RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02198 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His separation code of JGH (non-retention on active duty) and his Reentry (RE) code of 2X (First-term, second-term, or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP))be changed so that he can enlist in the Air National Guard (ANG). APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His separation code is unjust; he was separated because he was accused of abusing his medication subsequent to an All-Terrain Vehicle (ATV) accident, which left him with two fractures in his back and two fractured ribs. His doctor had prescribed the medication to calm the pain and had signed a letter approving him to take three pills in an eight-hour period; however, when he presented the letter to his commander, he still continued with the discharge action against him. The separation and RE codes are preventing him from joining the ANG. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 3 Aug 10, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force. On 18 Jun 13, the applicant’s commander non-selected him for reenlistment and the applicant indicated his intent to appeal the decision. However, on 24 Jun 13, he withdrew his intent to appeal. On 20 Sep 13, the applicant was discharged, with a reason for separation of non-retention on active duty and 2X RE code. He was credited with 3 years, 1 month, and 18 days of active service. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA recommends deny. DPSOA notes that AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment in the USAF, states commanders have selective reenlistment selection or non-selection authority. The SRP considers the members Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) ratings, Unfavorable Information from any substantiated source, the airman's willingness to comply with Air Force standards and/or the airman's ability (or lack of) to meet required training and duty performance levels. The commander acted within his authority and the RE code 2X is correct. The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial, indicating that based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. DPSOR notes the applicant was eligible for the Fiscal Year 2013 (FY13) DOS Rollback Program and was selected for separation. The commander recommended the applicant receive an honorable discharge service characterization. The base discharge authority directed separation with an honorable discharge service characterization. The applicant's commander indicated the applicant had been given a Letter of Reprimand (LOR), dated 11 Jun 13 and had also been placed on both an Unfavorable Information File (UIF) and Control Roster (CR) for Article 92, Failure to Obey a Lawful Order. The only remaining option for his commander was to separate the applicant under the FY13 DOS Rollback Program. The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 18 May 15 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). The Board viewed the application, on 16 Jun 15; however, as of this date, no response has been received by this office. THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has not 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. In this respect, we note this Board is the highest administrative level of appeal within the Air Force. As such, an applicant must first exhaust all available avenues of administrative relief provided by existing law or regulations prior to seeking relief before this Board, as required by the governing Air Force Instruction. The Board has reviewed your request and notes there is an available avenue of administrative relief the applicant has not first pursued. In this respect, we recommend the applicant; first, submit an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board prior to pursuing his request through the AFBCMR. In view of this, we find this application is not ripe for adjudication at this level as there exists a subordinate level of appeal that has not first been depleted. Therefore, in view of the above, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-02198 in Executive Session on 16 Jun 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 Jan 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Pertinent Excerpts from Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 24 Jun 14. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 28 Apr 15, w/atch. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 May 15.