Table Contents
Non-Judicial Punishment, commonly referred to as Article 15 in the Army and Air Force, NJP in the Navy and Marine Corps, and Captain’s Mast or Admiral’s Mast at sea, is a disciplinary process commanders use to address minor misconduct without initiating a court-martial. It allows the chain of command to respond quickly to infractions while maintaining order and discipline within the unit.
Unlike a court-martial, which is a judicial proceeding governed by formal rules of evidence and procedure, NJP is an administrative action. It does not involve a military judge or panel, and the standards for presenting and considering evidence are less rigid. The service member retains certain rights during the process, but the overall structure is designed to be faster and less formal than military criminal prosecution.
NJP results in a permanent record because the findings and imposed punishment are documented in official military personnel files. These records become part of the service member’s administrative history, allowing the military to maintain accountability, track disciplinary actions over time, and ensure consistent personnel management across the force.
Non‑Judicial Punishment (Article 15, also called NJP or Mast) at Fort Sill involves formal command-level action that is not minor discipline; it can affect a Soldier’s rank, pay, and long‑term career. Gonzalez & Waddington provide legal guidance. Call 1-800-921-8607 for service members seeking support.
Watch the criminal defense lawyers at Gonzalez & Waddington break down how they defend criminal cases and service members worldwide against Federal Charges, Florida State Charges, UCMJ allegations, CID/NCIS/OSI investigations, court-martials, Article 120 cases, administrative separations, and GOMORs. If you’re under investigation or facing charges, this video explains what your rights are and how experienced criminal defense lawyers can make the difference.
At Fort Sill, Non‑Judicial Punishment is not viewed as minor discipline because it requires deliberate command discretion and formal visibility within the chain of command. Leaders must review available evidence, evaluate a Soldier’s duty performance and service history, and issue a decision that becomes part of the individual’s official military record, giving the process a level of significance that exceeds routine, informal corrective measures.
NJP also carries weight in career‑related evaluations, as the documentation can be reviewed during promotion boards and assignment decisions. This means that even when the underlying conduct is limited in scope, the formal nature of NJP may affect how a Soldier competes for advancement, selection for specialized duties, or other opportunities that shape long‑term career development.
Additionally, NJP often results in subsequent administrative requirements, such as performance counseling, rehabilitation efforts, or enhanced monitoring by the chain of command. These follow‑on steps reflect the Army’s intent to address the matter through structured and consistent procedures, highlighting that NJP operates as a significant administrative action rather than a minor disciplinary measure.
If you or a loved one is facing criminal charges or a criminal investigation by federal authorities, the military, or the State of Florida, early defense matters. Gonzalez & Waddington provide disciplined, trial-focused criminal defense for high-stakes cases involving serious allegations and complex evidence. To speak with experienced criminal defense lawyers and get confidential guidance, call 1-800-921-8607 or text 954-909-7407 to request a no-cost, confidential consultation.
The Non‑Judicial Punishment process at Fort Sill follows a structured sequence that begins once potential misconduct is identified and reported through official channels. Each phase ensures that the commander reviews the matter in accordance with established procedures.
The steps below outline the order in which actions typically occur, from the initial report to the administrative recording of the outcome.
Soldiers at Fort Sill may receive administrative discipline when they fail to follow established orders or regulations, such as disregarding duty requirements or neglecting procedures set by their unit or command. These matters are handled through Non‑Judicial Punishment as a way to correct behavior without assigning criminal wrongdoing.
Alcohol‑related situations can also result in NJP when a Soldier’s judgment or readiness is affected, including instances where alcohol use contributes to being unprepared for duty or failing to meet expectations for safety and responsibility. These cases are treated as opportunities for correction rather than determinations of criminal fault.
Issues involving conduct or performance, such as patterns of tardiness, disrespectful behavior, or failure to maintain professional standards, are also commonly addressed under NJP. The focus remains on reinforcing discipline and helping the Soldier return to effective service, not on proving criminal liability.
Statements and reports compiled during the unit’s initial inquiry often serve as foundational evidence, including written accounts from involved personnel and official documentation collected by the chain of command.
Investigative summaries produced by military police, Inspector General inquiries, or command-directed investigations may be reviewed to outline the factual circumstances surrounding the alleged misconduct.
Witness accounts, both written and oral, can be considered alongside the commander’s discretion to determine what information is relevant, reliable, and sufficient for evaluating whether an Article 15 should proceed.
At Fort Sill, Non‑Judicial Punishment can trigger additional adverse measures, including formal letters of reprimand that may be filed in a Soldier’s official records. These reprimands can influence how command views future performance and discipline.
Commanders may also initiate separation processing after NJP if the underlying misconduct raises concerns about suitability for continued service. This step reviews a Soldier’s history and the circumstances surrounding the incident.
Depending on rank, service time, and the nature of the alleged misconduct, the matter may be sent to a Board of Inquiry, creating the risk of further scrutiny by a panel tasked with reviewing whether retention is appropriate.
Even when no immediate separation occurs, NJP and related administrative actions can create long‑term career consequences by affecting promotion opportunities, assignments, and the overall competitiveness of a Soldier’s record.
At Fort Sill, Non‑Judicial Punishment (NJP) often arises after command-directed investigations identify potential misconduct that does not yet warrant formal judicial proceedings. These investigations supply commanders with the factual basis needed to decide whether NJP is appropriate or if the matter should be handled through administrative or judicial channels.
NJP also interacts closely with administrative measures such as Letters of Reprimand, which may accompany or follow NJP when a commander believes additional documentation of the misconduct is necessary. In more serious or repeated misconduct cases, adverse findings may lead to Boards of Inquiry, where an officer’s continued service is evaluated using both NJP results and other evidence.
Finally, NJP serves as a midpoint on the spectrum of military justice, as commanders retain the ability to pursue court-martial escalation if misconduct exceeds the limits of administrative action or if the service member refuses NJP and demands trial. Thus, NJP functions both as an alternative to court-martial and as a potential precursor when more severe accountability is required.
Gonzalez & Waddington bring decades of military justice experience to administrative actions, including Non‑Judicial Punishment at Fort Sill. Their background handling Article 15 matters across multiple installations provides a grounded understanding of how administrative processes unfold within Army commands.
The firm’s experience extends beyond NJP itself, linking these proceedings to potential follow‑on actions such as administrative separation or adverse career consequences. This broader perspective helps ensure that every NJP defense is approached with an appreciation for the long‑term administrative implications.
They focus on building a thorough record, identifying mitigation evidence, and presenting advocacy that can influence commanders, boards, and reviewers. This detailed attention to documentation and procedure supports service members as they navigate the full spectrum of administrative defense requirements.
No, NJP is not classified as a criminal conviction. It is an administrative process under the UCMJ that addresses alleged misconduct at the command level. Although not criminal, NJP can still carry significant career implications for service members at Fort Sill.
NJP is an administrative action, while a court-martial is a judicial proceeding. NJP is handled by a commander and involves simplified procedures. A court-martial, by contrast, involves formal charges, rules of evidence, and potential criminal penalties.
Yes, NJP can include reductions in rank or forfeitures of pay. The extent of these impacts depends on the service member’s grade and the commander’s authority. Such actions are administrative consequences rather than criminal punishments.
NJP entries may be reviewed during promotion boards. The presence of NJP can be considered when evaluating a soldier’s overall service record. This review process can shape how competitive the service member appears for advancement.
NJP does not automatically trigger separation proceedings. However, a commander may consider the underlying misconduct when deciding whether to initiate a separation action. Separation decisions are made through a separate administrative process.
The permanence of an NJP record depends on where it is filed. Some NJP records are kept locally and may be removed after a set period, while others are placed in long-term personnel files. Filing decisions can affect how long the NJP remains visible within the service member’s records.
A service member may consult a civilian attorney, but the attorney cannot formally participate in the NJP hearing. The consultation can occur outside the command setting. Representation rules differ from those used in courts-martial or other judicial forums.
Fort Sill sits in southwest Oklahoma, just north of the city of Lawton and near the Wichita Mountains Wildlife Refuge. Its position on the Southern Plains places it within a region known for wide-open terrain and variable weather. This setting supports the installation’s longstanding role in field artillery training and testing.
The installation maintains close connections with Lawton and nearby towns that provide housing, services, and civilian employment. Military families regularly interact with local schools, medical facilities, and community programs. These relationships help sustain a stable environment for both long-term personnel and trainees.
The expansive plains and controlled ranges offer an ideal environment for live-fire artillery operations. Its central location in the United States supports rapid movement of units and equipment nationwide. These geographic advantages continue to shape the base’s mission and capabilities.
Fort Sill is a major U.S. Army installation and home to the Field Artillery School and key training centers. The base supports instruction, testing, and operational readiness across multiple artillery-related specialties. Its mission reinforces Army-wide modernization and joint force integration.
Fort Sill hosts artillery brigades, training units, and tenant organizations that support doctrine development and operational evaluation. Some elements prepare for global deployment, while others focus on advanced instruction. These units help sustain a continuous pipeline of trained soldiers.
The installation supports a substantial active duty presence, including permanent units and large numbers of trainees. Its training schedule creates a steady rotational flow of personnel. This mix contributes to a dynamic operational environment throughout the year.
Daily operations include artillery instruction, field exercises, testing, logistics support, and command functions. Aviation and medical elements also sustain mission readiness for assigned units. The pace reflects the ongoing demand for skilled artillery soldiers.
Service members at Fort Sill may encounter UCMJ matters stemming from training conditions, operational commitments, or administrative processes. Investigations, non-judicial punishment, and courts-martial can arise as part of routine enforcement of military standards. The military defense lawyers at Gonzalez & Waddington represent servicemembers stationed at Fort Sill.
Punishments can include reduction in rank, forfeiture of pay, extra duties, restriction, correctional custody, or written reprimands. The severity depends on rank and command authority.
Accepting NJP is not a formal admission of guilt under criminal law, but it may be treated as adverse information in administrative and career decisions. How it appears in the record often matters more than intent.
Yes, NJP is frequently cited as a basis for administrative separation or a Board of Inquiry. It can establish a pattern of misconduct even without criminal charges.
NJP is commonly used for minor misconduct, orders violations, duty performance issues, and behavior that a commander believes does not require a court-martial. The definition of “minor” is largely discretionary.
NJP is not a criminal conviction, but it is adverse administrative action that can carry serious career consequences. It can still be used against a service member in later proceedings.
