Posted on May 27, 2022
Can you get flagged for failing the army’s new M4 qualification?
6.5K
21
11
1
1
0
Does anyone know the answer to this question I’m having a hard time finding it online
Army Regulations
Weapons
Policy
Career Counselor
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 9
5
5
0
You're a SGT, the first place you should look is the reg not Google. There is a regulation for flags. In it you won't find failing marksmanship as a reason for flagging
(5)
(0)
4
4
0
I've never seen anyone get flagged for failed a weapons qualification. I have taken a private back to the range until he qualified. Turned out he was wearing his old 'super-cool' glasses with an old prescription. Once I made him put on his birth-control Army issue glasses he qualified quick enough.
(4)
(0)
In all of my almost 24 years of service, I have never heard of, nor seen, a Soldier get Flagged for failure to qualify. I'll have to do some digging in regards to the new tables to see if I can find a definitive answer. But, just looking at DA Form 268, I see nothing relating to weapons. The form has Transferrable and Non-Transferrable Flags. They are:
Transferrable: APFT/ACFT Failure; ABCP; Punishment Phase
Non-Transferrable: Adverse Action; Involuntary Separation-field initiated; Referred OER, AER, or Relief for Cause NCOER; Security Violation or loss of Clearance; HQDA Delay of Promotion or Removal from Selection List; AMEDD Lack of License or Cert; Commander's Investigation; Law Enforcement Investigation; Reserve Component Non-Compliance with 10 USC 10206; JAG Lack of License or Cert; Deny Auto Promotion to E2/3/4; Lautenberg Amendment; Administratively Non-deployable for Retention; No Family Care Plan; Deny Auto Promotion to 1LT/CW2; Drug Abuse; Alcohol Abuse; HQDA Involuntary Separation
Transferrable: APFT/ACFT Failure; ABCP; Punishment Phase
Non-Transferrable: Adverse Action; Involuntary Separation-field initiated; Referred OER, AER, or Relief for Cause NCOER; Security Violation or loss of Clearance; HQDA Delay of Promotion or Removal from Selection List; AMEDD Lack of License or Cert; Commander's Investigation; Law Enforcement Investigation; Reserve Component Non-Compliance with 10 USC 10206; JAG Lack of License or Cert; Deny Auto Promotion to E2/3/4; Lautenberg Amendment; Administratively Non-deployable for Retention; No Family Care Plan; Deny Auto Promotion to 1LT/CW2; Drug Abuse; Alcohol Abuse; HQDA Involuntary Separation
(4)
(0)
SGM Erik Marquez
Reading the reg, what it states unequivocally is when a flag MUST be initiated, not listing the ONLY reason a flag can be initiated.
"2-3 Circumstances requiring a transferable Flag"
"2–2. Circumstances requiring a nontransferable Flag"
And If you fail to qualify with ir assigned weapon a commander could begin an investigation into that SM as to if retention or involuntary separation is appropriate "The suspension of favorable actions on a Soldier is mandatory when military or civilian authorities initiate any investigation or inquiry that may potentially result in disciplinary or adverse administrative action. Commanders, general officer staff heads, and heads of HQDA staff agencies (to include the DA Suitability Evaluation Board) must ensure that favorable personnel actions are suspended in accordance with the criteria contained in this regulation."
But reality as I remember it is, failure to qualify was generally looked at as a training or supervisor failure. And thus, the individual SM was not punished or administratively dealt with. Supervisors and leadership was looked at with concern when an SM that has qualified previously can not now qualify. Its really one of three things, lack of training and supervision, a physical / mental change in the SM that has not been identified by leadership, or a intentional desire and failure of the SM, in which case, why has leadership not already identified the issue, and corrected it or started the separation process.
"2-3 Circumstances requiring a transferable Flag"
"2–2. Circumstances requiring a nontransferable Flag"
And If you fail to qualify with ir assigned weapon a commander could begin an investigation into that SM as to if retention or involuntary separation is appropriate "The suspension of favorable actions on a Soldier is mandatory when military or civilian authorities initiate any investigation or inquiry that may potentially result in disciplinary or adverse administrative action. Commanders, general officer staff heads, and heads of HQDA staff agencies (to include the DA Suitability Evaluation Board) must ensure that favorable personnel actions are suspended in accordance with the criteria contained in this regulation."
But reality as I remember it is, failure to qualify was generally looked at as a training or supervisor failure. And thus, the individual SM was not punished or administratively dealt with. Supervisors and leadership was looked at with concern when an SM that has qualified previously can not now qualify. Its really one of three things, lack of training and supervision, a physical / mental change in the SM that has not been identified by leadership, or a intentional desire and failure of the SM, in which case, why has leadership not already identified the issue, and corrected it or started the separation process.
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google