Secretary Hegseth’s Policy Changes

October 4, 2025

This article is meant to address Secretary Hegseth's Policy Changes, specifically as they relate to Army policy.

Secretary Hegseth's previous policy changes have resulted in new Army Flagging Rules and updates to AR 15-6. These changes are explained by Attorney Barry at the following links: 15-6 updates and Army Flagging Rules.

On 30 September 2025, Secretary Hegseth published 11 new directives, which will be explained by Attorney Barry in the paragraphs that follow. All 11 directives are available for download at this link.

Secretary Hegseth's Policy Change 1: Review of Hazing, Bullying, and Harassment Definitions

In his directive, Secretary Hegseth said that the definitions of hazing, bullying, and harassment are "overly broad, jeopardizing combat readiness, mission accomplishment, and trust in the organization."

He therefore directed each department to conduct a review of these definitions within 30 days. This review could result in updated definitions for each of these behaviors, less investigations, and less adverse actions.

Secretary Hegseth's Policy Change 2: Adverse Information Policy

Secretary Hegseth's directive mandated a review of each department's retention of adverse information. Specifically, he directed:

that preponderance of the evidence (or more likely than not) is the minimum standard for all adverse information
that all adverse information, with limited exceptions, can only be considered for 10 years
to limit redundancy of adverse information for the same conduct

This directive will likely not change the Army Adverse Information Program (AAIP) database. Furthermore, preponderance of the evidence is the current standard for almost all adverse actions, so little change is likely on that front as well.

That said, there is a possibility that adverse actions, like GOMORs, Article 15s, and OERs/NCOERs, that are older than 10 years, will somehow be expunged from Officers/NCOs military records. Furthermore, older AAIP entries and law enforcement actions may also be expunged. The directive is unclear on this front and further policy updates are expected.

Secretary Hegseth Policy Change 3: Special Selection Review Boards

Special Selection Review Boards (SSRB) are explained by Attorney Barry at this link.

Secretary Hegseth's Policy Changes have directed that SSRBs are limited to those required by statute. The relevant statute is available at this link.

SSRBs are required by statute if an Officer selected for promotion, but not yet promoted, "is the subject of credible information of an adverse nature, including any substantiated adverse finding or conclusion...that was not furnished to the promotion board during its consideration of the person for promotion."

Typically this occurs when an Officer is selected for promotion, but is later placed under investigation or receives some sort of adverse action, like a GOMOR or Article 15.

Discretionary SSRBs were not that common, so Attorney Barry does not believe that the directive will result in much change. All SSRBs he has ever seen were required by statute.

Secretary Hegseth's Policy Change 4: Military Fitness Standards

Secretary Hegseth has directed that, for active duty, Soldiers will execute two tests annually. One is the existing Service Fitness test and the other is a Combat Field Test for Combat Soldiers and a Combat Readiness Test for Non-Combat Soldiers

National Guard is only required to conduct one test annually.

Secretary Hegseth also directed updated height and weight standards for each department.

Finally, Secretary Hegseth directed that fitness scores, not just pass/fail, be recorded on evaluation reports.

Secretary Hegseth Policy Change 5: Military Education and Training Standards

Secretary Hegseth's Policy Changes directed a focus on combat readiness. He has directed a 60-day review of all policies to align with this focus and specifically requested a report on any drop in standards in training since 1990.

Secretary Hegseth's Policy Change 6: Reduction in Mandatory Training Requirements

Secretary Hegseth directed that there was too much mandatory training for Servicemembers. He directed the reduction of some common trainings, such as Cybersecurity and CUI training.

Secretary Hegseth Policy Change 7: Equal Opportunity Changes

Many of the changes directed mirror those already updated in the new AR 15-6, such as discretionary flagging and punishing those who make false complaints.

Additionally, Secretary Hegseth directed that mediation should be provided in lieu of filing formal EO complaints. This is likely to result in far less EO investigations, especially if complainants are mandated to attempt mediation first. At this point, it is unclear if mediation is required, or just encouraged.

Secretary Hegseth also directed that intake processes be standardized and that plan of action be submitted to him by each Service to remove the backlog of cases pending. Finally, he directed that timelines be established for all EO investigations.

Based on his directive, Attorney Barry is expecting significant changes the EO investigation process. The most important changes being mediation as an option instead of filing a formal complaint and mandatory timelines for investigations.

Secretary Hegseth's Policy Change 8: IG Reform

Again, many of the changes directed, such as a credibility assessment and discretionary flagging, have already been addressed in the new AR 15-6.

Additionally, Secretary Hegseth directed that all complaints filed a year after the alleged event are presumed to not be credible, unless "new compelling evidence is presented."

Furthermore, all "Command Directed Investigations" must be closed within 30 days. It is unclear if this timeline applies to all investigations, such as 15-6 investigations (Army), Command Investigations (Navy and Marines), and Commander Directed Investigations (Air Force), or if it only applies to investigations that start with an IG complaint. Along with this, Secretary Hegseth directed that updates be provided to the subject, complainant, and Command every 14 days. The update will include the status of the investigation, the anticipated completion date, and the forthcoming steps.

Finally, Secretary Hegseth directed a mechanism to track individuals who filed multiple complaints without credible information.

The impact of this directive is unclear at this time. If this only applies to IG investigations, then the impact is significant, but also narrow. If this directive applies to all administrative investigations, then the impact is significant and far-reaching. Specifically, the mandatory timelines would significantly speed up the investigation process and, considering the 1-year reporting limitation without new compelling evidence, there would likely be less investigations.

Secretary Hegseth Policy Change 9: Grooming Standards

Secretary Hegseth's Policy Changes addressed grooming standards. Specifically, the following changes have been mandated:

Sideburns will be above the ear-opening
Beards, goatees, and other facial hair (except mustaches) are prohibited

Special Forces can be granted exceptions.

Permanent profiles for shaving will result in separation - all profiles related to grooming standards are limited to 12-months and must include a treatment plan. Religious exemptions can only be granted to non-deployable personnel.

Secretary Hegseth's Policy Change 10: Purple Hearts

Secretary Hegseth directed that all Purple Hearts will be awarded in person, unless the recipient or his/her next of kin requests otherwise.

Secretary Hegseth Policy Change 11: Civilian Workers

Secretary Hegseth directed that high-performing Civilian workers be rewarded, potentially with monetary incentives. Furthermore, he directed that guidance be published to make it easier to fire low-performing Civilian workers.

Conclusion

Secretary Hegseth's policy changes potentially could result in big changes that favor those accused of misconduct. That said, these changes are forthcoming and dependent on what each Military Department proposes back to the Secretary. Attorney Barry will monitor these changes and provide updates.

This Article was written by Attorney Matthew Barry. Attorney Barry is highly rated by former clients and has a proven track record of success.

The Law Office of Matthew Barry represents Servicemembers worldwide. He has offices on the East Coast, West Coast, and in the Central U.S.