Naval Academy Principal Nomination

<p>Kate
In California, the senators only let you apply for a nomination for one academy, they don't even ask what your second choice is. The representatives will let you list in order of preference.</p>

<p>SemperG
You are correct, there is a big difference in the meaning of "qualified to compete" vs "eligible to compete"</p>

<p>Do you think they would have to stage the CA Senator interviews over a month or so's time? I mean, considering the numbers of quality applicants and the fact that some CA candidates aren't contacted until early to mid-January.</p>

<p>I'm almost sure that Boxer nominates, despite her lack of support for the military; at least I would hope that her application wasn't put out there for no reason. Her part in the nomination process is especially important because, without her, CA candidates would be at even more a disadvantage.</p>

<p>I'm definitely not too expectant, but I hope I get called for an interview. My congressman's interview is set for the 18th.</p>

<p>Ma'am (wstcoastmom), Let me reiterate Shogun's statement. Senator Boxer sends a full load of nominations to the Naval Academy every year. If you don't mind, I'd like to get some amplification on your daughter's BGO's comments. Please send as much information as you would like to provide to <a href="mailto:webmail@usna.edu">webmail@usna.edu</a>.</p>

<p>Hello,
Yes you read that correctly. I live in a very rural area and we only have 22 people in my class. I received the principal nomination from one senator, a "competitive" nomination from the other senator, and the representative has not yet announced his nominations. Is a competitive nomination basically just an alternate to a primary or principal nomination? Does it help any that I have a principal nomination and a competitive?
Sincerely,
Tyler</p>

<p>Tyleroar
A competitive nominating slate means that the senator or Congressman is leaving it up to the Academy to choose the best qualified person on the slate. No one is ranked higher than another on the slate by that member of congress. If the member of congress names a principal nominee, then the academy must offer that person an appoinment IF he/she qualifies academically, medically, and physically for the academy. If not, then the academy moves down the list of nominees if that list is ranked and the next peson is offered an appointment IF they are triple Qed. If the rest of the list is not ranked by the MOC then the academy selects someone off the list IF they meet the academies requirements. Remember that (nation wide) less than half of all nominees actually get an offer of appointment. Good Luck.</p>

<p>Tyleroar: A principal nomination is the best. As pointed out previously, if you are otherwise qualified (academically, physically, medically, morally) then you should receive an appointment - even if there are other more qualified individuals nominated by that particular senator, or any other MOC.</p>

<p>Given you have a principal nomination, I don't believe it matters whether you have more than one nomination.</p>

<p>Good luck.</p>

<p>Will candidates recieve appointment letters before December? My daughter has received 2 nominations and is waiting for a third. She is triple qualified and has also received an appointment to Westpoint. She submitted her final application a few weeks ago and withdrew early decision from an Ivy civilian school when she decided military service was the best fit for her and USNA is her first choice. I am concerned about her decision to drop the Ivy even though she thought the decision through. She has not received an LOA. The application was submitted just recently. Is there a point in time when LOAs are no longer sent out?</p>

<p>Military: No. Some candidates may receive appointments in Dec. Most appointments go out in Feb and March. Even if your D’s app is complete, noms in hand, realize that USNA will likely wait until all 10 candidates on a particular nomination slate have completed apps. And those apps are not due until March 1…so your slate may not be decided upon until somewhat later!</p>

<p>Unless, your D has a principle nomination. Then, if found qualified, an appointment will be offered very soon.</p>

<p>Will I be any more likely to recieve an appointment if I have multiple nominations? I just recieved my second and I’m qualified except for physically (im doing my cfa today).</p>

<p>It depends. It is not necessarily the number of nominations you have but the quality of them. Unless the Academy is able to appoint you with a nomination, it is worthless. Any nomination must be one to which a legal appointment can be granted. I have been accused, probably rightfully so, for being confusing but it is a complex issue which requires lengthy explanations. But here goes an attempt with examples. Suppose your Senator nominates first and your package is not of sufficient strength for you to be considered competitive in the national pool. Unless you are awarded the principal nomination from this slate, your nomination is worthless. When the usually less competitive Representative nominations come out and, and only if, you are the top candidate on this slate, you will be awarded an appointment. So in this case a second nomination was beneficial. However, starting all over and going back to the Senatorial nomination, had you been the principal candidate or if you were national pool eligible, no other nominations are necessary. Just to confuse things a bit with this scenario, suppose you did not receive the principal but, again, were national pool eligible and later when the representative’s slate comes out, you are the principal nominee, since principals are announced prior to pool appointments, you would most likely find out about your appointment sooner. Nice but not mandatory.</p>

<p>Once again, while there are elements of truth to be mined from this mountain, in a nutshell, it’s not accurate. It notes …</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>There are other scenarios here. Just one …suppose you’re ranked as #2 …or lower? In the event that …the principal or others ahead of you make other decisions. You’re the “man!.” </p>

<p>Or suppose, those nominees fail to successfully complete other components … PRT, DoDMERB, or they are not scholastically 3Qed for any # of reasons summarized by an insufficient Whole Person Score … You’re the man.</p>

<p>Only point? Don’t be looking for the correct, complete answer here. And take great caution when I or anyones else self-appoint themselves as “expert.” They all hang on the Yard. ;)</p>

<p>btw, unlike many aberrant examples often portrayed …you know, DoDMERB discovers you have an extra toe, or you have 3 extra wisdom teeth, or …:eek:, this is a not uncommon scenario.</p>

<p>^^^^^
In realty, the MOCs only submit a suggested order of preference. What USNA does is sort it all out and then dole out the nominations to those most eligible. In the scenario you present, of course #1 would not be eligible for the principal nomination and then it would be granted to someone else. Bottom line, if numbers 1 thru 8 all decide to go find themselves for a year by backpacking all over Europe, #9 becomes the principal nomination, and #10, unless he is national pool eligible, has a useless nomination. Therefore, my original very true and very pertinent statement stands:

</p>

<p>Perhaps I could have explained better, but there was nothing at all incorrect about my post.</p>

<p>Yes. And not correct.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Okay, one last attempt. If one is the #1 candidate on a slate, providing they are 3Qed and want the appointment, they are in. The number of nominations will make absolutely no difference.</p>

<p>If one is not, nor becomes so by attrition, the #1 candidate on a list, they are only eligible for the national pool. It only takes one such nomination to gain national pool status and more will not make one more competitive. Furthermore, if they are not national pool competitive, all the nominations in the world will not help.</p>

<p>Anytime anyone is not the #1 candidate on a list and all candidates that are ranked higher, drop out, they will become the #1 candidate and if they are 3qed, they will be offered the principal nomination. Therefore, I suppose in the wildest stretch, the more slates one is on, the greater the chances of everyone ahead of them dropping out (which my “It depends” was intended to cover).</p>

<p>Never assume anything. This is why it is ones best interest to do as the Academy requests, apply to all nominations eligible. There are all kinds of reasons that the person ahead of you on a slate might not be principal. In addition to what WP mentioned, if the #1 candidate is also #1 on another slate, the Academy will have an option as to which MOC to charge him against. This will eliminate him on the other slate, moving #2 up to the principal nomination.</p>

<p>A notably different answer than your first, we might agree. (Nah, probly not.) </p>

<p>But in any case, your origninal statement …

</p>

<p>…might be deemed, well worthless, especially if a nominee is the list’s #9 who attrites to that #1 spot. I’d say that was a pretty worthwhile nomination.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>My attempt was to say the exact same thing. How did I fail?</p>

<p>And in my #9 to #1 example, the Academy WAS able to provide him an appointment. Therefore all my statements stand. The point that I was attempting to make was that the only way a non-national pool eligible candidate would benefit from any nomination slate would be if he were the principal nominee, either by design or by attrition.</p>

<p>The principal nominee to whom the Academy finally awarded the appointment, not necessarily the MOCs initial pick.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Even where you noted early on …</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Of course, as has been noted and duly illustrated, your original claim is, shall we say, baloney, inaccurate, not the case.</p>

<p>More important than hair-splitting, had any reader believed what your wrote, they’d have been misinformed.</p>

<p>The consequent “yes, butting” edifies the correct, complete answer. But when one proclaims to grasp all the facts, be the font of all truth, nothing but the truth, the standard is a tough one to achieve. And sets one up for merited scrutiny.</p>

<p>Practically speaking, I always fall back on what my brutal English teacher-preacher shouted from her pulpit …“Say what you mean, mean what you say.”</p>

<p>She also waxed eloquently and often about brevity, and how ramblings rarely get read. I’m done and that’s for another class.</p>

<p>Whistle Pig you keep babbling on and on about clarity but you have provided none.</p>

<p>The Question was:

The answer: “It depends” is quite correct.
There really is no way of knowing if you will be more likely to get appointed with multiple nominations. Having multiple nominations does not make a candidate MORE qualifed - you don’t get points for a nomination; and indeed, there have been candidates who received a nomination from 3 MOC’s and been rejected. Obviously, if you are not a candidate that is qualifed scholastically, medically and physically all the nominations in the world won’t help you get an appointment.</p>

<p>Having mulitple nominations allows you to compete for an appointment in mulitple categories or on multiple slates. If you get multiple nominations from your MOC’s then this allows you to compete on two or three different slates. If you never rise to the top (become the principle nominee) - then your multiple nominations are moot and you will compete in the national pool.<br>
If you have an MOC and Presidential nom - you will compete in both those categories. If you fail to rise to the top of your MOC slate you might have a chance to be one of the 100 Presidentials and have a better chance at an appointment particularly if you are from a very competitive district.<br>
The most “valuable” nomination after being named “principle” by your MOC is probably the service connected Active duty nomination. The academy has 85 available each year and they are never filled.</p>

<p>It is impossible to tell when applying if multiple nominations will help you. So apply for every nomination for which you are elibigle.</p>

<p>My quote:

Completely correct. Your assumption was that I was referring to the slate when it was submitted. A MOC slate is a highly dynamic document, changing often. My reference was to the slate at the time a nomination and appointment is made. At this time, national pool aside, it is the ‘top candidate’ and the top candidate only who benefits. For your assumption to be correct, it would further imply that only the number one candidate at submittal would be eligible for an appointment and should he subsequently not prove qualified or have a change of plans, the MOC would lose his nomination for the year.</p>