RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  97-03534
            INDEX CODE:  131

            COUNSEL:  STEPHEN B. WHITING

            HEARING DESIRED:  No


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS:

Reversal of the order withholding promotion to the grade of  technical
sergeant issued on 24 Jul 84.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His commander took adverse actions against him  while  on  the  Weight
Management Program (WMP) knowing he had a mental illness and that  the
actions were arbitrary, capricious and not in the interest of military
justice.

Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the United States Navy and served from  1965  to
1969.  He entered active duty in the Regular Air Force on 19 May 71.

On 18 Nov 83, the applicant was entered in the WMP at 228  pounds,  29
pounds over the Air Force weight  standards  for  him  which  was  199
pounds.  The WMP progress chart reflects  he  had  two  unsatisfactory
periods of weight loss (19 Mar 84 and 15 Oct 84) for which he received
a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) and Unfavorable Information File (UIF)  on
20 Mar 84.

On 24 Jul 84, the applicant’s commander advised him that his promotion
to the grade of technical sergeant, which was to be effective on 1 Aug
84, was being placed in a withhold status in accordance with  AFR  39-
29, Table 3, Item 2, and paragraph  27  (Promotion  of  Airmen).   The
specific reason for withholding  the  promotion  was  the  applicant’s
continued difficulty  in  maintaining  his  weight  within  Air  Force
standards.   The  applicant  acknowledged  receipt  of  the  promotion
withhold on 25 Jul 84.

On 28 Aug 84, the applicant was admitted to  the  hospital  and  given
Elavil, an anti-depressant drug  with  a  possible  weight  gain  side
effect.  He weighed 214 pounds at the time of admission.

On 27 Sep 84, the applicant weighed in at 227 pounds and was placed on
a 1,000 calorie diet to control his weight.  On 28 Sep  84,  the  diet
was discontinued due to his refusal to comply with diet.

On 25 Oct 84, the Medical Treatment Facility notified the  applicant’s
commander of his current status and weight of 229 pounds.

On 19 Nov  84,  the  applicant’s  commander  decided  to  continue  to
withhold the promotion due to applicant’s refusal to comply  with  the
prescribed  diet  and  his  continued  weight  gain.   The   commander
determined that the applicant had not demonstrated the  potential  and
self-discipline to warrant promotion.

On 27 Nov 84, a Medical Evaluation  Board  (MEB)  convened  and  after
consideration of clinical records, laboratory findings,  and  physical
examination, the MEB established the following diagnosis:  cyclothymic
disorder, chronic, moderate, in remission on  medication.   Manifested
by mood dysphoria, increased fatigue, insomnia, suicidal ideation, and
feelings of worthlessness and  self-reproach  when  in  the  depressed
phase, and euphoric mood, irritability,  racing  thoughts,  and  other
hypomanic features when in the hypomanic  phase.   Stress:   Moderate,
routine   military   duty.    Predisposition:    Moderate,    paranoid
personality traits.  Degree of Impairment:  Marked for military  duty,
and considerable  for  social  and  industrial  adaptation.   The  MEB
recommended a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB).

On 5 Dec 84, an Informal IPEB convened and found the  applicant  unfit
because  of  physical  disability  with  a  diagnosis  of  cyclothymic
disorder, chronic, in  remission,  on  medication,  with  considerable
industrial impairment, with a 30% compensable  percentage.   The  IPEB
recommended temporary retirement.

On 9 Jan 85, the applicant was released from active duty and placed on
the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL).

On 21 Apr 86, an IPEB convened and found the applicant  unfit  because
of physical disability  with  a  diagnosis  of  cyclothymic  disorder,
chronic,  on  medication  (Lithium   Carbonate),   with   considerable
industrial impairment, with a 30% compensable  percentage.   The  IPEB
recommended permanent retirement.

On 28 Apr 86, the recommended findings of the PEB  were  forwarded  to
applicant for concurrence.

On 29 May 86, applicant concurred with the recommended findings of the
PEB.

On 3 Jun 86, applicant was removed from the TDRL.

On 23 Jun 86, applicant was permanently  retired  with  a  compensable
disability rating of 30% with a diagnosis of dysthymic  disorder  with
an honorable  characterization  of  service  in  the  grade  of  staff
sergeant.  He was credited with 16 years and 12 days of active service
and 17 years, 7 months, and 21 days of active service for retirement.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed this  application  and  indicated
that in his appeal, the applicant cites a  letter  from  his  treating
psychiatrist  wherein  weight  gain  associated   with   use   of   an
antidepressant medicine he was taking is mentioned as  a  possibility.
(Interestingly,  the  drug  compendium  cited  in  support   of   this
contention mentions the possibility of weight loss as well  as  weight
gain as possible side effects of the one medication).  This was in Sep
84 and records  indicate  the  applicant  was  first  prescribed  this
medicine  in  Nov  81.   Interestingly,  the  summary  of  applicant’s
hospitalization in 1981 that resulted in  his  being  placed  on  that
medication describes his appearance  as  “mildly  obese”  and  further
review of records shows that his enlistment  physical  examination  in
Feb 71 recorded his weight at 213 pounds, well over  weight  standards
at the time he  was  allowed  to  join  the  Air  Force.   From  these
observations, it is concluded that the applicant had problems with his
weight  well  before  he  was  ever  placed  on  medications  for  his
psychiatric problem and that these medications had little  or  nothing
to do with his ability to reach and maintain weight standards.

The BCMR Medical Consultant further states that the applicant’s  claim
that his inability to maintain weight standards, a  problem  that  was
administratively handled by appropriate counseling and downgrading  of
performance reports, was not temporarily related to the administration
of medications necessary to control his  later  psychiatric  symptoms.
Weight problems long pre-dated such medication use and  the  diagnosis
of “exogenous obesity” (without other apparent cause than individual’s
own doing) mentioned on the physical evaluation board’s  determination
of 5 Dec 84 is  valid.   The  applicant  was  properly  evaluated  and
retired   for   his   disabling   psychiatric   condition,   and   the
administrative actions  taken  against  him  for  his  weight  program
failures were, again, appropriately conducted.  Nothing in the records
indicate an inequity or  impropriety  upon  which  could  be  based  a
medical decision to overturn the withholding of  his  promotion  which
was done because of his WMP failures.  The BCMR Medical Consultant  is
of the opinion that no medical reason exists to  grant  the  applicant
the relief he requests.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

The Chief, Commander’s  Programs  Branch,  AFPC/DPSFC,  reviewed  this
application and indicated that the WMP  is  a  rehabilitative  program
designed  to  encourage  safe,  effective  weight  loss  and   closely
replicates proven civilian  weight  loss  programs.   Individuals  who
allow  themselves  to  exceed  the  Maximum  Allowable  Weight   (MAW)
standards are subject  to  administrative  actions  that  may  reflect
during and after their career.  Administrative actions may consist  of
counseling,  reprimands,   denial   of   promotion,   and   ultimately
involuntary  separation.   These  actions  support  good   order   and
discipline necessary for  a  strong  military  force.   The  commander
decided to continue withholding the applicant’s promotion due  to  his
actions (i.e., refusal to comply with a medically prescribed diet  and
continued weight gain).  DPSFC recommends denial of applicant request.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

The  Chief,  Inquiries/AFBCMR  Section,  AFPC/DPPPWB,  reviewed   this
application and indicated that the applicant was tentatively  selected
for promotion to technical sergeant during the 85A6 cycle  (promotions
effective Aug 84 - Jul 85).  He  received  Promotion  Sequence  Number
(PSN) 1373.0 which would have been effective 1 Aug 84.  Both the  BCMR
Medical Consultant and the Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR)  for
the WMP have indicated the circumstances of this case do  not  warrant
changing the decision  of  the  commander.   DPPPWB  defers  to  their
recommendation.

A complete copy of the Air  Force  evaluation,  with  attachments,  is
attached at Exhibit E.

The Staff Judge Advocate, AFPC/JA, also reviewed this application  and
provided a three-page response (see Exhibit F).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Counsel for the applicant  reviewed  the  Air  Force  evaluations  and
provided a two-page response (see Exhibit H).

_________________________________________________________________

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.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of probable error or injustice.  After a thorough review
of the evidence of record  and  applicant’s  submission,  we  are  not
persuaded that a reversal of the order withholding  promotion  to  the
grade of technical sergeant should be approved.  His  contentions  are
duly noted; however, we do  not  find  these  assertions,  in  and  by
themselves, sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided
by the Air Force.  We therefore agree with the recommendations of  the
Air Force and adopt the rationale  expressed  as  the  basis  for  our
decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden  that  he
has suffered either an error or an injustice.  Therefore, we  find  no
compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of probable  material  error  or  injustice;
that the application was denied without  a  personal  appearance;  and
that the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission  of
newly  discovered  relevant  evidence   not   considered   with   this
application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 24 June 1999, under the provisions of  Air  Force
Instruction 36-2603:

                  Mr. Henry Romo, Jr., Panel Chair
                  Ms. Sophie A. Clark, Member
                  Ms. Ann L. Heidig, Member
                Mrs. Joyce Earley, Examiner (without vote)

The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated Sep 97, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 24 Mar
                   98.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSFC, dated 14 Jul 98.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 6 Jul 98, w/atchs.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, AFPC/JA, dated 4 Sep 98.
     Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 21 Sep 98.
     Exhibit H.  Letter fr counsel, dated 20 Oct 98.


                                   HENRY ROMO, JR.
                                   Panel Chair