I am going to make an assumption that you are in the Guard or Reserve as this rarely happens in the active force…never seen one this late on the active side anyway.
I have provide some extracts from AR 623-3 below, but you should also review the entire regulation as it allows the unit to request a change to the dates under certain situations. If that applies the unit can change the dates of the NCOER thur date. There is also a specific process in the way the report must be signed. Now keep in mind there is nothing to my knowledge that prevents the unit from submitting your NCOER if they are willing to take the hit on submitting a late NCOER. The late submission and any procedural violation allows you to appeal the NCOER siting specific issues. If it has been 14 months and there is no documentation to support their comments you could argue they could not reasonably rate your performance during this time-frame as too much time has passed. You also need to read the section on Relief for Cause Reports and Appeals. I have attached an appeals guide for your review.
Bottom-line unless there is something really warranting an exception to policy the report was required to be at HQDA 90 days after the thru date.
Now before you go to your chain of command I would highly recommend you do your homework, get the facts, develop your argument from the facts, come up with a reasonable solution acceptable to all parties. Above all be calm, unemotional, and professional. If you are anything else you set yourself up for failure.
EXTRACTS OF AR 623-3 Follow (Keep in Mind this information is subject to change with the new evaluation regulation projected to com eout in 2014)
3–33. Preparation and submission requirement
l. Timeliness of submission.
Evaluation reports (OERs, NCOERs, and AERs) will be forwarded error-free to reach HQDA no later than 90 days after the “THRU” date of the report. The senior rater is responsible for ensuring the timely submission of OERs and NCOERs to HQDA; the reviewing official is responsible for the timely submission of AERs to HQDA. However, HQDA centralized selection, promotion, and school board requirements may mandate receipt by a date that is earlier than 90 days after the “THRU” date of the report. See appendix F for mailing address and contact information
Paragraph 3-9b(e) Senior Rater
(e) Ensure timely submission of reports, in the desired sequence, for processing at HQDA and filing in the rated NCO’s OMPF. The senior rater maintains responsibility for the evaluation report until it is filed in the OMPF
Paragraph 3-33K Preparation and Submission Requirements
Proper sequencing of evaluation report authentication provides credibility in the evaluation process.
(1) Members of the rating chain and the rated Soldier are the only authorized persons to sign an evaluation report. Rating officials and rated Soldiers will not sign blank evaluation reports or have someone sign for them.
(2) The rated Soldier will always be the last individual to sign the evaluation report. The rated Soldier’s signature will verify the accuracy of the administrative data in part I, including the accuracy of the name and SSN on the evaluation report, rank and date of rank, branch or MOS data, period covered and nonrated time; the rating officials in part II; APFT and height and weight entries. This procedure ensures that the rated Soldier has seen the completed report. It also increases the administrative accuracy of the report and will normally preclude an appeal by the rated Soldier based on inaccurate administrative data. In the event the rated Soldier is not available or refuses to sign, senior raters will provide an explanation in their narrative or bullet comments. If significant changes are made to a final evaluation after the rated Soldier has signed it, the senior rater will ensure the rated Soldier has an opportunity to see the changed evaluation report as stated in paragraph (4)(b), below.
(3) To facilitate the rated Soldier signing the evaluation report after its completion and signature by the rating officials, the evaluation report may be signed and dated by each individual in the rating chain up to 14 days prior to the “THRU” date of the report. However, the report cannot be forwarded to HQDA until the “THRU” date of the report. Evaluation reports submitted prior to the “THRU” date will be rejected and returned; a new report with signatures that meet the requirement must be resubmitted to HQDA.
(b) For NCOERs, the reviewer’s signature and date will not be before the rater’s or senior rater’s. The rated Soldier may not sign or date the report before the rater, senior rater, or reviewer.
Paragraph 2–15. The senior rater (DA Form 67–9 and DA Form 2166–8) or reviewing official (DA Forms 1059 and 1059–1)
a. Role.
Senior raters or reviewing officials use their positions and experiences to evaluate the rated Soldier’s performance and/or potential within a broad organizational perspective, military program of instruction, or civilian academic course standards. The senior rater’s evaluation is the link between the day-to-day observation of the rated Soldier and the longer term evaluation of the rated Soldier’s potential by HQDA selection boards. Normally, senior raters or reviewing officials control the accurate preparation and timely submission of evaluation reports. The overarching roles of senior raters or reviewing officials and specific roles by form type are outlined below.
b. Requirements.
Senior raters and reviewing officials will—
(1) Ensure support forms (or equivalent) are provided to all rated Soldiers they senior rate at the beginning of and throughout the respective rating periods.
(2) Use all reasonable means to become familiar with a rated Soldier’s performance. When practical, use personal contact, records and reports, and the information provided on the rated Soldier’s support form (or equivalent).
(3) Assess and evaluate the abilities and/or potential of the rated Soldier relative to his or her contemporaries.
Note. For OERs, this includes officers of the same rank and promotable officers who are serving at the same rank as the rated officer.
This involves evaluating performance in perspective by considering—
(a) The rated Soldier’s experience.
(b) The relative risk associated with the performance.
(c) The difficulty of the organization’s mission.
(d) The prudence and results of action taken.
(e) The adequacy of resources.
(f) The overall efficiency of the organization.
(g) When applicable, adherence to established military course or academic standards established by the civilian educational, medical, or industrial institution.
(4) Ensure rating officials counsel the rated Soldier, individually and throughout the rating period, on meeting his or her objectives and complying with the professional standards of the Army.
(5) Ensure all evaluation reports that the senior rater and subordinates write are complete, provide a realistic evaluation of the rated Soldier, and are submitted to HQDA in a timely manner (in accordance with this regulation and DA Pam 623–3).
(6) Ensure rated Soldiers sign evaluation reports before departing from a unit of assignment, military or civilian school or course of instruction
Hope this Helps
Did you find this information useful? We appreciate your feedback!
TOP
