The Officer Evaluation Report (OER) is the United States Army’s primary document for assessing a commissioned officer’s performance and potential for future service. This report is a foundation for critical career decisions, including selections for promotion, competitive assignments, and advanced military education. While most OERs are filed directly into an officer’s official record, a specific administrative status known as a “referred” OER signifies the presence of significant negative content. Understanding the mandatory process and the consequences of this status is paramount for any officer navigating the military personnel system.
Understanding the Officer Evaluation Report (OER)
The OER system provides Headquarters, Department of the Army (HQDA) with an assessment of each officer for use in selection board processes. The standard document, known as the DA Form 67-10 series, evaluates an officer’s demonstrated performance and potential for increased responsibility. It helps personnel managers determine appropriate assignments and utilization across the force.
The evaluation involves a rating chain that typically includes a Rater and a Senior Rater, who provide distinct perspectives. The Rater assesses specific performance during the rating period. The Senior Rater assesses the officer’s overall potential compared to their peers. Selection boards rely on these assessments to identify highly qualified officers for career progression.
Defining a Referred OER
A referred OER is an evaluation containing derogatory or negative information, which mandates a formal administrative action before the report is finalized and sent to HQDA. This process is governed by Army Regulation 623-3 and is required to ensure the rated officer is formally notified of the adverse content. The referral is not discretionary; it is triggered automatically when specific negative criteria are met within the report’s structure.
The referral process provides the officer an opportunity to acknowledge the negative content and submit a formal response for the record. This prevents the officer from claiming ignorance of the evaluation’s severe nature before it is permanently filed. A referred OER carries a unique administrative status that highlights the negative assessment to all future review boards.
Performance and Administrative Triggers for Referral
The referral status is triggered by specific, objectively negative entries or comments within the evaluation report. These mandatory referral criteria are defined precisely within Army regulations, covering both performance failures and administrative deficiencies. The objective nature of these triggers removes subjectivity from the referral requirement. Any OER containing one of these criteria must be processed through the formal referral channel.
Derogatory or Negative Comments
The inclusion of specific negative language in the narrative portions of the report mandates a referral. This includes derogatory remarks concerning the rated officer’s values, leader attributes, skills, or actions. A rater or senior rater’s narrative comment falling below expected standards compels the referral process, even if the numerical assessment is not the lowest possible. If derogatory information is deemed verified by the rating chain, it will trigger the referral.
Negative Rating by the Senior Rater
A referral is automatically triggered by a senior rater’s potential evaluation of “Do not Promote” in the final assessment block. This rating explicitly recommends against career progression and is highly damaging. Additionally, a senior rater’s check in the bottom two boxes of the potential evaluation section, indicating lower potential, will also trigger the referral. This ensures the officer is formally aware of a career-ending assessment before it is sent to the promotion selection board.
Failure to Meet Standards
Failure to meet mandatory Army standards, even if unrelated to daily duty performance, is a direct trigger for referral. A report must be referred if it contains a “Fail” entry for the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) or noncompliance with height and weight standards. Similarly, a rater’s performance evaluation of “Unsatisfactory” in the performance assessment section automatically requires referral. These entries represent a failure to meet basic military requirements that are non-negotiable for continued service.
Administrative Failures
A “relief for cause” report must be referred. This report is submitted when an officer is officially removed from a position due to substandard performance or misconduct. This type of OER is required regardless of the rating period duration and represents a severe administrative action. The referral ensures the officer has the opportunity to respond to the removal action documented in the report.
The Mandatory Referral and Review Process
Once a rating official determines the OER contains mandatory referral criteria, the administrative process is non-negotiable. The Senior Rater must place an “X” in the appropriate referral block on the OER form. The report is then formally delivered to the rated officer for acknowledgment and signature.
The officer must sign the OER, indicating whether they intend to submit a formal comment. This signature is a prerequisite for the report to be forwarded to HQDA. If the officer submits comments, they are enclosed with the original OER and forwarded through the chain of command to the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) for permanent filing.
Officer Rights and the Rebuttal Process
The referral process provides the rated officer the right to submit a formal statement, or “comment,” that will be permanently attached to the OER. This rebuttal allows the officer to present their perspective on the negative assessment and is a key part of their defense. The comment must be factual, concise, and focused solely on matters directly related to the evaluation, and it is limited in length with no external attachments allowed.
Commander’s or Commandant’s Inquiry
Beyond the initial comment, an officer can seek redress through the Commander’s or Commandant’s Inquiry process. This must be requested within 60 days of the officer’s signature on the OER. The inquiry is conducted by a commander or commandant in the supervisory chain above the rating officials. Its purpose is to determine if an illegality, injustice, or regulatory violation occurred during the evaluation process. It corrects procedural errors or factual inaccuracies, but does not resolve differences in opinion regarding performance.
Appeal to the Army Special Review Board
If the inquiry process is unsuccessful or if the officer seeks a more comprehensive review, a formal appeal can be submitted to the Army Special Review Board. The appeal must be submitted within three years of the OER’s “Thru” date. The burden of proof rests entirely on the officer, who must provide clear and convincing evidence that the report is inaccurate, unjust, or administratively flawed. A successful appeal can result in the OER being completely removed or the deletion of specific negative comments.
Long-Term Career Implications
A referred OER, even with a rebuttal attached, is a major obstacle that can derail an officer’s career trajectory. Promotion and selection boards review the officer’s entire record, and a referred report immediately signals documented performance or conduct issues. Since selection boards spend minimal time reviewing files, the presence of a referred OER often causes a file to stand out negatively.
The impact is most acutely felt in selection for competitive opportunities, such as Professional Military Education (PME) or command assignments. An officer with a referred report is at a severe disadvantage when competing against peers with positive records. The negative evaluation can lead to non-selection for promotion; officers who are twice non-selected face mandatory separation from the service. A referred OER can ultimately trigger the Army Officer Elimination process, prematurely ending an officer’s service.