-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Age waiver (OPNAV 1420.1A)
- Thread starter nsixer
- Start date
He gave you good advice.
OPNAVINST 1420.1A
7 Jun 04 PG. 1-3 or/ 9 of 174 on a pdf
a. General Information
(1) OCS is an initial commissioning program for
individuals possessing at least a baccalaureate degree from an
accredited institution. Selectees for OCS may choose, depending
upon individual qualifications, designators within the
Unrestricted Line, Restricted Line, and certain Staff Corps
designators. Appendix H of this manual provides a description of
the designators open to qualified candidates. OCS is a 13-week
program of concentrated officer training and indoctrination
located at Naval Aviation Schools Command, Pensacola, Florida.
(2) Enlisted applicants selected for the program who are
in paygrade E-4 or below are designated officer candidates and
advanced to paygrade E-5 upon reporting to OCS. Enlisted
applicants in paygrade E-5 and above are designated officer
candidates in their present paygrades. Graduates of OCS are
appointed as Ensigns, U.S. Naval Reserve and incur a minimum
active duty obligation of 4 years. Certain designators incur
OPNAVINST 1420.1A CH-3
7 Jun 04
Enclosure (1)
1-3
greater minimum active duty obligation because of follow-on
training required for that designator.
b. Basic Eligibility Requirements. Applicants must be
(1) citizens of the United States. This cannot be
waived.
(2) of good moral character and have no record of
disciplinary action within 3 years of application.
(3) possess a baccalaureate degree or advanced degree
from an accredited institution.
(4) at least 19 years old and meet designator specific
age limitations which are outlined in MILPERSMAN 1131-010.
(5) meet specific program qualifications and aptitude
scores.
(6) physically qualified and meet two consecutive
“good-low” final PRT score prior to entry into the program.
(7) recommended by their commanding officer.
Talked to the Pilot program Officer today, and didn't like what he had to say. For priors/active duty who are 29 yrs old and over, there is no age waiver as it say's in the OPNAV 1420.1A for the pilot designator up to your 31st birthday. You can scrap the 1420 and all the MILS PER manual, they are not even following those guidelines. I don't know where they came up with this because it doesn't even relate to anything toward's the OCS program. They are using the U.S. Code: Title 10, Program Authorization, good luck with it, it's a whole bunch of gibberish. It was told to my Chief that the OPNAV is being revised right now and a new version should be out in months, that's why the processors are not following it. Sorry, but for you civilians, it's still 27 yrs old.
So if you're prior/active duty trying to fly and you are approaching your 29th birthday, don't procrasinate with your OCS application. Otherwise you'll end up in my shoes. I wish I would of known about this 6 months, you just got to hate the system.
So if you're prior/active duty trying to fly and you are approaching your 29th birthday, don't procrasinate with your OCS application. Otherwise you'll end up in my shoes. I wish I would of known about this 6 months, you just got to hate the system.
Did you talk to anyone else in your chain of command? DIVO, DH, XO, CO, etc? They may be able to get involved and help you out.
-ea6bflyr
This seems to come up every so often. I'll admit, it can be confusing. Bottom line is that in recent history (last 3-5 years is all I can remember) the age limit for pilots has always been 27 w/ up to 24 months waived for prior service, month for month.
Jus2much has got it figured out. All the other crap references back to the 27 year limit. As to the Title 10 Program Authorization, that is where all the basic accession requirements come from and is the basis of the Recruiting Command's CRUITMANOFF. The key there is that it is US CODE TITLE 10. In other words, it is THE law, not just Navy policy or Instruction. Hope something works out for all you guys. Honestly, NFO is such a good deal you will never really look back.
Jus2much has got it figured out. All the other crap references back to the 27 year limit. As to the Title 10 Program Authorization, that is where all the basic accession requirements come from and is the basis of the Recruiting Command's CRUITMANOFF. The key there is that it is US CODE TITLE 10. In other words, it is THE law, not just Navy policy or Instruction. Hope something works out for all you guys. Honestly, NFO is such a good deal you will never really look back.
What's the FOFAR? Can you take the test again? I'm having trouble accepting that this is a done deal for you. What did your skipper have to say?
Yet another WTF? The requirements are clearly established and the Navy min scores for ASTB are:
AQR/FAR
Pilot: 3/4
NFO: 3/4
Marines ASTB min score requirements are a different animal.
This comes from the OPNAVINST 1420.1A: (to answer S.O.B.'s question)
Hmm...not sure what's going on here.
-ea6bflyr
This is going to require a drug deal.
Everything in the Navy is waiverable by someone. Even waivers are waiverable. I did a Lateral Transfer a few years ago, and the policy was 27 years old with a month for month waiver up to 48 months (for service prior to age 27). I didn't get into the Navy until I was almost 26 (16 months before my 27th Birthday), so I was eligible for a waiver up to the age of 28 and 4 months. Now, I didn't know this, and, in fact, the detailer (an LT) who was in charge of Lat Transfers told me that I was eligible for an age waiver (I had just turned 29). About 4 weeks before my package was due, I got a call from him telling me that he had misunderstood the instruction and that I was not eligible for the waiver. Not a happy day
Anyway, I asked him who had written the policy and was directed to the Assistant Aviation Community Manager (a CDR). I sent an email requesting a clarification. The response confirmed what I had been told about the waiver and encouraged me to apply for NFO. That was not the answer I wanted, so I sent a reply explaining (very respectfully, but in no uncertain terms) all I had been through in my quest to become a pilot, and that I did not want to be an NFO -- I wanted to be a pilot. As fate would have it, the Assistant Aviation Community Manager had gone out of town for the week, and his boss was answering his email. His response: "Send in the package, we'll give you the waiver".
Now the age waiver policy may have changed in the past few years, but the fact remains that there is someone out there who can fix this problem; probably the Aviation Community Manager. If your CO is really supportive of what you are trying to do, ask him to get on the phone and work some magic. Honestly, I wouldn't mess around with anyone lower than the Community Manager; he makes policy, the others just follow it.
Good Luck. I know it can be done, because I did it.
Everything in the Navy is waiverable by someone. Even waivers are waiverable. I did a Lateral Transfer a few years ago, and the policy was 27 years old with a month for month waiver up to 48 months (for service prior to age 27). I didn't get into the Navy until I was almost 26 (16 months before my 27th Birthday), so I was eligible for a waiver up to the age of 28 and 4 months. Now, I didn't know this, and, in fact, the detailer (an LT) who was in charge of Lat Transfers told me that I was eligible for an age waiver (I had just turned 29). About 4 weeks before my package was due, I got a call from him telling me that he had misunderstood the instruction and that I was not eligible for the waiver. Not a happy day
Anyway, I asked him who had written the policy and was directed to the Assistant Aviation Community Manager (a CDR). I sent an email requesting a clarification. The response confirmed what I had been told about the waiver and encouraged me to apply for NFO. That was not the answer I wanted, so I sent a reply explaining (very respectfully, but in no uncertain terms) all I had been through in my quest to become a pilot, and that I did not want to be an NFO -- I wanted to be a pilot. As fate would have it, the Assistant Aviation Community Manager had gone out of town for the week, and his boss was answering his email. His response: "Send in the package, we'll give you the waiver".
Now the age waiver policy may have changed in the past few years, but the fact remains that there is someone out there who can fix this problem; probably the Aviation Community Manager. If your CO is really supportive of what you are trying to do, ask him to get on the phone and work some magic. Honestly, I wouldn't mess around with anyone lower than the Community Manager; he makes policy, the others just follow it.
Good Luck. I know it can be done, because I did it.
This is utter Bull Sh!t.:icon_rage I don't know everything surrounding your case, but suffice it say you would not be where you are if your case was not waiverable. Glad it worked out for you. People forget that some of these standards are the LAW. Reference my previous post. No one can waive the law. If the law or regulation proscribes waivers, then so be it. This notion that some of you guys have that if you wish upon a star, and bitch long and loud enough you will get your way just because you deserve it is wearing a bit thin with me. Not everyone in this world gets what they want. Not everyone in this world is deserving of what they want and yes, some people very deserving of their fondest wish just get screwed. It would be more fair in the long run to simply encourage people to work hard and pursue every avenue available to them to get what they want, including proscribed waivers. You give false hope and make a lot of work for the chain of command when you state that everything is waiverable in the Navy. It simply is not so.
I guess Wink and I won't agree on this one. I am willing to restate my first line as "MANY things in the Navy are waiverable. Even waivers are waiverable". The fact is, I know this to be true. Recruiters, Detailers, Blue and Gold Officers, etc. don't like to hear this, but the truth of the matter is there are too many misinformed and/or lazy "gatekeepers" out there. I was fortunate enough to be working with a detailer who realized that he gave me bad advice and had the courage to admit it and point me in the direction of someone above him who could help. I am not advising that you just go straight to the highest level, but if you're getting bad advice or conflicting information (as seems to be the case with nsixer), and the person who is working with you will not own up to that, bypass them. It's your career
Bottom line: nsixer you can listen to the people who tell you it can't be done, or you can listen to the people who have done what you're trying to do. (I'm not trying to offend anyone here or create a big stir, I'm just telling people what worked for me.) Now I obviously can't guarantee that you will have the same results that I had, but I can guarantee you one thing: if you don't try, you won't get what you want.
I don't know what the law stated, but I certainly know what the instruction and the approved waiver stated. I was not eligible, yet the person who had written the waiver gave an exception to the waiver. He didn't rewrite the policy or the law, he just decided that it was the right thing to do and he did it.
People waive the law every day. That police officer who just watched you drive by at 63 in a 55 waived the law. There is currently a law about the requirements for entrance into the U.S. - about 13 million people are on waivers for that law. A "law" is actually called a statute until it is enforced by the Executive and upheld by the Judicial. If some guy in Millington decides to make an exception to a waiver, or policy, or "law" (and his superiors don't care), no one is going to come knocking down his door.
So just give up when someone tells you "no"?
I don't give false hope, I just tell people what is possible. Isn't it part of the job of the chain of command to help their people get what they want out of their careers? That's what my chain did for me, and I would hope that nsixer's would do the same for him.
Bottom line: nsixer you can listen to the people who tell you it can't be done, or you can listen to the people who have done what you're trying to do. (I'm not trying to offend anyone here or create a big stir, I'm just telling people what worked for me.) Now I obviously can't guarantee that you will have the same results that I had, but I can guarantee you one thing: if you don't try, you won't get what you want.
I would appreciate it if you clearly stated whether I am "misinformed" or "lazy". While I do make mistakes and have no trouble admitting it, I am not misinformed about this since I have many years experience in this area. As to lazy, I can not know how you could know whether I am or not since you have not witnessed my work ethic. I can say that I have spent more time personally helping young people make their dreams come true, mostly at no pay as a reservist in a non pay billet, then you have come close to counseling in your short career.
And yes. I do simply say NO some times. I have said it many times. That is because I know what is waiverable and what isn't and I have the courage to do my job and not just let someone continue on an impossible quest. I am a fvcking gate keeper. And you should be glad I am. My job is to man the Navy with the very best officer candidates and midshipmen I can muster. That rarely comes from a guy that needs a "waiver for a waiver" or needs to take his case to the Chief of Staff,
You describe anarchy. Cops who witness a law being violated (BTW the speeding example you give is not a criminal offense, it is a civil traffic violation) and do nothing about it are not "waiving" any law. They are simply not doing their jobs. If you received a waiver in the Navy like the illegal immigrants you site above, then you had better be worried that someone will decide you don't deserve it some day. Illegal immigrants can and do become the subject of law enforcement. No one can authorize some one to break the law. Law says you have to be a minimum age to enter the military, can't be waived. Go ahead and find some one that will waive that for me. Law says you have to be a US citizen to be an officer, go ahead and find the guy that can waive that. Those are laws, not instructions or policies. Many people simply do not know the difference between policy and instruction and the law. They are often intertwined and transparent to the unknowing. BTW, your comment regarding statue and law is incorrect.
I am a 50 year old male that never played baseball past Little League. When a professional baseball scout says "no" I can't be a big league ball payer, should I just give up? Get a grip. I don't care what parents tell their kids today. It takes more then just desire and a dream. You have to have talent, qualifications, physical ability, and the willingness to work hard. Sometimes you have to accept 'NO". LIfe is a bitch.
Of course some things are waiverable, usually the policy or instruction specifically authorizes it. This notion that everything is waiverable is wrong. Most of the guys on AW are not prior service. They have many fewer options and resources then a active or prior service guy. In any case, where someone "waives" or gives someone a pass on policy or instruction, the persona doing the waiver has either been authorized to give the waiver specifically by instruction or he is the guy that wrote the policy. This is the Navy. Policy and instruction is essentially an order. How do you think the Navy would react if some LT decided to waive the NATOPS check requirement for his buddys? That isn't a law. Just OPNAV 3710. Sure, get the guy that wrote the policy or instruction and he could change his mind based on his original intent. But imagine you have given the order that your division has to work the weekend to prepare for a material inspection and some sailor comes up to you and says, "Oh please sir, I'm a great guy, and I planned on sleeping in Saturday and mowing my lawn. Will you please waive your order for me to work the weekend." How effective will that leader be if he grants waivers like that?
I thought that maybe we should just let this die, but that's no fun.
Obviously, we have had different experiences when it comes to these issues and will probably never agree. Regardless, I do respect your opinions and experience, and your sincere desire to help.
Never meant to imply that you were lazy or misinformed. I have no doubt that you take your job very seriously and give it your all. Unfortunately, there are others out there who do not do this. We obviously hear a lot more about the bad recruiters (even though they are the minority) than the good, but I have heard enough stories and have had enough personal experiences to know that there is a legitimate problem in this area.
And I have the courage to keep going when the odds are stacked against me. If you had been my recruiter, you probably would have said no; I would have found a way around you. That probably pisses you off, but in the long run, my career is a lot more important to me than whether or not I make a recruiter mad.
I am glad you do your job and do it well, and when you can say "never" rather than "rarely", I'll stop encouraging people.
Bottom line is that laws go unenforced all the time. Whether you want to call it a waiver or "simply not doing their jobs" doesn't really matter; the end result is about the same.
The comment came from a neighbor who is a professor with a J.D. emphasizing Constitutional Law. If you have a reference that disputes this, I would be glad to take a look; until then, I'm going with what I said before.
Let's compare apples to apples. We're not talking about 50 year old who hasn't played since Little League. We're talking about a kid who has been playing Triple-A ball for several years with quite a bit of success, and a scout coming up to him and saying, "son, I think you probably have what it takes to play in the Bigs, but you know, you're about a year older than what we like to see, so no thanks"
I was talking to a prior about my experience of get into flight school while on AD, and suggesting that he go to the guy who wrote the policy. Based on what you wrote above, I'm a little confused as to why you had such a problem with my recommendations.
Once again, we have a fruit problem. You are comparing this guy’s career with "sleeping in Saturday and mowing my lawn". I think that the leader who has the ability to look at the rules and policies (which are often broad and arbitrary), and says, "I understand the rules and why we have them, but in this case, we need to apply them differently or make an exception" will be a highly effective leader.
Obviously, we have had different experiences when it comes to these issues and will probably never agree. Regardless, I do respect your opinions and experience, and your sincere desire to help.
ecofriendlyrich
Member
Age Waiver
I was pro select for SNA and SNFO in November 2007, I was over 27 years old by one month. I have no prior active service and a civilian. Can someone explain that?
I was pro select for SNA and SNFO in November 2007, I was over 27 years old by one month. I have no prior active service and a civilian. Can someone explain that?
No one likes a sea lawyer, quit trying to argue the finer points of Navy law, rules and regs with a former recruiter and current Blue Gold officer. That is until you become a qualified JAG or NAVPERS bureaucrat.
Lets stick to trying to help the OP find out as much information as possible so that he can get a reasonable resolution to his issue.
You got lucky and slipped through the cracks.