THE GOOD/ BAD NEWS ABOUT PROMOTIONS: Army Majors and
LTCs Board Results
(September 1997)
On 17 September, both the Army LTC and MAJ Promotion Board results were released. Generally speaking,
there was lots of good news for FAOs and our selection rates remain competitive with the rest of
the Army. A review of the results follows.
FY 97 MAJ Board Results.
For the MAJ's selection board we continued the trend of above-the-Army-average
selection results. The Army average in the Primary Zone (PZ) was 74.2%. 108 of 132 FAOs
were selected for a rate of 81.8%, 7.6% above the Army average. Of the 32 officers who were
not selected, the breakdown by AOC is: 3 - 48B; 11 - 48C; 1 - 48D; 2 - 48E; 0 - 48F; 4 - 48G;
1 - 48H; 1 - 48I; 1 - 48J. Also, 11 FAOs were selected Below the Zone (BZ), up from 4 last year.
None of the 4 FAOs in the Above the Zone (AZ) category were selected. Over the past 17
years, since Year Group (YG) 72, the FAO selection rate in the Primary Zone to Major averages
7.2% above the Army average. Only YG 83, five years ago, was below the Army average, (-)0.4%.
FY 97 LTC Board Results.
The FY 97 FAO selection rate was 57% compared with the Army average of 59.9%. Due
to the relatively small number of FAOs in the PZ, a total of 100, the difference between the Army
average is 3 FAOs. The total number of FAOs selected was 1 of 29 AZ, 57 of 100 PZ, and 1 of
89 BZ. Directed floors by Area of Concentration (AOC): 48E - 7; 48G - 4; 48H - 5; 48I - 3. All
floors were exceeded. A review of ORBs of selected officers revealed that 79% had served at
least one 48 utilization tour prior to the board, 67% served as BN XO/S3, and 93% had
commanded at the company level. Since YG 68, the FAO selection rate in the PZ to LTC
averages 5.5% above the Army average. Only two Year Groups, YG 78 (-)0.2% and this year's
group, YG 81 (-)2.9%, were below the Army average.
Floors.
In determining the need to establish a floor, DCSPER compares the total
requirements for a grade and AOC against the inventory of officers who hold that AOC. If,
based on the ratio of inventory to positions, an imbalance exists then a floor is generated.
However, the lowest density AOCs almost never put enough officers in a promotion zone to
even qualify for consideration for a floor (for example, Boards cannot be directed to promote
100% of an AOC, and if only 1 officer is in the zone . . .).
Summary.
While there have been occasional dips in our selection rates, a look at the total
picture shows that FAOs are statistically being promoted at or above the Army average to
MAJ and LTC.
Problems that remain are FAO selection for CGSC, SSC and
promotion to O-6. OPMS XXI should solve the schooling issues with universal MEL 4
training for all MAJs and MEL 1 for all COLs.
The issue of promotion to COL has also been addressed by GEN Reimer in his guidance
for OPMS XXI. The FAO 8 year average for selection to COL is 5.5%. In the development of
OPMS XXI, the CSA directed that FAOs be promoted at or above the DOPMA average. This,
combined with the directive to build MAJ/LTC inventories to meet COL requirements as well as
the implementation of single-tracking in the Operations Support career path for FAOs, should
correct the lower-than-Army-average COL promotion rate.
1997, Foreign Area Officer Association
Springfield, Virginia
Maintained by
LTC Steve
Gotowicki.
http://www.faoa.org