DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 10191-19 Ref: Signature Date This letter is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application has been denied. Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and consider your application on its merits. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 30 December 1959. On 16 November 1961, you received an evaluation with marks of 2.8 for professional performance, military behavior, and military appearance. On 10 December 1965, you were discharged with an honorable characterization of service. You request the Board award you the Good Conduct Medal. You assert that when you were a Seaman in Deck Division, your supervising Petty Officer told you he gave you a conduct grade of 2.5 on your evaluation. When you told him you did not deserve such a low grade and planned to request Mast, he quickly replied he was only joking, therefore, you didn’t take further action. When you were discharged, you saw your evaluation and realized he did give you a 2.5. You stated that you were a good Sailor who worked hard and followed regulations; however, the Petty Officer was very immature and not a good leader. You state that you never had problems with other leaders you worked for and were promoted on time. In support of your petition, you attached a letter of support from a retired Naval officer. The Board found no error in the records. With respect to your contention that a Petty Officer was solely responsible for your low trait mark, the Board noted that Naval regulations state that commanding officers (CO) and officers-in-charge (OIC) are responsible for the performance evaluation of all personnel assigned, and that final approval of an evaluation report contents, to include performance traits, is the purview of the CO or OIC. Additionally, the Board noted that prior to 31 August 1983, E-4 and below could not receive any marks below 3.0 in any performance trait and be eligible for the Good Conduct Medal. You were an at the end date of the evaluation report and received three traits below 3.0, making you ineligible for the Good Conduct Medal for the four years from 16 November 1961, since you were discharged less than four years after the ending date of the evaluation report. It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of new matters, which will require you to complete and submit a new DD Form 149. New matters are those not previously presented to or considered by the Board. In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. Sincerely, 3/27/2020