A UCMJ charge that does not result in conviction is not necessarily invisible to a promotion board. The military records system maintains information about adverse administrative actions, referred evaluation reports, and other documentation that was generated during the course of a disciplinary process. When a service member’s file contains this kind of material, a promotion board may see it and weigh it even if the underlying charge was ultimately dismissed or resulted in acquittal.
The practical implication is that a service member who goes through a UCMJ process and emerges without a conviction still faces potential career consequences that require active management. Requesting correction of the record, ensuring that evaluation reports accurately reflect the outcome of the case, and understanding what a future promotion board is and is not permitted to consider are all steps that a service member must take affirmatively to protect a career that the legal system has nominally vindicated.
What Promotion Boards Are Permitted to See in a Soldier’s File
Military promotion boards review the official military personnel file of each eligible candidate and assess that file against the standards and priorities the board has been directed to apply. The materials contained in that file vary by component and by record management practices, but they typically include performance evaluation reports, awards and decorations, assignment history, professional education records, and any derogatory information that has been filed in accordance with applicable regulations.
Derogatory information that has been properly processed and filed according to applicable regulations is available to promotion boards. A referred performance evaluation, a general officer memorandum of reprimand that has been filed in the official file, or documentation of prior misconduct that has been placed in the record through established procedures are all potentially visible to a board. The fact that an underlying charge was dismissed or resulted in acquittal does not automatically remove the documentation that was generated during the process, and that documentation may be the most significant adverse material the board sees.
How Adverse Administrative Actions From a Dismissed Charge Stay in the Record
When a UCMJ charge is preferred, administrative actions often run parallel to the criminal process. A referred performance evaluation report documenting the period of investigation, a general officer memorandum of reprimand issued in connection with the alleged conduct, or documentation of unit-level adverse actions can all be processed and filed in the service member’s official records even when the underlying criminal charge is later dismissed or results in acquittal.
These administrative documents do not automatically disappear when the criminal matter is resolved favorably. Removing them from the official record requires a separate affirmative process: a petition to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records, a request through the appropriate administrative removal process for letters of reprimand, or a formal challenge to a referred evaluation report through the evaluation appeals process. Each of these processes has its own requirements, timelines, and standards for success. A service member who fails to pursue them will enter the next promotion board with a file that tells a story the criminal outcome does not.
The Effect of a Referred OER or NCOER on Board Outcomes
A referred Officer Evaluation Report or Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Report is among the most damaging documents a service member can carry into a promotion board. A referred report signals to the board that the rating chain concluded the service member’s performance during the rated period was not fully satisfactory, or that there was information significant enough to require the report to be sent to the rated officer for comment. Even if the rated service member’s comment on the referred report explains the context and outcome of the underlying UCMJ matter, the report itself is visible and adverse.
Promotion boards that see a referred evaluation in an otherwise strong file will weigh the referred report as evidence that the service member experienced a serious adverse event during that period of service. Whether the board credits the explanation provided in the comments, and how much weight it gives the referred report relative to the overall record, depends on the board’s composition, the instructions provided, and the quality of the explanation offered. A service member with a referred OER should work with counsel to ensure the comment is as persuasive as possible and should simultaneously pursue removal of the report through available correction channels.
Requesting File Corrections Before a Promotion Board Convenes
A service member who has adverse documentation in their official record from a UCMJ process that did not result in conviction should pursue file corrections before their next scheduled promotion board. The BCMR and relevant administrative correction processes have established timelines, and a petition filed too close to a board date may not be resolved before the board convenes. Planning for file corrections should begin as soon as the UCMJ process concludes favorably, not when the next board is imminent.
The correction petition should specifically identify each adverse document that is requested to be removed, explain why each document is unjust or inaccurate given the outcome of the underlying UCMJ matter, and provide the documentary evidence of that outcome as support. A persuasive petition that connects the removal request to specific evidence of the favorable outcome is more likely to succeed than one that makes a general argument that the file should be cleaned up.
How Board Members Are Instructed to Weigh Adverse Information
Promotion board members receive specific instructions about how to weigh adverse information in an official military personnel file. These instructions typically direct board members to consider the complete record, to weigh adverse information in the context of the overall career, and to assess whether the adverse information represents a disqualifying pattern or an isolated event. The instructions do not direct the board to treat a dismissed UCMJ charge the same as a conviction.
Understanding the specific instructions boards are given, and how those instructions interact with the specific adverse documentation in the service member’s file, is important for assessing the realistic impact of the adverse material. In some cases a single adverse document in an otherwise strong file will not prevent promotion. In others the nature or timing of the adverse material makes its effect more severe. Defense counsel who advise on post-UCMJ career management should assess the likely board impact specifically rather than generally reassuring the service member that a favorable outcome will cure all file problems.
This content is provided for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Military law is complex and fact-specific. If you are facing a UCMJ investigation, court-martial, administrative separation, or any other military legal matter, consult a qualified military defense attorney before taking any action.