RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02437

	 	COUNSEL:  NONE

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.	The Air Medal, Sixth Oak Leaf Cluster (AM, 6 OLC) awarded for meritorious achievement on 29 November 1971, be upgraded to a Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) for extraordinary achievement.

2.	He be awarded the DFC, First Oak Leaf Cluster (DFC, 1 OLC), for extraordinary achievement on 1 December 1971.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

It is unjust that he was not awarded DFCs for his extraordinary achievements on the 29 November 1971 and 1 December 1971 missions.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits affidavits from his former commanders, supervisor, Awards and Decorations Monitor, pilots with whom he flew the 29 November 1971 and 1 December 1971 missions, and numerous other pilots with whom he flew; a Letter of Appreciation; proposed DFC and DFC, 1 OLC, citations, and a copy of the DFC citation awarded to the pilot of the 29 November 1971 mission.

The pilot of the 29 November 1971 mission recommends the applicant be awarded the DFC and states that during the mission his survival depended directly on the actions, communications and support of the applicant.  With adverse weather conditions, severe ground-fire, operation well below safe altitude, and some very non-routine operations to complete the mission, the applicant played a pivotal role in helping to pinpoint ground-fire and prevent midair collisions.  The pilot further states that for his actions on that date, he was recommended for the Silver Star (SS); however, the award was downgraded to a DFC.

The applicant’s former commander states that he recalls signing/ approving the applicant’s DFC recommendation, forwarding it through channels, and can only speculate on its disposition, since numerous citations were mislaid during the closing months of the war.

The pilot of the 1 December 1971 mission recommends the applicant be awarded the DFC, 1 OLC, and states that due to the applicant’s quick and accurate interpretation of the Cambodian Ground Commander’s requests during the mission, they were able to place seven separate sets of fighters in and around Kampong Thma as close as 100 meters of the friendly forces, preventing the overrun of the city and saving the lives of many friendly Cambodian troops.

The former Awards and Decorations Monitor for Rustic Operations states that he was informed on several occasions by 7th Air Force personnel that a number of issues could result in their unit’s submissions being delayed and/or possibly declined due to the classified status of their mission.  Furthermore, when forwarding award submissions, the scope of their mission’s security precluded the inclusion of pertinent details and impeded timely recognition in some instances.  In addition, the unique circumstances in which the Rustic operation was conducted throughout its duration involved numerous chains of command which contributed to some inconsistencies and in some instances, omissions of appropriate recognition.  Had it been possible to disclose, there were unique aspects related to their mission in Cambodia that would have been contributing factors weighing in favor of greater consideration given to approval of awards and decorations (i.e., only one airport available, lack of adequate navigation aids, adverse weather conditions, and extensive, ever changing Rules of Engagement).

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 17 December 1963, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force and entered active duty.

During the period 11 July 1969 through 18 August 1970, the applicant was assigned to Phu Cat Air Base (AB), Republic of Vietnam, as an Inventory Management Specialist.

During the period 13 September 1971 through 19 July 1972, the applicant was assigned to Ubon Republic of Thailand Air Force Board (RTAFB), Thailand as an Airborne Linguist/Interpreter Specialist (Observer & Interpreter) aboard OV-10 aircraft providing direct support for Forward Air Controllers (FAC) during Operation Rustic over Cambodia.

On 9 August 1972, the applicant was awarded the AM, 6 OLC, for meritorious achievement while participating in aerial flight on 29 November 1971.

On 31 January 1984, the applicant was relieved from active duty and retired effective 1 February 1984 in the grade of master sergeant.  His DD Form 214, Report of Separation or Discharge from the Armed Forces indicates that he was awarded a total of 11 Ams.

On 7 September 2000, the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) Air Force Decoration Board considered and denied applicant’s request for award of the DFC, with One Oak Leaf Cluster.

The DFC was established by Congress on 2 July 1926 and is awarded for heroism or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight.  The performance of the act of heroism must be evidenced by voluntary action above and beyond the call of duty.

The AM is awarded for heroic or meritorious achievement while participating in aerial flight.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPR recommends the application be denied.  AFPC/DPPPR states, in part, that the applicant received the Air Medal (AM), with Sixth Oak Leaf Clusters, for his achievements on 29 November 1971 and is not eligible for the DFC based on the same actions.  The applicant’s request for award of the DFC, 1 OLC, was denied by the Air Force Decoration Board because his actions did not meet the criteria for award of the DFC.  Although the statement from the Awards and Decorations Officer indicates that since the missions were classified, the unit’s recommendations were delayed or denied, the officers who signed the affidavits each received their DFCs in a timely manner and the applicant received his AMs in a timely manner.

The AFPC/DPPPR evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A representative of the Rustic FAC Association states that a DFC for extraordinary achievement is, at a minimum, the more appropriate award with respect to the applicant’s achievements on 29 November 1971.  On that date, the applicant’s aircraft was inside enemy territory almost 150 miles from his base, with no divert fields for an emergency landing or available search and rescue forces.  In addition, marginal weather conditions hampered the location of constantly moving friendly forces and enemy forces.  Despite these adverse conditions and heavy volume of anti-aircraft fire, he continued to seek and identify all friendly locations with friendly Cambodian positions on the ground.  His contributions to an extremely fluid tactical situation was noted by the A-37 Squadron Commander as having been a vital part of the team and greatly contributed to the overall success of the mission.  Had it not been for the applicant’s ability to accurately communicate in a highly stressful combat situation and locate in a highly precise manner the constantly moving friendly forces, the lives of many allied forces would have been lost.  The applicant’s demonstrated heroism, courage under intense anti-aircraft fire, superior airmanship incorporating the use of a foreign language, excellent map reading skills, total positional awareness throughout a sustained time period in marginal weather conditions, and unwavering devotion to duty in the face of grave personal danger were instrumental in accomplishing this hazardous mission.  The applicant volunteered to bear the same risks and dangers that the pilots did, and provided the skills that allowed the pilots to perform their missions.  Of the Airborne Interpreters who participated in the Rustic Operation, the applicant is one of only two individuals who did not receive at least one DFC.  The lives of Cambodians were saved by his good work and it is unjust to deprive him of the recognition he deserves.

In further support of the appeal, documentation regarding the award of DFCs to fellow enlisted Airborne Interpreters serving in Southeast Asia is provided.

The Rustic FAC Association representative’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.  After thoroughly reviewing the criteria for awarding the DFC, we believe the applicant’s actions clearly met the extraordinary achievement requirement for award of the DFC.  The former pilots that flew the subject missions with the applicant indicate that they would not have been able to complete the subject missions, for which they received DFCs, without the applicant’s exceptional ability to remain in constant contact with the ground commanders, assume the role of reconnaissance observer, call-in airstrikes, and assist in spotting enemy aircraft.  The evidence presented to this Board clearly substantiates that the applicant’s performance during these missions went beyond that of an interpreter.  More importantly, in his rebuttal to the advisory opinion, the applicant has provided documentation regarding the award of DFCs to fellow enlisted Airborne Interpreters serving in Southeast Asia that performed the same duties and extraordinary achievements as he did. Therefore, we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected to the extent indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that:

	a.	He was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for extraordinary achievement, while participating in aerial flight as a Linguist/Interrogator Specialist (Observer and Interpreter) in Southeast Asia on 29 November 1971, rather than the Air Medal, Sixth Oak Leaf Cluster.

	b.	He was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross, with the First Oak Leaf Cluster, for extraordinary achievement, while participating in aerial flight as a Linguist/Interrogator Specialist (Observer and Interpreter) in Southeast Asia on 1 December 1971.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 14 December 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

	            Panel Chair
	            Member
	            Member

 The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 16 Jul 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 1 Oct 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 5 Oct 01.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 1 Nov 01, w/atchs.

                                   

AFBCMR 01-02437

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

	Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

	The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that:

		a.		He was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for extraordinary achievement, while participating in aerial flight as a Linguist/Interrogator Specialist (Observer and Interpreter) in Southeast Asia on 29 November 1971, rather than the Air Medal, Sixth Oak Leaf Cluster.

		b.	He was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross, with the First Oak Leaf Cluster, for extraordinary achievement, while participating in aerial flight as a Linguist/Interrogator Specialist (Observer and Interpreter) in Southeast Asia on 1 December 1971.