DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 4580-20 Ref: Signature Date This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code. After careful and conscientious consideration of relevant portions of your naval record and your application, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application has been denied. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 September 2021. 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, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies and 18 April 2021 advisory opinion furnished by the Board’s Physician Advisor. Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. The Board carefully considered your request to remove your 8 February 2016 non-judicial punishment (NJP); fitness report for the reporting period 2 November 2015 to 31 October 2016; 8 November 2016 Detachment for Cause; 7 February 2017 Disclosure Accounting Form; and 7 September 2017 Status in the Navy Letter. The Board considered your contentions that at Captain’s Mast no one knew that your self-incriminating statements were driven by a medical condition and you accepted the NJP without appealing the charges. You also contend that during June 2017, you were diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and your PTSD is connected to the self-incriminating statements. You claim that your NJP is erroneous and unjust in light of your PTSD diagnosis and the supporting Navy Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) investigation. You assert that psychologists have all acknowledged that your PTSD led to the false and self-incriminating statements made during your pre-polygraph interview and your PTSD directly contributed to the statements which resulted in your NJP. You argue that the previous Board failed to address the Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Regarding Equity, Injustice, or Clemency Determinations, dated 25 July 2018 issued by then Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel or Readiness (Wilkie Memo). Specifically, request for relief based in whole or in part on a mental health condition, including PTSD should be considered for relief on equitable, injustice, or clemency grounds. You also argue that if your commanding officer (CO) had been aware of the facts that are known today, it is likely that he would not have issued NJP. The Board, however, determined that your NJP was valid, that all administrative actions and documents associated with your NJP are also valid, and should remain in your record. In this regard, the Board acknowledged your voluminous evidence and statements regarding the previous AO furnished by the Office of Legal Counsel (BUPERS 00J) and Wilke Memo. On 3 December 2015, during a pre-polygraph interview for the Joint Military Attaché, you admitted to numerous instances of misconduct. Specifically, you admitted to entering into a false marriage in 1994 to obtain a U.S. Permanent Resident Green Card (green card); filing false Internal Revenue Service (IRS) claims in 1994 and 1995 that involved having a small business; paying someone $500 to obtain a false Social Security Card without “not valid for work” stamped on it; assisting your brother to obtain the same Social Security Card; claiming to be a U.S. citizen in 1996 to qualify for in-state tuition; submitting false paperwork to improve your credit history; submitting false documents to clear your credit; not paying rent; getting fired; being involved in a bribe at the airport; improperly receiving Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) to support your dependent mother who did not live with you; knowingly taking classified material home while stationed in Naples, Italy; and showing your husband, a dual citizen, classified information. On 5 January 2016, during a NCIS investigation into the disclosures and statements you provided during a pre-polygraph interview, you recanted the voluntary statements you made during the pre-polygraph interview and provided additional statements addressing each issue. On 13 June 2016, the Commanding Officer (CO), (DIA) imposed NJP for violations of Article 92 and Article 107, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for improperly storing classified documents marked SECRET at your private residence without proper authorization and for providing and signing false official statements during your pre-polygraph interview. You pled guilty to violating Article 92, UCMJ, and your CO found you guilty. Your CO also found you guilty of violating two specifications of Article 107 and awarded a Punitive Letter of Reprimand (PLOR). You were detached for cause and required to show cause for retention. On 21 July 2016, the CO, Navy Element DIA submitted a Report of NJP. In your response to the Report of NJP, you expressed regret for your failure to obey regulations in the mishandling of classified information and for failing to communicate clearly and accurately because you miscommunicated out of a desire to be truthful. The Board noted the correspondence documenting your mental health evaluations. On 2 May 2017 a Clinical Psychologist furnished correspondence of evaluating and treating you from January to March 2017, and diagnosed you with PTSD from repeated reproductive trauma of multiple failed In-Vitro Fertilization (IVF) Procedures resulting in miscarriages (including one at her office), molar pregnancy that required a Dilation and Curettage (D&C) procedure (which you experienced as “killing my baby”), and death of a close colleague, all leading up to your pre-polygraph interview. She stated that you experienced marked memory disturbances, negative beliefs and delusions about yourself, and perceptual disturbances all contributing to making self-incriminating statements that were not based in reality, nor “meant to deceive.” On 2 May 2017, a Clinical Psychologist treated you from March 2017 to December 2018 and diagnosed you with PTSD from reproductive trauma of multiple failed IVF treatments, two miscarriages, and a molar pregnancy that required D&C procedure you experienced as “having an abortion.” The Clinical Psychologist stated that for the period of December 2014 through December 2015, your PTSD symptoms included poor reality testing (unable to discern if images you experienced of you doing “troubling” things were real or imagined), memory difficulties, negative delusions about self, dread, and avoidance of triggers or memories of miscarriages and failed IVF. A Forensic psychological evaluation was requested for your Board of Inquiry (BOI) to determine if your PTSD was a contributing factor to conduct supporting an administrative separation. On 19 June 2017 during a Forensic Psychological Examination by a Forensic Psychologist you were diagnosed with PTSD with dissociative and de-realization symptoms from repeated failed IVF treatments, two miscarriages, “molar” pregnancy requiring D&C procedure, and death of colleague. You suffered flashbacks and nightmares to your miscarriages and “difficulty distinguishing between events that were real and those you imagined. You were overwhelmed by feelings of guilt for what you believed to be your past bad actions and failures.” You felt you were “the most terrible person in the world and I needed to pay for it.” You felt all your accomplishments were “not real and you must have cheated your way to them.” The report indicated your feelings of inadequacy, guilt, and failure led your to feel you “needed to report all of the things you believed you had done wrong” at the time of the pre-polygraph interview. The report stated at the time of the interview, you were “looking for all the places I could have messed up.” According to the AO, your in-service record contains evidence of a diagnosis of PTAD. The AO explained that it is very likely that your self-incriminating statements regarding misconduct or inappropriate behavior during your pre-polygraph interview were largely the product of guilt, negative self-perception, and persecutory delusions not uncommonly seen in PTSD. The AO opined that the evidence established that you suffered from PTSD at the time of your self-incriminatory statement, and your statements of misconduct were mitigated by the manifestations of your PTSD. Concerning your contention that the previous Board failed to address your PTSD and the application of the Wilke Memo, the Board determined that your PTSD was address by both the AO and the Board. The Board noted that according to the Wilke Memo “This guidance does not mandate relief, but rather provides standards and principles to guide DRBs and BCM/NRs in application of their equitable relief authority.” The Board gave an abundance of consideration to your evidence you furnished and your PTSD diagnosis. The Board also gave consideration to the full range of factors noted in paragraph 7.a. through 7.r. of the Wilke Memo for granting relief and your statement. The Board also noted that the Wilke Memo provides that “Each case will be assess on its own merits. The relative weight of each principle and whether the principle supports relief in a particular case, are within the sound discretion of each board.” The Board considered the merits of your case and was sympathetic to your circumstances attributing to your PTSD. The Board concurred with the AO that your PTSD mitigated your statements; however, the Board also considered the severity of your misconduct, your admission of guilt for the mishandling of classified information, and details of your statements and determined that your PTSD does not exonerate you of your misconduct or the consequences resulting from your misconduct. The Board determined that there was sufficient evidence of your mishandling of classified material, your misconduct was confirmed through your repeated statements admitting to the mishandling of classified material and your guilty plea at NJP. When considering the severity of your misconduct and whether the punishment was too harsh, the Board determined that your CO’s punishment was appropriate given the severity of your misconduct. The Board further noted that the Wilke Memo provides that mental health conditions should be considered for relief, the Wilke Memo does not mandate relief because of a mental health condition. Concerning your assertion that your CO may not have imposed NJP had he know you were diagnosed with PTSD. The Board determined that without a statement from the CO that imposed you NJP, the Board is unable to speculate about what your CO would or would not have done. Accordingly, the Board concluded that there is no probable material error, substantive inaccuracy, or injustice warranting corrective action. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon 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, 10/17/2021 Executive Director