RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBERS:  01-00097
      INDEX CODE 134.02  111.02  131.09   131.03
                       COUNSEL:  None

                       HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His records reflect he was not entered into the Weight & Body  Fat
Management Program (WBFMP).

2.  Any negative WMP comments  on  his  Enlisted  Performance  Reports
(EPRs) be removed [only the referral report closing 30 Sep 97 reflects
he did not meet standards].

3.  He be afforded promotion consideration to the grade  of  technical
sergeant (TSgt) for those previous promotion cycles for which  he  was
ineligible.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was denied the opportunity to test for promotion because of failure
to progress in the WBFMP. However, his thyroid level was  not  checked
until Nov 00. This condition can cause weight gain, joint problems and
mood swings. Had his condition been known from the beginning, he would
not have been disqualified from testing. This error subjected  him  to
unfair administrative actions, stopped his career growth,  and  placed
him and his family at a disadvantage.

He provides a statement from the Chief,  Medical  Staff  of  the  43rd
MDG/SGH, Pope AFB, NC, who indicates he found  no  evidence  that  the
applicant’s thyroid status  was  checked  until  recently.  The  Chief
recommends the applicant’s WBFMP records be purged and he  be  allowed
to restart the program with a fresh record once his medical conditions
and life situation have stabilized.

His complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered active duty  on  16  Sep  82  and  is  currently
serving in the Regular Air Force in the grade of staff sergeant with a
date of rank of 1 Sep 88.  During  the  period  in  question,  he  was
assigned to the 43rd Medical Operations Squadron at Pope AFB, NC.

A 26 Oct 88 medical entry reflects that the applicant was entered into
a cholesterol and  weight  control  program;  however,  no  weight  is
recorded.

A medical entry dated 18 Sep 94 indicates that a  thyroid  stimulating
hormone (TSH) test on the applicant was requested pursuant to a weight
management evaluation and that the results were normal.  The applicant
weighed 191 pounds and had a body fat (BF) of 26%.

On 28 Oct 96, a medical entry reflects that  the  applicant,  who  was
5’7” and whose ideal body weight was around 148  pounds,  weighed  200
pounds and had a BF of 35%.  He was counseled and placed  on  a  1500-
calorie diet.

On 21 Dec 98, he was entered into the WBFMP weighing 216 pounds with a
BF  of  32%.   The  BF  standard  for  his  age  was  24%.  His  first
unsatisfactory period was on 21 Oct 99, when he weighed 219 pounds and
had a BF of 33%.  His received a Letter of Counseling (LOC) on 16  Feb
00 for unsatisfactory progress on 8 Feb 00, when he weighed 223 pounds
and had a BF of 31%.  He received a Letter of Reprimand  (LOR)  on  16
Mar 00 for unsatisfactory progress on 14 Mar 00, when he  weighed  220
pounds and had a BF of 32%.  On 9 Nov 00, he  was  placed  on  profile
until 9 Feb 01 for hypothyroidism.  He resumed WBFMP participation  on
12 Mar 01 and at that time weighed 225 pounds and had a BF of 33%.

His EPRs from 1982 to 1989 reflect overall ratings  of  “9.”  The  new
rating system was in effect in 1990 and from then  until  present  his
overall ratings are: 4, 3, 3 (Referral--Duties & Training), 4,  5,  5,
5, 5, 3 (Referral--Standards), 4, 5, 5 and 3.

Effective 1 Aug 95, individuals who make  unsatisfactory  progress  on
the WBFMP are automatically ineligible for promotion consideration  in
accordance with AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion Program.   Additionally,
members who receive a referral EPR,  as  did  the  applicant  for  the
period ending 30 Sep 97, are ineligible for promotion consideration in
accordance with HQ  AFMPC/DPMA  9 Jun  95  message  and  AFI  36-2502.
Promotion eligibility is regained only after receiving an EPR with  an
overall rating of “3” or higher that is not  a  referral  report,  and
closes out on or before the Promotion Eligibility Cutoff  Date  (PECD)
for the next cycle.

As a result, the applicant was ineligible for promotion  consideration
to TSgt  for  cycles  97E6,  98E6,  and  00E6.  He  was  eligible  for
consideration by the 99E6 cycle, for which he was  not  selected,  and
the 01E6 cycle. [DPPPWB informally advised the AFBCMR Staff  that  the
applicant was selected (29 May 01) in the 01E6 cycle  and  received  a
Promotion Sequence Number of 93, which would be effective  1  Aug  01.
However, his promotion has been placed in a withhold status  since  he
is in the WBFMP. He is in Promotion Eligibility Status (PES) Code  "I"
(Reference AFI  36-2502,  Table  1.2,  Item  4),  which  means  he  is
presently making satisfactory progress and will be able to assume  the
grade once his weight standard  has  been  met,  and  provided  he  is
recommended by his commander and is otherwise eligible.]

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant reviewed the appeal and notes  that  the
applicant provides results of a single thyroid function test taken  in
Nov 00 that shows an elevation of the pituitary  gland  TSH,  a  value
that may be an indication of low thyroid gland hormone output. A  test
for free thyroid done at the same time, however, shows a normal value.
A normal TSH was reported in Sep  94  when  a  WBFMP  laboratory  test
review was accomplished, thus negating the  applicant’s  argument  for
relief. The applicant has had at least 13 years of difficulty  meeting
and maintaining WMP standards and has had a negative test for  thyroid
dysfunction in the course of his evaluations.  Since  reentry  to  the
WBFMP in Dec 98, his weight has varied from a high of 225 currently to
202 pounds last August.  He  has  demonstrated  the  ability  to  lose
weight, but feels a tentative diagnosis of  hypothyroidism  should  be
taken into account.  The Consultant is not convinced by evidence of  a
single test that the applicant has bonefide hypothyroidism or that the
requested relief should be granted.  While  it  appears  he  has  been
started on thyroid hormone replacement,  the  rationale  for  this  is
lacking in the records available for review. Evidence reflects that in
1994 his thyroid function was normal even  though  he  was  struggling
with weight control  at  that  time,  also.    While  the  applicant’s
physician alludes also to some psychological  problems  that  are  not
otherwise addressed in the medical records,  further  comment  is  not
possible from this review.  Denial is recommended.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

The Chief, Field Operations Branch, HQ AFPC/DPSFM, evaluated the  case
with regard to the validity of the applicant’s WBFMP  case  file.  The
applicant  entered  the  WBFMP  in  Dec  98.  The  Medical  Consultant
confirmed  that  all  the  necessary  lab  tests  were  conducted  and
reflected the applicant was healthy. The WBFMP case file was  properly
administered and maintained. No injustice or irregularities have  been
found to support the applicant’s request, which should be denied.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.

The  Chief,  Inquiries/AFBCMR  Section,  HQ  AFPC/DPPPWB,  noted   the
applicant was ineligible for cycles 97E6, 98E6 and 00E6.  However,  he
was eligible and considered, but not selected, for TSgt in cycle  99E6
because his score was 315.61 and the required score for  selection  in
his Air Force Specialty  Code  (AFSC)  was  328.92.  He  is  currently
eligible for promotion cycle 01E6 (promotions effective 1 Aug 01 and 1
Jul 02). The Chief  agrees  with  the  recommendations  of  the  other
advisories and also recommends denial. However, the Board could direct
supplemental promotion consideration for the three  missed  cycles  if
the unsatisfactory progress record, as well as the 30 Sep 97 EPR,  are
removed.

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

The Chief,  Performance  Evaluations  Section,  HQ  AFPC/DPPPEP,  also
reviewed the appeal and notes the Medical Consultant’s review  of  the
applicant’s medical condition. The Chief indicates the  applicant  has
not provided sufficient documentation to reasonably conclude that  the
hypothyroidism was preexisting and undiagnosed.  All  evaluations  are
considered  accurate  as  written;  therefore,  eliminating   comments
referring to the applicant’s WBFMP status would be unjust.  Denial  is
recommended.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations  were  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 29 Jun 01 for review and comment within 30 days.   As  of
this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

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

2.    The application was timely filed.

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 the applicant’s submission, we  are  not
persuaded that the requested  relief  is  warranted.  The  applicant’s
contentions are duly noted, as was the supporting statement  from  the
Chief, Medical Staff of the 43rd MDG/SGH.  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  of  having  suffered  either  an  error  or  an
injustice. In view of the above and absent persuasive evidence to  the
contrary, 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 15 August 2001, under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:

                  Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
                  Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Member
                  Ms. Mary C. Johnson, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

  Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 Nov 00 (received 10 Jan 01),
                        w/atchs.
  Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
  Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 11 Apr 01.
  Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSFM, dated 18 May 01.
  Exhibit E.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 23 May 01, w/atchs.
  Exhibit F.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPEP, dated 27 Jun 01.
  Exhibit G.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 29 Jun 01.




                                   CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                                   Panel Chair