Page 1 of 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 128

Thread: Upcoming changes to AR 670-1

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    At your mom's house
    Posts
    252
    Likes (Received)
    25
    Thanks (Received)
    1

    Default Upcoming changes to AR 670-1

    These are some notes from the Sergeant Major of the Army's Board of Directors meeting that took place 9-11 January 2012. They are not yet in effect but will be published and clarified in an upcoming update to AR 670-1.

    Some of these are going to cause quite an uproar. I'm dying to hear comments on these!

    *AR 670-1 update
    -Many changes are coming to AR 670-1. This is just a summary of some of them. Do not begin to enforce until the regulation is complete and published!
    -New revision of the regulation will define the following terms; eccentric, faddish, conservative, inconspicuous, unsightly, hair braids/plaits.
    -AR 670-1 will be a punitive order in the future.
    -Sideburns will not extend below the top of the ear.
    -Soldier will be clean shaven on and off duty.
    -Female and male hair grooming standards will become more restrictive and better defined.
    -Females will be allowed to put their hair into a pony tail during PT.
    -Males will be prohibited from wearing cosmetics to include nail polish, females may wear cosmetics conservatively, but can only wear nail polish in service, mess or dress uniforms.
    -Females fingernail length will not exceed ¼ in, no fake nails, add-ons, or extensions will be authorized.
    -Tattoos will not be visible above the neck line when the IPFU is worn. Tattoos will not extend below the wrist line and not on the hands. Sleeve tattoos will be prohibited (this one will be grandfathered).
    -Soldiers will not walk while engaged in activities that require the hand salute. (eating, cell phone use, etc…)
    -ACUs will not be commercially pressed; hand ironing of the ACU (UCP) only will be authorized.
    -Bags worn over the shoulder will only be black or ACU without logos.
    -The new regulation will specify civilian clothes standards both on and off duty and both on and off post.
    -No visible body piercings on or off duty and on or off post, males will never wear earrings. Ear gauging will be unauthorized.
    -No dental ornamentation will be authorized.
    -Soldiers will be authorized to wear authorized ballistic eyewear in garrison.
    -Officers will wear non-subdued rank on their headgear in garrison.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    82
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0

    Default Re: Upcoming changes to AR 670-1

    Er, source? Obviously many of these changes are controversial to state the least. Until they are official and until a source on these changes are given, I’ll believe it (and comment on it) when I see it.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    100
    Likes (Received)
    1
    Thanks (Received)
    0

    Default Re: Upcoming changes to AR 670-1

    Some of these new standards seem overboard. Dictating your cleanliness and fashion style while off post/off duty?

    What is your source for this? post a link.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    At your mom's house
    Posts
    252
    Likes (Received)
    25
    Thanks (Received)
    1

    Default Re: Upcoming changes to AR 670-1

    This was from an email I received yesterday about the SMA's BOD that took place last week. My guess (and this is only a guess) is that some of this stuff is going to have to be revised prior to implementation. I can certainly agree with SOME of it, but telling me I have to shave every freakin' day, even on leave and weekends? Telling my I have to have my sideburns at the top of my ears? Then you don't have sideburns, right? There are some who take liberties with AR 670-1...we all know that. But who's to decide what's acceptable off-duty attire? If the new reg says you can't wear anything "offensive," then that's pretty open to interpretation because anything can be offensive to at least one person.

    There is no link to my source...it was on a Word document I got as an attachment to an email. A retired SGM who works here in the Pentagon sent it to us as an FYI. I have no idea when this will actually take effect, as it was not stated.

    What I posted was just a snippet of what's on the sheet. There are other changes, such as to NCOES courses, that are supposed to be taking place as well.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Fighting for your freedoms!
    Posts
    529
    Likes (Received)
    17
    Thanks (Received)
    6

    Default Re: Upcoming changes to AR 670-1

    Sidesburns cannot go below the top of the ear? It should be middle. Top of the ear does not make sense.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    98
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0

    Default Re: Upcoming changes to AR 670-1

    Quote Originally Posted by MisterBen View Post
    Sidesburns cannot go below the top of the ear? It should be middle. Top of the ear does not make sense.
    I was going to say the same thing. I'd have to have a diagonal line from the corner of my forehead to behind my ear to conform to this regulation.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    98
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0

    Default Re: Upcoming changes to AR 670-1

    Overall, nothing on this list surprises me. I still don't understand the purpose of writing something into regulation that you can't possibly enforce, i.e., what people wear when on leave (really on leave, not just weekends on post). I'd like to see them specify, like: "Except for when on leave status...".

    Regulating civilian attire will be interesting. I don't understand how this will be accomplished and I am not convinced of the merits behind it. I think this has the potential to be more of a hinderance and distraction then solving any problems.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Pasadena, California
    Posts
    735
    Likes (Received)
    101
    Thanks (Received)
    11

    Default Re: Upcoming changes to AR 670-1

    Man you soldiers cry like little babies once actual rules come to implement dress and uniform standards. The Marine Corps has already had most of these for over a decade, and started a couple of the others in the last 4 years (ie sleeve tattoos). I am on KAF right now and there are so many nasty soldiers that just feel they can do whatever the hell they want and no one will say anything. It is sickening.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Pasadena, California
    Posts
    735
    Likes (Received)
    101
    Thanks (Received)
    11

    Default Re: Upcoming changes to AR 670-1

    Actually it is easy to implement out in town. IF you have actual NCO's, SNCO's, and Officer willing to stand up to the little punk E3/E4 and tell them to fix their shit

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Bordentown, NJ
    Posts
    1,940
    Likes (Received)
    23
    Thanks (Received)
    8

    Default Re: Upcoming changes to AR 670-1

    What is coming down the line is a trip back to the future. That is, I see that many things we had when I first joined are on their way back. Hallelujah. Yes, I was still on Active Duty when many of these items first changed, and all of the people I knew at the time knew that things wouldn’t last: we all felt that sooner or later, our progeny would take things too far, and a Conservative SMA would bring the hammer down. Well, if this one is really serious, I would get ready to comply in short order if I were you; this SMA strikes me as being a reincarnation of Gunny R. Lee Ermey; there were lots of NCOs in the Regular Army who were just like him, and this one seems to have hunkered down and went along with the program until he got to where he is, and can now do something about the things he doesn’t like.

    1. AR 670-1 will be a punitive order in the future. AR 670-1 was a punitive order at the time I joined, and I forget when it ceased being one in the past.
    2. Sideburns will not extend below the top of the ear. This was the case when I first joined, and it kept several Post Barber Shops in full service.
    3. Soldier will be clean shaven on and off duty. Ditto about the Post Barber Shop(s). This one can be easily enforced for those who remain On Post, and for those who live Off Post, but come to work in the Duty Uniform. We African Americans broke the back on this one. Many of us ended up getting Pseudofolliculitis barbae because of the number of shaves we had to do to remain Clean Shaven, and things got worse when we switched to Magic Shave depilatory in order to remain In Compliance, and got burned. I standardized on Magic Shave because that was the only way I could shave, and come away without visible stubble, and only have to shave once a day. Those of us who really didn’t want to go through the hassle and seriously had the affliction, would go on Sick Call and got a Profile for the affliction, and when enough of us showed up for Formation with Profiles in the Upper Left Pocket, that part of AR 670-1 was changed accordingly.
    4. Female and male hair grooming standards will become more restrictive and better defined. This one has been changed a whole lot since the days of World War One, when Women first showed up in Uniform. When I first joined, Men had to visit the Post Barber Shop(s) once a week to remain In Compliance. Why? Because the PBS always had photographic samples of the haircuts that were in compliance with AR 670-1, often with numbers below the pictures, and you would get in the Barber’s Chair, and ask for “Give me a number X”. To show you how this one has remained active in the Guard, we had two guys in my Unit who brought their Hair Clipper Kits with them to Saudi Arabia, and, on layovers at each of our Bivouac Sites, they would set up in one of the GP Mediums, and charge a Dollar for a Hair Cut and 50 Cents for a Trim. Yes, my Unit remained In Compliance with the Haircut Regulation as a result.
    5. Females will be allowed to put their hair into a pony tail during PT. This one is totally new, since Females were never allowed to wear their hair long enough to be put up in a Pony Tail; the limit was always a Bun.
    6. Males will be prohibited from wearing cosmetics to include nail polish, females may wear cosmetics conservatively, but can only wear nail polish in service, mess or dress uniforms. This one adheres closely to current policy with a few serious modifications, especially the last clause. Originally, Females were only permitted to wear cosmetics when in Civilian Clothes.
    7. Females fingernail length will not exceed ¼ in, no fake nails, add-ons, or extensions will be authorized. This one is simply a clarification of existing policy. Originally, Females had the same requirement as Males
    8. Tattoos will not be visible above the neck line when the IPFU is worn. Tattoos will not extend below the wrist line and not on the hands. Sleeve tattoos will be prohibited (this one will be grandfathered). This one is totally new. Originally, only the Navy and the Marine Corps allowed any sort of Tattoos for any reason, at any time. It was only during Vietnam that they started to show up with any regularity.
    9. Soldiers will not walk while engaged in activities that require the hand salute. (eating, cell phone use, etc…). This one represents a clarification, since it is based on the age-old prohibition of carrying an Umbrella.
    10. ACUs will not be commercially pressed; hand ironing of the ACU (UCP) only will be authorized. This is one that we thought had a stake in its heart when we did away with it. The original Fatigues required Starching and Ironing, and AR-670-1 had a paragraph that said as much. In those days, there was no way for Bachelor Soldiers to wash, starch and iron the fatigues themselves because the Post Laundry had a monopoly on such tasks, and Barracks had yet to gain Washing Machines. With the arrival of the BDU/DBDU, this paragraph was withdrawn, since we were told to NOT starch or Iron the BDU/DBDU under any circumstances.
    11. Bags worn over the shoulder will only be black or ACU without logos. This is a twist on the original paragraph. When I came in, only Females were permitted to carry shoulder bags.
    12. The new regulation will specify civilian clothes standards both on and off duty and both on and off post. This one really brings back memories. This is one of the reasons why Posts originally had the MPs on the Gate stop all POVs, and visually inspect all obvious troops. If you didn’t meet AR 670-1 Standards, you couldn’t leave post. If there was bus transportation between the Post and Downtown, the MPs would board at the gate, and remove anyone who violated AR 670-1. In areas where the Troops spent a lot of time Downtown, MPs would roam the Downtown area, and would stop obvious Troops and inspect them on the spot. Those that violated the AR 670-1 Standards would find an Article 15 waiting for them upon their return to Post, or on the next Duty Day.
    13. No visible body piercings on or off duty and on or off post, males will never wear earrings. Ear gauging will be unauthorized; -No dental ornamentation will be authorized. AR 670-1 has always said this in various forms of language.
    14. Soldiers will be authorized to wear authorized ballistic eyewear in garrison. This one made me laugh. Why? Because when I was on Active Duty, Sunglasses – other than those prescribed by the Post Optometrist – were totally prohibited. This liberalization should be quite welcome.
    15. Officers will wear non-subdued rank on their headgear in garrison. This one restores the Army –almost – to the pre-Vietnam War uniform dress. Prior to the Vietnam War, there was no such thing as Subdued Rank Insignia. It was instituted to reduce the possibility of being shot in Combat. The current paragraph in AR 670-1 on the subject is the original one, except that wear on the Beret was added. This change will be a pain in the butt UNLESS people start buying two sets of headgear, one with Subdued Rank, and the other with Full Color Rank.
    SSG Cornelius Seon, USA (Retired)

    We must respect the other fellow’s religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart.

    H.L. Mencken

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •