RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-03063
		INDEX NUMBER:  131.02
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her date of rank to technical sergeant be retroactive to 1 September 2000 and she receive retroactive pay.  

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her promotion was withheld on 25 August 2000 due to her entry into the Weight Management Program (WMP).  This enrollment marked the first time in seven years that she had a problem meeting weight standards.  She entered the (WMP) after being exempted from weight management standards for over a year due to medical issues that prevented her from exercising.  She made satisfactory progress in the program until 30 April 2001 when she again received a medical deferral.  

In support of her appeal, applicant submits a personal statement.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 31 July 2002 the applicant was released from active duty in the grade of technical sergeant with an effective date of promotion of 2 May 2002 and retired in the same grade on 1 August 2002.  She was credited with 20 years, 5 months and 22 days of total active duty service.  She was credited with 21 years, 3 months and 23 days service for basic pay.  

The applicant was selected for promotion to technical sergeant during cycle 00E6 with a promotion sequence number of 1249 which incremented 1 September 2000.  Her commander withheld her selection for promotion to technical sergeant due to her entry into the WMP.

A resume of her last five performance reports follows:

	  Closeout Date           Promotion Recommendation

	   29 Aug 96			5
	   15 Dec 97			4
	   15 Sep 98			4
	   15 Sep 99			5
	   15 Sep 00			4

The applicant’s WMP case file indicates that she entered the Weight and Body Fat Management Program (WBFMP) on 25 August 2000 at a weight of 194 pounds and bodyfat of 40 percent.  Her allowable bodyfat standard was 32 percent.  The applicant began the 3-month exercise and dietary period (WSC 0) on 5 September 2000.  On 6 December 2000, she entered into Phase I of the WBFMP.  The AF Form 393, Individual Record for the Weight Management and Fitness Improvement Training Programs, reflects the following progress by the applicant:

	  Date Weighed Weight/Bodyfat%	Gain/Loss

	   06 Dec 00      190/38           0%
	17 Jan 01      186.5/39        -3.5/+1%
	20 Feb 01      188/38          -2/-1%
	20 Mar 01      187.5/37        -.5/-1%

AF Form 422, Physical Profile Serial Report, dated 25 April 2001, indicates that the applicant was placed on a physical profile “4” placing her in a temporary medical deferral from Phase I of the WMP due to early osteoarthritis involving multiple joints including the back and bone spur surgery initiated on 7 July 2000.  Her release date from this temporary profile was 1 January 2002.  

On 10 May 2002, the commander requested that the applicant’s promotion to technical sergeant be reinstated with a date of rank of 1 June 2002.  The vice commander concurred with this request.  

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPWB recommends the application be denied.  DPPPWB states that in accordance with the Military Personnel Flight Manual 00-06, individuals in Exercise and Dietary Period (WSC 0), are eligible to test for promotion; however, if they attain a line number, it will be withheld until they meet their standard.  If individuals do not meet their standard at the completion of the 3-month WSC 0, and are placed into the Initial Entry Period, they are not eligible for backpay and allowances.  Individuals who progress through the Initial Entry Period and Phase I, Satisfactory Progress to the Observation Period will receive their original DOR and the effective date is the date they were placed in the Observation Period and/or are recommended by their commander.  DPPPWB states that on 10 May 2002, the applicant’s commander recommended her promotion to TSgt be reinstated.  Since the applicant’s promotion was in a hold status and not actually removed/cancelled, the commander’s recommendation should have been to remove her promotion from withhold status.  Her DOR would be her original date of 1 September 2000, but the effective date would be 10 May 2002, date of commander’s letter.  

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 25 October 2002 for review and comment.  As of this date, no response has been received.

_________________________________________________________________

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 error or injustice.  We carefully reviewed the documents provided, which include a letter signed by her commander and vice commander approving reinstatement of her promotion eligibility to technical sergeant (E-6).  We note that in accordance with established policy, the commander has the authority to terminate the promotion withhold action and reinstate her promotion eligibility.  In applying the rules established by this same policy, it appears that the promotion authority understood that the applicant would receive her original date of rank and that the effective date of the promotion to technical sergeant would be the date of the reinstatement approval.  Consequently, since the effective date of promotion determines eligibility to receive pay and allowances in that grade, the applicant would not be entitled to back pay and allowances as requested.  We believe that the application of policy regarding the establishment of the effective date is proper and the applicant has not provided any evidence to indicate otherwise.  Accordingly, in view of the above and in the absence of evidence indicating that the commander abused his discretionary authority when he determined the withhold action was appropriate; the Board finds no basis on which to favorably consider this application.

_________________________________________________________________

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 19 March 2003 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

		     Panel Chair
			Member
			Member

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number 02-03063 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 18 Sep 02, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 8 Oct 02 w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Oct 02.