APCH CTLR AT ANC VECTORED A B737 TO FINAL APCH BTWN 2 B747'S IN IMC. THE B737 WAS ISSUED A GAR BY THE TWR CUE TO THE CLOSENESS TO THE FIRST B747 AND RE-SEQUENCED. NO LOSS OF SEPARATION OCCURRED.

Narrative

I OPENED UP FINAL W IN PREPARATION FOR AN ARR RUSH. WX BEGAN TO RAPIDLY DETERIORATE; BUT THE BRIEFING I GOT FROM THE S RADAR CTLR IN TRAINING DID NOT INDICATE THE WX AND TURB WERE FACTORS. I SOON FOUND OUT THEY WERE WITH VIRTUALLY MY FIRST SEQUENCE! I OBSERVED A 12 MI INTERVAL ON FINAL AND DECIDED I WOULD 'STUFF' THE B737-400 INTO THE HOLE BTWN HEAVIES. THE S SIDE FEEDER WAS NOT ISSUING SPD RESTRS AND ACFT CAME TO ME VERY FAST. I IMMEDIATELY ISSUED 180 KTS TO THE INVOLVED ACFT TO MATCH SPDS AND MAINTAIN SPACING. THE FIRST B747 I ALREADY SWITCHED TO TWR BY THE FAF. I TURNED THE B737 ONTO FINAL AROUND 7 MI IN-TRAIL; KNOWING SEPARATION WOULD COMPRESS INSIDE THE FAF. I HAD THE B737 MAINTAIN 180 KTS TO THE FAF AND; ALTHOUGH THE PRECEDING HVY B747 WAS SHOWING 120 KTS WITH 1 MI OR SO TO CROSS THE THRESHOLD; I JUDGED I WOULD STILL HAVE THE REQUIRED 5 MI AT TOUCHDOWN. THEREFORE; I SWITCHED THE B737 TO THE TWR ON A 6 MI FINAL. TWR BROKE OUT THE B737 DUE TO APPARENT OVERTAKE ON PRECEDING HVY. REVIEW REVEALED PROPER SEPARATION AS THE PRECEDING ACFT CROSSED THE THRESHOLD; HOWEVER; BREAKOUT INSTRUCTIONS HAD ALREADY BEEN ISSUED. I RE-SEQUENCED THE B737 AS THE PLTS QUESTIONED THE BREAKOUT -- SO DID I. IN THE END; I'D LIKE TO STATE THAT YES; IT WAS A 'SQUEAKER;' BUT OUR TWR'S POLICY OF QUALITY ASSURANCE REVIEW; EVERY GAR AND BREAKOUT GIVES THE REVIEWERS THE ABILITY TO NOT MONITOR SVC; BUT TRY TO HANG CTLRS WITH 'DEALS.' I GOT LUCKY. 1/10 OF A MI CLOSER AND I'D BE DECERTIFIED! WHAT INCENTIVE DO WE (OR I) HAVE TO RUN A TIGHT; EFFICIENT FINAL? NONE.