Changes to SA Nominations

dddad said:
Worth noting that the other significant amendment seems to be the increase to 200 from 150 in order of merit from “qualified alternates.” This may be of equal importance to candidates coming from highly competitive districts/states.
Click to expand...
This does not really change the numbers who are admitted, what it does is somewhat tie the hands of admissions a bit more as they bring in the "Additional Appointees" that bring the class up to planned strength. What I'm getting at is once you have settled all of the slates, you have a number, lets say its 950 and they want to bring in 1250 so there are 300 spots left. Right now, the academy is REQUIRED to bring in the top 150 remaining qualified in order of merit. once that is done, there are 150 spots left and admissions is able to bring in candidates that they want such as minorities, athletes, etc to balance out the class. As I read it, this changes that equation to require more merit-based admissions.
 
In reading the US Code link, it appears the nomination increase may be so but looks like total number of cadets/midshipmen remains 4400. Remember, that’s total all classes. Yes, five more can be nominated, but it’s still highly competitive and may not mean offers for more from a slate. Applicants have to understand a nomination whether one of 10 or 15 is no guarantee of an offer. Staffers and liaisons officers should be forthcoming to the applicant that all nominations don’t get admission. I don’t mean to sound negative, but getting an offer is tough. Look at the numbers: files opened down to nominations down to offers. In regard to the comment about revamping the entire system; centralizing. Many MOCs consider it an honor to nominate and applicants from all states have a chance under the current system. Over 20+ years, I cared about each applicant and always tried to be certain they understood the process. And that parents understood also. Misrepresenting the process or giving false hope is not fair.
 
flieger83 said:
I guess the question that immediately comes to my mind is this: when did the US Congress change 10 U.S. Code § 7442 - Cadets: appointment; numbers, territorial distribution? Because there, it still clearly states "...Each Senator, Representative, and Delegate in Congress, including the Resident Commissioner from Puerto Rico, is entitled to nominate 10 persons for each vacancy that is available to him under this section. "

There's more but that's the relevant part.

I've seen nothing from USAFA/RR, and nothing from my MOCs (I work with them on nominations). I'm not saying it's not true, but where can I find this "officially" and not on a website that's looking for customers?

Steve
USAFA ALO
Click to expand...
I believe this change was just included in the recently passed NDAA or was a rider in the Defense appropriations bill.
 
I contacted one of our USNA alumni sponsor family members, an officer who is currently serving in a Congressional legislative affairs fellowship on a shore tour.

He checked on this for me, contacting the senior staffer on his Senator’s service academy nom team. The staffer confirmed for the Class of 2029, the slate size can be 15. They don’t expect any changes to the methods for submitting the slate (unranked, principal nom, etc.). No Intel on Qualified Alternates.
 
Sounds like it could take them longer to resolve slates in future cycles if the slates will be increasing from 10 to 15, that's a 50% increase.
 
My guess is this is Congress trying to keep more constituents happy. Since the size of the SAs isn't changing, the number of appointees isn't changing. Thus, having more nominees just means more people will be in the running up front and more will receive turndowns at the end.
 
Has the # of nominees increased in the past? Maybe a growing population requires a higher amt of nominees?

Including excerpts from the USNA's laws bottom and attaching links for AFA and USMA for those that didn't get a chance to read them.

2023-Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 118–31, §561(b)(1), substituted "15 persons" for "10 persons" in concluding provisions. (MOC)
"Each Senator, Representative, and Delegate in Congress, including the Resident Commissioner from Puerto Rico, is entitled to nominate 15 persons"


Subsec. (a)(8). Pub. L. 118–31, §562(b), substituted "Five" for "Four". (Guam)
"Five from Guam, nominated by the Delegate in Congress from Guam."


Subsec. (b)(5). Pub. L. 118–31, §561(b)(2), substituted "200" for "150". (Qualified Alternatives)
"200 selected by the Secretary of the Navy in order of merit (prescribed pursuant to section 8456 of this title) from qualified alternates nominated by persons named in paragraphs (3) through (10) of subsection (a)."

USNA
USMA
USAFA
 
Last edited:
I see this has a double edged sword. It allows more hope in January and more disappointment in April.

In some ways, it waters down the nom process. The number of MOC noms are going from around 6700 to10k. (assuming 1/4 get the 2nd slate each year). That should be over 50% of all applicants (however loosely the SAs count that number) might get nominations.

I don't know the effect of the extra 50 merit appts, assuming the SAs still can change their calculations for that score.
 
I agree it waters down the nomination process. Getting a nomination is a great achievement, and great to say you got one. It means you survived a process that narrows down the field to be considered for an offer of appointment. Most important to me is that the applicant (and their family) fully understand a nomination doesn’t get one in. I found this misconception was common all too often. I made it a point to explain how the process works. When the applicants came in for their interview I went out to the waiting and told them what this all means. And the congratulatory letter when they explained a nomination is no guarantee. Why the US Code was changed is “above my pay level”.
 
blinkus said:
Has the # of nominees increased in the past? Maybe a growing population requires a higher amt of nominees?

Including excerpts from the USNA's laws bottom and attaching links for AFA and USMA for those that didn't get a chance to read them.

2023-Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 118–31, §561(b)(1), substituted "15 persons" for "10 persons" in concluding provisions. (MOC)
"Each Senator, Representative, and Delegate in Congress, including the Resident Commissioner from Puerto Rico, is entitled to nominate 15 persons"


Subsec. (a)(8). Pub. L. 118–31, §562(b), substituted "Five" for "Four". (Guam)
"Five from Guam, nominated by the Delegate in Congress from Guam."


Subsec. (b)(5). Pub. L. 118–31, §561(b)(2), substituted "200" for "150". (Qualified Alternatives)
"200 selected by the Secretary of the Navy in order of merit (prescribed pursuant to section 8456 of this title) from qualified alternates nominated by persons named in paragraphs (3) through (10) of subsection (a)."

USNA
USMA
USAFA
Click to expand...
One subsection also states that "Nominees may be submitted without ranking or with a principal candidate and 9 ranked or unranked alternates." This is the same as before the new changes. I wonder if this will be updated to "14 ranked or unranked alternates" or an increase in principal nominees. I'm not sure as to why these changes were made, are they wanting to increase class sizes?
 
ebross67 said:
I'm not sure as to why these changes were made, are they wanting to increase class sizes?
Click to expand...
No
Class sizes are pretty much dictated by infrastructure and a large increase would be tough to handle at the 3 DoD academies.

Remember that there are MOCs who don't even fill up 10 noms and some who don't even submit a single nom. I think that this is mostly to help out those districts with literally dozens of super candidates and only 10 noms per opening.
 
I don't see this as having any meaningful impact. Yes, more candidates will be happy b/c they received a nom. But, as noted, with the number of students at the SAs remaining constant, the number of appointments won't go up. In fact, at least for USNA, they tend to decrease year over year due to reduced attrition. So now more people fighting for the same number of slices of pie, so to speak.

Even in the hyper-competitive districts, the candidates in the 11-15 spots (who previously weren't even in the mix) aren't likely to receive appointments.

Who does this help? The MOCs, who now have more happy constituents. It also makes it easier on the nom committees in hyper-competitive districts, since the cutoff is now 15 vs. 10. Congress passed the change . . . obviously, they will benefit. :)

The new process MIGHT make it a bit easier for the SAs in that they have greater flexibility in charging candidates to MOCs. But that's an administrative thing for the SAs and doesn't impact the individual candidates.
 
OldRetSWO said:
Remember that there are MOCs who don't even fill up 10 noms and some who don't even submit a single nom.
Click to expand...

How many MOCs dont submit a single nom? And do those slots go unused, or become wildcards for the SAs to use elsewhere? I can't imagine that there are many any given year...
 
justme said:
How many MOCs dont submit a single nom? And do those slots go unused, or become wildcards for the SAs to use elsewhere? I can't imagine that there are many any given year...
Click to expand...
I do not have a number for you and it changes from cycle to cycle. After all of the slates for which there are nominees are decided, the academy uses Additional Appointee slots to bring the class up to size.
 
Unless I'm mistaken, it seems obvious that this will help competitive districts. It will allow an MOC to provide noms not to 5 more people, but maybe give strong candidates noms to multiple academies. Our district will only allow you to pick one academy for a nom.
 
Nytoga330 said:
Unless I'm mistaken, it seems obvious that this will help competitive districts. It will allow an MOC to provide noms not to 5 more people, but maybe give strong candidates noms to multiple academies. Our district will only allow you to pick one academy for a nom.
Click to expand...
It's not perfect, but it will definitely help. It is for sure a welcome change to an antiquated system. Where you live should not be one of the major determinants on whether or not you get to compete for an appointment.
 
Thinking out loud for a moment…

Is there a way to redistribute nominations (not appointments) once a single nomination is received?

If you only need 1 nomination to move forward, what is the benefit to a candidate having multiple nominations for the same SA?
 
GrilledCheese94 said:
Thinking out loud for a moment…

Is there a way to redistribute nominations (not appointments) once a single nomination is received?

If you only need 1 nomination to move forward, what is the benefit to a candidate having multiple nominations for the same SA?
Click to expand...
It gives the SA more places to charge an appointment, if they want to offer an appointment. If they don’t, having 1 or 4 noms won’t help.
 
Capt MJ said:
It gives the SA more places to charge an appointment, if they want to offer an appointment. If they don’t, having 1 or 4 noms won’t help.
Click to expand...
Can you tell I’m bored at work?

I’m trying to wrap my head around various ways that the entire SA & ROTC process could be done more efficiently.

An exercise in futility, but I have time to kill.

Building a better mousetrap isn’t one of Uncle Sam’s specialities, unfortunately!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top