USNA Wait List–Information?

I don't believe 808Dad said that redistricting was the reason his Senator lost a slot:

It commonly doesn't effect my state but for some reason because of POTUS budget cuts my state was affected. This now causes my Senator to lose a slot so from two slots he now goes down to one which was already taken by the EAP candidate and my DS ends up on the waitlist.

This sounds like sequester/budget cuts caused the slot to disappear. As I mentioned in an earlier post, this happened to a friend's DS a couple of years ago. His appointment was postponed until the next year because the number of appointment slots was reduced due to budget cuts.

Based on past experience working in the DoD, budgets aren't usually solidified until late in the year (when they SHOULD be done in October.)

Edit:
My DD's BGO "sort of" mentioned Early Action. He told her to get everything done before October. Because of rolling admissions, the longer you wait, the less slots are available.

2nd Edit:
Regarding the slot that was lost, the assumption is that 808Dad's Senator had an extra slot this year because he only has 3 appointees at the Academy this year (for whatever reason.) I would bet that this late in the game, any MOC slot that wasn't filled by the end of 2013 got cut to remain within budget. I honestly can't blame USNA for this. It wasn't their fault. Sequester hit everyone in the DoD pretty hard. Though, I feel really bad for those affected. I truly hope that if the waitlisted principals don't get an appointment this year, then a deferred appointment will be offered.
 
Last edited:
Where are the numbers?

Aveon said:
808DAD, The reason I have been stalking this thread lately is because I, too, know a USNA principal nominee that this is happening to, and my own DS has gone through something similar. But I must say, I am really confused by what you were told...I have read and reread what you wrote and your MOC rep's answers just cause to raise more questions in my mind, then provide answers.

First, at the federal level, redistricting within a state only affects US representative seats (and those academy nominations/slots thereof) - NOT US senatorial seats, which will always be a constant 2 senator seats per state (5 respective academy slots per senator).

Therefore, the US senators will always have the US service academy slots open/or filled, that they actually have open/or filled- IOW's redistricting would not affect the number of slots that your nominating US senator has to fill.

With that, I question how your senator's second slot/slate disappeared within what...not more than a few months time? Your MOC either had 2 openings at the time your DS applied- or they didn't. I could see an extra slot opening up within that timeframe, ie. a cadet leaving, etc... but, a Senatorial nom slot becoming unavailable?? Perhaps through MOC error thinking he/she had a second slot to fill in the first place- but not through redistricting! It also seems plausible that your DS was the principal of this secondary disappearing slate, as I couldn't imagine your MOC would make him the principal on both slates. I think this may be where your answer lays.

Also, budget cuts do not affect or initiate the reapportionment and redistricting process of federal MOC's. The process, done every 10 years, is dictated by the population decrease/increase of ones state as determined by the constitutionally mandated Census.

So, I have to call a bit of BS on what your MOC rep is telling you :eek: It just doesn't make sense.

I was also unaware of the USNA having early action...Im curious how many other posters knew that USNA had early action?? 808DAD, were we the only one's in the dark?

Anyway, congrats to your son's AFA appointment and thanks for keeping us apprised 808DAD, I just question the legitimacy of what your MOC is telling you, it sounds more like MOC CYA. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

MY DS Rep has similarly explained the situation, and has not given up the fight. I imagine 808DAD's Senator is fighting too.

I was not aware of the EAP and cannot find it described anywhere on USNA related publications.

The problem I have with all of these explanations, even though they seem to combine to make a plausible cause, is that admissions is not revealing the numbers involved. I am sure they are busy, but now their integrity is in question by Congress and the public, so it's time to take time...so to speak. Peacemeal incomplete explanations cause more problems than they solve. I am sure my DS would appreciate a letter of explanation from the Superintendent.

In regard to the redistricting explanation. Law already provides that representative districts gaining residences of enrolled midshipmen are authorized to enroll more then the maximum normally authorized, then when the redistricted midshipmen graduates or otherwise disenrolled, that extra position is eliminated. For districts losing residences of enrolled midshipmen , they then gain open slots to fill by nomination and appointment. The law leaves their minimum four (4) authorized enrollment positions intact, thus ensuring that the population residing within the District was fully represented and afforded the same rights of enrollment as the populations residing elsewhere, including those within the armed forces system. It is clear the intent of Congress was to prevent what is occurring now. What is the related number of increased enrollees should all MOC positions be filled? Like others, my DS's district open position for which he was Principal Nominated is being left vacant and he is waitlisted.

In regard to the explanation of a loss of 25 authorized positions due to budget cuts? How would the loss of so few positions combined with redistricting enrollment increases result in such a loss of MOC open positions? Providing the numbers would help answer these questions.

In regard to the EAP, it makes perfect sense to have a program designed to smooth out the flow of applications and the selection process, cheaper and more effective that way, but it poses new questions. Was 808 DAD's Senator's explanation accurate? Does the academy segregate application review process from the MOC's complete submitted slate? Since law requires a "competitive" process from which appointments may only come from authorized MOC sources' submitted slate(s), then how is it that EAP applications are reviewed exclusively before other applications on the same slate, and it appears maybe even appointed superior to even a MOC Principal Nominee on the same slate? When a MOC has two vacant positions and slates, and the Academy deems it necessary to hold one of the two open (which still remains a question), then what is the legal basis to appoint the EAP LOA candidate from the non-ranked slate while holding vacant the Principal Nominated second slate? Is that an unlawful end run around the Principal Nomination Mandate?

In regard to the waitlisting of Principal Nominees, I have too many questions to type them all.

This is no longer a mess, it's become a tragedy. I feel for all involved, including Admissions.
 
Last edited:
USAFA83GradWife said:
I don't believe 808Dad said that redistricting was the reason his Senator lost a slot:
Click to expand...

I have to disagree USAFA83Gradwife. Let’s plug back in the preceding sentence on 808Dad’s post: “Now for the second slot. Well thanks to great minds, people upstairs decided that a redistricting should occur this year. It (which would refer to the redistricting) commonly doesn't effect my state but for some reason because of POTUS budget cuts my state was affected. This now causes my Senator to lose a slot so from two slots he now goes down to one which was already taken by the EAP candidate and my DS ends up on the waitlist”.

If 808Dad’s MOC would have left out the redistricting scenario all together, than maybe the explanation would have held more weight with me. Putting the fact aside that Senator Seats are never affected by redistricting- the fact is, no Federal Representative seats were gained, nor lost, in 808Dads state (HI) due to the last Census. So, why even mention redistricting, as any reason, to 808Dad? Perhaps 808Dad will chime in soon and clarify what was actually said.

Although, what you have stated: “This sounds like sequester/budget cuts caused the slot to disappear,” does sound more credible, and would more reasonably explain the sheer number of principal candidates that this seems to be happening to.

However there is one problem with this scenario, as well: Under Federal Code 10 U.S.C. § 6954 – when limitations are placed upon the number of midshipmen appointed, MOC nominations should not be affected as WithYou2018 points out in her last post.
 
WithYou2018 said:
Is that an unlawful end run around the Principal Nomination Mandate? This is no longer a mess, it's become a tragedy.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree with this more... I am having a lot of problems buying into the EAP explanation given to 808Dad. Im going to PM you WithYou2018.
 
Maybe they are going to fix this. Look at this from the Appointments Thread:

Posted by NewGoatDad:

Is this normal?

DS in an RA and had his LOA, but did not receive the MOC nomination. He was 3Q'd and received a superintendent nom. Because of "good, but not great" SAT scores, all throughout the process, we figured he would probably be going the NAPS route - and everyone was onboard with that scenario.

About 4 weeks ago, DS received his packet from admissions. And to our surprise, he was offered a direct admit. His GPA, class rank, AP classes must have been enough to make the cut. USNA Class of 2018 was the new destination.

About a day ago, all that has changed...and I've not seen anything like this situation posted before. Evidently, all of the superintendents nominations are receiving additional scrutiny and now 30-40 RA's who were offered direct admit, are being told that they need to go through NAPS. Seems like there is no option here, and DS doesn't want to 'rock the boat' and lose his spot...so NAPS it is.

DS and our whole family is still very honored by the selection....but talk about a heck of an emotional roller-coaster ride. My question is this - is this normal? Has anyone heard of such a thing before?

Thank you for your responses


Posted by Sledge:

^^^Strange

I wonder if USNA Admissions has had to go back in and find direct admit slots for the Principal nominees they initially put on the wait list. Maybe your DS got bumped down to NAPS for that reason. Just a guess.



Maybe good news for the principal nominees?? I hope!
 
Hope it is good news for the principal noms. I am a principal nom and am on the waitlist.
 
Hoping those principal noms on the wait list keep us updated. I'm rooting for you!!!
 
gavigane14 said:
Hope it is good news for the principal noms. I am a principal nom and am on the waitlist.
Click to expand...

Sorry that this happened to you. Have you received any explanation, by any chance?

Good luck to all the principals in this position.
 
BGO Explanation

Sorry ladies and gentlemen, I didn't know there were questions regarding my last post until my DS told me. I've been on the USAFA forum trying to make out what we need to do next as parents.

I met with my DS BGO at his Air Force Appointment the other day. It seems I've opened up a can of worms from a thousands of miles away.

1. Per the MOC staffer my DS was ranked #1 in the state out of over eighty that qualified for a nomination. So his academics, athleticism, extracurricular, and leadership ability was not in question.

2. US Code Title 10: BGO was informed by USNA admissions that there is no such law that a principle nominee shall be appointed and that they basically take the MOC's list as an advisement.

3. Per the BGO, a list of 150 candidates, I don't remember which 150 she was talking about, needs to be appointed to USNA. If any of this special 150 were wait listed they will get the slot first until all 150 are appointed. Again I don't know who these 150 are.

4. This is how redistricting was explained to me by the BGO. Yes Hawaii was not involved in the redistricting but the rest of the 49 states were. Well this caused a big problem in Representatives USNA slots. (To let you know there was a large number of applicants this year compared to previous years.). When appointments went out to LOA & EAP candidates the redistricting caused some areas to have more positions so some MOCs received more appointments in their new district and other MOCs lost positions but counted towards their number. So if you got your app and 3q'ed done early you got the slot and that left candidates that had medical remedial or any other issues with their app (like my DS) on the wait list. It didn't matter if you were a principle nominee and/or the best candidate in the pile it was all about timing.

5. So where are we now. Supposedly all of the principle nominees are ranked high on the wait list but again refer to #3. USNA didn't tell the BGO where DS was ranked but assured her he is high on the list. Currently five appointments were given in Hawaii and only one has taken the appointment. So in the mean time DS accepted the appointment to USAFA and hopefully we will find out in mid May if he will be accepted through the wait list but we are not holding our breath.
 
???

808DAD,

No. 2 is interesting. The law as previously discussed is there, black and white, unequivocal. It really only matters if Congressmen/Congresswomen choose to enforce it. It's in their power to enforce. It can't be taken away, only given away.

Meanwhile, the waitlist is the primary focus...good fortunes to all of these deserving candidates.
 
Re No. 2 above, I have read the law and while it addresses the three possible ways in which the MOC can submit his or her slate of candidates (Principal, Ranked, and Unranked), I couldn't find any specific language which stated that the Academy had to accept the Principal nomination. If I missed something, could someone please point out where in the law this is written. Or is it simply the norm that the Principal is offered an appointment and, as such, people assume that it is the law? Please note I don't have a DS/DD applying to the USNA; just interested. For those of you who are in this situation, I wish you the best of luck for a positive resolution.
 
TennisDad said:
Re No. 2 above, I have read the law and while it addresses the three possible ways in which the MOC can submit his or her slate of candidates (Principal, Ranked, and Unranked), I couldn't find any specific language which stated that the Academy had to accept the Principal nomination. If I missed something, could someone please point out where in the law this is written. Or is it simply the norm that the Principal is offered an appointment and, as such, people assume that it is the law? Please note I don't have a DS/DD applying to the USNA; just interested. For those of you who are in this situation, I wish you the best of luck for a positive resolution.
Click to expand...

808DAD--PMed you.

TennisDad--not sure about the law, but have found it stated in a couple of places.

"Nominees may be submitted in three categories: without ranking, with a principal candidate and
nine ranked alternates, or with a principal candidate and nine unranked alternates. When the
Member specifies a principal candidate, that individual will be appointed to a DOD academy as
long as he or she meets all other admission criteria. If the principal candidate is disqualified, the
service academies will appoint the first fully qualified, ranked alternate, if specified by the
Member. In circumstances where Members do not specify a principal candidate or ranked
alternates, one individual from among the Member’s nominees who is found to be fully qualified
will be appointed by the academies to serve as a cadet."

"An applicant selected for a principal nomination requires the Naval Academy to use the nomination vacancy for that applicant if the applicant is qualified."
 
I'm very annoyed at this whole process. USNA stated that I was 3q, I received a principal nom, and I was placed on the waitlist. Totally unfair and frustrating.
 
gavigane14 said:
I'm very annoyed at this whole process. USNA stated that I was 3q, I received a principal nom, and I was placed on the waitlist. Totally unfair and frustrating.
Click to expand...

I agree and am so sorry, gavigane. My DS friend (principal nom) got the TWE, too; although, his letter doesn't even state he was wait-listed.
 
COmom said:
808DAD--PMed you.

TennisDad--not sure about the law, but have found it stated in a couple of places.

"Nominees may be submitted in three categories: without ranking, with a principal candidate and
nine ranked alternates, or with a principal candidate and nine unranked alternates. When the
Member specifies a principal candidate, that individual will be appointed to a DOD academy as
long as he or she meets all other admission criteria. If the principal candidate is disqualified, the
service academies will appoint the first fully qualified, ranked alternate, if specified by the
Member. In circumstances where Members do not specify a principal candidate or ranked
alternates, one individual from among the Member’s nominees who is found to be fully qualified
will be appointed by the academies to serve as a cadet."

"An applicant selected for a principal nomination requires the Naval Academy to use the nomination vacancy for that applicant if the applicant is qualified."
Click to expand...

COmom,
The issue is that is not what the law says. Lots of people on here are saying the law is black and white. I have Title X of the United States Code, Subtitle C - Navy and Marine Corps, Part III - Education and Training, Chapter 603 - United States Naval Academy. If you read Section 6954 it does not say that. So all I'm asking is if I am misreading the law, which the Navy is required to follow, please let me know where this is written.
 
Not sure of the "Letter of Law", but if I were a Congress member and this happened to my Principle, then there would be H*** to pay. Willing to bet none of the principles this happened to were nominated by a member of the Armed Services Committee.
 
2017MarineDad said:
Not sure of the "Letter of Law", but if I were a Congress member and this happened to my Principle, then there would be H*** to pay. Willing to bet none of the principles this happened to were nominated by a member of the Armed Services Committee.
Click to expand...

There is definitely some confusion going on here in Hawaii. I have a nomination letter from the MOC in question in front of me and it says:

"I have chosen to use the competitive method of nomination. Under this method, up to ten nominees are submitted to the United States Naval Academy for each vacancy. The Academy will make an Offer of Appointment from this list and will notify the applicants directly."

I'm not sure how one can be a primary when the MOC sent in the list using the competitive method. There could be some other reason why one cadidate was chosen over another that we just don't know. I'm sure all ten candidates listed on the nomination slate are very deserving and it's up to the academy to decide who to take. There are several pieces of the application that the MOC does not see.

Good luck to all waiting!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top