(a) The Board shall have no authority to:
(1) Review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial;
(2) Alter the judgment of a court-martial, except the discharge or dismissal awarded may be changed for purposes of clemency;
(3) Revoke any discharge or dismissal;
(4) Reinstate a person in the naval service;
(5) Recall a former member to active duty;
(6) Change a reenlistment code;
(7) Make recommendations for reenlistment to permit entry in the naval service or any other branch of the Armed Forces;
(8) Cancel or void enlistment contracts; or
(9) Change the reason for discharge from or to a physical disability
(b) Review of naval discharges shall not be undertaken in instances where the elapsed time between the date of discharge and the date of receipt of application for review exceeds fifteen years.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
3
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1987–2023 · leading case:
Doyon v. United States, 58 F.4th 1235 (Fed. Cir. 2023).
Doyon v. United States, 58 F.4th 1235 (Fed. Cir. 2023).
“§ 1553 (b)(1); see also 32 C.F.R. § 724.205 (a)(9) (“The [DRB] shall have no authority to .”
Blassingame v. Sec'y of Navy, 811 F.2d 65 (2d Cir. 1987).
“The Review Board cannot provide certain types of relief, such as revocation of a discharge, see 32 C.F.R. § 724.205 , nor can it grant any relief requested after the 15-year period in 10 U.”
Malcolm v. United States (Fed. Cl. 2022).
“Plaintiff directed an earlier request for relief to the Naval Discharge Review Board, but that body is not authorized to hear claims for medical retirement, see 32 C.F.R. § 724.205 (a)(9), and so its 2014 decision cannot trigger the statute of limitations.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.