How Different Branches Handle Article 15 (Non-Judicial Punishment)

If you’re a service member facing an Article 15 – also known as Non-Judicial Punishment (NJP) – it’s normal to feel anxious and confused. Different branches even call it by different names. In the Army and Air Force, it’s usually just called an Article 15, referencing the UCMJ article that authorizes it. In the Navy and Coast Guard, you might hear it called a Captain’s Mast, and in the Marine Corps they refer to it as Office Hours​. Despite the different names and traditions, the purpose is the same: to discipline minor misconduct without a court-martial. This blog post will break down how each branch handles Article 15/NJP in a conversational, approachable way. We’ll cover what to expect in your specific branch, how the process works, and how it might impact your career. Let’s dive in.

Army: Company-Grade vs. Field-Grade Article 15

In the Army, Article 15s come in flavors of Company-Grade and Field-Grade, which basically refer to who imposes the punishment and how severe it can be. A Company-Grade Article 15 is imposed by a company-level commander (usually a Captain, O-3) and carries lighter maximum punishments​. A Field-Grade Article 15 is given by a higher commander (Major/O-4 or above) and can impose stiffer consequences​. Here’s how they differ:

• Company-Grade NJP (imposed by a Company Commander, e.g. a Captain) – Maximum punishment might include up to 14 days of extra duty and/or restriction, a week’s pay forfeiture, and at most one rank reduction for junior enlisted (E-4 and below)​. Notably, a Company-Grade Article 15 for lower ranks is often filed locally and won’t go in your permanent record (it’s destroyed after two years or upon transfer) if you’re E-4 or below​. This means a young Soldier who learns from a mistake can move on with a clean slate in a couple of years.
• Field-Grade NJP (imposed by a Field Grade officer, e.g. a Battalion Commander who is a Major or Lieutenant Colonel) – Can impose much harsher penalties. For example, up to 45 days of extra duty, 45 days of restriction, half a month’s pay for two months, and even reduction to the lowest enlisted grade (E-1) for a junior Soldier​. These Article 15s are often filed in your Official Military Personnel File if you’re NCO rank or higher, which can seriously affect your future promotions and career​. 

Example: Imagine a Specialist (E-4) who showed up late to formation multiple times. His company commander might decide to handle it at company level. The Specialist could be given a Company-Grade Article 15 with, say, 7 days extra duty and a reduction to Private First Class (E-3). That punishment will be recorded locally, and if he stays out of trouble, it won’t follow him around in his permanent file. But if the misconduct were more serious – let’s say the same soldier was also disrespectful to an NCO or got a DUI – the battalion commander (field grade) might take the Article 15. In a Field-Grade NJP, the soldier could be demoted all the way down to Private (E-1), hit with 45 days of extra duty, and have the Article 15 noted in his official record​. This kind of record can impact promotions, special schools, and even lead to an involuntary separation down the line if the behavior doesn’t improve. In short, Army Soldiers should know whether they’re facing a company or field-grade NJP, because it makes a big difference in both the immediate punishment and the long-term effects on their career.

Air Force: Commander’s Discretion and the Review Process

The Air Force handles Article 15s in a similar spirit to the Army, but with its own style. In the Air Force, commanders have a lot of discretion in how they administer discipline. There’s an emphasis on “progressive discipline,” meaning a commander might start with verbal counseling, then a Letter of Reprimand, and only move up to an Article 15 if the Airman’s behavior doesn’t improve or the offense is serious​. An Article 15 is considered a serious step up from a reprimand but still below a court-martial in severity​. The idea is to correct misconduct at the lowest appropriate level. However, if the misconduct warrants it, a commander can jump straight to an Article 15 without doing lesser steps first – it really depends on the case and the commander’s judgment​. 

Here’s what to expect in an Air Force Article 15 process: once your commander “offers” you the Article 15, you’ll be formally notified of the allegations. You typically have three duty days to decide how to respond, during which time you have the right to consult with the Area Defense Counsel (ADC) – a military attorney who can give you free legal advice​. Accepting the Article 15 does not mean you’re admitting guilt; it just means you agree to let the commander handle it instead of demanding a court-martial. You can present your side of the story (in writing or in person) and even bring witnesses or statements to try to convince the commander that you’re not guilty or deserve leniency​. After hearing both sides, the commander will decide if you committed the offense and, if so, announce a punishment​.

Typical Air Force NJP punishments can include a reduction in rank (for enlisted members), forfeiture of pay, extra duties, restriction to base, and a reprimand​. The maximums depend on the commander’s rank (just like Army, a Squadron Commander who is a Major can impose higher punishments than a junior O-3 Flight Commander). One important aspect in the Air Force is the paper trail: if you receive an Article 15, it often goes into an Unfavorable Information File (UIF). A UIF is essentially a record that flags you for commanders and promotion boards, and it stays active for a set period (often two years for enlisted Airmen). While a UIF is active, it will be reviewed for things like promotions, re-enlistments, and special duty selections​– needless to say, it can stall your career progression. The good news is, if you keep your nose clean, once the UIF period expires, it can be removed and you can move forward.

Example: Let’s say an Air Force Staff Sergeant is caught misusing a government vehicle. The commander considers the SSgt’s clean record and could issue a stern Letter of Reprimand. But due to the seriousness (maybe there was property damage or safety at risk), the commander uses his discretion to go with an Article 15. The SSgt is notified and goes to the ADC for advice. With the ADC’s help, he provides a written rebuttal explaining his side and good character references. The commander reads everything and decides the SSgt did violate the rules. As punishment, the SSgt is demoted to Senior Airman (E-4) and given 15 days of extra duty. Now, feeling the punishment was too harsh, the SSgt exercises his right to appeal​. In the Air Force, you have 5 calendar days to appeal an NJP to the next higher commander, who will review the case. In our example, the appeal goes to the Group Commander (the SSgt’s commander’s boss). That higher commander reviews all the evidence and perhaps agrees the punishment was a bit heavy for a first-time offense. The appeal results in the reduction in rank being overturned – the SSgt gets his stripe back – though the extra duty and a formal reprimand remain as a warning. This outcome still isn’t fun for the Airman, but it’s better than a permanent demotion. The whole process, from the initial decision to the appeal, shows how the Air Force’s review process can provide a second look to ensure the punishment is fair and not excessive​.

Throughout this process, it’s important for Airmen to stay engaged and use their rights – talk to a defense counsel, submit a strong written statement, and appeal if necessary. Also, even after everything is done, be aware that an Article 15 can trigger other administrative actions, like being put on a Control Roster (another Air Force tool for monitoring substandard behavior) or even an administrative discharge proceeding if the offense was serious (for example, drug use or DUI often leads to discharge). In short, the Air Force tries to be fair and corrective with NJP, but it absolutely can impact your career if you’re not careful. Always respond within deadlines and seek guidance so you don’t accidentally waive your rights.

Navy & Marine Corps: Captain’s Mast vs. Office Hours

The Navy and Marine Corps handle non-judicial punishment in a way that reflects their naval traditions, though the fundamentals are still under Article 15 of the UCMJ. In both services, a commanding officer (or an officer in charge) holds a formal proceeding to address the alleged misconduct. In the Navy (and Coast Guard), this proceeding is called Captain’s Mast (or just “Mast”), and in the Marine Corps it’s called Office Hours​. Don’t let the names confuse you – they serve the same purpose. If a sailor says “I’ve got mast” or a Marine says “I’m going to Office Hours,” it means they’re facing NJP.

One key difference in the sea services is who typically imposes the NJP. In the Navy, it’s often the ship’s Commanding Officer (who might be an O-5 or O-6) handling the mast, and similarly in the Marine Corps, usually the battalion or squadron commander (often a Lieutenant Colonel, O-5) holds Office Hours. This means many Navy/Marine NJP proceedings are effectively at the “field-grade” level in terms of authority​. For instance, the commanding officer at mast can usually impose the maximum allowable NJP punishments. By contrast, the Army and Air Force frequently use lower-level commanders for minor offenses (with lower maximum penalties)​.

Another difference is in terminology and setting. At a Navy Captain’s Mast, tradition might have the sailor stand before the captain’s desk or podium, sometimes under the ship’s bell or with an assembly of the crew (in some cases, Open Mast is held publicly to reinforce discipline). The term “mast” comes from the age-old practice of gathering at the ship’s mast for announcements of punishment. In the Marine Corps, Office Hours might be less ceremonial but still formal – the Marine stands at attention in the commander’s office or conference room, often with the unit’s First Sergeant or Sergeant Major present. In both cases, the service member’s chain of command (Chiefs or NCOs) may be there to speak on behalf of the member’s character, and the accused can present matters in defense or mitigation, just like in other branches’ NJP proceedings.

At a Navy Captain’s Mast, the commanding officer (right) delivers his verdict to the sailor standing at attention, while the executive officer (left) looks on​. This formal proceeding is the Navy’s version of an Article 15 hearing, where informal courtroom rules don’t apply, but the commanding officer listens to the facts and decides on the spot.

When it comes to punishments at Mast/Office Hours, they’re dictated by the same UCMJ limits, but there are a couple of branch-specific nuances. For example, reduction in rank works a bit differently: Navy and Marine Corps rules typically limit NJP reduction to one pay grade per mast​. So if a Marine Lance Corporal (E-3) is at Office Hours, the lowest he could be reduced is to Private First Class (E-2). In the Army or Air Force, a single NJP could potentially knock an E-4 all the way down to E-1 in the most extreme case​. Another quirky naval tradition is the infamous “bread and water” punishment – on the books, a Navy CO can confine an E-3 or below to the ship’s brig on bread and water for up to 3 days for minor offenses at sea. However, the Marine Corps generally doesn’t use that, and notably the Coast Guard explicitly disallows bread-and-water punishment​. In modern practice, even the Navy uses this sparingly or not at all, but it’s one of those old-school punishments that still exists in theory.

Example: A Navy E-3 (Seaman) is found to have fallen asleep on watch. He’s summoned to Captain’s Mast. On the day of mast, he stands at attention facing his Commanding Officer on the ship. The CO states the offense (“dereliction of duty for sleeping on watch”) and asks the sailor for an explanation. The sailor, with the guidance of a Navy JAG beforehand, respectfully explains that he had been working extra hours and made a mistake, and he presents a statement from his chief about his otherwise good performance. After considering everything, the CO finds the sailor did commit the offense. For punishment, the CO might impose 30 days of restriction to the ship, 15 days of extra duty, reduction in rank from E-3 to E-2, and a half-month’s pay for one month. The sailor cannot have an attorney speak for him during mast – it’s not a trial – but he had the chance to consult one beforehand. If the sailor thinks this is unjust or too heavy, he can appeal to the next senior officer (perhaps the Squadron Commodore). Just like other services, appeals in the Navy/USMC must be submitted within 5 days in writing​. The appeal won’t suspend the punishment unless it’s not decided within a certain time, so our sailor might be enduring extra duty while waiting on the result. The higher authority could decide to lessen the punishment if it seems too harsh, but they won’t increase it. Importantly, because this was a fairly serious offense on watch, the sailor’s command might also decide to make a note in his service record (often called a Page 13 in the Navy) and even consider whether further administrative action (like discharge for cause) is warranted if he has other disciplinary issues.

Now consider a Marine Corps example: A Marine Lance Corporal gets into a fistfight with another Marine at the barracks. He’s called to Office Hours with the Battalion Commander. In the office, the Marine stands stiffly at attention while the LtCol commander reads him his rights and the accusation (perhaps “disorderly conduct” or assault consummated by battery under UCMJ). The Marine’s Platoon Commander and First Sergeant are present. The Marine speaks on his own behalf, maybe apologizing and explaining any mitigating factors. The commander finds the Marine guilty of the misconduct. As punishment, the Marine could receive 14 days of extra duty, 14 days of restriction to barracks, and a reduction in rank by one grade (to Private First Class). The Marine’s NJP is then recorded in his service record (a page 11 entry in the USMC). He too has the right to appeal within 5 days. Suppose he appeals to the regimental commander, who reviews the case and decides the proceedings were fair – the appeal is denied. The Marine now has to complete his extra duties and live with the rank reduction. This NJP will be a black mark on his record that could affect his chances at promotion (for instance, a Marine needs a good conduct record for promotions, and an NJP breaks their Good Conduct Medal period). Repeated NJPs might trigger an administrative separation for misconduct.

One more thing to note for Navy/Marine personnel: the “vessel exception.” If you’re attached to or embarked on a vessel (like a ship or deployed Marine unit on a ship), you do not have the right to refuse NJP. Sailors and embarked Marines can’t turn down a Captain’s Mast in favor of a court-martial – you must go through the mast. In contrast, service members not attached to a vessel (like someone stationed on shore duty or a stateside base) generally have the right to refuse NJP and demand trial by court-martial, up until the moment NJP proceedings actually begin​. Refusing NJP is risky (you could end up with a court-martial conviction if things go poorly), so it’s something to only decide after consulting a lawyer. But it’s good to know this right exists if you truly believe you’re innocent or being treated unfairly – except, again, if you’re on a ship at sea, in which case NJP might be unavoidable.

Overall, Navy and Marine Corps NJP might feel a bit more formal or steeped in tradition (especially in the Navy), but the core process – your CO hears the case and decides punishment – is very much like the other services. The impact on your career can be significant: a reduction in rank hurts your pay and future opportunities, and having NJP in your record can derail promotions or desirable assignments. Many Navy/USMC members who get NJP also find themselves facing diminished prospects of reenlistment – you might get a lower evaluation score, or even be recommended for discharge if the offense was serious (like drug use or a serious assault). That’s why having strong representation before you go to mast or office hours (even if the lawyer can’t be in the room, they can help you prepare) is crucial.

Coast Guard: Naval Tradition with Unique Nuances

The Coast Guard, while not part of the Department of Defense in peacetime (it falls under the Department of Homeland Security), still operates under the UCMJ just like the other branches. When it comes to NJP, the Coast Guard’s procedures and terminology are very similar to the Navy’s – no surprise, given the Coast Guard’s naval roots. In fact, Coast Guard non-judicial punishment is also commonly called Captain’s Mast, and it’s typically carried out by the unit’s commanding officer. A Coast Guard cutter’s CO or a sector commander has the same authority to impose NJP as a Navy CO would.

What’s similar to the Navy: If you’re a Coast Guardsman facing NJP, expect a process almost identical to a Navy Captain’s Mast. You’ll be read your rights, the allegations will be explained, and you’ll have a chance to present your side of the story. The punishments that can be given at Coast Guard mast are the same as those in the Navy – extra duty, restriction, forfeiture of pay, reduction in rank, etc., within the limits allowed by the UCMJ for the rank of the officer imposing NJP. And like the Navy/Marine Corps, if you’re attached to a cutter (a vessel), you cannot refuse NJP and demand a court-martial; you have to go through the mast proceedings. If you’re at a shore unit, you theoretically have the right to turn down the NJP and seek a court-martial instead, but again, that decision should be made very carefully with legal counsel’s input.

Unique Coast Guard nuances: One notable difference is that the Coast Guard does not allow the old “bread and water” punishment that the Navy has on its books​. So you won’t have to worry about being confined on bread and water for three days on a cutter – that’s not an authorized punishment in the CG. Another nuance is administrative: because the Coast Guard is smaller, NJP might be handled a bit more “personally.” For instance, your mast papers might go up to the District legal office for review, and Coast Guard commands often have to report NJP statistics to higher headquarters. But as a member going through it, you won’t notice much difference. The impact on your Coast Guard career is akin to the Navy’s: an NJP can result in a mark on your record (documented in your Personnel Data Record), and it can affect your eligibility for advancement. The Coast Guard, like the Navy, requires good conduct for certain awards and reenlistment criteria. If you receive NJP, you might lose your Good Conduct Medal eligibility and potentially receive an adverse Page 7 entry (Coast Guard equivalent of a counseling record) noting the misconduct. Multiple offenses could lead to being discharged from the service for misconduct.

Example: Let’s say a Boatswain’s Mate Second Class (BM2) in the Coast Guard is found to have negligently run a small boat aground, causing minor damage. His cutter’s CO calls him to Captain’s Mast. The BM2’s commanding officer follows the same script as a Navy CO would – informs him of his rights and the offense, hears the BM2’s explanation (perhaps the BM2 admits fault but cites poor visibility or equipment issues), and even considers the BM2’s otherwise excellent service record. The CO decides that NJP is warranted for accountability. As punishment, the CO might reduce the BM2 to BM3 (one pay grade), take half a month’s pay for two months, and assign 30 days of restriction to base. This is effectively a “field-grade” level punishment (since most COs in the Coast Guard are O-4 or O-5). The BM2 cannot refuse this mast because he’s on a cutter, but he can appeal to the Sector Commander (the CO’s boss) if he believes the punishment is unjust or too severe. After mast, the BM2’s reduction in rank will be reflected in his record, and he’ll likely have a notation that may impact his next advancement opportunity. The Coast Guard is a small service, so everyone tends to know when someone’s been to mast. It can be humbling, but many Coasties recover from an NJP by squaring away their performance. The key is understanding that while it’s not a court-martial (no conviction), it is a big deal in terms of your career standing.

In summary, Coast Guard members should treat Captain’s Mast just as seriously as any sailor would. The processes are nearly identical to the Navy’s, and the consequences – both immediate and long-term – are comparable. The unique aspects (like no bread-and-water punishment, slightly different paperwork, and the CG’s organizational structure) don’t change the fact that an NJP can stall or end a Coastie’s career if problems persist. On the flip side, a single mast isn’t necessarily the end of the world – many Coast Guard members have had one NJP early in their career and still gone on to serve honorably. It’s all about how you move forward and learn from the experience.

Facing an Article 15 or Other NJP? Contact Us.

Facing an Article 15 or any form of NJP is undoubtedly stressful, but you don’t have to go through it alone. No matter your branch – Army, Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard – understanding your rights and the process is crucial. Each service has its quirks in handling NJP, but in all cases an Article 15 can have real impacts on your pay, rank, and future opportunities in the military. The stakes are high, and the outcome can shape your career. The good news is that you do have rights (to consult an attorney, to present your side, to appeal, etc.), and there are strategies to mitigate the damage.

If you or a fellow service member are facing an Article 15/NJP, now is the time to get informed and get support. The National Security Law Firm (NSLF) is here to help. Our team has experience with all branches of the military justice system. We speak Army, Air Force, Navy/Marine, and Coast Guard – fluently. We can guide you on how to respond to an NJP, help you prepare statements or evidence, and if needed, assist with appeals or further legal action. An Article 15 doesn’t have to be the end of your military career, especially if handled correctly. Contact NSLF today for a consultation. We’ll listen to your situation, explain your options in plain language, and fight to protect your rights and your future. Don’t navigate this challenging moment alone – reach out to NSLF and let us help you secure the best possible outcome for your Article 15 situation.

Cost of Hiring a Lawyer for Your Article 15 Case

At National Security Law Firm, we provide clear, upfront pricing so you know exactly what to expect. If you’re facing Article 15 (Non-Judicial Punishment), we offer a flat fee of $2,500, which includes:

✅ Thorough Case Investigation – We analyze the allegations, gather evidence, and assess the strength of your case.
✅ Preparation & Strategic Planning – We craft a compelling defense, including written responses, mitigating evidence, and witness statements.
✅ Representation at the Article 15 Hearing – We advocate for you during the proceedings, working to minimize penalties or even get the charges dropped.
✅ Guidance on Article 15 vs. Courts-Martial – We help you understand your rights, the potential consequences of each option, and whether rejecting Article 15 in favor of a courts-martial is the right choice for your case.

Learn More About Article 15 Defense

Choosing NJP or court-martial is just the first step. To truly maximize your chances of a favorable outcome, you need to understand the best legal defenses, how to minimize penalties, and what mistakes to avoid. Visit our comprehensive Article 15 resource page to learn about:

• Winning strategies for NJP hearings
• Common defenses that can beat an Article 15
• How to negotiate the best possible outcome
• The true cost of an NJP vs. a court-martial
• Mistakes that get service members kicked out—and how to avoid them

Why Choose National Security Law Firm?

When facing NJP or a court-martial, experience matters. The attorneys at National Security Law Firm are not just skilled military defense lawyers—we are battle-tested litigators with real-world experience in military justice. Here’s why service members trust us:

✅ Decades of Military Law Experience: Our team consists of former JAG officers, military prosecutors, retired federal judges, and defense attorneys who have handled thousands of cases like yours.

✅ Aggressive, Strategic Defense: We don’t back down. Our attorneys develop calculated strategies to maximize your chances of avoiding conviction, reducing penalties, or winning outright acquittals.

✅ Insider Knowledge of Military Justice: With extensive experience advising commands on Article 15 and court-martial procedures, we know how the military prosecutes these cases—and we use that knowledge to your advantage.

✅ Personalized Legal Guidance: No two cases are the same. We provide tailored legal strategies, ensuring that your defense is built around the specific facts of your case.

You’ve given your service to this country. Now let us serve you by protecting your rights, your career, and your future.

Don’t Make This Decision Alone—Get Experienced Legal Advice Now

You have a limited time to decide whether to accept NJP or demand a court-martial. Making the wrong choice could cost you your career, your benefits, or even your freedom. Don’t take that risk without talking to an experienced military defense lawyer.

At National Security Law Firm, we provide confidential consultations to help you understand your options and develop a game plan. Call us today at (202) 600-4996 or schedule a free consultation online: Book Now. 

We also offer legal financing options allowing you to pay your legal fees over monthly installments.

Check out our Google Reviews.

National Security Law Firm: It’s Our Turn to Fight for You!