Posted on May 9, 2016
Has anybody successfully submitted an appeal against a falsified NCOER?
130K
360
279
23
23
0
This question was brought to me recently. A concerned peer is just now finding out about the NCOER appeal process. Their concern is the counseling dates were falsified giving the individual no time to rehabilitate from a 4/4 rating. Also, to clarify it's not just the counseling dates in question. What is the level of proof needed etc.? I personally have not dealt with this type of situation, but want to help them out the best I can without just sending them to the HRC website.
Leadership
Senior Leaders
NCOER
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 130
0
0
0
Have this NCO go to the legal office, they can help guide them through the AR and DA PAM for the appeal process as well as what is needed for submission. Legal can also assist with helping them out the appeal together and how to properly format and word it.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I had the same issue in the USAF, the supervisor lied and the Chief Master Sergeant and Commander allowed it. Your word against theirs. You lose.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Go see client services (JAG). They should be able to provide guidance.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
It's hard to find an NCOER on which at least one counseling date was not falsified.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
My PSG did once, the process took a long time for a response from the CoC.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I was able to post examples of the NCOER in question. I copied it verbatim. Please weigh in RP I just couldn't believe they even signed this. However, they just wanted the experience over and done with, however can not career progress to go recruiter or anything.
(0)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
SGT Nia Chiaraluce As others have posted AR 623-3 for redress process. How did this NCOER make it thru the NCO Support channel? I'm assuming this is on a SGT? If it is that means a SSG, SFC, and 1SG should have had visibility on this, and it went thru?? Mind boggling to say the least.
Now to ask the "difficult" question. Are any of the bullets justified?
Now to ask the "difficult" question. Are any of the bullets justified?
(1)
(0)
SGT Nia Chiaraluce
I'm being told that is the primary issue. The bullets are fabricated, the counseling dates never occurred and also the junior NCO filed an EO complaint against the rater and this still went through. Their thought process is that this is recourse, but is more shocked it made it all the way up to HRC and nobody stopped it.
(0)
(0)
CSM Chuck Stafford
SGT Nia Chiaraluce - So the NCO Support Channel was not involved in the posting of this NCOER to HRC and there are no supporting documents? Get them involved ASAP; and again encourage the NCO to use the appeals process.
(2)
(0)
0
0
0
One of the things the signature of the rated NCO does is verify the counseling dates. If the counseling dates were inaccurate, the NCO shouldn't have signed. Going off of AR 623-3, Chapter 3, Para. 3-4 (g.):
g. Although the support form is an official document covered by regulation, it will not be part of an official file used by selection boards or career managers. Failure to comply with any or all support form requirements will not constitute the sole grounds for appeal of an evaluation report. The senior rater will ensure that a completed DA Form 67–9–1 or DA Form 2166–8–1, as applicable, is returned to the rated individual when the evaluation is forwarded to HQDA.
So even if there are inaccurate dates on a 2166-8-1, that is not grounds for appeal. If the NCO feels their performance was such that they received an unfair rating, that is another story. This is especially so if the rater and senior rater comments and ratings don't jive, but I for one have only seen that one time.
I am willing to bet that the rater or senior rater did not wait a year prior to letting the NCO know their performance was substandard, regardless of what counseling dates were included.
g. Although the support form is an official document covered by regulation, it will not be part of an official file used by selection boards or career managers. Failure to comply with any or all support form requirements will not constitute the sole grounds for appeal of an evaluation report. The senior rater will ensure that a completed DA Form 67–9–1 or DA Form 2166–8–1, as applicable, is returned to the rated individual when the evaluation is forwarded to HQDA.
So even if there are inaccurate dates on a 2166-8-1, that is not grounds for appeal. If the NCO feels their performance was such that they received an unfair rating, that is another story. This is especially so if the rater and senior rater comments and ratings don't jive, but I for one have only seen that one time.
I am willing to bet that the rater or senior rater did not wait a year prior to letting the NCO know their performance was substandard, regardless of what counseling dates were included.
(0)
(0)
SGT Nia Chiaraluce
You are correct. My only concern for this person is the time frame. There is not a statute of limitations that I have come across as of yet to appeal. I have copied the NCOER over to a blank form and will post it later it is very interesting how this even made it through to HRC.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
I don't know what the very latest NCOER form is like, but in the past each form had a little blurb in the NCO's signature block saying words to the effect that he was not necessarily agreeing with the rating, but was verifying that all the admin data was correct, including the couseling dates. Is that still present, and did the NCO sign it, or is that verification no longer on the form? If he did sign it, it seems like it would be hard for him to appeal it later, unless I guess he says he was pressured/threatened to sign a false document.
(0)
(0)
SGT Nia Chiaraluce
I'm familiar with the admin data a verification, but am unclear if that includes counseling dates. If I am able I will post a copy of it clear of all PII and admin data Sir.
(0)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
SGT Nia Chiaraluce - I found this in an online AR623-3 dated 10 Nov 2015. I'm not sure if that's the latest, or if there have been any changes issued. Here is the paragraph about NCO verification. As you can see, it specifically states that when the NCO signs off on it verifying the counseling dates it normally precludes any appeals based upon inaccurate information.
DA Form 2166-9-1, part II: block d2—Rated NCO’s Signature
Action required: The rated NCO will sign and date the NCOER after it has been completed and signed by the rater and senior rater in the
rating chain.
— The rated NCO acknowledges that he or she has seen the completed NCOER and verifies the accuracy of administrative data in part I
(except part I, block m), the rating officials and counseling dates in part II, the duty description in part III, and the APFT and height and
weight entries in part IV, block a and block b. This action increases administrative accuracy of the NCOER since the rated NCO is most
familiar with and interested in this information. Confirmation of the administrative data also will normally preclude an appeal by the rated
NCO based on inaccurate administrative data. Any administrative errors noted by the rated NCO will be brought to the attention of the
rating officials and corrected prior to his or her signature. It is important that rated NCOs and rating officials clearly understand that the
rated NCO’s signature does not constitute agreement or disagreement with the evaluations of the rater and/or senior rater. Rating officials
will ensure that the rated NCO is aware of the redress process
http://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/pdf/p623_3.pdf
DA Form 2166-9-1, part II: block d2—Rated NCO’s Signature
Action required: The rated NCO will sign and date the NCOER after it has been completed and signed by the rater and senior rater in the
rating chain.
— The rated NCO acknowledges that he or she has seen the completed NCOER and verifies the accuracy of administrative data in part I
(except part I, block m), the rating officials and counseling dates in part II, the duty description in part III, and the APFT and height and
weight entries in part IV, block a and block b. This action increases administrative accuracy of the NCOER since the rated NCO is most
familiar with and interested in this information. Confirmation of the administrative data also will normally preclude an appeal by the rated
NCO based on inaccurate administrative data. Any administrative errors noted by the rated NCO will be brought to the attention of the
rating officials and corrected prior to his or her signature. It is important that rated NCOs and rating officials clearly understand that the
rated NCO’s signature does not constitute agreement or disagreement with the evaluations of the rater and/or senior rater. Rating officials
will ensure that the rated NCO is aware of the redress process
http://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/pdf/p623_3.pdf
(1)
(0)
SGT Robert Wager
I guess what I find hard to believe is that this NCOER went through the rated, rater, senior rater, and reviewer and these bullets and the 4/4 are totally unjustified. Also usually when an NCO is getting bad paper the NCO support channel and Chain of Command is totally aware of it. I know that when I was in all NCOERS went across the CSM's desk for a final review before they were sent up. Is the argument that the counseling didn't happen or that the bullets are false? Was the NCO disrespectful? Did he leave his weapon unsecured? Did he fail to report? I guess in other words, did he actually earn the bad paper and now he wants to move on to bigger and better things by beating the earned NCOER on a technicality? I see people everyday in the civilian world trying to get their records corrected because they were chaptered out of the military for whatever reason and get an OTH discharge because they can't see the forest for the trees and just wanted out. Now they cannot get VA benefits and suddenly it is a major miscarriage of justice. I am not saying this is the case here, but I would also caution you against leading the charge in trying to help someone that has sour grapes because of their own actions got them exactly what they deserved, especially if you are in the same unit where there is actual knowledge of the NCO's sub-par performance.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google