Below is a AI generated letter i might tinker with and use for when i do submit. It didnt copy/paste perfectly, i would fix the formatting.
Personal Statement in Support of CRSC Claim: SarcoidosisApplicant: [Your Full Name]SSN/Service Number: [Your Number]Branch of Service: United States Air Force
Subject: Evidence of Combat-Related Exposure and Application of Precedent in
Smoke et al. v. Driscoll
I am submitting this statement to request Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) for sarcoidosis, which the VA has service-connected as a PACT Act-presumptive condition at [Your Rating]%. I contend that my condition was caused by exposure to toxic substances and particulate matter while serving at Joint Base Balad (JBB), Iraq, in the summer of 2010. This exposure qualifies as combat-related under the "Instrumentality of War" criteria, as reinforced by recent federal legal precedents.
1. Identification of the Instrumentality of WarDuring my deployment to Balad, my primary respiratory environment was dictated by the proximity of open-air burn pits. These pits were an essential military tool used to dispose of war-related hazardous waste (JP-8, munitions, medical waste, and military equipment) in a combat zone. Under 26 U.S.C. § 104 and DoD Directive 1332.18, an "instrumentality of war" includes any device designed for military use and intended for use in a period of war. The military-operated burn pits at JBB were unique to the combat theater and essential to the sustainment of combat operations.
2. Legal Precedent:
Smoke et al. v. Driscoll (2026)The Air Force Board should be guided by the landmark settlement in
Smoke et al. v. Driscoll (D.D.C. Mar. 6, 2026). In this case, the military transition from denying burn pit claims was codified into a formal policy acknowledgment: open-air burn pits located in combat zones are designated as "instrumentalities of war" for the purposes of combat-related disability findings.
This ruling clarifies that the definition of an instrumentality includes illnesses caused by the "fumes, gases, or explosion of military material" within those pits. As sarcoidosis is a systemic inflammatory disease linked specifically to the inhalation of these toxic particulates, my diagnosis meets the legal threshold for a combat-related finding. Under this precedent, the Air Force must acknowledge that the environment I was subjected to at Balad was a direct result of these instrumentalities.
3. Environmental Persistence in Summer 2010While active 24-hour burning at the primary JBB pit was phased out in late 2009, the combat-related hazard remained active during my 2010 tour:
- Residual Toxicity: The 20-acre pit site remained a source of heavy metals, dioxins, and particulate matter. During the summer of 2010, high-heat winds and sandstorms "re-suspended" these settled toxins into the air.
- Incineration Fallout: The transition to early-model incinerators at Balad in 2010 continued to release toxic fly-ash and particulate matter because they lacked modern filtration.
- Combined Exposure: I was forced to inhale a "toxic cocktail" of soot from military waste and desert dust, a hazard that was exclusive to the combat environment of JBB.
Conclusion The
Smoke v. Driscoll precedent established that veterans should not be denied CRSC for conditions the VA already recognizes as burn-pit related. My sarcoidosis is a direct consequence of hazardous conditions created by military instrumentalities necessary for combat operations. I respectfully request that the Air Force Board apply the current legal standard and approve my claim for CRSC.
Respectfully submitted,
[Your Signature][Your Printed Name][Date]
