FY15, CPT, Army Promotion List (APL) RC Promotion Board Results Release?

That's correct, 1LT (Join to see).

The MILPER said that, today (05JUN), a "pre-positioned" list would be released.

Basically, as I understand it, this means that the promotion list was released to commands to screen for any officers who were on the list, who shouldn't be on the list. For example, because so much time (5+ months) transpired from when the board recessed and NOW, it's possible that some 1LTs who were initially selected/recommended could have passed away, retired, or had some other kind of disciplinary/flagging action that occurred WHILE awaiting the results but after the recess of the board....so, these 2 weeks are command's opportunity to screen the list, and recommend removal of anyone who appears on the list, that shouldn't be on the list.

Makes sense.

I spoke to a friend who sat for last year's board, and he said they didn't have a "pre-positioned" released. This SOUNDS like it is the first year they are doing it this way.

I heard that, last year, someone got a copy of the list and was peddling it online for $20/pop. As a result, it sounds like this is why they are now doing this pre-positioning release....to really have more control over the process of the most accurate results being released.

Anyone here actually see the 'pre-positioned' list?

Anybody still have a good link to the FY15 RC CPT list? Its not on HRC anymore.

Basically alert select commands and select individuals

BLUF: States have two weeks to scrub the list and identify lieutenants that shouldn't be on it.

https://www.hrc.army.mil/Milper/15-162

OFFICER RECORDS WORK CENTERS MUST SCREEN THE SELECTION LISTS. IDENTIFY THOSE OFFICERS SELECTED AND NON-SELECTED IN THEIR COMMAND. ENSURE SYSTEMS ARE UPDATED (RLAS, AGMIS AND TAPDB-R) AND ALL ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED. REPORT ANY CASUALTIES, RETIREMENTS AND DISCHARGES PRIOR TO 15 JUN 15 TO ENSURE OFFICERS SELECTED ARE NOT ERRONEOUSLY PROMOTED. OFFICERS PROMOTED THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN FLAGGED WILL REQUIRE A MEMORANDUM FROM THE FIRST COLONEL IN THE OFFICER’S CHAIN OF COMMAND EXPLAINING WHY THE OFFICER WAS NOT FLAGGED IN A TIMELY MANNER.

Ah...I think I get it now...

Considering the 5+ months elapsed between when our board recessed and NOW, it sounds like all sorts of things could have happened to those who were recommended for promotion/made the list.....passing away, retiring, and, it sounds like, even if any disciplinary actions/flaggings occurred (or should have occurred) while waiting between when the board recessed and now.

Sounds like these 2 weeks will give them the opportunity to trim the list of people who otherwise shouldn't/can't be promoted, due to whatever reason, before the list is officially released.

Makes sense. (If I understand that correctly).

Anybody still have a good link to the FY15 RC CPT list? Its not on HRC anymore.

Now, my friend did also write back, with a few additional questions.

One thing that MAJ did mention was potentially making room for separated Active Duty officers in the ARNG/Reserves. I do know that, just prior to their being separated, those Active Duty officers were told that they "MAY" be able to continue their service in the ARNG/Reserves.

It sounds very plausible that they could be trying to push ARNG/Reserve officers out of the service, to make room for our separated Active Duty counterparts....

That would make sense....although I'd disagree with such an initiative....it seems like something plausible.

I have a few theories as to what I THINK MAY be occurring right now.

First, I think, as we transition back to a peace time Army, the DA/Pentagon are utilizing this time to essentially push promotion time lines back to where they were before the wars. During the height of the wars, officers were literally going from newly commissioned O-1s to O-3s in a matter of 3 to 4 years. Right now, while they simultaneously separate, I think they are also trying to push those promotion timelines out to 5 to 7 years total 2LT/1LT service to make CPT. This 'enhanced screening process' seems like it will be a more intensive screening process that will create a delay that simultaneously pushes those promotion timelines out, while also, essentially finding reasons to separate ARNG/RC officers--to make room for separated AC officers, while rapidly bringing troop strength numbers down to the congressionally mandated expectation.

I know we have many AC officer brethren who frequent this website, so I will tred cautiously with the following opinions.

Last year, the OSB separated roughly 1,100 Captains, and 500 Majors, from Active Duty:
https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/strategic-messaging-branding-of-officer-separation-boards

....What I am trying to wrap my head around is how the trickle down of these AC officer separations will impact the RC/ARNG, and, in relation to our board in particular, how it will impact how many of us actually get promoted (i.e. our selection rate). Personally, I have a gut feeling that another reason for the 'delay' in releasing our board results is that, quite possibly, they might not even know exactly how many of us they want/need to promote. This is all just a theory, but I think, before they can make decisions regarding how many get promoted for our board, they need to have a firm understanding of how many separated AC officers will be seeking positions/slots in the RC/ARNG. This is all very unclear now....I don't know if any separated AC officer, who is separated from AC, will essentially automatically be granted a slot in the RC/ARNG to 'continue their service'. Assuming a slot is a limited resource like anything else in life, it would seem that any separated AC officer that is offered a slot in the RC/ARNG, would essentially means that one of us wouldn't be promoted. (at least that is how I understand this all...)

Another thing I am trying to wrap my head around is how those separated AC officer's performance comes into play here, and how that would actually impact their ability to secure a RC/ARNG slot.

Of the AC Majors that were separated, it sounds like 80% of them had at least derogatory information in their files.
http://taskandpurpose.com/heres-army-needed-cut-officers-history-bad-decisions/

"Looking at the statistics of those majors selected for separation, the board largely focused on policing the profession in terms of character and performance. Eighty percent of those selected — 440 out of the 550 majors — had derogatory information in their files."

....so, I don't quite understand how, if those officers were deemed unfit to serve on Active Duty, then how are they still fit to 'continue their service' in the RC/ARNG? So, they weren't good enough to serve in the AC, but they are now good enough to serve in the RC/ARNG? This at least APPEARS to be the message that is being sent, should this actually be the way this is being executed. ....In one email my friend had received, he was told that those AC officers still had service obligations and moving them into the RC/ARNG after their separation from the AC would help them meet those service obligations, but, we (RC/ARNG officers) also have service obligations.

So, this is all very confusing as to how all of this is working/will actually be working.

Anybody still have a good link to the FY15 RC CPT list? Its not on HRC anymore.

I've been in the Army long enough to know that "waiting" is really a deeply ingrained part of Army culture, Ma'am.

To me and alot of LTs, I don't believe it's so much the "wait" as much as it is about any perceived lack of respect stemming from zero (official) communication--now, especially, during a period when we hear all about drastic cuts to congressionally mandated troop levels, force shaping, declining selection rates and, recently, one O-4 from G-1 even mentioned (in an email) reserve troops having to "go home" due to making way for separated AC officers (to continue their careers in the reserves) . On Facebook, and elsewhere, I've seen O-4s and above express frustration with 'the process' of releasing results--so, I know the frustration isn't confined to just the O-2 level.

It sounds like you were apart of the FY13 board, Ma'am? I stumbled upon a few threads....the frustration in your group was palpable. You guys waited something like 250+ days, and, from what I heard, it was a combination of sequestration + your board having to reconvene due to some kind of error with the actual board process (I talked to some officers from that group, and they told me that, even after the results were released, noone actually told them definitively WHY it was delayed until July or so for release).

Late on a Friday, in June, before a holiday weekend, I also recall HRC posting a message (SEE BELOW) that basically said they weren't obligated or required to notify "the field" (you/us) if a board ever had to be reconvened, even though that would add 3-4 months to the wait process. I know the Army isn't exactly like Burger King--you don't always get to "have it your way"--but, I think there is a certain level of respect that could/should be shown with an official MILPER, to clearly articulate what is going on, especially when a group like yours makes it over, say, a 6 month wait time. To me, the disconnect in Leadership that doesn't see this as even a remote problem is most concerning.

I think the frustration, stemming from this sort of treatment, was captured in your group's comments here:

https://www.facebook.com/ArmyHRC/posts/ [login to see] 89630

"A lot of questions have been posted lately about Promotion
Boards and the release of the official results. Please remember that the Officer promotion selection process is tightly controlled by Law to ensure fair consideration for all eligible service members. The processing of results is constrained further by policy to ensure the integrity of the well established board process, and protect the rights of individuals and their military status under the Constitution.
In general the process, from board recess to release of the results, is approximately four (4) months. This timeframe allows for administrative processing, legal review and post-board exemplary conduct certification screenings. In the event the post-board review determines that the board proceedings were inconsistent with Law, Department of Defense Directives, Army Regulations or Secretary of Army Guidance, the board may be reconvened without notice to the field. This reconvene action may take at least three to four (3-4) additional months, adding to the time delayed in the results being released to the field.
We hope this explanation, while not easing the angst of the wait, clarifies why release of board results can be delayed."

[Comment Deleted by USER]

What did it say?

MAJ (Join to see),

What did the MILPER say?

From what I gather it said the results should be released on the 16th. I will believe it whenu see it on Tuesday

Sorry if it sounds like I'm rambling...we've been told alot...alot of different sources of information, given to alot of different people, with alot of variance in information (difference in timeframe expectations, etc...)

I did just go ahead publish my last post because it was getting very long...and, I didn't want to loose it (again).

I do still have a few more thoughts, though.

Thanks for the update, Mitch.

I had written a long diatribe in response a few days ago, but I guess my connection dropped and I lost the post before submitting.

Here are some of my thoughts.

I guess that's a bit reassuring that they feel it will be NLT 01 October (I'd love to get these results before Christmas, personally...), but I just can't see it taking that long based on a number of things. It just seems an odd choice of wording to say "NLT 01 October"...that is basically just putting a month to the far tail end (actually, beyond it), of the time frame to expect results that we have been told already. There are a few 'process related' reasons why I just don't think it will take THAT long to release (will talk about them later). Honestly, I think we are looking at more a late June/July time frame...)

(Bear with me with this post, but I'll be referencing some of the emails/messages I've seen released 'unofficially' from different ranks.)

#1) 01 October is a good 5 months from now. Not only is this date a long way away from NOW (18 MAY), but actually falls OUTSIDE the time frame we've been tracking. In the emails/messages I've seen (along with what myself and other 1LTs have been told via email/phone contact)--nothing "official", like a MILPER, by the way--the expectation for results release has been so varied that it could make your head spin.

--In February, I was told to expect (that HRC board support) was 'expecting' an March/April timeframe release. (I think it's safe to say that, now in mid-May, that that isn't going to happen...)
--On 20 MAR, a 1LT had posted a message to Facebook, from a G-1 O-6, who said: "....Consequently, we expect results of all FY15 DA Reserve Component Centralized Boards to be released 7-8 months after the date the board closes, including all DA Centralized Board results that are currently pending release.". So, assuming a a 10 December 2014 board recess (our board was SCHEDULED to recess on 12 December, but I was told it ACTUALLY recessed on 10 December), 7-8 months would put us in the July/August time frame (assuming we are actually talking about CALENDAR days, and not business days....even that is unclear right now...)...also, once I saw that email posted, I did shoot HRC an email to clarify whether it applied directly to the release of OUR board's results, in particular. The wording of the email, referencing results that were "pending release" certainly made it SOUND like it was referencing our board...but, it was just so odd that we received that message (2nd hand, by the way, posted on a Facebook page)...literally on the eve of when many of us were thinking the results would be released (at least in relation to last year's FY14 25MAR2014 release...). I was specifically told that this message wouldn't impact the release of our board's release, in particular....because of all the inconsistencies in communication, you can see how, while temporarily reassuring, I still don't put much stock into what I was told. I'm not saying that people are deliberately lying, but I've seen so many different messages, each citing different time frames with inherent vagueness, that there is at least a deep appearance that there isn't much communication going on between all the different places we've received 2nd hand information from....HRC/HQDA, G-1, NGB, etc....
--In different responses on Facebook, other LTs were told everything from 60-90 days from board recess to 90-120 days from board recess. I believe it was in an email from a G-1 O-4, but I recall the time frame of 6 to 9 months being thrown out there too.
--It is also unclear whether we are talking in terms of BUSINESS DAYS or CALENDAR DAYS. One 1LT reported that he was told that all the time frames were being counted in BUSINESS DAYS, which, wouldn't be such a big deal had we been talking about a 1 month wait time, however, when you start pushing 5/6/7/8/9 months wait time, those uncounted Saturdays/Sundays really add up and chizzle out a good 1-2 months in wait time....For example, TODAY we are at something like 160 or so CALENDAR days, but only around 110 BUSINESS days...

Thanks, Mark. I haven't personally used S1Net, but I do follow the released MILPERs via the HRC and My Board File Facebook pages. Even after these promotion board results are released, following those MILPERs is probably something that officers should get in a habit of doing on a fairly regular basis.

I've spoken to a few 1LTs who are awaiting release of these results, who have also been in command, as well, Mitch. I believe one was currently deployed. As you can likely imagine, they are itching at the bit for these results to get published. I'm not in a command slot quite yet, however, less than a month after the board recessed, I was offered an O-3 slot at our brigade headquarters. I had to wait for a O-3 to move out of that slot, to take a command slot, before I could move into it. To any LT out there, I would HIGHLY encourage them to try to get a vacancy promotion before they/their files are committed to the DA Select promotion board process. Once you are committed to the DA Select promotion board process for the next rank/grade, as far as I understand, you can't just go ahead and get a vacancy promotion (if non-select the 1st time) even if you are sitting in an O-3 slot. If non-select the first time, you essentially have to be committed to a 2nd DA Select promotion board consideration the following year.

If non-select then, officers are suppose to be separated.

So, what does everyone think about that message that was put out (see above)?

Thoughts?

Howie, I am sure I speak for others in stating I appreciate the in depth research to date you have done on this FY15 RC CPT AP board (or lack of) results!

I was eligible for CPT over two years ago but I was put in a CW2 slot with my old state's newly created Cyber Team and that state would not promote me. Now I am anxiously awaiting these results as I am in a current O-3 slot with another Guard Cyber Unit.

Hey Jason,

No problem about the research. Following along religiously has been my own natural reaction to the anxiety related to the waiting process. Not pointing fingers here, but, the information given to us thusfar certainly leaves alot of room for discussion. Had we been in a period where selection rates for this board were near 99%, I think things would be a little different....but, last year the selection rate for this board was in the low 80%, and, with all the force-shaping/drawdown inititiaves, noone (at least that I've talked to) really has any idea what to expect as far as selection rates....and, it appears like that will remain a mystery, at least until our results are released.

How long ago did you get your O-3 slot?

If you had it before the board, and you were at your TIG eligibility, why didn't you get put in for a vacancy promotion?

(I wasn't able to secure my O-3 slot until, sadly, less than a month AFTER our board had recessed...)

One note here: Another 1LT and I were discussing this email. In this email, the writer wrote "current focus is on 1LT and CW2 promotion results"....

Now, I can't speak for the writer of the email, but we are 'assuming' this email was meant to address the CPT board results. It just doesn't make sense that this email would be addressing '1LT promotion results', because, as most of us know already, promotion to 1LT is essentially an automatic promotion at 18 years TIG....so, there isn't a formal board process, where a panel of board members review files and produce a recommendation/results list, that I know of.