Military Justice: Quality Data Needed to Improve Oversight of Navy and Marine Corps Disciplinary Measures
Fast Facts
The Navy and the Marine Corps may impose punishments—such as extra duties or loss of pay—against service members for minor offenses. Commanding officers at sea may discipline service members via the "vessel exception" that prohibits service members from refusing punishment by demanding a trial.
The Navy and the Marine Corps report data on these punishments. But data on use of the "vessel exception" may be inaccurate and incomplete because these services don't have an automated process to record this data. The Navy and the Marine Corps recognize the need for automated systems but have not implemented them.
Our recommendations address this.
Highlights
What GAO Found
Nonjudicial punishment, such as forfeiture of pay or a reduction in grade, is a tool to deter misconduct, maintain discipline, and improve performance without going through the court-martial process. Service members onboard a vessel at sea cannot refuse nonjudicial punishment and demand a trial by court-martial when a commanding officer uses the vessel exception. The Navy and the Marine Corps are refining guidance on the use of the vessel exception for nonjudicial punishment and plan to evaluate policy changes as new guidance is issued. For example, in November 2023, the Department of the Navy issued guidance that restricts use of the vessel exception when a ship is undergoing maintenance and is not operational. With these ongoing efforts, the Department of the Navy is on track to improve oversight of nonjudicial punishment and the use of the vessel exception.
The Navy and the Marine Corps have processes in place to report nonjudicial punishment data. However, GAO found, and Navy and Marine Corps officials acknowledged, that the accuracy and completeness of nonjudicial punishment data are limited due to human error and lack of automated processes. The Navy planned to use an automated system by October 2022 to collect nonjudicial punishment data but did not meet this goal due to funding constraints, according to Navy officials. Further, although the Navy issued a revised policy that clarifies reporting on the use of the vessel exception in January 2024, the policy does not address data quality issues stemming from the manual compilation of data. Without establishing a time frame to automate the collection and maintenance of quality nonjudicial punishment data and then implementing these automated processes, the Navy, the Marine Corps, and Congress may be hindered in their ability to provide sufficient oversight of nonjudicial punishment and the use of the vessel exception. Such oversight would include the use of quality data to analyze trends in military justice processes and to measure the effectiveness of discipline-related initiatives.
Navy and Marine Corps Process for Reporting Nonjudicial Punishment Data, as of January 2024
Why GAO Did This Study
The Navy and the Marine Corps impose nonjudicial punishment as a disciplinary measure for minor offenses. A service member's career can be stigmatized by a record of nonjudicial punishment, which can lead to involuntary separation with less than an honorable discharge, according to Navy and Marine Corps officials.
House Report 117-397 includes a provision for GAO to review the Department of the Navy's use of the vessel exception and policies related to nonjudicial punishment. Among other things, this report 1) describes Navy and Marine Corps guidance for using the vessel exception, and 2) assesses the extent to which the Navy and the Marine Corps report quality data for oversight of the vessel exception.
GAO analyzed guidance, policies, and data; interviewed relevant officials; and conducted one site visit onboard a vessel at sea.
Recommendations
GAO is making two recommendations to improve oversight of the vessel exception, specifically that the Navy and the Marine Corps each establish a time frame for automating processes to collect and maintain quality nonjudicial punishment data in respective personnel databases and then implement these automated processes. The Department of Defense concurred with GAO's recommendations.
Recommendations for Executive Action
| Agency Affected | Recommendation | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Department of the Navy | 1. The Secretary of the Navy should ensure that the Chief of Naval Operations establishes a time frame for automating the Navy's process to collect and maintain quality nonjudicial punishment data in its personnel database and then implements this automated process. (Recommendation 1) |
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
|
| Department of the Navy | 2. The Secretary of the Navy should ensure that the Commandant of the Marine Corps establishes a time frame for automating the Marine Corps' process to collect and maintain quality nonjudicial punishment data in its personnel database and then implements this automated process. (Recommendation 2) |
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
|