No Potential Rule
Rater bullets are not allowed to speculate about your future. The regulation is one sentence and it's the rule that gets violated most often.
// 01The verbatim rule
The rule lives in one paragraph. Read it before the catalog of violations below.
"For OERs and NCOERs, rater comments are specific to performance-based assessments. Intermediate raters (OER only) may comment on both performance and potential when writing assessments. Potential comments are reserved for senior raters on both OERs and NCOERs."
AR 623-3 ¶1-40c
Checkpoint
Per ¶1-40c, where can potential comments appear on the NCOER?
"Potential comments are reserved for senior raters on both OERs and NCOERs." The senior rater is the only place on the NCOER where the future can be discussed.
// 02The forbidden phrases
These are the phrases that violate the rule. Every NCO has written at least one of them. Memorize the list — the rewrite move below applies to all of them.
- "has potential to..."
- "will become..."
- "capable of..."
- "shows promise..."
- "future leader"
- "ready for [a role they haven't held]"
- "destined for..."
- "promotable based on potential"
Each one points at the future. Each one belongs to the senior rater. None of them survive in a rater bullet.
Checkpoint
Which of these phrases is acceptable in a rater bullet?
The third option describes a past action that actually happened during the rating period. It can support a rater box check. The other three are potential statements about the future — senior-rater territory.
// 03The rewrite move
The rewrite for every forbidden phrase is the same: anchor in past action. Watch the transformations:
- "Has potential to lead at the platoon level" → "Led the platoon for 47 days during PSG R&R; zero deficiencies on the QTB"
- "Capable of running larger training events" → "Ran the battalion's largest STX of the year; 240 Soldiers, two-week duration, zero incidents"
- "Shows promise as an instructor" → "Instructed the brigade NCOPD twice in the rating period; received 'excellent' on both end-of-course critiques"
- "Future leader" → Delete and replace with a specific past leadership action
The test: read your bullet without the recommendation. Does it stand as a statement about something that happened? If yes, you can add the recommendation. If the bullet collapses into vague qualities, the recommendation is doing all the work — and that is the wrong direction.
// 04Recommendation language is the edge case
Recommendation language sits at the edge. "Promote ahead of peers" is allowed — but only when anchored in a specific past achievement cited in the same bullet. "Promote ahead of peers — led the brigade ITX after the senior NCO was medevac'd" is a recommendation tied to demonstrated performance. "Promote ahead of peers — shows leadership potential" is just potential speculation with the recommendation tacked on.
The same applies to "select for First Sergeant," "school selection," and similar phrases. They are allowed when tied to past action. They are forbidden when used alone to imply future capability.
Checkpoint
Which of these recommendation phrasings is acceptable per AR 623-3 ¶1-40c?
The second option anchors the recommendation in a specific past achievement (the SOP build). The other three use potential language as the anchor, which violates the rule.
// 05Worked examples
Worked example · Did Not Meet
A SSG performed competently during the rating period. The rater wanted to flag him for promotion.
Has potential to be one of the top NCOs in the battalion.
"Has potential to" is forbidden. No specific past action. No quantified result. A board reads the bullet, identifies the potential violation, and discounts the report. The rater achieved nothing for the NCO they were trying to advocate for.
Worked example · Exceeded
Same SSG. The rater rewrote the bullet to anchor in actual performance.
Promote ahead of peers — served as Acting Platoon Sergeant for 47 days during PSG R&R; zero deficiencies on the QTB, sustained training schedule through the transition.
"Promote ahead of peers" is recommendation language, allowed because anchored in past action ("served as Acting Platoon Sergeant for 47 days"). The quantified result ("zero deficiencies") supports Exceeded. The bullet does the rater's intended work — advocating for the NCO — while staying within the rule.
// 06Practice: name the tier
Read each bullet, decide the tier it honestly supports, then check the answer underneath.
Answer · Did Not Meet
Has the potential to lead at the next level.
"Has the potential to" is the canonical violation. No past action, no specifics. Senior-rater territory. Rewrite as past action: what did this NCO do that suggests they could lead at the next level?
Answer · Did Not Meet
Will excel as a Drill Sergeant.
"Will excel" is future-tense potential. The rater cannot project future role performance. Senior rater can.
Answer · Far Exceeded
Filled in as Senior Drill Sergeant for the company's BCT cycle when the SDS was injured; consistently maintained training standards across the full ten-week cycle; cycle qual rate sustained at 94%.
Markers: consistent initiative; leadership multiplier; enduring effect
No potential language. Specific past action ("Filled in as SDS for the BCT cycle"). "Consistently across the full ten-week cycle" is the frequency marker. The cycle qual rate is the immediate-impact qualification. The multiplier is implied through the BCT-scale impact. Strong Far Exceeded.
Answer · Did Not Meet
Capable of running brigade-level training events.
"Capable of" is potential. Rewrite: "Ran the battalion's largest STX of the year — 240 Soldiers, two-week duration, zero incidents."
Answer · Far Exceeded
Built the brigade ammo SOP now in use as the division template; trained six company supply NCOs who ran the next ITX without rater involvement; division qual rates sustained up 18% through the next quarter.
Markers: enduring effect; leadership multiplier; extraordinary performance
SOP in use is enduring effect. Six NCOs trained / division-wide impact is multiplier. Division-scale work is extraordinary for the typical NCO grade. Three markers fire. No potential language anywhere.
Answer · Did Not Meet
Promotable based on demonstrated potential.
"Promotable based on potential" is the most explicit form of the violation. Rewrite by replacing "demonstrated potential" with the actual past action that demonstrates promotion readiness.
// 07What most get wrong
The trap is when an NCO IS genuinely high-performing and the rater feels every accomplishment under-sells them. The temptation: add "has potential to lead at the next level" to round out the picture. That phrase gets the bullet sent back.
The rewrite move: every time you reach for "has potential to X," change it to "did X." If you cannot point to an instance where they did X, the claim doesn't belong on the rater bullet. Save it for the senior rater conversation.
// 08Regulations cited in this lesson
- AR 623-3 ¶1-40c
// 09More in Foundations
The facts behind a good bullet get written down in February, not remembered in November. The free Accomplishment Log keeps them.
Get the free logWriting one right now? Open BulletForge.