RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02652
INDEX CODE 107.00
COUNSEL: HAROLD G. MERCER
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) for extraordinary for
actions over Cambodia as an airborne interpreter.
_________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He should have been awarded the DFC for his actions on 23 November 1970 as
an Airborne Interpreter; however, due to the then classified nature of the
mission and the drawn down of United States forces in Southeast Asia, he
was not.
In support of the appeal, applicant submits affidavits from his former Task
Force Commander and OV-10 pilots strongly recommending that he be awarded
the DFC, and a proposed DFC citation.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 14 December 2001, the AFBCMR considered and granted a similar request by
a former Airborne Interpreter who participated in the Rustic Operation.
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.
_______________________________________________________________
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 and states, in part, that
although the 23 November 1970 mission may have been classified at the time,
the proposed citation is entirely unclassified, except for identying the
enemy territory as Combodia, and was unclassified at that time. AFPC/DPPPR
does not believe sufficient justification has been provided to show that
the applicant was not recommended for the DFC because of the classified
nature of his mission.
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 number of
interpreters having similar duties were awarded the DFC based on timely
submissions. However, some recommendations were compromised, in some
instances apparently lost, and others not acted upon due to the classified
nature and exigencies of the missions, and the drawn down of United States
forces in Southeast Asia. The author of the Air Force evaluation does not
appreciate the unique circumstances in which the Rustic Operation was
conducted. The classified nature of the operation ranged from some French
terms and phrases that were deemed classified, to secure radio equipment
and night vision scopes that were, at the time, state of the art
intelligence gathering devices that were top secret. Furthermore, the
nature of the operation, the specifics relating to the levels of authority
approving certain missions, certain intelligence methods and sources, and a
myriad of other aspects surrounding the missions flown affected virtually
every submission that was considered for recognition of an aircrew member.
The Rustic FAC Association representative’s complete response 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
pilot that flew the subject mission with the applicant indicates that, in
essence, the applicant provided critical coordination with friendly ground
commanders to coordinate the successful rescue of two airmen that had been
shot down. The evidence presented to this Board clearly substantiates that
the applicant’s performance during this mission went beyond that of an
interpreter. More importantly, documentation has been provided showing that
fellow enlisted Airborne Interpreters serving in Southeast Asia that
performed the same duties and extraordinary achievements as he did were
awarded the DFC. 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 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 23 November 1970.
_______________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive
Session on 16 September 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Charles E. Bennett, Panel Chair
Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Member
Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 Jul 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 9 Sep 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Sep 02.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 12 Sep 02.
CHARLES E. BENNETT
Panel Chair
AFBCMR 02-02652
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 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 23 November 1970.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that although the 1 October 1970 mission may have been classified at the time, the proposed citation is entirely unclassified, except for identying the enemy territory as Combodia, and was unclassified at that time. AFPC/DPPPR does not believe sufficient justification has been provided to show that the applicant was not recommended for...
_________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He should have been awarded the DFC for his actions on 15 March 1971 as an Airborne Interpreter; however, due to the then classified nature of the mission and the drawn down of United States forces in Southeast Asia, he was not. The AFPC/DPPPR evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...
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. As such, they believe he received sufficient recognition for his achievement during aerial flight. Of the Airborne Interpreters who participated in the Rustic Operation, the applicant is one of only two individuals who did not receive at...
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. Applicant’s complete submission, with...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02018
The SAFPC evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Neither the applicant nor Colonel M----, the former unit Awards and Decorations Officer, realized the original submission for the DFC had been downgraded to an AM, 6 OLC. In all submissions made by the Rustic FAC Association to date, extenuating circumstances have been detailed noting that then headquarters review and decision authorities...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02156
In 1974, a recommendation to award the applicant the BSM was considered and denied by the 13th Air Force. While the applicant contends he was not submitted for any decorations because of the classified nature of his duties, many intelligence personnel were recommended for decorations during the contested period in Vietnam, and many decorations were approved. The AFPC/DPPPR evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02495
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02495 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: Mr. Harold G. Mercer HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Air Medal (AM). It appears that timely submission for award of the AM was precluded by to the classified nature of Rustic operations and exigencies of the service. CHARLENE M. BRADLEY Panel...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | bc-2003-03616
Furthermore, his medical records indicate that he had an operation. Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial of the applicant’s request for award of the DFC and states, in part, that there is no evidence he was recommended for, or awarded the DFC. Should the applicant provide additional statements containing specific details regarding his...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00916
DPPPR states that many members of the decedent’s organization, Rustic FAC did not receive recognition of specific flights due to rapid mission requirements. After reviewing the evidence of record, we are persuaded that the decedent’s actions on 20 June 1970, justify awarding of the Silver Star Medal (SSM). Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 May 03 JOHN L. ROBUCK Panel Chair DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON DC [pic] Office Of The Assistant Secretary AFBCMR BC-2003-00916 MEMORANDUM...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01874
_________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Based on established Eighth Air Force policy of awarding a DFC upon the completion of 10 lead combat missions, based on his completion of 11 lead combat missions he should be awarded the DFC. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on...