PACT ACT- Sinusitis and CRSC

[scottymotech]

Looking for success stories with CRSC sinusitis after PACT ACT passage.

How did you win? Seems like you have to contend “instrumentality of War” seems like the Army has strategized since Pact Act passage and found creative ways to deny.
member. I won PDBR and was granted medical retirement. After a lengthy decade long fight to the VA, went to the BVA, I was granted 100%. Recently diagnosed for Sinusitis. PACT made this a presumption for service. However reading and seeing mixed things. Seemed like they were granting conditions that were presumptive until PACT ACT. Now some conditions which are granted n presumptive basis and being denied. Seems like you have to fight to prove burn pits are an instrumental of war, which well they are. I wasn’t burning poop or trash when I was conus, but was when I was deployed to Iraq 2x for 26 months.

I already lost over a decade of retirement pay due to VA offset.
So anyway I am considering moving forward with my VA claim, which after getting a scan they diagnosed. I am already 100% so hesitant to poke the bear, but I am not filing any secondaries or increases. Looks like I may be in for a fight with the Army. I have a lawyer, that’s who took me to the BVA, but not sure how good he is with CRSC or if I need him. There was a recently filed class action lawsuit regarding CRSC.

Seems like unless you have a MoH with 4 PHs you could be in for a fight.

Veterans File Class-Action Suit over Medical Retirements for Burn Pit-Related Illnesses | Military.com

www.military.com

 

[Provis]

Looking for success stories with CRSC sinusitis after PACT ACT passage.

How did you win? Seems like you have to contend “instrumentality of War” seems like the Army has strategized since Pact Act passage and found creative ways to deny.
member. I won PDBR and was granted medical retirement. After a lengthy decade long fight to the VA, went to the BVA, I was granted 100%. Recently diagnosed for Sinusitis. PACT made this a presumption for service. However reading and seeing mixed things. Seemed like they were granting conditions that were presumptive until PACT ACT. Now some conditions which are granted n presumptive basis and being denied. Seems like you have to fight to prove burn pits are an instrumental of war, which well they are. I wasn’t burning poop or trash when I was conus, but was when I was deployed to Iraq 2x for 26 months.

I already lost over a decade of retirement pay due to VA offset.
So anyway I am considering moving forward with my VA claim, which after getting a scan they diagnosed. I am already 100% so hesitant to poke the bear, but I am not filing any secondaries or increases. Looks like I may be in for a fight with the Army. I have a lawyer, that’s who took me to the BVA, but not sure how good he is with CRSC or if I need him. There was a recently filed class action lawsuit regarding CRSC.

Seems like unless you have a MoH with 4 PHs you could be in for a fight.

Veterans File Class-Action Suit over Medical Retirements for Burn Pit-Related Illnesses | Military.com

www.military.com

Would love to see this pass! My wife argued that her chronic sinusitis should be combat related but the PEB ruled against her. This was several months after the passing of the PACT Act. Her only saving grace is that the PEB gave her combat related designation for mental health condition instead. So she is tax exempt already.

 

[scottymotech]

Would love to see this pass! My wife argued that her chronic sinusitis should be combat related but the PEB ruled against her. This was several months after the passing of the PACT Act. Her only saving grace is that the PEB gave her combat related designation for mental health condition instead. So she is tax exempt already.

I was looking thru your post history and saw you replied to me. Thank for your contributions on here. I have weaved in and out over the years.

That being said did she apply for CRSC?

 

[Provis]

I was looking thru your post history and saw you replied to me. Thank for your contributions on here. I have weaved in and out over the years.

That being said did she apply for CRSC?

Yes. Approved no problem due to presumptive conditions. She maxed out compensation by getting CRSC so the VA offset didn't harm her.

 

[iamthewalrus016]

I haven’t helped anyone directly with an application to the Army… but I have assisted with 7 packages to the Navy. Out of those 7 packages.. 5 had the sinusitis, rhinitis, asthma burn pit trifecta. All were approved due to presumptive status under instrument of war. Six packages if you include mine as well. If you have service in a PACT area on your DD214 and your VA code sheet lists these conditions or one of these conditions as presumptive service connected I don’t see how the Army is denying, let alone picking and choosing approving some packages.

 

[RetiredColonel-MikeT]

Looking for success stories with CRSC sinusitis after PACT ACT passage.

How did you win? Seems like you have to contend “instrumentality of War” seems like the Army has strategized since Pact Act passage and found creative ways to deny.
member. I won PDBR and was granted medical retirement. After a lengthy decade long fight to the VA, went to the BVA, I was granted 100%. Recently diagnosed for Sinusitis. PACT made this a presumption for service. However reading and seeing mixed things. Seemed like they were granting conditions that were presumptive until PACT ACT. Now some conditions which are granted n presumptive basis and being denied. Seems like you have to fight to prove burn pits are an instrumental of war, which well they are. I wasn’t burning poop or trash when I was conus, but was when I was deployed to Iraq 2x for 26 months.

I already lost over a decade of retirement pay due to VA offset.
So anyway I am considering moving forward with my VA claim, which after getting a scan they diagnosed. I am already 100% so hesitant to poke the bear, but I am not filing any secondaries or increases. Looks like I may be in for a fight with the Army. I have a lawyer, that’s who took me to the BVA, but not sure how good he is with CRSC or if I need him. There was a recently filed class action lawsuit regarding CRSC.

Seems like unless you have a MoH with 4 PHs you could be in for a fight.

Veterans File Class-Action Suit over Medical Retirements for Burn Pit-Related Illnesses | Military.com

www.military.com

The article you posted has ZERO to do with CRSC determinations, only PEB determinations for being combat-related. In my several years of working with Army CRSC claims, I have yet to see anyone denied for PACT Act claims and they were among the first to start approving them in early 2023 once the branches figured out how to process them. Two completely different groups doing this work.\

 

[iamthewalrus016]

The article you posted has ZERO to do with CRSC determinations, only PEB determinations for being combat-related. In my several years of working with Army CRSC claims, I have yet to see anyone denied for PACT Act claims and they were among the first to start approving them in early 2023 once the branches figured out how to process them. Two completely different groups doing this work.\

It is my understanding that if you have a PACT Act condition that is service connected and you have evidence of service in a PACT location on your DD214 or another document, CRSC claims are automatically approved for such conditions. I saw a post on Reddit recently by a VA employee that said the PACT Act and VA code sheet had nothing to do with CRSC claims. It’s really unfortunate to see so much misinformation about CRSC out in the wild. Like the angry E3 that doesn’t understand why they aren’t paid 4k CRSC at 100% approval.

 

[RetiredColonel-MikeT]

It is my understanding that if you have a PACT Act condition that is service connected and you have evidence of service in a PACT location on your DD214 or another document, CRSC claims are automatically approved for such conditions. I saw a post on Reddit recently by a VA employee that said the PACT Act and VA code sheet had nothing to do with CRSC claims. It’s really unfortunate to see so much misinformation about CRSC out in the wild. Like the angry E3 that doesn’t understand why they aren’t paid 4k CRSC at 100% approval.

Obviously, you're going to need to show you're rated for said PACT Act condition and prove that you were in said location. And it's not just PACT Act, it's any and all presumptives. Not sure what that VA employee is talking about as the code sheet can be used in lieu of one's VA Decision Memos to show condition rating. Also, as a side note: all presumptives are approved under Instrumentality of War (IN).

 

[bjenk]

Scottymotech:
Combat Veterans:

A lot of Peb Forum posters served in combat zones after 9/11. Scotty stated he served 26 months in Iraq. Some sources state that 2 to 3 million service members deployed to combat zones after 9/11. For those who used leave days or received cash payments, did you exclude leave income from gross income? Did DFAS, IRS, or local military finance offices provide any guidance? Below is example 2 from 26 CFR 1.122-1. Service members in the grade of E-1 to O-4 should qualify for the combat zone tax exemption for accrued leave. Most O-5s monthly salary is more than the highest E-9 salary so I left out 0-5s and above . What are your thoughts? Is it too late to request a congressional or DOD inquiry? It's frustrating to know that many service members lost tax refunds due to DODs lack of guidance and oversight. I will move this subject to another thread but thought it was worth addressing.


26 CFR 1.122-1 Example 2.
From March through December, an enlisted member became entitled to 25 days of annual leave while serving in a combat zone. The member used all 25 days of leave in the following year. The member may exclude from income the compensation received for those 25 days, even if the member performs no services in the combat zone in the year the compensation is received.

 

[scottymotech]

The article you posted has ZERO to do with CRSC determinations, only PEB determinations for being combat-related. In my several years of working with Army CRSC claims, I have yet to see anyone denied for PACT Act claims and they were among the first to start approving them in early 2023 once the branches figured out how to process them. Two completely different groups doing this work.\

So take a look at the updated
Army’s CRSC page which they stalked updating for all of 2023 and deferred to waiting in VA guidance. There’s a very telling example about Asthma which runs in contrary to the CFR.
ran thru the BCMR reading room, BEFORE I posted this. filtered for after 2022, sinusitis, and CRSC. Loaded with denials as well as the sinusitis within 10 years of exit from service which was presumptive before pact was passed. So you claiming you didn’t see it doesn’t mean it is not happening. Also on the Army’s CRSC FAQ, they try to declare conditions like Asthma, “environmental”, even though it’s a presumptive per PACT and the CFR that dictates CRSC states presumptive conditions as determined by the VA qualify for CRSC.

You’re handful of anecdotal experiences is NOT refuting the decided appeals that went to the BCMr, most are affirmed denials by the way. That’s fine, then to the federal courts we go.

SO to proclaim this is not happening post 2023 when in fact it is, is false. I will file a FOIA for all sinusitis decisions since 2022 just with the Army. Sure they will foot drag, but about a year will have the answer. Meantime the BCMR decisions are published. I just looked at the Army so I cannot speak for other branches.

 

[bjenk]

Scotty
You will probably get it. Keep fighting for what you think is right. No one is disagreeing with you. COl Mike T is giving you the overall picture. Let's go over the 2008 information paper and guidance in the DD form 2860. Presumptive illness is a standard.
Military services can determine if a service member had a disability prior to deployment. If this is the case, service connection is still warranted but not combat related because it is documented prior to combat service.

 

[RetiredColonel-MikeT]

So take a look at the updated
Army’s CRSC page which they stalked updating for all of 2023 and deferred to waiting in VA guidance. There’s a very telling example about Asthma which runs in contrary to the CFR.
ran thru the BCMR reading room, BEFORE I posted this. filtered for after 2022, sinusitis, and CRSC. Loaded with denials as well as the sinusitis within 10 years of exit from service which was presumptive before pact was passed. So you claiming you didn’t see it doesn’t mean it is not happening. Also on the Army’s CRSC FAQ, they try to declare conditions like Asthma, “environmental”, even though it’s a presumptive per PACT and the CFR that dictates CRSC states presumptive conditions as determined by the VA qualify for CRSC.

You’re handful of anecdotal experiences is NOT refuting the decided appeals that went to the BCMr, most are affirmed denials by the way. That’s fine, then to the federal courts we go.

SO to proclaim this is not happening post 2023 when in fact it is, is false. I will file a FOIA for all sinusitis decisions since 2022 just with the Army. Sure they will foot drag, but about a year will have the answer. Meantime the BCMR decisions are published. I just looked at the Army so I cannot speak for other branches.

First of all, you do whatever you feel is necessary. If you're going to talk about CRSC, then don't post a link to an article about a class action suit about PEB findings, they are NOT one in the same. That was my MAIN point which you so nicely danced around. All the cases I've assisted with submitted a) VA rating of 0% or more (even though there won't be any compensation for a 0% rating for CRSC) and b) proof that they were in the geographical area during the period specified. All approved. Seeing that I don't have the time on my hands to delve into the ABCMR appeals, I cannot respond to specifics. If the person only submitted orders, well, orders are NOT source documents for proving one was in theatre. I can tell you that HRC is VERY HARD with the number of appeals/etc and whether or not the substantive documentation is enough to warrant a "combat-related" designation. I don't necessarily agree with that but here we are. Army also at least approves Asthma even though it specifically states "after service". The AF denies it:
Have you submitted your DD-2860 to HRC yet and was denied or just conjecture at this juncture?

 

[RetiredColonel-MikeT]

So take a look at the updated
Army’s CRSC page which they stalked updating for all of 2023 and deferred to waiting in VA guidance. There’s a very telling example about Asthma which runs in contrary to the CFR.
ran thru the BCMR reading room, BEFORE I posted this. filtered for after 2022, sinusitis, and CRSC. Loaded with denials as well as the sinusitis within 10 years of exit from service which was presumptive before pact was passed. So you claiming you didn’t see it doesn’t mean it is not happening. Also on the Army’s CRSC FAQ, they try to declare conditions like Asthma, “environmental”, even though it’s a presumptive per PACT and the CFR that dictates CRSC states presumptive conditions as determined by the VA qualify for CRSC.

You’re handful of anecdotal experiences is NOT refuting the decided appeals that went to the BCMr, most are affirmed denials by the way. That’s fine, then to the federal courts we go.

SO to proclaim this is not happening post 2023 when in fact it is, is false. I will file a FOIA for all sinusitis decisions since 2022 just with the Army. Sure they will foot drag, but about a year will have the answer. Meantime the BCMR decisions are published. I just looked at the Army so I cannot speak for other branches.

btw, let's take a second about that class-action suit - I hope they win, if their conditions were caused by burn pits and those were the referred conditions, they SHOULD be combat-related out the gate. But don't confuse combat-related for PEB findings with CRSC findings, they are not one in the same.

 

[CristinaJ]

It is my understanding that if you have a PACT Act condition that is service connected and you have evidence of service in a PACT location on your DD214 or another document, CRSC claims are automatically approved for such conditions. I saw a post on Reddit recently by a VA employee that said the PACT Act and VA code sheet had nothing to do with CRSC claims. It’s really unfortunate to see so much misinformation about CRSC out in the wild. Like the angry E3 that doesn’t understand why they aren’t paid 4k CRSC at 100% approval.

The CRSC (Combat Related Special Compensation) and the PACT Act are both about helping veterans get benefits, but they're different programs. However, the PACT Act can affect how much CRSC a veteran gets by adding more conditions that are automatically considered combat-related for disability claims. This means that if the PACT Act agrees that a new condition is connected to their service, it could lead to a veteran getting more CRSC for that condition.

 

[scottymotech]

First of all, you do whatever you feel is necessary. If you're going to talk about CRSC, then don't post a link to an article about a class action suit about PEB findings, they are NOT one in the same. That was my MAIN point which you so nicely danced around. All the cases I've assisted with submitted a) VA rating of 0% or more (even though there won't be any compensation for a 0% rating for CRSC) and b) proof that they were in the geographical area during the period specified. All approved. Seeing that I don't have the time on my hands to delve into the ABCMR appeals, I cannot respond to specifics. If the person only submitted orders, well, orders are NOT source documents for proving one was in theatre. I can tell you that HRC is VERY HARD with the number of appeals/etc and whether or not the substantive documentation is enough to warrant a "combat-related" designation. I don't necessarily agree with that but here we are. Army also at least approves Asthma even though it specifically states "after service". The AF denies it: View attachment 11116
Have you submitted your DD-2860 to HRC yet and was denied or just conjecture at this juncture?

Yeah please don’t order people around. That’s fine you don’t have time. I guess even though I work full time I do, because it’s not that hard if you understand basic Boolean search operatiors which the majority of search queries do. You can easily narrow down board decisions for CRSC and specific conditions.

You seem to have time to apply effort to prove a point. I’m simply stating concerns the services are NOT adhering to PACT ACT presumptions like they have with agent orange. Heck the application hasn’t been updated in a decade. And PACT applicants are being advised NOT to select GW but instead IN. GW seems to be fast track to denial.

I hope you spend a little time reading the board decisions and a little less asserting anecdotes. If you can find the time.
Good luck.

 

[RetiredColonel-MikeT]

Yeah please don’t order people around. That’s fine you don’t have time. I guess even though I work full time I do, because it’s not that hard if you understand basic Boolean search operatiors which the majority of search queries do. You can easily narrow down board decisions for CRSC and specific conditions.

You seem to have time to apply effort to prove a point. I’m simply stating concerns the services are NOT adhering to PACT ACT presumptions like they have with agent orange. Heck the application hasn’t been updated in a decade. And PACT applicants are being advised NOT to select GW but instead IN. GW seems to be fast track to denial.

I hope you spend a little time reading the board decisions and a little less asserting anecdotes. If you can find the time.
Good luck.

Not sure how you feel that I'm ordering anyone, I'm just stating you do you, that's not ordering. As for following PACT Act, again, I can only speak specifically about Army and your "you're handful of anecdotal experiences" did not go unnoticed. Perhaps you need to join my Facebook group to see actual evidence posted by vets from all branches? Btw, you never did answer my question: have you applied for Chronic Sinusitis for CRSC or no? Are you not putting the cart in front of the horse getting yourself all worked up, possibly over nothing? Just curious on that one. I think it's admirable that you want to push forward with a Class Action suit to fix the problem, we all know it's probably not just that one item that's either getting pushed off and denied, you have more info at your digits than I do, I work full-time as a cybersecurity analyst and run a group on FB with over 8000 members and have a family and an 88 yo Mom whom I'm trying to get moved into her apt which has been a shitshow from the start. Note the first image that has Chronic Sinusitis is under the combat code of GW, until I honested started looking at what was posted in the FB group, I had not noticed that. I also had a member today post the next image, the items indicated were NOT claimed by the vet but actions taken by HRC. Note: the last image was posted by a member in April 2024. Do I have all of the results? No. As for taking time to prove a point, you bet I will take the time, especially since I've been a CRSC Ambassador for HRC (non-paid, volunteer) for nearly a decade and have seen a LOT change over the years, I don't agree with it all, and perhaps you do get those loose strings tied up so more vets get what they deserved.

 

[scottymotech]

alright well thanks for the examples. I already planed to file under IN. We’ll see what happens,

Based on my experiences excluding my most recent pACT ACT VA claim, nothing has come easy.
I came to tho forum almost 15 years ago as I went to the PDBR. This was after I was lowballed 10% and med boarded. Granted retro medical retirement 30%. This while I was in the middle of my VA fight. First 10% then 20% on appeal. New claim, everything denied. 10 years and a BVA remand later fully granted, only 2 secondaries, no private DBQs or nexus letters, but still a long and frustrating process in which my claim languished at the RO for 3 years, they tried to close it on me saying I didn’t respond within 60 days, false. I got very familiar with congressional inquiries, FOIAs and unfortunately with the claims and appeals process. Maybe has bearing why my last claim went well, fully granted, no BS. I think it’s because the culture changed at the VA and they invested in technology.

Whelp I am moving forward with CRSC. We will see how’s it goes.

 

[RetiredColonel-MikeT]

alright well thanks for the examples. I already planed to file under IN. We’ll see what happens,

Based on my experiences excluding my most recent pACT ACT VA claim, nothing has come easy.
I came to tho forum almost 15 years ago as I went to the PDBR. This was after I was lowballed 10% and med boarded. Granted retro medical retirement 30%. This while I was in the middle of my VA fight. First 10% then 20% on appeal. New claim, everything denied. 10 years and a BVA remand later fully granted, only 2 secondaries, no private DBQs or nexus letters, but still a long and frustrating process in which my claim languished at the RO for 3 years, they tried to close it on me saying I didn’t respond within 60 days, false. I got very familiar with congressional inquiries, FOIAs and unfortunately with the claims and appeals process. Maybe has bearing why my last claim went well, fully granted, no BS. I think it’s because the culture changed at the VA and they invested in technology.

Whelp I am moving forward with CRSC. We will see how’s it goes.

Good luck! I'm sure you'll report back in 120 business days or so once you get the results back. Here's to hoping!

 

[scottymotech]

Well that last example is spot on as I am 10 Rhinitis and 30 Sinusitis.

I have PTSD, Sleep apnea. But not confident I would get those connected. I even sought mental health treatment in theater both deployments, but of course records are sparse. So for now just going to stick to PACT ACT presumptive. Plus doesn’t look like I would get higher compensation anyway. Unless Major Richard Starr Act is passed.

I hate to do this since I was initially pissy. Would you suggest for documents? I was thinking just sending in DD214,DD215, maybe my ERB. Dd214 shows combat and Iraq campaign medal. The full VA rating letter which shows “Service connection for chronic rhinitis has been awarded on the basis of this presumption.”
DBQ examiner wasn’t asked to determine service connection just severity. I don’t have the code sheet and they are requiring a FOIA which take 6 months. Well I recant my previous attitude and appreciate your genuine efforts at help vets on here.

 

[RetiredColonel-MikeT]

Well that last example is spot on as I am 10 Rhinitis and 30 Sinusitis.

I have PTSD, Sleep apnea. But not confident I would get those connected. I even sought mental health treatment in theater both deployments, but of course records are sparse. So for now just going to stick to PACT ACT presumptive. Plus doesn’t look like I would get higher compensation anyway. Unless Major Richard Starr Act is passed.

I hate to do this since I was initially pissy. Would you suggest for documents? I was thinking just sending in DD214,DD215, maybe my ERB. Dd214 shows combat and Iraq campaign medal. The full VA rating letter which shows “Service connection for chronic rhinitis has been awarded on the basis of this presumption.”
DBQ examiner wasn’t asked to determine service connection just severity. I don’t have the code sheet and they are requiring a FOIA which take 6 months. Well I recant my previous attitude and appreciate your genuine efforts at help vets on here.

No worries, this isn't my first rodeo As for documents: DD-214/215, PEB findings (DA-199 if Army), Retirement Orders, ERB if it shows deployment to the geographic locales per the VA Presumptives list, umm, refresh my memory, do you have any combat-related awards? That would cover the PTSD. Not sure when you got out, but if you have any connection to your wartime chain of command (E-8/O-3 or above) and can get a statement from someone at that level who can validate the circumstances that led to the PTSD, that goes a long way for the Army. Mind you: fear of or witnessing death does not typically get awarded CRSC; you have to be in imminent danger from direct and/or indirect fire. The second-to-last page of the DD-2860 has the list of documents required; however, I know that the Army will pull the code sheet. I cannot speak on behalf of the other branches. Hope that gets you rolling