AR 600-37 Explained: Unfavorable Information, Where a Reprimand Gets Filed, and How It Comes Out

01The short answer

Every cell is our paraphrase of a passage quoted in the section named in the last column.

02The restricted folder is not a hiding place

The enlisted promotion regulation, in its paragraph on what boards see:

... The restricted portion of the AMHRR is authorized for use during the SFC, MSG, and CSM/SGM evaluation board only, consistent with the corresponding board’s MOI. AR 600-8-19, ¶4-4b, p.56

And AR 600-37 keeps restricted-portion information in play for its own decisions:

Unfavorable information that has been directed for filing in the restricted portion of the AMHRR may be considered for making determinations under this regulation. AR 600-37, ¶3-2e, p.3

Soldiers selected for the Sergeants Major Academy get one more look:

All Soldiers selected to attend the SGM-A are subject to personnel suitability screening. This process includes review of information contained on the restricted section of the AMHRR, substantiated DA Inspector General reports, and reports filed with the U.S. Army Crime Records Center. ... AR 600-8-19, ¶1-40, pp.26-27

Our reading of ¶4-4b, ¶3-2e and ¶1-40: moving a reprimand to the restricted portion takes it out of the performance folder. It does not take it out of the senior NCO boards named in ¶4-4b, out of SGM-A suitability screening, or out of later decisions under AR 600-37. Plan your career with that in mind, not with the version told in the motor pool.

03What AR 600-37 covers, and the memorandum itself

The regulation applies to the Regular Army, the Army National Guard/Army National Guard of the United States, and the U.S. Army Reserve, unless otherwise stated (title page). Its purpose:

This regulation sets forth policies and procedures to ensure the best interests of both the Army and Soldiers are served by authorizing unfavorable information to be placed in, transferred within, or removed from an individual’s Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR). AR 600-37, ¶1-1, p.1

What counts as unfavorable information:

Any credible derogatory information that may reflect on a Soldier’s character, integrity, trustworthiness, or reliability and includes letters of reprimand and UCMJ, Art. 15. AR 600-37, Glossary, Section II, p.21

The regulation’s term for the document is a memorandum of reprimand, admonition, or censure. “GOMOR” is common usage, not the regulation’s word: the acronym never appears in AR 600-37, and the full phrase appears once, in the paragraph on sex-related offense packets, which mentions “supporting documents for the offense (Article 15/General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, Court-Martial Conviction) for filing in the AMHRR” (¶3-4f(2), pp.4-5). A memorandum headed for the AMHRR must state that it was imposed as an administrative measure, not as punishment under Article 15 (¶3-5c(2), p.6).

A reprimand imposed as Article 15 punishment is a different animal, governed by AR 27-10 (¶3-5g). For that path, see the Article 15 statement and appeal guide.

04Who may issue it, and who may put it in your AMHRR

These are two different authorities. For an enlisted recipient, the local file rule:

Authority to issue and direct the filing of a memorandum of reprimand, admonition, and/or censure in the local file (after referral to the person concerned pursuant to para 3-7) of enlisted personnel is restricted to the recipient’s immediate commander (or a higher commander in his or her chain of command), school commandants, any general officer (GO) (to include those frocked to the rank of brigadier general), or an officer exercising general court-martial jurisdiction over the recipient. Immediate supervisors of enlisted personnel also have authority to issue memoranda of reprimand, and may also direct filing in the local file, but only if serving in one of the capacities listed above. AR 600-37, ¶3-5a(1), p.5

For officers, ¶3-5a(2) adds the rating chain under AR 623-3 and requires the commander or GO to be senior to the recipient. Filing in the AMHRR is a separate authority:

A memorandum, regardless of the issuing authority, may be filed in the AMHRR, and managed by HRC or the proper State Adjutant General (for Army National Guard personnel) upon the order of a GO (to include one frocked to the rank of brigadier general). The GO directing filing must: exercise GCMCA over the recipient, or be the GCMCA’s designee or delegate; be a GO commander over the recipient; been [sic] a filing authority from the recipient’s losing command pursuant to paragraph 3-5f(1); be the Commander of HRC; be any HQDA staff principal, to include the Chief of Staff of the Army, Vice Chief of Staff of the Army (VCSA), or the DAS; be a State Adjutant General or designee; or be the chief, or his or her designee, of any designated special branch pursuant to 10 USC 3064-acting pursuant to their statutory authority over members of their respective special branches. Memoranda filed in the AMHRR will be filed in the performance folder. Directions for filing in the AMHRR will be contained in an endorsement or addendum to the memorandum. AR 600-37, ¶3-5b, p.5

Our reading of ¶3-5a and ¶3-5b: a company or battalion commander can issue a reprimand and file it locally, but only a general officer on the ¶3-5b list can order it into the AMHRR. That AMHRR authority is not split by the recipient’s grade. The one recipient carve-out in the text is for general officers, whose administrative actions are withheld to the VCSA (¶3-5b, Note). If the GO decides not to file in the AMHRR, the memorandum goes back to the issuing authority, who tells the recipient (¶3-5d).

05The two filing options and their rules

Authority for filing in the local file. There are only two filing options: filing in the performance portion of the AMHRR, or local filing. Commanders do not have the option to file memoranda in the restricted portion of the AMHRR. If local filing is intended, the memorandum does not need to be referred to a higher authority for review. AR 600-37, ¶3-5a, p.5

Once in the AMHRR, it stays unless the chapter 7 appeal process changes it:

(5) Be forwarded for inclusion in the performance portion of the AMHRR, only after considering the circumstances and alternative non-punitive measures. Minor behavior infractions or developmental mistakes will not normally be recorded in a Soldier’s AMHRR. Once placed in the AMHRR; however, such information will be permanently filed, unless removed through the appeal process (see chap 7). AR 600-37, ¶3-5c(5), p.6

The local file has an expiration date:

Filing memoranda designated for local files. Local filing may only be filed for up to 18 months, or until reassignment of the recipient to another general court-martial jurisdiction, whichever is sooner. Such a letter will state the length of time the letter is to remain in the local file, and provide a point of contact for the Soldier to contact after the expiration date to ensure removal. Both the Soldier and his or her unit are equally responsible for removing the letter from the local file after18 [sic] months. AR 600-37, ¶3-5e, p.6

When the Soldier or the reprimanding official moves before the reprimand is imposed:

(1) If/when a Soldier leaves the chain of command or supervision after a commander or supervisor has stated, in writing, the intent to impose a reprimand, but before the reprimand has been imposed, the action may be processed to completion by the losing command. In such cases, the losing command must coordinate reprimanding action(s) with the gaining command prior to imposition.
(2) If/when the reprimanding official leaves the chain of command or supervision after stating in writing the intent to impose a reprimand, his or her successor may complete appropriate action on the reprimand. In such cases, the successor must be familiar with relevant information about the proposed reprimand. AR 600-37, ¶3-5f(1)-(2), p.6

A local file memo can also come out before its date. The request is in writing, with evidence, and:

c. Appeals to remove a locally filed memorandum of reprimand, admonition, or censure involving unfavorable information from the Soldier’s local file, prior to the designated removal date, should be directed to the individual who initially directed the filing of the memorandum, or a higher-level commander in the chain of command for action on the request. AR 600-37, ¶7-4c, pp.13-14

06Referral and the response window

Unfavorable information is referred to you before filing, except the items ¶3-3 exempts (such as court-martial and Article 15 records and evaluation reports), and you get 7 calendar days on active duty (all components) or in a USAR Troop Program Unit, or 30 calendar days in the Guard or Reserve when not on active duty, to submit a statement or decline in writing (¶3-7a-b, p.7). How to write that statement is covered in how to respond to a GOMOR and the Academy lessons on your rebuttal rights and issuing a GOMOR. BulletForge’s GOMOR rebuttal drafter builds the memo from the facts you give it, and it does not replace legal review.

07Getting it out of the AMHRR: removal through the DASEB

The DASEB is the initial appeal authority and makes recommendations for removal, alteration, or transfer of unfavorable information entered in the AMHRR. ... AR 600-37, ¶7-1, p.12

Who may appeal, as written:

Who may appeal? The DASEB will consider all appeals from Soldiers in the Regular Army, the Army National Guard of the United States/Army National Guard, USAR (in grades E-6 and above), officers, and warrant officers. The DASEB will consider appeals from Soldiers in grades below E-6 only as an exception to policy granted by the DCS, G-1. AR 600-37, ¶7-2b, p.12

We quote that paragraph as printed and do not read it further; ask your legal assistance office how it applies to your grade and component. Veterans, retirees, and IRR members go to the ABCMR instead (¶7-2c). The removal standard:

(a) There is no time restriction for submitting an appeal for removal of unfavorable information from the AMHRR.
(b) The recipient has the burden of proof to show, by clear and convincing evidence, to support assertion that the document is either untrue or unjust, in whole or in part.
...
(e) The DASA (RB) is the final decision authority for removal of unfavorable information from the AMHRR. This authority will not be further delegated. AR 600-37, ¶7-2d(2)(a), (b) and (e), p.12

Our reading of ¶7-2d(2): removal is about whether the reprimand was wrong, untrue or unjust, not about how you have done since. Appeals that only allege an injustice without supporting evidence are returned without action (¶7-2d(2)(d)). The officer who directed the filing can also ask the DASEB for revision, alteration, or removal if later investigation shows the information was untrue or unjust, but cannot start an appeal on the basis that the memorandum has served its purpose (¶7-2, p.12).

08Moving it to the restricted portion: transfer

Transfer is the other path. The reprimand stays in the record; it moves from the performance file to the restricted file, which, per section 02, some boards still see.

(a) Soldiers must have received at least one evaluation (other than academic) since imposition.
(b) The recipient bears the burden of providing substantial evidence that the intended purpose of the document has been served in support of a request for the transfer of any official memoranda of reprimand, admonition, censure, or records of proceedings pursuant to UCMJ, Art. 15 from the performance file to the restricted file of the recipient’s AMHRR. AR 600-37, ¶7-2d(3)(a)-(b), pp.12-13

A paragraph in chapter 6 reads differently. It applies clear and convincing evidence to both paths:

... Thereafter, the burden of proof rests with the recipient responsible for providing clear and convincing evidence to support the document is either untrue or unjust, in whole or in part, thereby warranting its alteration or removal from the AMHRR; or has served its intended purpose, and it is in the best interest of the Army to transfer it to the restricted portion of the AMHRR. AR 600-37, ¶6-3b(2), p.10

The two paragraphs conflict on the transfer standard, and we do not resolve it. A second conflict is chain of command support. One paragraph says the appeal must include it:

Such appeals must include evidence that -
...
(d) The Soldier’s chain of command at the time of the imposition and/or imposing authority support the transfer in the form of a memorandum. AR 600-37, ¶6-3a(5)(d), p.10

The criteria list a page later calls the same support recommended or optional:

... (a) (Required) Time elapsed since the filing.
(b) (Required) The Soldier has indicated remorse for the actions which caused the unfavorable information to be filed.
(c) (Required) At least one positive evaluation report, other than an academic evaluation, has been received since the filing.
(d) (Required) There is no evidence or indication of a repeat of the offense.
(e) (Recommended) Memorandum from the original imposing authority supporting the transfer.
(f) (Optional) Memorandum of support from the current chain of command and the chain of command at the time of imposition. AR 600-37, ¶6-3b(5)(a)-(f), p.11

The regulation says “must” in one place and “Recommended” or “Optional” in the other. We quote both and do not pick one. Two more rules matter. A denied transfer leaves a mark in the performance record:

(f) If the DASEB denies an appeal, a copy of the memorandum of notification regarding the denial will be placed in the commendatory and disciplinary portion of the performance record. The appeal itself and the record of the proceedings will be placed in the restricted portion of the AMHRR. AR 600-37, ¶7-2d(3)(f), p.13

And after a denial, a request for reconsideration can go in no earlier than 1 year from the date of notification, with evidence not previously considered (¶6-3a(6), p.10).

09How long to wait before a transfer appeal

AR 600-37 sets no minimum. “Time elapsed since the filing” is a required criterion with no number attached (¶6-3b(5)(a)), and the evaluation gate is at least one since imposition (¶7-2d(3)(a)). The one-year rule people quote comes from AR 27-10 and covers Article 15 records only:

Requests normally will not be considered until a minimum of 1 year has elapsed, and the Soldier has received at least one nonacademic evaluation report since the imposition of the punishment. AR 27-10, ¶3-43b(2), p.25

10Check the source

Every AR 600-37 passage above is from the 2 October 2020 edition. The cross-references are AR 600-8-19 (6 March 2026), paragraphs 1-40 and 4-4b, and AR 27-10 (8 January 2025), paragraph 3-43b(2). All are free on the Army Publishing Directorate. If this page and a publication ever disagree, the publication wins, and we want to know. For anything about your own reprimand, see your legal assistance office.

← Back to The Field Manual