Posted on Mar 4, 2018
Other than using my chain of command, how can I rectify false statements on my NCOER?
12.3K
10
15
1
1
0
So my last NCOER I feel I was sandbagged for missing a battle assembly for charity events I had previously scheduled but wasn’t allowed an RST. The unit rescheduled the battle assembly and gave less than a months notice. I was never counseled on the U’s they gave me or the negative bullets they put in my NCOER. I’ve gone all the way to my 1SG with this but was told if I appealed I would lose.
Posted in these groups: 
NCOER
NCOER
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 10
2
2
0
First, they do not need to provide counseling to you for the missing U's, this is already documented through the unit sign-in roster and if your unit was on the ball they probably attempted to call you during the BTA and now have a record that will count against you regardless if you received a counseling or not.
I won't get into the nitty gritty as it sounds like you've already attempted to solve this at the lowest levels. Yes you can appeal, if you lose; nothing different happens NCOER is processed as usual. If you win great, you'll get another NCOER. Understand that the repeal process effects everyone in your rating chain, even if you do win I wouldn't expect high rating NCOER afterwards.
So the question is: Is it worth the fight? I see that your promoteable, will this NCOER cause you to lose your P status? typically not. HOWEVER if it truly will, then FIGHT. ultimately you are responsible for your own career. Is the overall Rating 'NOT-QUALIFIED'? If its not, lick your wounds and consider yourself lucky and do great things in the Army Reserves.
Not all leadership is equal, and some are downright mean. But there are always options, some better and others...
I won't get into the nitty gritty as it sounds like you've already attempted to solve this at the lowest levels. Yes you can appeal, if you lose; nothing different happens NCOER is processed as usual. If you win great, you'll get another NCOER. Understand that the repeal process effects everyone in your rating chain, even if you do win I wouldn't expect high rating NCOER afterwards.
So the question is: Is it worth the fight? I see that your promoteable, will this NCOER cause you to lose your P status? typically not. HOWEVER if it truly will, then FIGHT. ultimately you are responsible for your own career. Is the overall Rating 'NOT-QUALIFIED'? If its not, lick your wounds and consider yourself lucky and do great things in the Army Reserves.
Not all leadership is equal, and some are downright mean. But there are always options, some better and others...
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Actually, if there are no documents to prove the substandard ratings then you will probably automatically win that appeal. I would go for it. The failure of your support chain or rating scheme to do the paperwork benefits you.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
NCOER's can be appealed all the way to DA. It takes paperwork and a lot of time. Never a sure thing, unless you can show they violated the regulation somehow.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
Submit an appeal. You never know if you don't try. The process is contained in CH6 of DA PAM 623-3. Here's an excerpt.
6–2. Preparing an appeal a. Develop rationale. An appeal’s success depends on the care with which the case is prepared, the line of argument presented, and the strength of the evidence presented to support it. Begin by specifically identifying those entries or comments to be challenged, the perceived inaccuracy in each entry or comment, the evidence you think is necessary to prove the alleged inaccuracy, and where and how to obtain such evidence. b. Obtain evidence. (1) Collect supporting evidence necessary to refute adequately the contested evaluation report. (2) Third party statements form the basis of most substantive appeals: “Third parties” are persons who have official knowledge of the rated Soldier’s duty performance during the period of the evaluation report being appealed. Statements from Soldiers who establish they were on hand during the contested rating period, who refute faulting remarks on the evaluation report, and who served in positions from which they could observe the appellant’s performance and their interactions with rating officials, are both useful and supportive. These statements should be specific and not deal in general discussions of the appellant. As an example, if an appellant desired to challenge a comment concerning his or her ability to communicate effectively with subordinates, it would be advantageous for that appellant to provide statements from a cross-section of individuals who could provide specific information pertaining to
137DA PAM 623–3 • 10 November 2015
the faulting comment. Although third party statements can be provided by knowledgeable subordinates, peers, and superiors, additional weight is normally given those statements where the authors occupied vantage points during the contested period that closely approximated those of the rating officials. An example could be a BN executive officer that had knowledge of the situation in a company, battery, or troop. Such third party statements should be on letterhead if possible; describe the author’s duty relationship to the appellant during the period of the contested report; describe and demonstrate degree (frequency) of observation; and should include the author’s current address and telephone number. (3) Statements from rating officials often reflect retrospective thinking, or second thoughts, prompted by an appellant’s nonselection or other unfavorable personnel action claimed to be the sole result of the contested evaluation report. As a result, claims by rating officials that they did not intend to evaluate as they did will not, alone, serve as the basis of altering or withdrawing an evaluation report. Rating officials may, however, provide statements of support contending the discovery of new information that would have resulted in an improved evaluation had it been known at the time of evaluation report preparations. Such statements must describe what the new information consists of, when and how it was discovered, why it was reportedly unknown at the time of evaluation report preparation, and the logical impact it may have had on the contested evaluation report had it been known at the time the evaluation report was originally prepared (see AR 623–3). (4) Official documents may substantiate that an evaluation report is in error. (a) In an administrative appeal, for example, an official copy of a published rating scheme in effect during a specific evaluation report period may indicate that an incorrect rating official prepared an evaluation; or duty appointment orders and appropriate extracts from local personnel records may indicate that the period of a report, duty title, or periods of nonrated time are incorrect. (b) For substantive claims, certain documents such as annual general inspection results may be helpful in refuting faulting remarks on an evaluation report concerning an appellant’s duty performance, provided such documents are official copies, are relevant to the rating period, and specifically pertain to faulting comments. (c) Award citations and letters of commendation may or may not be of value. The period and circumstances surrounding an award or letter of commendation must be compared to the contested period and circumstances surrounding the contested evaluation report. Are they relevant to the period? Do they refute the report? (5) To obtain current mailing addresses of Army personnel, check first with your local BN or BDE S1, or administrative office. If the individuals in question have since retired or have otherwise left active duty, write to National Personnel Records Center, Army Reference Branch (NCPMA), 1 Reserve Way, St. Louis, MO 63132–5200. The individual’s full name and SSN must be provided along with the request. State that this is for official use in conjunction with an evaluation report appeal. To protect the privacy of individuals no longer on active duty, these agencies will normally forward correspondence to the appropriate individual rather than provide an address. (6) Relevant portions of official documents such as annual general inspection, Army Training and Evaluation Program, or command inspection results may be obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by writing the individual unit or headquarters responsible for conducting such inspections. Addresses for military organizations can be obtained by contacting your servicing administrative office. (7) To obtain records and verify dates, start with the AMHRR for orders and other documents, or contact a former organization, BN and/or BDE S1, or unit-level Army administrative office to determine whether records are still retained.
6–2. Preparing an appeal a. Develop rationale. An appeal’s success depends on the care with which the case is prepared, the line of argument presented, and the strength of the evidence presented to support it. Begin by specifically identifying those entries or comments to be challenged, the perceived inaccuracy in each entry or comment, the evidence you think is necessary to prove the alleged inaccuracy, and where and how to obtain such evidence. b. Obtain evidence. (1) Collect supporting evidence necessary to refute adequately the contested evaluation report. (2) Third party statements form the basis of most substantive appeals: “Third parties” are persons who have official knowledge of the rated Soldier’s duty performance during the period of the evaluation report being appealed. Statements from Soldiers who establish they were on hand during the contested rating period, who refute faulting remarks on the evaluation report, and who served in positions from which they could observe the appellant’s performance and their interactions with rating officials, are both useful and supportive. These statements should be specific and not deal in general discussions of the appellant. As an example, if an appellant desired to challenge a comment concerning his or her ability to communicate effectively with subordinates, it would be advantageous for that appellant to provide statements from a cross-section of individuals who could provide specific information pertaining to
137DA PAM 623–3 • 10 November 2015
the faulting comment. Although third party statements can be provided by knowledgeable subordinates, peers, and superiors, additional weight is normally given those statements where the authors occupied vantage points during the contested period that closely approximated those of the rating officials. An example could be a BN executive officer that had knowledge of the situation in a company, battery, or troop. Such third party statements should be on letterhead if possible; describe the author’s duty relationship to the appellant during the period of the contested report; describe and demonstrate degree (frequency) of observation; and should include the author’s current address and telephone number. (3) Statements from rating officials often reflect retrospective thinking, or second thoughts, prompted by an appellant’s nonselection or other unfavorable personnel action claimed to be the sole result of the contested evaluation report. As a result, claims by rating officials that they did not intend to evaluate as they did will not, alone, serve as the basis of altering or withdrawing an evaluation report. Rating officials may, however, provide statements of support contending the discovery of new information that would have resulted in an improved evaluation had it been known at the time of evaluation report preparations. Such statements must describe what the new information consists of, when and how it was discovered, why it was reportedly unknown at the time of evaluation report preparation, and the logical impact it may have had on the contested evaluation report had it been known at the time the evaluation report was originally prepared (see AR 623–3). (4) Official documents may substantiate that an evaluation report is in error. (a) In an administrative appeal, for example, an official copy of a published rating scheme in effect during a specific evaluation report period may indicate that an incorrect rating official prepared an evaluation; or duty appointment orders and appropriate extracts from local personnel records may indicate that the period of a report, duty title, or periods of nonrated time are incorrect. (b) For substantive claims, certain documents such as annual general inspection results may be helpful in refuting faulting remarks on an evaluation report concerning an appellant’s duty performance, provided such documents are official copies, are relevant to the rating period, and specifically pertain to faulting comments. (c) Award citations and letters of commendation may or may not be of value. The period and circumstances surrounding an award or letter of commendation must be compared to the contested period and circumstances surrounding the contested evaluation report. Are they relevant to the period? Do they refute the report? (5) To obtain current mailing addresses of Army personnel, check first with your local BN or BDE S1, or administrative office. If the individuals in question have since retired or have otherwise left active duty, write to National Personnel Records Center, Army Reference Branch (NCPMA), 1 Reserve Way, St. Louis, MO 63132–5200. The individual’s full name and SSN must be provided along with the request. State that this is for official use in conjunction with an evaluation report appeal. To protect the privacy of individuals no longer on active duty, these agencies will normally forward correspondence to the appropriate individual rather than provide an address. (6) Relevant portions of official documents such as annual general inspection, Army Training and Evaluation Program, or command inspection results may be obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by writing the individual unit or headquarters responsible for conducting such inspections. Addresses for military organizations can be obtained by contacting your servicing administrative office. (7) To obtain records and verify dates, start with the AMHRR for orders and other documents, or contact a former organization, BN and/or BDE S1, or unit-level Army administrative office to determine whether records are still retained.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
This is a tough one, they should not of given you a U especially if the unit changed the dates. A lot of people work jobs that don't allow them to just change it their units discretion. IMHO your 1SG is wrong, no counseling should not result with a needs to improve. But go in with in facts not opinions.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
All you have to prove is that your rating chain did something wrong in the process. Even something as simple as not having any documentation to back up the nicer, i.e. quarterly counseling, then you will win an appeal.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
First you do not sign it. Take it to your COC and then the IG. Thank you for your service.
(0)
(0)
SFC Michael Hasbun
If you refuse to sign it, they simply click the "refused to sign" button and off it goes. That's not terribly helpful. The appeals process is a better avenue. Signing just verifies the admin data anyway...
(0)
(0)
CSM Darieus ZaGara
I take it as understood that signature or lack three of signifies just that refuse to sign. Whether you think it better to sign or not IG before it is submitted is not a bad course. I agree with your comments if the document has already been submitted. Saying my comments are notvheloful is your right. I do believe that after 31 + active duty and over 13 as a CSM might depict my experience. In the future, should you choose to counter my comments, keep it at that state your point. Implying my comments are less than helpful is out of line. Thank you for your service.
(0)
(0)
CSM Richard StCyr
SFC Michael Hasbun - The new DA Pam on NCOERs does a much better job of clarifying the signature and it's use, and the fact that signing the document only precludes you from basing an appeal on admin errors. This used to be ambiguous and was cited in some instances as a contributing reason for appeals denials. The new verbiage is much clearer on this. Don't sign it and submit an appeal was very good advice for many years. here's an excerpt from the current Pam, I include the blurb on counseling as this was part of the NCO's original discussion...... Reference: AR 623–3, paragraph 2–8
DA Form 2166-9-1, part II: block d1—Counseling Dates Action required: Enter the actual dates of counseling as documented on DA Form 2166–9–1A (YYYYMMDD). When counseling dates are omitted, the senior rater will enter a statement in part V, block b explaining why counseling was not accomplished. The absence of counseling will not be used as the sole basis for an appeal. However, the lack of counseling may be used to help support other claims made in an appeal. Reference: None
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. — If the rated NCO is physically unavailable to sign his or her NCOER (and the NCOER cannot be forwarded to him or her to sign), unable to sign the NCOER digitally or manually, or refuses to sign the NCOER for any reason, the senior rater will either resolve the problem or explain the reason for the lack of a signature. Using the Wizard application associated with the electronic form within the EES, the senior rater will check the appropriate “NO” box response to the question “Is the rated Soldier available for signature?” or the comment “Rated Soldier refused to sign.” The applicable statement will then be entered in part V, block b (“Soldier unavailable for signature” and/or “Soldier refused to sign”). Note. If the rated NCO’s signature is left blank in block d2, and the Wizard application associated with the electronic form within the Evaluation Entry System is not used to enter the appropriate status, the Evaluation Entry System may not allow the NCOER to be submitted. A NCOER stating that the NCO cannot sign due to CAC issues is unacceptable, and such NCOERs will not be processe
DA Form 2166-9-1, part II: block d1—Counseling Dates Action required: Enter the actual dates of counseling as documented on DA Form 2166–9–1A (YYYYMMDD). When counseling dates are omitted, the senior rater will enter a statement in part V, block b explaining why counseling was not accomplished. The absence of counseling will not be used as the sole basis for an appeal. However, the lack of counseling may be used to help support other claims made in an appeal. Reference: None
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. — If the rated NCO is physically unavailable to sign his or her NCOER (and the NCOER cannot be forwarded to him or her to sign), unable to sign the NCOER digitally or manually, or refuses to sign the NCOER for any reason, the senior rater will either resolve the problem or explain the reason for the lack of a signature. Using the Wizard application associated with the electronic form within the EES, the senior rater will check the appropriate “NO” box response to the question “Is the rated Soldier available for signature?” or the comment “Rated Soldier refused to sign.” The applicable statement will then be entered in part V, block b (“Soldier unavailable for signature” and/or “Soldier refused to sign”). Note. If the rated NCO’s signature is left blank in block d2, and the Wizard application associated with the electronic form within the Evaluation Entry System is not used to enter the appropriate status, the Evaluation Entry System may not allow the NCOER to be submitted. A NCOER stating that the NCO cannot sign due to CAC issues is unacceptable, and such NCOERs will not be processe
(1)
(0)
SFC Michael Hasbun
CSM Richard StCyr - Tracking CSM. I actually messaged him a link to the HRC NCOER FAQ, just for reference. It occurred to me afterwards that, as much as things have changed, it's possible a lot of the NCOER administrivia isn't common knowledge.
(2)
(0)
0
0
0
You might win an appeal, you might lose. The only definite way to lose is to not try. I know there is another side to the story, but if your side of events is accurate the only thing you have to lose is the time you put into the appeal. Or, are you more concerned about the command atmosphere after they learn of the appeal?
(0)
(0)
SGT(P) (Join to see)
At this point I have no worries of what the command atmosphere will be if I begin an appeal. I’m an adult and understand what I do. I simply wanted my COC to at the very least assist in the process not to just deter you.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
Seems unfair. Since you were shot down by your top shirt with only the warning you would fail no matter where you went with your issue would seem unfair to me. The appearance is that he just wants you to be quiet and be a good little soldier. Can you get an appoint to talk to battalion S-3? Maybe you can find an ear to hear you out at that level. I would think personnel (under the purview of S-3) would be a place to get the ball rolling. I am many years removed from the Army and way things are accomplished. Good luck Sgt.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Good question that I can’t answer. However, you will be told you can’t do something when the fact is they don’t want you to do it. Makes them look bad. Suggest you check reg. On NCOER rather than taking someone’s word for it. Do your home work. Was told I couldn’t put in a waiver for a Airman, I put it in and got the waiver.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
-
Ask questionGet expert advice and
tips for your questions. -
Post updatePost pictures, personal updates, plans, or anything you like!
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google 
