RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02436

	 	COUNSEL:  NONE

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) with Two Oak Leaf Clusters, for extraordinary achievements on 25 August 1972, 17 January 1972, and 24 February 1972.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

All of the Airborne Interpreters received either an end of tour DFC and/or a DFC based on a specific mission.

The applicant states that when he had the error checked into upon his arrival at Loring AFB, ME, he was told that his records had been lost.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits affidavits from his former commanders, supervisor, Awards and Decorations Monitor, pilots with whom he flew the 25 August 1972, 17 January 1972, and 24 February 1972 missions, and numerous other pilots with whom he flew; and proposed DFC citations.

The pilot of the 25 August 1972 mission recommends the applicant be awarded the DFC and states that during the mission the applicant played an extraordinary role in pre-planning, coordinating and ensuring the success of reconnaissance and air strikes.  Because of the applicant’s excellent teamwork, advance coordination and logical recommendations, they were able to get target approval for an unusually high number of strike aircraft (i.e., three separate flights of fighters, including one with rare loads of 2,000-pound bombs) within 200 meters of friendly forces.  The pilot states that he would not have been able to do so without the applicant’s exceptional ability to communicate with the ground commanders and filter only the most pertinent information to him.  The applicant also assumed the role of reconnaissance observer in addition to his other roles to find enemy boats en route to reinforce the enemy positions.

The applicant’s former commander states that he recalls signing/ approving the applicant’s DFC recommendation, forwarding it through channels, and can only assume that it was lost in channels.

The pilot of the 17 January 1972 mission recommends the applicant be awarded the DFC, 1 OLC, and states during the mission, the applicant was on the radio with both the ground commander and 7th Air Force, while he [the pilot] was busy locating the enemy position.  The applicant requested an airstrike from 7th Air Force, coordinated the attack with the ground commander, and as a result the enemy attack was halted.

The pilot of the 24 February 1972 mission recommends the applicant be awarded the DFC, 2 OLC, and states that during the mission, the applicant was in constant communication with the ground commanders, updating him [the pilot] on their comments regarding the results of the air strike and watching for ground fire.

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 24 June 1970, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force for a period of four years and entered active duty.

During the period 16 September 1971 through 15 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.  He was awarded a total of 9 Ams.

On 22 February 1974, the applicant was released from active duty.  

On 12 November 1999 and 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 Two Oak Leaf Clusters.

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 none of the individuals providing affidavits in support of the applicant’s request are listed on his performance report rendered during the period in question. While the applicant claims that all aircraft interpreters received a DFC as an end-of-tour decoration and/or for a specific mission, he did not provide any substantiating documentation.  The individual submitting the applicant’s package through Congressional channels for reconsideration in 2000 was not assigned to Thailand, but in Vietnam, and did not know the applicant or have firsthand knowledge of his accomplishments.  The individuals recommending the applicant indicate that they could not have performed their missions without his ability to act as an interpreter; however, that was his job.  In addition, the proposed DFC citations are almost identical in verbiage and do not show that he distinguished himself by heroism or extraordinary achievement.  There is no doubt that he performed his duties in an outstanding manner and received the nine AMs.  As such, they believe he received sufficient recognition for his achievement during aerial flight.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A representative of the Rustic FAC Association states that during the 25 August 1972 mission, the applicant gathered the complex array of information and using his excellent linguistic skills, coordinated the location and status of an ever-changing situation as it evolved on the ground.  Existing friendly casualties, together with concerns for allied logistics and escape options for allied forces had reached a grievous condition. 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 the referenced hazardous missions.  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 17 January 1972.

	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 24 February 1972.

	c.	He was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross, with the Second Oak Leaf Cluster, for extraordinary achievement, while participating in aerial flight as a Linguist/Interrogator Specialist (Observer and Interpreter) in Southeast Asia on 25 August 1972.

_________________________________________________________________

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 12 Oct 01.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 1 Nov 01, w/atchs.

                                                                     

AFBCMR 01-02436

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 17 January 1972.

		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 24 February 1972.

		c.	He was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross, with the Second Oak Leaf Cluster, for extraordinary achievement, while participating in aerial flight as a Linguist/Interrogator Specialist (Observer and Interpreter) in Southeast Asia on 25 August 1972.