IWC board 29-Nov-21

[Creeping_Geep]

From the December Mustang Lariat, consistent with what the CW OCM put out with the slide above

6820 Update: 6820 LDO sundown is not official until a NAVADMIN is released, however, we anticipate FY23 being the last board. Information Warfare Community values enlisted experience, as such, we anticipate an increase in CWO billets and have adjusted the draft OCS PA to allow applicants to apply with up to 10 years prior TIS.

They're really talking out of both sides of their mouths, aren't they? "We value enlisted experience, as such we are implementing TIS limits." It's almost as sad as RDML Scheidt's memo announcing the sundowning of the 6810 program earlier this year. "I am personally committed to maximizing CW accession opportunities, therefore I am ending an entire avenue of commissioning for enlisted Sailors."

edit: "Something something Great Power Competition, therefore no more CW LDOs". Lol. Lmao.

 

[Creeping_Geep]

Their value in enlisted experience is what caused issues in the past, the 10 year limit should help.

I can't speak to past issues, but the current issue has several contributing causal factors, to include mismanaged growth of control grade billets* and failure to retain officers after their obliserve. CW didn't reach 90%+ opportunity to O-4 from a handful of O-3E's punching their tickets at 20 years, and the IWC isn't going to get out of the personnel hole it's in by digging faster.

*NB: an O-6 level IWC command recently divided itself up into something like six subordinate O-5 commands, complete with all associated staffs (plus another at the O-6 level, of course!)

 

[exNavyOffRec]

They're really talking out of both sides of their mouths, aren't they? "We value enlisted experience, as such we are implementing TIS limits." It's almost as sad as RDML Scheidt's memo announcing the sundowning of the 6810 program earlier this year. "I am personally committed to maximizing CW accession opportunities, therefore I am ending an entire avenue of commissioning for enlisted Sailors."

edit: "Something something Great Power Competition, therefore no more CW LDOs". Lol. Lmao.

What about those CW LDO's that don't have 4 years degrees, how will that work for them? I get what you are saying.

I can't speak to past issues, but the current issue has several contributing causal factors, to include mismanaged growth of control grade billets* and failure to retain officers after their obliserve. CW didn't reach 90%+ opportunity to O-4 from a handful of O-3E's punching their tickets at 20 years, and the IWC isn't going to get out of the personnel hole it's in by digging faster.

*NB: an O-6 level IWC command recently divided itself up into something like six subordinate O-5 commands, complete with all associated staffs (plus another at the O-6 level, of course!)

CW had smaller numbers several years ago so it didn't take many O-3E's leaving or O-4's to cause disruption.

10+ years ago getting selected as IP or CW was not common if you didn't have prior service in those fields, I think they are still trying to adjust from years of issues.

 

[taranteeno]

Congrats to all who have been selected!!!! That is awesome!

I literally am simply waiting on my meeting with my CO (07 Jan) before he signs my CO rec letter. With the Intel board selecting 43 applicants, do you all think there will even be a February Intel board? Last I was tracking was they wanted to fill 49 quotas for Intel. Or should I just wait for the June board?

Also, PRIMS is down so the CFL has not been able to update my PRIMS. What would you guys suggest I do to get my updated PRT scores depicted in my packet? Do you think the signed page 2 of the packet will suffice?

 

[RhodesReese]

Congrats to all who have been selected!!!! That is awesome!

I literally am simply waiting on my meeting with my CO (07 Jan) before he signs my CO rec letter. With the Intel board selecting 43 applicants, do you all think there will even be a February Intel board? Last I was tracking was they wanted to fill 49 quotas for Intel. Or should I just wait for the June board?

Also, PRIMS is down so the CFL has not been able to update my PRIMS. What would you guys suggest I do to get my updated PRT scores depicted in my packet? Do you think the signed page 2 of the packet will suffice?

I would still get my package complete and submit for the February board. It was “closed” for November but opened up. If it doesn’t go to the board for reviews they’ll probably hold it for the next board.

As for PRIMs I don’t think you need to submit your actual prims printout with your package. You just need to put down the scores and have your CFL sign that they are true. So if you’re CFL has your scores, just put down what you got and have him sign.

 

[exNavyOffRec]

I would still get my package complete and submit for the February board. It was “closed” for November but opened up. If it doesn’t go to the board for reviews they’ll probably hold it for the next board.

As for PRIMs I don’t think you need to submit your actual prims printout with your package. You just need to put down the scores and have your CFL sign that they are true. So if you’re CFL has your scores, just put down what you got and have him sign.

What happened was the word came out that the designator was closed, but that wasn't the entire picture. The designator was closed but it was closed because they already had enough applicants to do the selections they needed. This is what can happen when information is passed from NRC to NRD to Recruiters and the full message isn't passed along. What should have happened is the info put out that the designator was closed after the Nov board due to NRC having enough applications to make the final selections. The actual info was pieced together after NRC processors said people were at board and the dashboard reflected the real story. It was very confusing to many people.

The interesting thing is the board did not use all the available selections for the November board, they had 49 selections to give out but they only found 43 applications to give Pro Y's to.

The dashboard now reflects 6 remaining selections with a board date of 14 Feb even though the designator is closed. The dashboard also shows they will have a max of 9 1st and 2nd choice applications at board for those 6 spots so get that application in fast.

 

[CWO_change]

What about those CW LDO's that don't have 4 years degrees, how will that work for them? I get what you are saying.

CW had smaller numbers several years ago so it didn't take many O-3E's leaving or O-4's to cause disruption.

10+ years ago getting selected as IP or CW was not common if you didn't have prior service in those fields, I think they are still trying to adjust from years of issues.

This is true. And while this is only one part of the problem, it was a part of the problem that could more readily be addressed by instituting the TIS requirement. I'd wager that a 6 year prior enlisted SVM who commissions as a CW officer is still likely to get out at 20 years, but at least then s/he'll be able to more substantially support control grade billeting.

On the flip side, there is no true fix for people getting out "early" when discussing new accessions leaving in the O2-O3 pay grades, which has become more of a problem it seems as cyberspace operations have taken on greater importance in the CW community and officers are getting that "cyber" experience that is easily transferrable (at least this has been my anecdotal observation).

So you fix what you can as you try to mitigate the other issues via other avenues such as increasing the number of new accessions, allowing for more lateral transfers, etc.

For context, the number that the CW community is undermanned at the O3 level went from less than 40 in the August report I saw to I believe over 80 in the November report I reviewed from the OCM.

 

[taranteeno]

What happened was the word came out that the designator was closed, but that wasn't the entire picture. The designator was closed but it was closed because they already had enough applicants to do the selections they needed. This is what can happen when information is passed from NRC to NRD to Recruiters and the full message isn't passed along. What should have happened is the info put out that the designator was closed after the Nov board due to NRC having enough applications to make the final selections. The actual info was pieced together after NRC processors said people were at board and the dashboard reflected the real story. It was very confusing to many people.

The interesting thing is the board did not use all the available selections for the November board, they had 49 selections to give out but they only found 43 applications to give Pro Y's to.

The dashboard now reflects 6 remaining selections with a board date of 14 Feb even though the designator is closed. The dashboard also shows they will have a max of 9 1st and 2nd choice applications at board for those 6 spots so get that application in fast.

I would still get my package complete and submit for the February board. It was “closed” for November but opened up. If it doesn’t go to the board for reviews they’ll probably hold it for the next board.

As for PRIMs I don’t think you need to submit your actual prims printout with your package. You just need to put down the scores and have your CFL sign that they are true. So if you’re CFL has your scores, just put down what you got and have him sign.

@RhodesReese : Yup! Sounds like a plan. I'll press forward with the PRIMS data I have. Thank you!
@exNavyOffRec : That is honestly alot. It's all over the place. When you say "The dashboard also shows they will have a max of 9 1st and 2nd choice applications at board for those 6 spots", what do you mean? What are 1st and 2nd choice apps? And does the board not accept all apps that are submitted prior to the board?

 

[CWO_change]

I can't speak to past issues, but the current issue has several contributing causal factors, to include mismanaged growth of control grade billets* and failure to retain officers after their obliserve. CW didn't reach 90%+ opportunity to O-4 from a handful of O-3E's punching their tickets at 20 years, and the IWC isn't going to get out of the personnel hole it's in by digging faster.

*NB: an O-6 level IWC command recently divided itself up into something like six subordinate O-5 commands, complete with all associated staffs (plus another at the O-6 level, of course!)

I'll just add that the creation of CWG-6 and establishment of the subordinate commands did not seem to create more officer billets (that the Navy was subsequently unable to staff) than existed previously under NIOC MD. Subordinate O5 commands under CWG-6 are still woefully undermanned in many ways. They are still pulling sailors out to work out of rate as admin clerks as an example and still are required to staff various roles (to include JO roles) that NIOC MD previously had to staff under FCC and USCC/CNMF/JFHQ DODIN. All in all, I wouldn't be surprised if the number of officers under the CWG-6 structure is essentially the same as the number of officers that were at NIOC MD.

For context and rough comparison, when I was at NIOC HI--which was roughly the same size at NIOC MD, though MD was a little bigger--we had the O6 CO (for two years, we had two O6s, but that was a funky story related to spousal colocation), something like 8-9 O5s (the XO, OPS, and various directorate leads were CDRs, in addition to some one-offs like this one 1830 CDR who was assigned to the command), roughly 15-20 LCDRs across the enterprise, some 40+ odd LTs, etc. We don't seem to have very different numbers under the CWG-6 structure now, tbh. There is still one O6 billet (the CWG-6 CDRE) and 7 CDR billets that I'm tracking (CWG-6 XO and the 6 activity COs), though this is a decrease in the number of O5 billets as several commands previously had XO-CO fleet ups, which meant two O5s at those commands at a given time, though this practice is getting phased out. The number of LCDR and LT billets I'm tracking don't seem to be very much out of whack with the current NIOC HI numbers for context.

 

[exNavyOffRec]

This is true. And while this is only one part of the problem, it was a part of the problem that could more readily be addressed by instituting the TIS requirement. I'd wager that a 6 year prior enlisted SVM who commissions as a CW officer is still likely to get out at 20 years, but at least then s/he'll be able to more substantially support control grade billeting.

On the flip side, there is no true fix for people getting out "early" when discussing new accessions leaving in the O2-O3 pay grades, which has become more of a problem it seems as cyberspace operations have taken on greater importance in the CW community and officers are getting that "cyber" experience that is easily transferrable (at least this has been my anecdotal observation).

So you fix what you can as you try to mitigate the other issues via other avenues such as increasing the number of new accessions, allowing for more lateral transfers, etc.

For context, the number that the CW community is undermanned at the O3 level went from less than 40 in the August report I saw to I believe over 80 in the November report I reviewed from the OCM.

I would think that allowing more lateral transfers would mitigate some manning issues.

I can understand manning issues at the O3 level as that is where many end up leaving after their initial contract, especially for those with no prior service. Then you also have those that have right around 10 years prior service who become retirement eligible at 20 when they would also be O3, I know many prior service who left right at 20 as an O3

Are you seeing many leaving to work for the 3 letter agencies? I worked with a Intel LT who ended up going to work for one of them, I remember going to career fairs and it wasn't uncommon for the people the 3 letter agencies sent to the career fairs to be prior junior officers.

 

[CWO_change]

I would think that allowing more lateral transfers would mitigate some manning issues.

I can understand manning issues at the O3 level as that is where many end up leaving after their initial contract, especially for those with no prior service. Then you also have those that have right around 10 years prior service who become retirement eligible at 20 when they would also be O3, I know many prior service who left right at 20 as an O3

Are you seeing many leaving to work for the 3 letter agencies? I worked with a Intel LT who ended up going to work for one of them, I remember going to career fairs and it wasn't uncommon for the people the 3 letter agencies sent to the career fairs to be prior junior officers.

In my admittedly anecdotal experience (still, my observations cover dozens of people who served at various commands across geographic regions), a minority appear to be going to work at 3 letter agencies or to work for various military departments/teams as a GS/GG employees, with more going to work in the private sector (either as contractors or otherwise). Contractor work seems especially prevalent for those who served in cyber billets in my experience. Those who don't have much of a cyber background have tended to stay with various 3 letter agencies conducting more of a traditional SIGINT/intelligence role. Again, this is my experience, but I haven't seen anything to suggest that this isn't representative of what is going on with folks who leave the CW community generally.

 

[exNavyOffRec]

@RhodesReese : Yup! Sounds like a plan. I'll press forward with the PRIMS data I have. Thank you!
@exNavyOffRec : That is honestly alot. It's all over the place. When you say "The dashboard also shows they will have a max of 9 1st and 2nd choice applications at board for those 6 spots", what do you mean? What are 1st and 2nd choice apps? And does the board not accept all apps that are submitted prior to the board?

If a person puts SWO as their 1st choice and Intel as their 2nd choice they are included in the "max 9 1st and 2nd choice applications at board", but if a person puts IP 1st, CW 2nd, and Intel 3rd then they aren't included in those numbers, so while the max is 9 applications there could be a few more due to them listing Intel as 3rd choice.

NRC controls the applications that go to board, they not only have an application due date but also a max number at board, so like many have found out you can submit prior to the deadline but not actually make the board. It is possible that the applications showing as waiting for the Intel board were submitted but not processed in time.

It also looks like that NRC pushed all 80+ Intel application to the last board vice the 74 max at board they indicated, so there won't be a lot of time for others to submit, which is good, but what the board has shown is even though they had 80+ applications they only found 43 fit to give a pro Y to even thought they had 49 to select.

 

[taranteeno]

If a person puts SWO as their 1st choice and Intel as their 2nd choice they are included in the "max 9 1st and 2nd choice applications at board", but if a person puts IP 1st, CW 2nd, and Intel 3rd then they aren't included in those numbers, so while the max is 9 applications there could be a few more due to them listing Intel as 3rd choice.

NRC controls the applications that go to board, they not only have an application due date but also a max number at board, so like many have found out you can submit prior to the deadline but not actually make the board. It is possible that the applications showing as waiting for the Intel board were submitted but not processed in time.

It also looks like that NRC pushed all 80+ Intel application to the last board vice the 74 max at board they indicated, so there won't be a lot of time for others to submit, which is good, but what the board has shown is even though they had 80+ applications they only found 43 fit to give a pro Y to even thought they had 49 to select.

Okay I understand now. Wow! Thank you very much for the explanantion. This process has not been the most straightforward, there's so many little fine print type of things that candidates can encounter. It sucks, but honestly, the tedious nature of the application probably weeds out tons of potential applicants.

 

[exNavyOffRec]

Okay I understand now. Wow! Thank you very much for the explanantion. This process has not been the most straightforward, there's so many little fine print type of things that candidates can encounter. It sucks, but honestly, the tedious nature of the application probably weeds out tons of potential applicants.

Unfortunately for AD you are right, now the process is easy and straightforward for civilian applicants, with the exception of medical I would have applicants come in, test, and have their application ready to submit in a few hours. In many cases for AD what causes the issues is that NPC won't update the 1420 as things change and they do change, this causes AD to miss things or do things that aren't required. The other issue is officers giving advice to those applying for OCS that don't understand the OCS process as it is not like LDO/CWO/NROTC/USNA and some of the things I have heard AD applicants told just blow my mind. Here are a few "AD applications are reviewed and picked as they are submitted", "GPA doesn't matter for AD applicants", "If AD they over look your degree so you can apply CEC with a History degree", and there are others. It is rare for an AD command to not be somewhat close to an NTAG/NRD where they can't ask an OR questions, I told some of these guys to let their commands know I was willing to answer questions and go over the programs and no a single phone call was received.

 

[taranteeno]

Unfortunately for AD you are right, now the process is easy and straightforward for civilian applicants, with the exception of medical I would have applicants come in, test, and have their application ready to submit in a few hours. In many cases for AD what causes the issues is that NPC won't update the 1420 as things change and they do change, this causes AD to miss things or do things that aren't required. The other issue is officers giving advice to those applying for OCS that don't understand the OCS process as it is not like LDO/CWO/NROTC/USNA and some of the things I have heard AD applicants told just blow my mind. Here are a few "AD applications are reviewed and picked as they are submitted", "GPA doesn't matter for AD applicants", "If AD they over look your degree so you can apply CEC with a History degree", and there are others. It is rare for an AD command to not be somewhat close to an NTAG/NRD where they can't ask an OR questions, I told some of these guys to let their commands know I was willing to answer questions and go over the programs and no a single phone call was received.

This has literally been my journey. I've gotten so much mixed guidance from career counselors, recruiters, mentors, etc.. I have fumbled through the package and I am basically done. Hopefully it will all be worth it in the end.

One more question for you: I will need a med waiver due to my anxiety diagnosis. However, my doc recommended me for a waiver due to the adjustment disorder not hindering my ability to work effectively. That said, on the checklist it states "applicants must be fully medically qualified prior to the deadline in order to be forwarded to the Selection Board". How do I get fully qualified prior to the deadline if I submit my entire package all at once? And how long does it take to fully qualify someone with an adjustment disorder? Do I find out right away? Or does it take weeks or months?