How to Request Reconsideration of Findings from a Command Investigation – A 2026 Guide for Service Members
TLDR – If a Command Investigation (e.g. under AR 15-6) Ends Against You, Prompt Reconsideration with New Evidence or Legal Errors May Save Your Career
When a command-directed investigation concludes with adverse findings, those conclusions can trigger administrative action, non-judicial punishment, or even initiate separation or discharge proceedings. But the law does not always lock you out — under rules such as those in AR 15-6, you may have the right to request reconsideration of the findings if you identify new evidence, legal or factual mistakes, or administrative errors. A well-crafted reconsideration request, submitted correctly and supported by compelling new information, can result in amended findings or mitigation. Time, procedure, and quality of evidence matter greatly.
- A request for reconsideration must generally be submitted within one year of the approval of the original investigation.
- You must present “new evidence,” a mistake of law, a mistake of fact, or administrative error.
- Reconsideration is generally not permitted if the investigation already resulted in judicial action, non-judicial punishment (NJP), or another process with its own due-process safeguards.
- All requests typically go through the Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) or legal advisor for review by the same “approval authority” that signed off the original investigation.
- New or revised findings may influence administrative separation, discharge boards, or adverse evaluation reports — making timely reconsideration critical.
What Is a “Reconsideration Request” After a Command Investigation?
A “reconsideration request” is a formal submission by a service member (the subject of the original investigation) asking the command to re-evaluate the findings of a prior investigation (e.g., under AR 15-6) because of new evidence, errors, or changed circumstances. Military regulations — including AR 15-6 and implementing service-specific rules — allow this process under limited circumstances.
The goal of reconsideration is not to relitigate every issue but to demonstrate that the prior findings are no longer supportable under a “preponderance of the evidence” standard — because of newly discovered facts, procedural flaws, misinterpretation of evidence, or legal mistakes.
Why Reconsideration Matters
Negative investigation findings can trigger a cascade of adverse consequences: administrative separation, negative performance evaluations, disciplinary action, loss of security clearance, or damage to promotion potential. Because command investigations often rely on incomplete data, assumptions, or hearsay — and because many of them proceed under relaxed evidentiary rules — errors often occur. Reconsideration offers a corrective mechanism.
Without timely reconsideration, the original findings may become the basis for adverse actions that follow you for years. With the right documentation, timeline, and legal strategy, you may mitigate or nullify those consequences.
When You Can Ask for Reconsideration — Recognized Grounds
- New Evidence: Information or documentation not available during the original investigation (e.g., digital records, communications, forensic data) that materially impacts findings.
- Mistake of Fact: The investigation overlooked or misinterpreted key facts (e.g., incorrect witness statements, misdated documents, mischaracterized communications).
- Mistake of Law or Procedure: The investigating officer or approving authority applied the wrong standard, misapplied regulations, ignored legal requirements, or violated procedural safeguards.
- Administrative or Clerical Error: Errors in record keeping, missing attachments, chain-of-custody failures, or lost evidence.
- Changed Circumstances or Evidence of Rehabilitation: In some cases, especially when adverse administrative action has not yet been taken, new mitigation information may persuade command to reconsider findings before discharge boards or separation proceedings.
How the Reconsideration Process Works — Step by Step
Step 1 – Determine Eligibility
Review the approval memo of the original investigation. Check the date: you generally must act within one year. Confirm that the investigation did not result in court-martial, NJP, or other process with its own due-process protections.
Step 2 – Gather New Evidence & Documentation
Collect all relevant new material — digital records, communications, witness statements, forensic data — that were unavailable or overlooked during the original investigation.
Step 3 – Draft a Formal Reconsideration Request
Your request should clearly identify:
- Which findings you challenge (by allegation, date, or section of the report)
- The specific errors (fact, law, procedure) or new evidence you present
- A concise explanation of why the original findings are no longer supportable under “preponderance of evidence.”
Step 4 – Submit via Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) or Legal Advisor
Submit the request through the legal advisor who supports the approval authority that signed the initial investigation. If that person has changed duty, the submission goes to the new advisor for forwarding to the proper authority.
Step 5 – Await Review & Decision by Approval Authority
The approval authority reviews the reconsideration request, evaluates whether the new material affects the prior findings, and decides whether to amend, withdraw, or uphold the original findings. If amended, any adverse consequences tied to that investigation may be delayed, mitigated, or avoided entirely.
Common Mistakes That Undermine Reconsideration Requests
- Waiting too long — missing the one-year submission window.
- Submitting only character statements or letters of support — courts generally reject them as “new evidence” if they were available during the original investigation.
- Failing to identify specific factual or procedural errors — vague assertions rarely succeed.
- Not using counsel to frame the request — legal and regulatory nuances are often decisive.
- Neglecting to preserve evidence at the earliest opportunity (digital logs, communications, video, chain-of-custody records). Without preserved records, new evidence may be unavailable or inadmissible.
Real-World Examples When Reconsideration Made a Difference
Example 1 – Newly Discovered Digital Communications
An AR 15-6 investigation concluded that a soldier sent improper messages to a subordinate. The soldier later obtained metadata showing the messages were routed through a supervisor’s account and logged incorrectly. The reconsideration request highlighted the metadata, demonstrated chain-of-custody error, and the findings were withdrawn.
Example 2 – Witness Recantation or Additional Statements
A subordinate witness who originally supported the allegation submitted a sworn retraction explaining misremembered events. The reconsideration request included the new statement, which undermined the primary evidence for the investigation. The adverse findings were rescinded before any administrative action.
Example 3 – Procedural Violations Discovered After Approval
The approval authority’s signature was dated incorrectly (before final legal review), violating regulation timelines. The reconsideration request identified the procedural defect; the authority vacated the findings and ordered a new investigation or corrective action.
Example 4 – Forensic or Physical Evidence Later Exonerating the Accused
A misconduct allegation was based on alleged physical evidence. Later forensic testing showed contamination, invalidating the basis for the finding. The reconsideration request attached the forensic report and triggered withdrawal of the prior finding.
Example 5 – Increased Consequences Trigger New Consideration
After the original investigation, the command attempted separation based on the findings. The soldier submitted a reconsideration request citing new performance evaluations, awards, and evidence of rehabilitation — persuading the authority to downgrade the characterization and allow retention under conditional duty status.
Five Strategic Tips for Effective Reconsideration Requests
- Tip 1 – Act immediately. Preserve all records and start rebuilding your evidence file the moment you receive notice of adverse findings.
- Tip 2 – Focus on material facts, not opinion or character statements. New documentary, digital, forensic, or testimonial evidence that directly undermines findings carries far more weight than general support letters.
- Tip 3 – Use experienced military-defense counsel. The procedural and regulatory landscape is complex; expert counsel helps identify legitimate grounds for reconsideration and draft a persuasive request.
- Tip 4 – Ensure proper submission through legal advisor/SJA to the correct approval authority. Procedural missteps can result in outright rejection.
- Tip 5 – Prepare for potential follow-up action — if findings are withdrawn or amended, confirm that any databases, OERs, or personnel files are updated accordingly.
Military Law Resources
Relevant regulations and references include:
DoD Instruction 1332.14 – Enlisted Administrative Separations (DoD-wide policy)
AR 15-6 – Procedures for Administrative Investigations and Boards of Officers
AFI 36-3208 – Air Force Administrative Separation of Airmen (for space/USAF cases)
COMDTINST M1000.6A – Coast Guard Military Separations and Related Procedures
Why Prompt, Expert Legal Support Is Essential
Because reconsideration depends on regulations, deadlines, definitions of “new evidence,” and command-level procedures, simple mistakes can doom a request before it’s considered. Effective legal counsel helps identify valid grounds, preserve evidence, frame persuasive arguments, and ensure proper submission. Early engagement often makes the difference between restoring your record and irreversible career damage.
Requesting Reconsideration of Command Investigation Findings – Frequently Asked Questions
What qualifies as “new evidence” for a reconsideration request?
“New evidence” must be information or documentation that was not reasonably available during the original investigation. This can include previously unavailable digital records, metadata, forensic results, or other material that directly challenges the findings. Character statements alone rarely qualify.
How long do I have to request reconsideration after an AR 15-6 investigation?
Typically within one year of the approval authority’s endorsement of the original investigation. Some services may consider requests submitted later if there is a demonstrated “good cause,” such as evidence that could not reasonably have been discovered sooner.
What happens if reconsideration is granted?
If the approval authority finds the new evidence or errors undermine the original findings, they may amend or withdraw the conclusions. That can remove or reduce potential adverse actions, improve discharge-board outcomes, and protect promotions or benefits.
Can I request reconsideration more than once?
Only if you can present additional new, material evidence or demonstrate a valid error that was not previously addressed. Repeated requests without new information are unlikely to succeed.
Does requesting reconsideration delay administrative or disciplinary action?
It can — often submitting a reconsideration request pauses downstream administrative action until the request is adjudicated. That makes early action especially important. However, procedures vary by branch and command. Consulting experienced counsel is critical.
Do I need a lawyer to submit a reconsideration request?
While not required, specialized military-defense counsel greatly improves the likelihood of success. Counsel helps identify valid grounds, gather and preserve evidence, and present a compelling, regulation-compliant request. Many service members who attempt it on their own fail due to technical mistakes.
What if my request is denied — is there any further recourse?
Some branches permit submission of supplemental material later if new, relevant evidence emerges (“good cause”). Otherwise, after denial the original findings stand. Use of regulatory tools such as a record-correction board or personnel-records review may be available depending on the circumstances.
