Announcement

Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Article 15 when underage

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Article 15 when underage

    Hello my situation is this while in my unit and while 17 I am 22 now I was breathalyzed after a post basic party a week after I graduated I was an article 15 for underage drinking with a demotion suspended with six months of good conduct. I am 23 in october is this disqualifying ?

    Oh yeah and it did not affect me in any way outside of it being on my record I never lost my rank and have had zero issues since then

  • #2
    It will depend on whether the Art. 15 is in your official military personnel file (OMPF) or not. Most likely it is not, due to your pay grade at the time and it occurred during BCT. But, if it is or if there is any civilian law violation/charge involved with the incident, then it would disqualify you for Special Forces.
    Last edited by SF Hunter; May 21st, 2014, 11:21 AM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Its impossible that it is in his ompf...unless he was a 17 year old E5 in basic training.

      Comment


      • #4
        To clarify I was not at basic I was in between basic and ait a split op at the time ( I know very very stupid ) its only recorded on my NGB 22-3 the offense is listed as underage drinking the reason for reduction of rank is listed as unsatisfactory conduct.Other than that form its on nothing else I appreciate your time and imput and also appreciate you not judging

        Comment


        • #5
          All of it is irrelevant. Sounds like he was discharged from the NG and the recruiter will have to look at his re-code, discharge type and narrative. If he was in drill status, obviously he did not receive an article 15. Mr. Hill, go visit your local recruiter and bring all your service documents.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Chief Kemosabe View Post
            All of it is irrelevant. Sounds like he was discharged from the NG and the recruiter will have to look at his re-code, discharge type and narrative. If he was in drill status, obviously he did not receive an article 15. Mr. Hill, go visit your local recruiter and bring all your service documents.
            That doesnt rule out the possibility of an article 15. Each states rules are different. I typed one for a drilling guy today.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Hank Hill View Post
              To clarify I was not at basic I was in between basic and ait a split op at the time ( I know very very stupid ) its only recorded on my NGB 22-3 the offense is listed as underage drinking the reason for reduction of rank is listed as unsatisfactory conduct.Other than that form its on nothing else I appreciate your time and imput and also appreciate you not judging
              This isnt something that would be on discharge paperwork...unless said action was the basis for seperation.

              Comment


              • #8
                I did reenlist with no issues it was not the cause of my discharge. I am currently shipping to infantry school in august the article 15 was no obstacle in getting back in and getting infantry. Unfortunately this is a real article 15 which is why im concerned it will dq me for SF I have no other issues and other than an old traffic ticket have nothing else in my record sorry for the confusion chief kemosabe also i was army reserve when this happened so im not sure if that changes anything

                Comment


                • #9
                  My official reason for discharge was failure to report to ait but wasint an issue since i was able to get back in

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Hank Hill View Post
                    Unfortunately this is a real article 15
                    As opposed to a fake article 15?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Test reply

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Chief, I don't understand this either. If he was "Split Op", he was an enlisted Guardsmen who, according to his self report, completed basic. He seems "positive" that he received non judicial punishment, which would mean (as a Guardsman), would have to be while on Initial Active Duty for Training. If he had been RFRADed after Basic (ostensibly a week earlier), he wouldn't be subject to UCMJ. I first thought he meant OSUT (with perhaps a week delay or something), but he claims his discharge was due to not reporting for his second ship date. Something is amiss, but in any event a Article 15 (particularly one placed in the restricted file) is not a "big deal" going forward. I'm getting to be an expert at Article 15s here in Afghanistan, as I've been tagged as an IO several times for a variety of shenanigans.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Mongoose772 View Post
                          Chief, I don't understand this either. If he was "Split Op", he was an enlisted Guardsmen who, according to his self report, completed basic. He seems "positive" that he received non judicial punishment, which would mean (as a Guardsman), would have to be while on Initial Active Duty for Training. If he had been RFRADed after Basic (ostensibly a week earlier), he wouldn't be subject to UCMJ. I first thought he meant OSUT (with perhaps a week delay or something), but he claims his discharge was due to not reporting for his second ship date. Something is amiss, but in any event a Article 15 (particularly one placed in the restricted file) is not a "big deal" going forward. I'm getting to be an expert at Article 15s here in Afghanistan, as I've been tagged as an IO several times for a variety of shenanigans.
                          Many states National Guardsman are subject to the UCMJ via a nexus in their state law. Others just simply call their punitive laws a State Code of Military Justice or words to that effect. In short, I am trying to say he doesn't have to be on Initial Active Duty for Training dependent upon state laws. Furthermore, Article 15's for E-4 and below are not filed...not even in the restricted file. I already addressed this, but now I have said it again in a little more detail.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Many states National Guardsman are subject to the UCMJ via a nexus in their state law. Others just simply call their punitive laws a State Code of Military Justice or words to that effect. In short, I am trying to say he doesn't have to be on Initial Active Duty for Training dependent upon state laws. Furthermore, Article 15's for E-4 and below are not filed...not even in the restricted file. I already addressed this, but now I have said it again in a little more detail.

                            Thank you for the update and clarification. I thought I remember seeing in the past, that you explicitly stated that UCMJ only applied to people on title 10, serving on active duty.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I agree that while individual state legislatures have enacted a variety of state uniform codes of military justice they are not synonymous with the actual UCMJ, which the OP seems to be implying a reference to here.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X