a. DA Form 67–10 series.
(1) Supplementary reviewer eligibility and responsibility.
In most instances, the senior rater will conduct the final rating chain review; other mandatory reviews are discussed in paragraphs 2–16 and 2–17.
(2) Supplementary review requirement.
In instances when there are no uniformed Army designated rating officials for the rated officer, an Army officer within the organization will be designated as a uniformed Army advisor and perform a supplementary review.
The uniformed Army advisor will be a U.S. Army officer, senior to the rated officer and normally senior to the senior rater, within the organization.
The uniformed Army advisor will monitor evaluation practices, and provide assistance and advice to rating officials (as required) on matters pertaining to Army evaluations.
The uniformed Army advisor will be designated by the commander establishing the rating chain and identified in the published rating scheme at the beginning of the evaluation period.
(a)
When a supplementary review is required for DA Form 67–10–1, DA Form 67–10–2, or DA Form 67–10–3, the uniformed Army advisor’s information will be entered in part II, blocks f1 and f2, of the OER.
If the uniformed Army advisor determines the OER is accurate and comments are unnecessary, they will select “No” in part II, block f5, of the OER.
If the uniformed Army advisor determines comments are necessary, they will select “Yes” in part II, block f5, of the OER, prepare an enclosure to the OER, and comment on the accuracy and clarity of the completed OER (see fig 2–1).
The comments will not include evaluative statements about the rated officer or statements that amplify, paraphrase, or endorse the ratings of the other members of the rating chain.
(b)
When a supplementary review is required for DA Form 67–10–4, the uniformed Army advisor will prepare an enclosure to the OER (see fig 2–1).
If necessary, the reviewer will comment upon the accuracy and clarity of the completed OER.
The comments will not include evaluative statements about the rated officer or statements that amplify, paraphrase, or endorse the ratings of the other members of the rating chain.
If there are no comments, the uniformed Army advisor will indicate in the enclosure that no added comments are necessary.
(c)
If no Army officer is available above the senior rater in the organization or chain of supervision to perform a review, the submitter will request a review by HRC (AHRC–PDV–ER) (see fig 2–2).
(3) Special branch evaluation reports.
For chaplains, see appendix C; for JAGC officers, see appendix D; and for AMEDD officers, see appendix E.
Appendix E does not apply to ARNG Soldiers.
Figure 2–1. Sample format for a supplementary review memorandum
Figure 2–2. Sample format for a Headquarters, Department of the Army supplementary review request memorandum
b. DA Form 2166–9 series.
(1) Reviewer eligibility and responsibility.
In instances when a rated NCO’s rating chain includes SGM/CSM, chief warrant officer three (CW3) through CW5 or an Army officer in the rank of CPT or above as the senior rater, the senior rater will conduct the final rating chain review; exceptions and other mandatory reviews are discussed in paragraphs 2–8b(2), 2–16, and 2–17.
(2) Supplementary review requirement.
(a)
A mandatory supplementary review is required for NCOERs when a senior rater within the rated NCOs rating chain includes an NCO in the rank of SFC through 1SG/MSG, warrant officer in the rank of WO1 through CW2, and Army officer in the rank of 2LT and 1LT.
This supplementary review will be performed by a uniformed Army Soldier, senior to the senior rater within the rated NCO’s organization in the rank of SGM/CSM, CW3 through CW5, or CPT and above.
This Army Soldier will be designated as a uniformed Army advisor.
The uniformed Army advisor will monitor evaluation practices and provide assistance and advice needed to rating officials (as required) on matters pertaining to Army evaluations.
The uniformed Army advisor will be identified on the published rating scheme at the beginning of the evaluation period by the commander establishing the rating chain.
(b)
Mandatory supplementary reviews are also required when no uniformed Army designated rating officials exist in the rating chain.
This also includes when the senior rater is other than a uniformed Army Soldier and a rater is an NCO in the rank of SGT through 1SG/MSG, warrant officer in the rank of WO1 through CW2, and Army officer in the rank of 2LT and 1LT.
This supplementary review will be performed by a uniformed Army Soldier, senior to the senior rater within the rated NCO’s organization in the rank of CSM/SGM, CW3 through CW5, or CPT and above.
This Army Soldier will be designated as a uniformed Army advisor.
The uniformed Army advisor will monitor evaluation practices and provide assistance and advice needed to rating officials (as required) on matters pertaining to Army evaluations.
The uniformed Army advisor will be identified on the published rating scheme at the beginning of the evaluation period by the commander establishing the rating chain.
(c)
As an exception to requirements outlined in paragraphs 2–8b(2)(a) and 2–8b(2)(b), CSMs serving at the USASMA as Director, Sergeants Major Course or Director, Staff and Faculty may perform supplementary reviews for any NCO that their Deputy Director senior rates, without regard to date of rank.
Additionally, the Commandant and Deputy Commandant at USASMA, both nominative CSMs (TDA remarks code 8C), may serve as supplementary reviewer on any NCOER for which the Director, Sergeants Major Course or Director, Staff and Faculty serves as senior rater.
(d)
When a supplementary review is required for DA Form 2166–9 series (NCOER), the uniformed Army advisor’s information will be entered in part II, blocks c2, c3, and c7, of the NCOER.
If the uniformed Army advisor determines the NCOER is accurate and comments are unnecessary they will select “No” in part II, block c4, of the NCOER.
If the uniformed Army advisor determines comments are necessary, they will select “Yes” in part II, block c4, of the NCOER, prepare an enclosure to the NCOER, and comment on the accuracy and clarity of the completed NCOER (see fig 2–1).
Comments provided will not include evaluative statements about the rated NCO or statements that amplify, paraphrase, or endorse the ratings of the other members of the rating chain.
(e)
If no uniformed Army advisor is available in the organization or chain of supervision to perform a review, the submitter will request a review by HRC (AHRC–PDV–ER) (see fig 2–2).
(f)
No minimum time period is required for reviewer qualification.
(g)
The senior NCO (that is, CSM, SGM, or 1SG) within the organization should conduct an undocumented review of every NCOER to ensure accountability of Soldiers’ NCOERs and to supervise performance of junior NCOs (see para 2–18).