Search:

Custom Search
Photo of Susan Smith

Lying about Government Credit Card Debt Leads to Removal

By Susan Smith

Sunday, May 11, 2008

You can have daily headlines from FedSmith.com delivered right to your desktop each business morning. The service is free and you don't get junk e-mail as the price of your subscription. Just visit our newsletter page to sign up!

Susan McGuire Smith spent most of her 26-year federal government career with NASA, first at NASA Headquarters Office of General Counsel and then at Marshall Space Flight Center, serving as Chief Counsel there for more than 14 years. Her expertise is in government contracts, ethics, and personnel law. Ms. Smith has a J.D and a B.A. degree from the George Washington University. Her publications include Practical Ethics for the Federal Employee.

An information technology specialist with the Department of Veterans Affairs was unable to convince the federal appeals court to overturn her removal that stemmed from giving inaccurate information on a background investigation questionnaire. (Daniels v. Department of Veterans Affairs, C.A.F.C. No. 2008-3065 (nonprecedential), 5/7/08) The facts are taken from the court's opinion.

As an Army reservist, Daniels ran up debt on her government-issued credit card to the tune of more than $2,700. Her boss advised Daniels to pay the balance to avoid an indefinite suspension of her security clearance. She failed to pay and the clearance was revoked and suspended indefinitely. (Opinion p. 2)

After this, Daniels went to work for the VA in Nashville, Tennessee, and was required twice to fill out a Standard Form 85P for a background investigation—one by her agency and one by the Office of Personnel Management. On both of those form she answered "no" to questions involving whether she had ever had a clearance denied, suspended or revoked, and whether she was delinquent on any financial obligations. (p. 2)

Sure enough, the background investigation turned up the problem with Daniels' bad government credit card debt as well as the previous suspension and revocation of her security clearance with the Army reserves. The end result was Daniels' removal for "failure to provide accurate information" on the background questionnaires.

Daniels appealed to the Merit Systems Protection Board. Following a hearing, the Administrative Judge found that the agency had proved that Daniels provided incorrect information on the Standard Form relating to her previous security clearance and her bad debts. The AJ concluded the removal was reasonable. (p. 5)

Daniels took her case to the Federal Circuit, but she fared no better there. The court sided with the findings of the AJ and sustained Daniels' removal. (pp. 6-8)

© 2009 FedSmith Inc. All rights reserved. This article may not be reproduced without express written consent of FedSmith Inc.

Add a Comment about this Article

** All fields are required.
Note: Your comments will not show up right away. FedSmith.com selects the most insightful comments from our readers for posting. If selected, your comments will show up in the comments section after they have been reviewed and approved. See our terms of use for more information.

Readers' Comments

  • Lying is never the "best policy"; however, depending on one's circumstances, it may be the only policy, if someone wants to get their foot in the door. I'm speaking only of a "mental health condition". Everyone, at least if they are honest with themselves, will tell you that if a company (not the ...
    Posted: September 1, 2008 10:46 AM
  • That does not excuse what she did. It is much better to be honest about stuff. As my colleague below says, lying is stupid and the gov't will find out about it. Not only that, it is a felony!...
    Posted: June 20, 2008 6:14 AM
  • It is not what she did, it is what she failed to do!...
    Posted: June 20, 2008 6:12 AM

View All Comments »

MORE BY SUSAN SMITH

Contact Susan Smith or read more articles on the author's page.