FY16 Chief Selection Board

[Tony]

Next we await the reports of Chief Selectee apparel showing up at the NEX

 

Don't forget CNP callout

[Guest AEGFC87]

Just looked at last years thread. It was reported by multiple sources on here July 15.

So it looks like the first week in August is still a decent guess then.

[Guest Blondie]

So it looks like the first week in August is still a decent guess then.

I'd have to check last year's thread to be absolutely certain, but I recall that last year's boards were delayed due to (I think) flooding in Tennessee.

[Guest Ordy]

I'd have to check last year's thread to be absolutely certain, but I recall that last year's boards were delayed due to (I think) flooding in Tennessee.

Was that last year?  Or the year before, but I do remember that happening...  I think there was a minor computer hickup there this year as well.  Either way, 29th or the 5th.  I'm hoping for the 29th, even though I will be on leave... Sooner the better, I HATE the last two weeks...

[Guest Ordy]

As of this year they will no longer be doing the holds. If you would have been on the list and your PRIMS or whatever else is wrong, you're scratched from the list with no notification. At least that's what my Senior Chief who has been on the board before told us several months ago.

Well that would suck for people who had clerical errors...  But if that were true, wouldn't there have been some kind of NAVADMIN stating a change in the procedures?

[Guest AWFChief]

I'd have to check last year's thread to be absolutely certain, but I recall that last year's boards were delayed due to (I think) flooding in Tennessee.

 

FY11 results were released late because of the Millington flood.

 

Just got done looking through last years thread and if things go the same we should expect 5 Aug around 0800 EST.

 

Here's what I found message release wise

 

 

FY     DATE                  DAY          MESSAGE                      TIME

 

 

2001  04AUG2000         TUE            NAVADMIN 198/00       1100 EDT

2002  03AUG2001          FRI             NAVADMIN 197/01       1200 EDT

2003  02AUG2002          FRI             NAVADMIN 238/02       1200 EDT

2004  06AUG2003         WED           NAVADMIN 218/03       1300 EDT

2005  28JUL2004          WED           NAVADMIN 173/04       1100 EDT

2006  28JUL2005          THU            NAVADMIN 183/05       1100 EDT

2007  04AUG2006         FRI             NAVADMIN 221/06       1500 EDT

2008  08AUG2007        WED           NAVADMIN 196/07       1300 EDT

2009 01AUG2008          FRI             NAVADMIN 213/08       1500 EDT

2010 31JUL2009           FRI             NAVADMIN 230/09       1500 EDT

2011 11AUG2010         WED           NAVADMIN 269/10       1300 EDT

2012 01AUG2011         MON           NAVADMIN 233/11       1300 EDT

2013 31JUL2012           TUE            NAVADMIN 232/12       1300 EDT

2014 31JUL2013           WED           NAVADMIN 193/13       1500 EDT

[Guest FCC_Thawk]

Well that would suck for people who had clerical errors...  But if that were true, wouldn't there have been some kind of NAVADMIN stating a change in the procedures?

I agree.  I believe that something that critical would be addressed in the NAVADMIN.  PRIMS data isn't looked at by the board members, but there is a scrub post-selection for PRT failures, NJP's, etc.  Anyway, now the waiting game is in full swing.  One of the Chiefs that I work with was a recorder on the board.  I'm not going to say anything to her, but I will be paying attention to any change of mannerisms from her when she gets back   Fingers crossed ladies and gentlemen!

[Guest FCC_Thawk]

With the board being done, my guess now is July 29th for triad and the 30th for general release.  Two weeks is usually the timeframe that it takes for it to go through the chop chain and CNP call out from my experience.

[Guest Tincan_OS]

this is my first time up for Chief, what exactly is the CNP call out?

[Guest FCC_Thawk]

this is my first time up for Chief, what exactly is the CNP call out?

From Dogg on last year's thread: Call out is when the board president meets with the CNP to convince him that the board went smoothly without any glitch. If the CNP buys what the Board President is pitching, he will validate the results and they can be released immediately after his approval.

[Guest Ordy]

I'll wager a 12 pack of virtual beer that the release will be 5 August. 

[Guest seabee42]

http://www.npc.navy.mil/bupers-npc/boards/activedutyenlisted/Pages/GeneralInformation.aspx

The board DOES NOT look at PRIMS data before or after the board. A PFA failure does not equal not making it. Where are all you people getting this? The advancement manual? The PRT instruction? It's not in there at all. They are just very persistent rumors. Like that the board looks back only five years. Do your research.

1. The above link is to the selection board brief ON NPC. It outlines that the board does not EVER look at PRIMS nor is anyone put on hold for a PFA failure. In the questions section.

2. If you failed a PRT OR PFA, you only have to make up one on FEP, to be put off of FEP. You have to have 2 failures for it to effect anything, and being that an evaluation period is a year, as long as you passed the next one you could still get an EP. I know, this happened to me and I was still ranked #1. Look it up. People make mistakes, and the PRT is big deal at a ranking board but not so much balanced against what could be a great record. And as an anecdote, I heard it just doesn't matter that much. Know anyone who failed and made it? Of course you do. Not because it was their only fault. Because 1 failure doesn't even carry any wieght in its own instruction.

3. The board looks back as far as it needs to. I could give all the anectdotal evidence in the world but it's in the instructions. The advancement manual says so, and they look at field codes 30 to 38, and that is every eval you have ever had. They might cut it off for expediency but if your rate has a very low percentage of quotas then they will go back a lot further to gauge sustained superior performance emphasis then mostly on the "sustained" part.

I am not trying to ruffle feathers, just actually look these things up, it's public knowledge. I've talked to a lot of past board members and the only thing that they all agree on is that you should read the instructions for yourself, write evals to the board, and try hard from when you join the navy, not when you make first class. And that you can have more than 1 mistake in your record and still be ready. You have to have REAL responsibilities to be able to make truly huge mistakes, even if it's more than one, you must be doing something for your CO and Chiefs to give you those responsibilities. And that's what they are looking for. Ready to be a Chief. Taking care of yourself to make sure you are perfect "sometimes" means you might be playing it too safe. That's my five cents. The last bit is conjecture from shipmates the numbered bits are true. If you ask for chapter and verse, forget it, look it up.

+1 ?

[Guest Squidly]

Can I go all in on that one Navy20?

RUMINT, scuttlebutt, the fact that there are no baseline minimum requirements, go/no go, or any type of debriefing for non-selectees, all lend credence to the unintentional misinformation spreading and blatant fallacious theories. The I heard from a guy that knew a guy that was at the board stuff is pure conjecture. Maybe one day some of us will be able to step behind the curtain and behold the mighty Oz firsthand.

"Knowing is half the battle."

-Shipwreck (GI Joe)

[Guest Blondie]

 Taking care of yourself to make sure you are perfect "sometimes" means you might be playing it too safe

 

I was with you up until this part.  I cannot endorse ever advising Sailors to not strive to be the absolute best they can be at all times, and introducing a notion that there could be such a thing as "too good" into their minds does exactly that.  The precept for selection has certainly never said to keep a weather eye on eligibles that appear perfect.  In fact, I have it on good authority that the board members seek to identify the "shoe-ins" early so they have more time to rack and stack the folks who are not quite so obviously perfect later on

 

[Guest Dusten]

Yeah, that reads wrong. Not the intention at all. I kind of touched on it in my next post, and that is to say, you might have a lot of the stuff that makes you look perfect on paper but not have scope of responsibility. Collateral duties are nice but perfect means being able to replace your chief. And having a bunch of standard first class watches and duties, is "perfect", but not really next level.

Hope that makes more sense, you should always be striving, upward, not across. As that is what I see the most. Everyone fighting for best first class, instead of fighting for next chief, if that makes any sense.

I ruffled feathers one day when I told a group of fellow firsts that they needed to stop trying to be good firsts, and start trying to be a chief.

[Guest Dusten]

Yeah, I saw that. People jump on the defensive really fast. The thing is, when was the last time you went around the pier, around the base, to your C schools, and talked to other forts classes in you rate and shared you record? Probably never. Everyone has a chief or master chief check their stuff out, but have you looked at the competition? That's what I said at first. That's where I learned a lot this year! Last year I didn't pick up and so I talked to some people and that was different enough advice to ring a bell in my head. As it stands my record had been received by the right people and they said it was good to go. But then I found out what others had in their records, how about a first with OOD underway, CSOOW, and EOOW. I am pretty sure he's gonna get it this year. But don't quote me on that cause he doesn't go to cpo 365 training? Just saying even #1 EP is subjective depending on what you've done compared to others.

I am able to compare, but that's because I'm at a command that's 90% my rate. My issue is my dismissed njp in 2011 that still effected my eval. I can't say I've done enough to put that away in the eyes of the board.

[Guest WVMTNMAN82]

http://www.npc.navy.mil/bupers-npc/boards/activedutyenlisted/Documents/ENL%20ADVANCEMENT%20BOARD%20BRIEF%20FOR%20PERS-803%20WEBPAGE%20(Feb%2010%202015).pptx
 
FY 16 Enlisted Selection Board Brief, for those who are interested.

 

[Guest Ordy]

http://www.npc.navy.mil/bupers-npc/boards/activedutyenlisted/Pages/GeneralInformation.aspx

The board DOES NOT look at PRIMS data before or after the board. A PFA failure does not equal not making it. Where are all you people getting this? The advancement manual? The PRT instruction? It's not in there at all. They are just very persistent rumors. Like that the board looks back only five years. Do your research.

1. The above link is to the selection board brief ON NPC. It outlines that the board does not EVER look at PRIMS nor is anyone put on hold for a PFA failure. In the questions section.

2. If you failed a PRT OR PFA, you only have to make up one on FEP, to be put off of FEP. You have to have 2 failures for it to effect anything, and being that an evaluation period is a year, as long as you passed the next one you could still get an EP. I know, this happened to me and I was still ranked #1. Look it up. People make mistakes, and the PRT is big deal at a ranking board but not so much balanced against what could be a great record. And as an anecdote, I heard it just doesn't matter that much. Know anyone who failed and made it? Of course you do. Not because it was their only fault. Because 1 failure doesn't even carry any wieght in its own instruction.

3. The board looks back as far as it needs to. I could give all the anectdotal evidence in the world but it's in the instructions. The advancement manual says so, and they look at field codes 30 to 38, and that is every eval you have ever had. They might cut it off for expediency but if your rate has a very low percentage of quotas then they will go back a lot further to gauge sustained superior performance emphasis then mostly on the "sustained" part.

I am not trying to ruffle feathers, just actually look these things up, it's public knowledge. I've talked to a lot of past board members and the only thing that they all agree on is that you should read the instructions for yourself, write evals to the board, and try hard from when you join the navy, not when you make first class. And that you can have more than 1 mistake in your record and still be ready. You have to have REAL responsibilities to be able to make truly huge mistakes, even if it's more than one, you must be doing something for your CO and Chiefs to give you those responsibilities. And that's what they are looking for. Ready to be a Chief. Taking care of yourself to make sure you are perfect "sometimes" means you might be playing it too safe. That's my five cents. The last bit is conjecture from shipmates the numbered bits are true. If you ask for chapter and verse, forget it, look it up.

Yeah... so I suggest you do a little research before coming on here and stating that people don't know what they are talking about.  Please view this powerpoint presentation.  I refer you to page 20 of 29 which details the post board scrub I referred to. 

 

http://www.slideshare.net/TroyVFuchs/enl-advancement-board-brief-for-pers-803-webpage-17-may12

 

"Conduct Post-Board review of selects to identify adjudicated or pending substandard or adverse information

Items discovered are:

-Security Clearance Issues

-Misconduct

-PFA Failures or missing PRIMS data"

 

As far as the "Last 5 evals" are concerned.  I have spoken with SEVERAL MC's that have sat boards and it has been explained to me the same way every time.  They state that they don't have a lot of time to look through an entire history of Evals, so the rule of thumb is to look at the last five years and compare it to the PSR and LTB to identify the cream of the crop or the "crunch".  Once they are in the tank and after two separate independent reviews at which time very few records are looked at past 5 years, the Sailor's are presented to the board for the slate brief without identifying information to the board.  So in a nutshell, they have so little time to look at the records they can only afford to look at 5 per record.  It's not in the "Board brief," but it is common practice.

[Guest WVMTNMAN82]

One more time for yeah. Stop using Google and use NPC.navy.mil

That WAS from npc.navy.mil

[Guest AWFChief]

And for this reason, I'm going with 12-AUG.

 

That would be a 5 week phase II.  I'm going with 5 Aug approx 0800 EST like last year

[Guest Ordy]

Read what I posted again and then read the brief from THIS YEAR. Not 3 years ago. It IS different. Just like the NAVADMIN is every year. READ IT! And it's can all be backed up in the instructions. That very paragraph you mentioned is different. And like I said you can talk to a lot of people but I know guys who looked at 7 years of records. It varies because it can. I bet corpsman look at 5 years do to quantity, but seals look at the whole record, or any other small rating. You info and resource is outdated.

 

"They are just very persistent rumors. Like that the board looks back only five years. Do your research. "

I did read your post.  The point is not that what you are saying is incorrect, the point is that you are accusing people of perpetuating rumors.  We were having a discussion about whether PRIMS data and holds were relevant and you came out and flamed the forum members.  We all appreciate your input, we just don't appreciate how you are presenting the information.  You could have easily said.  Hey everyone, I read through the most recent board ppt and found this ... but you didn't, you accused us of making things up.  That is what bothered me.  You don't need to project arrogance while getting your point across.  

One more time for yeah. Stop using Google and use NPC.navy.mil

It was the same NPC PPT I read a few years ago.  And google is an amazing tool... you should try it before coming in the forum on fire.

 

Not saying a pet failure is ok, just that it's not a deal breaker. Also... And this is hard to hear... Not everyone is going to make chief. Period. It's quota based. And there just isn't a spot for everyone. You could easily stack up to people who have made it or be even better and more capable. You people act like if you didn't make it you weren't doing enough. Some people are. And are still not gonna make it. The process isn't near perfect, and far too subjective. The only way it could be objective is to have people review who have no stake involved with a MC there as a guide in each rate.

What do you mean "You people"  

 

Us dog faces don't appreciate being discriminated against...

[Guest FC1(SW/MTS)]

Does anyone know if Millington will hold orders for SBE First Classes that are transfering in September?

[Guest Dusten]

Does anyone know if Millington will hold orders for SBE First Classes that are transfering in September?

I have never seen this. But you're command can change you're transfer date, so you leave after the 16th

[Guest FC1B]

Now we play the waiting game! Good luck to all those eligible!

The waiting game really started when the quotas were released. Its just that now we can sort of see the light and the end of this tunnel. I would just like to know as soon as possiblem yes or no, not just wait. But then again, hurry up and weight has been how most things are in the Navy. Good luck to everyone.

[Tony]

 READ IT! 

 

No, you read this; from the guidelines...

 

19. And of course, be courteous to other forum members.

"Respect and you shall be respected"