RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02656
            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 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.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits affidavits from his former  Task
Force Commander, a former Airborne Interpreter who  was  awarded  two  DFCs,
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.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPR recommends the application be denied and 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
officer’s 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  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
applicant’s  former  commander  and  immediate  supervisor   have   provided
statements indicating, in essence, that  during  the  subject  mission,  the
applicant provided critical coordination with  an  allied  ground  commander
whose forces were being surrounded by enemy forces and were  being  overrun.
These statements also indicate that the applicant called in airstrikes  that
resulted in turning the tide of the battle into  a  major  victory  for  the
allied forces, despite the fact  that  his  aircraft  was  struck  in  three
places by enemy  ground  forces.   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 15 March 1971.

_______________________________________________________________

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 19 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 02-02654




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 15 March 1971.








JOE G. LINEBERGER

Director

Air Force Review Boards Agency