BulletForge
← BulletForge Academy

Common Rejection Patterns

Senior NCOs send drafts back for a small set of recognizable reasons. Learn the five most common rejection patterns and you'll catch them in your own draft before someone else has to.

// 01The regulation, verbatim

"Bullet comments will— (1) Be short, concise, and to the point. Bullets will not be longer than two lines, preferably one, and no more than one bullet to a line. (2) Start with action words (verbs) or possessive pronouns (his or her); personal pronouns (he or she) may be used; use past tense when addressing how the NCO performed and his or her contributions made during the rating period. (3) Be double-spaced between bullets. (4) Be preceded by a small letter "o" to designate the start of the comment. (5) Support the box checks by rating officials. (6) Use a specific example only once; therefore, the rater must decide under which attributes or competencies the bullet fits best or is most applicable."

DA PAM 623-3 ¶3-6b

// 02Pattern 1: Box-check mismatch

Exceeded-tier language under a Met box, or Met-tier language under an Exceeded box. The regulation says bullets "support the box checks." When they contradict, the senior NCO catches it on first read. Fix: align the bullet's tier vocabulary with the box (see lesson 2.6 for the tier-bleed audit).

"Bullet comments will— ... (5) Support the box checks by rating officials. (6) Use a specific example only once; therefore, the rater must decide under which attributes or competencies the bullet fits best or is most applicable."

DA PAM 623-3 ¶3-6b

Checkpoint

A bullet says "consistently led the brigade NCOPD across all four quarters" and the box check is Met. What is the problem?

  • Nothing — strong Met
  • Box-check mismatch (bleed up): Far Exceeded language under Met box correct
  • The bullet needs more specifics
  • "Consistently" should be "often"

"Consistently across four quarters" is Far Exceeded language (Marker 2 consistent initiative). Under a Met box, the contradiction signals either rater inflation or under-checked box. Per ¶3-6b(5), bullets must support the box check. Fix: align them.

// 03Pattern 2: Potential language in a rater bullet

"Has potential to," "will become," "ready for the next level." The regulation reserves potential to the senior rater. Fix: rewrite every forward-looking phrase as a past-tense anchored claim (see lesson 3.2).

Checkpoint

Which rewrite is required for "Has the potential to lead at the next level"?

  • Add "demonstrated" to make it "demonstrated potential"
  • Rephrase as "shows promise to lead at the next level"
  • Anchor in past action: "Filled in as Platoon Sergeant for 47 days during PSG R&R; zero deficiencies on the QTB" correct
  • Leave it; the bullet works as is

Adding "demonstrated" or substituting "shows promise" still points at potential. The only fix per ¶1-40c is anchoring in past action.

// 04Pattern 3: Non-rating-period content

The bullet describes something that happened before the rating period started or after it ended. The regulation is explicit: comments must pertain exclusively to the rating period. Anything outside gets cut.

"Comments will not exceed the space provided on evaluation reports. Additionally, comments must pertain exclusively to the rating period of the evaluation report; comments related to nonrated periods will not be included..."

AR 623-3 ¶3-18a

Checkpoint

Per ¶3-18a, what is required of every bullet on an NCOER?

  • It must include the rating period dates
  • It must pertain exclusively to the rating period correct
  • It can reference prior rating periods if relevant
  • It must be approved by the senior rater first

The verbatim text says "comments must pertain exclusively to the rating period of the evaluation report; comments related to nonrated periods will not be included." If an event happened before the rating period started or after it ended, the bullet cannot reference it.

// 05Pattern 4: No quantified impact

The bullet describes an action but does not say what happened. "Led the range qualification." How many Soldiers? What was the qual rate? What changed? Without a number or a specific named outcome, the bullet does no work for the box check.

Checkpoint

Which version is the stronger bullet?

  • "Led the company range qualification"
  • "Led company range operations supporting 120 qualifications; raised company qual rate from 78% to 91% within the rating period" correct
  • "Was responsible for the company range qualification"
  • "Has demonstrated effective range leadership"

Only the second option has a quantified action + impact + scope. The others are vague, stative, or potential. The board can use only the second.

// 06Pattern 5: Duplicate accomplishment across sections

The same event appears twice with slightly different verbs. The regulation says "use a specific example only once" (¶3-6b(6)). Fix: pick the section where the event most clearly demonstrates the leader quality being tested, delete from the other section, find a different real accomplishment to fill the gap.

If no different accomplishment exists for the other section, that section's box check probably cannot be supported at the tier the rater intended — and that is information the rater needs.

Checkpoint

Your draft has the brigade ammo resupply accomplishment in both Achieves and Leads Others. What does ¶3-6b(6) require?

  • Pick the section where it most clearly demonstrates the leader quality; delete from the other correct
  • Use it in both with different verbs
  • Reduce it to a one-line summary in each section
  • Move it to Overall

The verbatim rule: "Use a specific example only once; therefore, the rater must decide under which attributes or competencies the bullet fits best or is most applicable." Pick one section. Find a different real accomplishment for the other.

// 07Worked examples

Worked example · Exceeded

Clean bullet, passes all 5 checks.

Mentored three E-4s into E-5, two on first-look, through weekly NCOPD sessions and structured individual training plans across the rating period.

Tier vocabulary matches Exceeded box. No potential language. Rating-period scope ("across the rating period"). Quantified impact ("three E-4s, two on first-look"). Used only once (Develops Others section). Passes all five checks.

Worked example · Did Not Meet

Fails patterns 1 and 4.

First-rate squad leader, top performer across the unit.

"First-rate, top performer" is Far Exceeded vocabulary — bleed up if under a lower box. No specifics, no quantified impact, no scope. Two patterns violated. Fix: rewrite around the actual past actions that demonstrate the squad leadership.

// 08Practice: name the tier

Read each bullet, decide the tier it honestly supports, then check the answer underneath.

Answer · Did Not Meet

Led the platoon to victory in the brigade physical fitness competition during the prior rating period.

"During the prior rating period" violates ¶3-18a. Bullets must pertain exclusively to the current rating period. Rewrite using only the current rating period's events.

Answer · Met

Achieved consistently above standard performance throughout the rating period.

"Above standard performance" is Exceeded vocabulary. "Consistently throughout the rating period" is Far Exceeded frequency. No specifics, no quantified impact, no scope. Pattern 4 (no quantified impact) and likely Pattern 1 (box mismatch with whatever box the rater checks). Rewrite around specific past actions.

Answer · Exceeded

Often took disciplined initiative across the rating period; rebuilt the section's M4 qualification training cycle; raised section qual rate from 71% to 89% within the cycle.

Markers: often take disciplined initiative; immediate impact

Clean Exceeded bullet. No potential language. Rating-period scope. Quantified impact. Single accomplishment that fits the section. Passes all five checks.

Answer · Did Not Meet

Will continue the unit's tradition of excellence in the next rating period.

"Will continue... in the next rating period" violates two patterns: future tense (Pattern 2 potential language) and non-rating-period content (Pattern 3). Rewrite as past action in the current rating period.

Answer · Far Exceeded

Built the battalion's NCOPD curriculum, instructing 47 NCOs across three companies; curriculum now in use at brigade level; ran the program every quarter through the rating period.

Markers: consistent initiative; leadership multiplier; enduring effect

Clean Far Exceeded bullet. Action + impact + scope + magnitude. No potential language. Rating-period scope. Quantified impact. Single accomplishment. Three markers fire. Passes all five checks.

Answer · Did Not Meet

Led the company through quarterly readiness inspection; passed all evaluated tasks. Led the company through quarterly readiness inspection; achieved zero deficiencies.

Same event described twice with slightly different verbs. Violates ¶3-6b(6). The rater needs a different accomplishment for the second placement. If no different accomplishment exists, the section cannot support the box check.

// 09What most get wrong

Raters often draft all bullets in one sitting and submit without a second pass. By the time the senior NCO catches one of the five patterns above, the rater has to track down receipts, re-edit, and re-circulate. That cycle of rework is what burns rating-period time.

The rewrite move: build a five-question checklist for every draft before you send it up. (1) Every bullet's tier language matches its box? (2) No "has potential to" / "will become" in any rater bullet? (3) Every event happened during the rating period? (4) Every bullet has a number OR a named specific outcome? (5) No accomplishment appears twice? If yes to all five, you've saved a round of rework.

// 10Regulations cited in this lesson

  • DA PAM 623-3 ¶3-6b
  • AR 623-3 ¶3-18a

// 11More in Writing Patterns

The facts behind a good bullet get written down in February, not remembered in November. The free Accomplishment Log keeps them.

Get the free log

Writing one right now? Open BulletForge.

← All Academy lessons