Drafting the Award Narrative

The OTTER Methodology

Five-step methodology for awards writing.

• Organize the facts. Originator gathers and orders facts to determine the type and level of award (heroic, valorous, meritorious).
• Take Statements. Witness statements, basic facts, POC info collected. Required for the Navy and Marine Corps Medal, BSM with "V" device, and above. Substantiate major facts with statements or observer input.
• Transcribe Summary of Action. Write the narrative based on notes and statements. Factual and orderly.
• Extract Citation. Draft the formal citation based on the SOA.
• Review your work.

The citation is downstream of the SOA. The SOA is downstream of the facts. Build in order or the citation surfaces gaps the chain reads.

SOA Length by Award Tier

The SOA length is fixed by award tier. Per the unit guidance.

A NAM SOA running into page two reads as a leader who did not understand the standard. A LM SOA stopped at one page reads as undeveloped.

SOA Writing Rules

The SOA is a narrative justification with sufficient data, against the eligibility criteria, to enable the reviewing and approving authorities to consider the recommendation adequately.

• Establish why the Marine has earned this distinction and what sets the Marine apart from peers.
• Avoid reproducing the command chronology. Focus on unique accomplishments.
• Chronological order unless functional categories serve the case better.
• Sufficient facts and detail to compare against established award criteria and previously approved awards.
• Specific examples plus manner of accomplishment plus results plus benefits derived.
• Performance under combat conditions, extended duty, or a large number of combat missions does not in itself justify a personal decoration. The act and the outcome do.

The Three-Part Structure

The board reader reads top to bottom and stops when the narrative loses substance. Build the strongest claims into the early body.

The Opening Sentence

The opening identifies the Marine and frames the recognition.

• Rank, name, MOS.
• Billet during the period of recognition.
• Time period covered.
• One-line summary of why.

Worked example, neutral form. "Sergeant Smith, 0311, Squad Leader, 1st Platoon, Bravo Company, distinguished himself through superior performance from 1 January 2025 to 31 December 2025."

The opening pre-frames every SAR statement that follows.

SAR Statements - Specific, Action, Result

Each body paragraph follows the SAR structure.

• Specific. The event, the date, the context.
• Action. The Marine's action verb and the action.
• Result. The measurable outcome. Numbers when available.

Worked example. "On 14 March 2025, Sergeant Smith led the squad through a 72-hour live-fire exercise in restrictive terrain, rehearsing react-to-contact drills for 12 iterations while sustaining squad night-fire qualification at 100 percent and zero training accidents."

Three SAR statements like that beat 12 lines of generic praise.

Verb Choice Matters

Strong verbs carry the SAR statement. Weak verbs sink it.

Use the strong verb. The board reader is trained to discount the weak ones.

The Closing Sentence

The closing pulls the narrative into a recommendation.

• Reinforce the rank.
• State the recommended award.
• Tie character to the recognition.

Worked example. "Sergeant Smith's leadership, technical mastery, and unwavering commitment to the section reflect great credit upon himself and uphold the highest traditions of the Marine Corps and the United States Naval Service."

Modify to fit the award tier per MCO 1650.19JMCO 1650.19J. MCO 1650.19J Ch 3

Where SECNAV M-1650.1 Sets the Standard

SECNAV M-1650.1SECNAV M-1650.1 Appendix 1A sets the DON timeliness standards for award processing. SECNAV M-1650.1 App 1A A narrative drafted past the timeliness window per Appendix 1A pushes the package into Chapter 8 "Beyond the Limits" handling, which carries additional procedural overhead. Draft and route within the standard window or accept the Chapter 8 burden.

Common Drafting Mistakes

• Generic praise. "Outstanding Marine, hard worker, sets the example." The board reader sees this on every package and stops reading.
• Wrong tense. The narrative is past tense for completed acts.
• Personal pronouns drift. Stay third person throughout.
• Recycled phrases. The board reader spots reuse across packages from the same originator.
• No numbers. Adjectives without numbers carry no weight.
• Buried lead. The strongest event sits in paragraph four. Move it to the front.
• Length without substance. Five paragraphs of fluff lose to three paragraphs of SAR.

The Read-Aloud Test

Before you submit, read the narrative aloud.

• Did each paragraph deliver a specific event, an action, a result?
• Did any paragraph rely on adjectives instead of evidence?
• Did the opening and closing match the body's strength?
• Did the verb choices stay strong throughout?

If the read-aloud surfaces weak spots, fix them before the package routes.

Where to Go Next

• Choosing the right award covers selecting NAM versus NCM versus MSM.
• Routing and endorsements covers the chain mechanics after the draft.