Correction to: "the FA Master Gunner and reset of the redeployed FA battalion".(Incoming)(Correction notice)(Letter to the editor)

In my column in the January-February 2007 edition, I made an incorrect statement when recommending how to rate Master Gunners. In the article, I suggested the following rating scheme: the command sergeant major (CSM) rate the Master Gunner and the S3 senior rate the Master Gunner with the battalion commander reviewing the efficiency report. I since have learned that my proposed rating scheme conflicts with new Army Regulation (AR) 623-3 Military Evaluations System because the rater (battalion CSM) must be supervised by the senior rater (in this case, the S3, who is not the CSM's rater). This new requirement only was "recommended" under the old AR 623-205.

I asked the Human Resources Command (HRC) evaluation gurus to look at my rating proposal and give me feedback. Bottom line up front: they said that using the rating chain I suggested could lead to Inspector General (IG) complaints or NCO evaluation report (NCOER) appeals because the rating chain is not in accordance with AR 623-3. So, I must ask you to comply with the AR--not follow my proposed rating scheme.

That having been said, I believe the battalion CSM should rate the Master Gunner, when possible (mission dependent). I rate the Field Artillery Master Gunner and the Chief of Field Artillery is his senior rater. Of course, if the CSM rates the Master Gunner and the ...