enemy action.

Secondary exposure, as you refer to it, is arguable Chaplaincharlie. But I wouldn't consider it combat related because, as I said, it is no different from an ER in Chicago or LA.
A guy is actively engaged in combat, being fired upon and returning fire, and while avoiding enemy fire sustaines injuries, and you recommend denial. Nice. I think you were getting a little too far into the weeds with that guy and really overthinking it. Was he in combat, yes. He was injured while actively returning fire. And you're going to split hairs because he wasn't injured from a bomb or a bullet. The fall was a result of active combat. If the enemy had not been attacking him, he would not have needed to return fire while walking backwards.
 

corey17a

PEB Forum Regular Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
A guy is actively engaged in combat, being fired upon and returning fire, and while avoiding enemy fire sustaines injuries, and you recommend denial. Nice. I think you were getting a little too far into the weeds with that guy and really overthinking it. Was he in combat, yes. He was injured while actively returning fire. And you're going to split hairs because he wasn't injured from a bomb or a bullet. The fall was a result of active combat. If the enemy had not been attacking him, he would not have needed to return fire while walking backwards.
That is splitting hairs to an extreme. Let's see I would not have fallen off the hill had 300,000 Chinamen not been trying to bayonet me. Also under direct fire. Really... not bad for Government work.

Unbelievable that so many people working in MEB/PEB/CRSC have this crazy holier than thou attitude. They act like every guy who puts in for anything is a mouch. I wish this much scrutiny was put into welfare, social security benefits, and the half million other government programs that dole out money to people who have done nothing.

Survived Chosin Reservoir yet did not make it passed the Monday morning quarter back. Makes me proud to be an American knowing that our own Government puts such effort in to scrutinizing every detail of guys that risked all.

I could understand the Taliban doing something like this. I can not fathom another American being this obtuse.
 

AllenS

PEB Forum Regular Member
Registered Member
Doesn't really matter what the VA said as far as percentages. Was PTSD main discharge and rated by the PEB? If the Army is going to pay you CRSC, then the conditions should have received a P3 and referred from the VA to the PEB. Or else the VA would pay CRSC
 

MHites

PEB Forum Regular Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
ok, I was recently denied CRCS for PTSD (50% by VA) due to insufficient documentation. I apparently did not go into enough detail regarding the direct enemy mortar attacks we received. Is there anything else I need to consider prior to sending my DD149 and DD2860 back to AFPC? I have re-written to be more direct and explain how we had no way to return fire while being attacked. Thank you in advance.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
data-matched-content-ui-type="image_stacked" data-matched-content-rows-num="3" data-matched-content-columns-num="1" data-ad-format="autorelaxed">
Top