Rates ~Rnatr WASHINGTON

tinitcd ~rates ~rnatr WASHINGTON. DC 20510

May 14, 2019

John F. Remondi President and CEO Navient Solutions, LLC 123 Justison Street Wilmington, DE 1980 I

Dear Mr. Remondi:

We are writing regarding disturbing information we have recently obtained about the refusal of federal student loan servicers to cooperate with Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or "the Bureau") oversight and supervision after receiving December 20 17 guidance from the U.S. Department of Education (ED or "the Department"). In response to a letter we sent in April 2019, CFPB Director Kraninger revealed, "student loan servicers have declined to produce information requested by the Bureau for supervisory examinations,"1 following the release of the ED guidance. We request that, to the extent your company is failing to cooperate with the CFPB, you cease this obstruction immediately, and we ask that you provide answers to our questions on this matter no later than May 28, 2019.

On December 27, 2017, the Department issued a policy memorandum entitled, "Ownership of and Access to U.S Department of Education Records and Data," which provided guidance to all federal loan servicers, private collection agencies, and other Department contractors that participate in federal student aid programs regarding records.2 This guidance required, "any request from any third party for Department records to which a contractor has access must be made directly to the Department."3

The December 20 17 guidance effectively directed student loan servicers to withhold information from state and federal law enforcement agencies seeking to enforce consumer protection laws, including the CFPB, state Attorneys General, and other state and federal banking regulators. Last month, a coalition of 22 state Attorneys General wrote to the Department, revealing that the Department has rejected routine requests fo r student loan information by states and urging the Department to reverse this policy guidance.4

1 Letter to Sens. Warren, Brown, Gill ibrand, Durbin, Whitehouse, and Menendez from CFPB Director Kathy Kraninger, April 23 , 2019. 2 Memorandum from Patrick A. Bradfield, "Ownership of and Access to U.S. Department of Education Records and Data," Department 27, 2017, https://static.politico.com/5111f/Of805fd04c2eb035bcd79f9200be/december-27-2017- servicer-memo.pdf. 3 Ibid. 4 Letter from Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, et. al., to ED Secretary Betsy De Vos, Apri l 4, 2019, http://www.marylandattomeygeneral.gov/News%20 Documents/Final%20AGs%20Letter%20to%20DO E%204 .4. 19. ru!.f. State and federal law enforce111ent must l1ave access to the info11nation they need to do their jobs and protect student loan bo1Towers fi·on1 illegal, unfair, abusi\'e, or deceptive practices, and to enforce consU111er protection laws that fall outside of tl1e Departn1ent's jt1risdiction. No Depart1nent policy guidance can absolve servicers of their legal responsibilit)' to comply witl1 state and federal consumer protection lav.'.

On April 2, 2019, several Senators wrote to CFPB Director Kath)' Kraninger seeking h1for1nation about CFPB's ongoing oversight of student loa11 servicers, and the effects of the Decen1ber 2017 guidance a11d other ne\V ED and CFPB policies on these efforts.5

Director l(raninger responded to this letter 011 April 23, 2019, confirming that the C.FPB "has condttcted several exams of student loan servicers since Decen1ber 2017 ."6 'fhis response, l1owever, also raised several concerns about the co11sequences off:D policies put in place over the last several years, including the Departtnent's ter1nination of a CFPB-ED Memorandttm of Understanding and the December 2017 policy guidance:

Si11ce Decen1ber 2017, student loan scrvicers have decli11ed to produce info1matio11 requested by the Bureau for supervisory examinations related to Dil'ect J_,oa11s and Federal I·'an1ily Education Loan Program (F'FELP) loans held by the Depart1nent based on the Departn1ent's guidance. 7

The response also noted, "the Bureau has pursued options that \VOttld 11ave pe1mitted it to obtain information from st11dent loan servicers necessary for supervisory exa1ninations of Direct loans and Department-l1eld 1:FEI~P loans."8

1'his is disturbing ne\VS. It reveals that the Department, under Secretary DeVos, has removed the most potent \\'Capon from the CFPB 's arsenal to figl1t illegal behavior and niistreatment of bon·o,vcrs by student loan servicers, and t11at federal student loan servicers, who are paid by the federal government, are ignoring federal regulators' requests for information. It also appears to indicate tl1at - at a time \\'hen independent watchdogs have identified major and ongoing compliance problems with tl1e student loan progra1n and the failure of the Depart1nent to adequately oversee the program - servicers l1ave been complicit in these efforts. 9

1'o address our concerns about this tnatter, we ask that you provide ans,vers to the follo'-'"'ing questions:

; Letter to CFPB Director J(a1hy J(raninger from Sens. Warren, Brov:n, Gil!ibrand, Durbin. Whitehouse, and' Menendez, April 3, 2019. 6 Letter to Sens. Warren, Brown, Gillibrand, Durbin, Whitehouse, and Menendez fro1n CFPB Director Kathy Kraninger, April 23, 2019. 7 !hid. 8 [bid. 9 Depart1ncnl of Education lnspcctor General, Federal Student Aid: Additional Actions Needed to Mitigate the R·isk of Servicer Nonco1npliancc with Rcquirc1nents for Servicing Federally l·Ield Student Loans," Control Number ED OIG/A05Q0008, Februa1y 20 19, https://\V\V\V2.cd.gov/about/ofAces/1ist/oig/auditreports/fv2019/a05q0008.pdf.

2 l. When and on 11ow 1nm1y occasions since December 2017 has t11e CFPB requested data or info1111ation from your co1npany in connection witl1 examination or Sltpervision activities? a. Please provide all written communicatio11s between )'Our con1pany and tl1e Depmtment since December 2017 in con11ection v..r:ith CFPB exan1i11atio11 or supervisio11 activities.

2. According to an April 9, 2018 letter from the CFJ>B to a federal judge, the CFPB requested i11fonnatio11 during discovery in its enforcen1e11t action against Navient; ho\vever, the Deparhnent instr11cted Navient to decline to provide tl1is information and indicated that CFl)B needed to obtain a court order to get it. 10 A federal judge 11ad to intervene to compel Navient to com1Jly with the Bureau's request for doc11ments in discovery durl11g the course ot'the Bureau's law enforcen1e11t action. 11 a. When and 011 how inany occasions since December 201711as the CFPB requested or demanded data or information fron1 your company in com1ection with an investigation, laws11it, or other enforcement action related to federal student loans? b. _Please provide all written communications between your company and tl1e Departn1ent since Decc1nbcr 2017 in connectio11 witl1 any investigation, laws11it, or other enforce111ent action by tl1e CFPB.

3. According to July 2018 cou1t documents, the Pennsylvania J{igher Education Assistance Agency has resisted the Connecticut Depart1ncnt of Banking's request for information, rclyi11g also on the Department's December 2017 n1cmorand111n. 12 a. Wl1en a11d 011how1nany occasions since Decen1ber 2017 has a state banking regulator requested data or information fro1n your company 111 connection with exa1nination or supervision activities related to federal stude11t loans? b. Please provide all written con1m11nications between your compa11y and the Department since Decen1ber 2017 in connection \Vith examination or supervision activities by state ba11king reg11lators.

4. According to August 2018 court documents, Navient 11as also denied Atton1eys General i11 Washington and Pennsylvania access to in1portant docun1ents in discovery during state enforcement actions against tl1e con1pany, again relying also on the Department's

10 Letter from CFPB to The 1-fonorable Judge Robe1i D. .1'vfariani. Re: CFPB v. Navient Corp., et al., Case No. 3: 17" CV"00101"H.OM. April 9, 2018. h!!.P.s://www .court! i stener .coin/recap/gov. uscourts. pan1d. l 10329/gov. us courts. pamd.1 I 03 29. 84. 0. pdf 11 Mcmorandtun Opinion, The }{onorable Judge Robe1i D. Mariani. CFPB v. Navient Corp., et al., Case No. 3: l 7- CV-00101-RDM. May 4, 20 l 8. https://\V\Vw.cou1ilistener.com/recap/gov .uscourts.pamd.1103?9/gov .uscourts.pan1fl. l ! 0329.88.0 l .pdf 1 ~ Complaint for Declarato1y and Injunctive Relief, Plaintiff Pennsylvania l-Iigher Education Assistance Agency v. Jorge L. Perez, in his official capacity as Con1missioner of the Connecticut Department of Banking, et al., Case 3: l8"cv-O l 114-MPS. July 2, 2018. https://ww\v.courtlistener.co1n/recap/gov.uscourts.ctd. 126659/gov .uscourts.ctd. 126659 .1.0.pdf 3 Dece1nber 2017tnemora11dL11n. 13 'fhe courts have consistently ordered Navient to produce tl1ese records and co1nply with law enforcen1ent. 14 a. When and on ho\.\' 1nany occasions since December 2017 lias a state Attorney General requested or demanded data or info11nation from your company i11 connection with any investigation, lawsuit, or other enforcement action related to federal student loans? b. Please provide all written con1n1u11ications between your company and the Deprutn1ent since December 2017 in connection \Vith any investigation, lawsuit, or otl1er enforcc1ncnt action by a state Attorney General.

5. }las your company failed to provide all requested infonnation on any oftl1e occasio11s referred to in Questions l ~4? If so,

a. On what occasion(s) did )'Otlr con1pany fail to provide requested information'? b. What requested info1mation did your company fail to provide? c. Why did your company fail to provide tl1is requested infom1ation? d. Has your company provided this information to the Department? e. I,las your compa11y provided this information to ru1y other federal or State entity, such as a state's Attorney General or state banking regulator? t: 111 cases wl1cre your con1pany has refused to provide h1formation requested by CFPB, did the Bureau pursue other options? And if so, \\'l1at were these options and wl1at was your response'?

6. Did )'OU co1nmunicate witl1 ED officials about 111e Privacy Act guidance in advance of the December 2017 release? a. If so, \.\1hat was the nature of that comn1unication? b. Please provide copies and records of all e-mail, memoranda, or any other verbal or written co1ru11u11ications of or related to tl1ese discussio11s.

7. I-lave yot1 con1municated with ED officials about the Privacy Act gttidance since the Decen1bcr 2017 release? a. If so, wl1at was the nature of that co1nm11nication? b. Please provide copies and records of all e-mail, memoranda, or a11y other verbal or written com1n1n1ications of or related to these discussions.

8. Please prov·ide copies of all i11temal co1nmunications related to CFPB co1nplianec 1natters, state ba11ki11g regulator compliance matters, or state Atto111eys General actions and the Dece1nber 2017 Edt1cation DepartJ11ent Privacy Act guidance.

Please provide answers no later than May 28, 2019.

13 Lener fron1 Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro to The E-lonorable Robert D. Mariani, Re: Comn1onwealth of Pennsylvania v. Navient Corporation et al., No.3;17-cv-Q 1814-RIJM. August 17, 2018. https://\V\V\V.courtlistener.com/rccap/gov .uscourts.patnd.113587/gov.uscourts.pamd. 1 13587 .35.0.pdf; H Me1norandu1n Opinion, 'fhc l·lonorable Judge Robert 0. Mariani. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Navient Corp., et al .. Case No, 3: I 7-cv-01814-RDM. October 17, 2018. htms://\VW\V .pourtl i stener.com/recapigov. uscourts.pan1d. l 13 587/gov. uscourts. paind_ l 13 5 87 .44 .0. pdf 4 Sincerely,

Sherrod Brown nited States Senator United States Senator

~~Kirsten Gillibrand Richard J. Durbin United States Senator United States Senator

e don Whitehouse United States Senator

5 tinital ~mtrs ~rnatr WASHINGTON, DC 20510

May 14, 2019

Mr. Jeffrey R. N oordhoek Nelnet, Inc. 121 South 13th Street Lincoln, NE 68508

Dear Mr. Noordhoek:

We are writing regarding disturbing information we have recently obtained about the refusal of federal student loan servicers to cooperate with Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or "the Bureau") oversight and supervision after receiving December 2017 guidance from the U.S. Department of Education (ED or "the Department"). In response to a letter we sent in April 2019, CFPB Director Kraninger revealed, "student loan servicers have declined to produce information requested by the Bureau for supervisory examinations,"1 following the release of the ED guidance. We request that, to the extent your company is failing to cooperate with the CFPB, you cease this obstruction immediately, and we ask that you provide answers to our questions on this matter no later than May 28, 2019.

On December 27, 2017, the Department issued a policy memorandum entitled, "Ownership of and Access to U.S Department of Education Records and Data," which provided guidance to all federal loan servicers, private collection agencies, and other Department contractors that participate in federal student aid programs regarding records. 2 This guidance required, "any request from any third party for Department records to which a contractor has access must be made directly to the Department."3

The December 2017 guidance effectively directed student loan servicers to withhold information from state and federal law enforcement agencies seeking to enforce consumer protection laws, including the CFPB, state Attorneys General, and other state and federal banking regulators. Last month, a coalition of 22 state Attorneys General wrote to the Department, revealing that the Department has rejected routine requests for student loan information by states and urging the Department to reverse this policy guidance. 4 State and federal law enforcement must have access to the information they need to do their jobs and protect student loan borrowers from illegal, unfair, abusive, or deceptive practices,

1 Letter to Sens. Warren, Brown, Gillibrand, Durbin, Whitehouse, and Menendez from CFPB Director Kathy Kraninger, April 23, 2019. 2 Memorandum from Patrick A. Bradfield, "Ownership of and Access to U.S. Department of Education Records and Data," Department 27, 2017, https://static.politico.com/51/1 f/Of805fd04c2eb035bcd79t"9200be/december-27-2017- servicer-memo.pdf. 3 Ibid. 4 Letter from Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, et. al., to ED Secretary Betsy DeVos, April 4, 2019, http://www.marylandattomeygeneral.gov/News%20Documents/Final%20AGs%20Letter%20to%20DOE%204.4.19. rujf. and to enforce consumer protection laws that fall outside of the Department's jurisdiction. No Department policy guidance can absolve servicers of their legal responsibility to comply with state and federal consumer protection law.

On April 2, 2019, several Senators wrote to CFPB Director Kathy Kraninger seeking information about CFPB' s ongoing oversight of student loan servicers, and the effects of the December 201 7 guidance and other new ED and CFPB policies on these efforts. 5

Director Kraninger responded to this letter on April 23, 2019, confirming that the CFPB "has conducted several exams of student loan servicers since December 201 7. "6 This response, however, also raised several concerns about the consequences of ED policies put in place over the last several years, including the Department's termination of a CFPB-ED Memorandum of Understanding and the December 2017 policy guidance:

Since December 201 7, student loan servicers have declined to produce information requested by the Bureau for supervisory examinations related to Direct Loans and Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFELP) loans held by the Department based on the Department's guidance. 7

The response also noted, "the Bureau has pursued options that would have permitted it to obtain information from student loan servicers necessary for supervisory examinations of Direct loans and Department-held FFELP loans."8

This is disturbing news. It reveals that the Department, under Secretary DeVos, has removed the most potent weapon from the CFPB' s arsenal to fight illegal behavior and mistreatment of borrowers by student loan servicers, and that federal student loan servicers, who are paid by the federal government, are ignoring federal regulators' requests for information. It also appears to indicate that- at a time when independent watchdogs have identified major and ongoing compliance problems with the student loan program and the failure of the Department to adequately oversee the program - servicers have been complicit in these efforts.9

To address our concerns about this matter, we ask that you provide answers to the following questions:

5 Letter to CFPB Director Kathy Kraninger from Sens. Warren, Brown, Gillibrand, Durbin, Whitehouse, and Menendez, April 3, 2019. 6 Letter to Sens. Warren, Brown, Gillibrand, Durbin, Whitehouse, and Menendez from CFPB Director Kathy Kraninger, April 23, 2019. 7 Ibid. 8 Ibid. 9 Department of Education Inspector General, Federal Student Aid: Additional Actions Needed to Mitigate the Risk of Servicer Noncompliance with Requirements for Servicing Federally Held Student Loans," Control Number ED OIG/A05Q0008, February 2019, https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oig/auditreports/fy2019/a05q0008.pdf.

2 1. When and on how many occasions since December 201 7 has the CFPB requested data or information from your company in connection with examination or supervision activities? a. Please provide all written communications between your company and the Department since December 201 7 in connection with CFPB examination or supervision activities.

2. According to an April 9, 2018 letter from the CFPB to a federal judge, the CFPB requested information during discovery in its enforcement action against N avient; however, the Department instructed Navient to decline to provide this information and indicated that CFPB needed to obtain a court order to get it. 10 A federal judge had to intervene to compel N avient to comply with the Bureau's request for documents in discovery during the course of the Bureau's law enforcement action. 11 a. When and on how many occasions since December 201 7 has the CFPB requested or demanded data or information from your company in connection with an investigation, lawsuit, or other enforcement action related to federal student loans? b. Please provide all written communications between your company and the Department since December 201 7 in connection with any investigation, lawsuit, or other enforcement action by the CFPB.

3. According to July 2018 court documents, the Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency has resisted the Connecticut Department of Banking's request for information, relying also on the Department's December 201 7 memorandum. 12 a. When and on how many occasions since December 201 7 has a state banking regulator requested data or information from your company in connection with examination or supervision activities related to federal student loans? b. Please provide all written communications between your company and the Department since December 2017 in connection with examination or supervision activities by state banking regulators.

4. According to August 2018 court documents, Navient has also denied Attorneys General in Washington and Pennsylvania access to important documents in discovery during state enforcement actions against the company, again relying also on the Department's

10 Letter from CFPB to The Honorable Judge Robert D. Mariani. Re: CFPB v. Navient Corp., et al., Case No. 3:17- CV-00101-RDM. April 9, 2018. https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.pamd.110329/gov.uscourts.pamd.110329.84.0.pdf 11 Memorandum Opinion, The Honorable Judge Robert D. Mariani. CFPB v. Navient Corp., et al., Case No. 3:17- CV-00101-RDM. May 4, 2018. https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.pamd.110329/gov.uscourts.pamd. l 10329.88.0 l .pdf 12 Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, Plaintiff Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency v. Jorge L. Perez, in his official capacity as Commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Banking, et al., Case 3:18-cv-01114-MPS. July 2, 2018. https://www .courtlistener.com/recap/gov. uscourts.ctd.126659/gov. uscourts.ctd.126659 .1.0.pdf

3 December 2017 memorandum. 13 The courts have consistently ordered Navient to produce these records and comply with law enforcement. 14 a. When and on how many occasions since December 201 7 has a state Attorney General requested or demanded data or information from your company in connection with any investigation, lawsuit, or other enforcement action related to federal student loans? b. Please provide all written communications between your company and the Department since December 2017 in connection with any investigation, lawsuit, or other enforcement action by a state Attorney General.

5. Has your company failed to provide all requested information on any of the occasions referred to in Questions 1-4? If so,

a. On what occasion(s) did your company fail to provide requested information? b. What requested information did your company fail to provide? c. Why did your company fail to provide this requested information? d. Has your company provided this information to the Department? e. Has your company provided this information to any other federal or State entity, such as a state's Attorney General or state banking regulator? f. In cases where your company has refused to provide information requested by CFPB, did the Bureau pursue other options? And if so, what were these options and what was your response?

6. Did you communicate with ED officials about the Privacy Act guidance in advance of the December 2017 release? a. If so, what was the nature of that communication? b. Please provide copies and records of all e-mail, memoranda, or any other verbal or written communications of or related to these discussions.

7. Have you communicated with ED officials about the Privacy Act guidance since the December 2017 release? a. If so, what was the nature of that communication? b. Please provide copies and records of all e-mail, memoranda, or any other verbal or written communications of or related to these discussions.

8. Please provide copies of all internal communications related to CFPB compliance matters, state banking regulator compliance matters, or state Attorneys General actions and the December 2017 Education Department Privacy Act guidance.

Please provide answers no later than May 28, 2019.

13 Letter from Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro to The Honorable Robert D. Mariani, Re: Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Navient Corporation et al., No.3:17-cv-01814-RDM. August 17, 2018. https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/ gov. uscourts.pamd.113 5 87 I gov. uscourts.pamd.113 5 87 .3 5 .0 .pdf; 14 Memorandum Opinion, The Honorable Judge Robert D. Mariani. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Navient Corp., et al., Case No. 3:17-cv-01814-RDM. October 17, 2018. https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.pamd.113587/gov.uscourts.pamd.113587.44.0.pdf

4 Sincerely,

Elizabeth Warren United States Senator United States Senator

Kirsten Gillibrand ~Cc~-ICarCli Durbin United States Senator United States Senator

United States Senator

May 14, 2019

Mr. James H. Steeley Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency 1200 North 7th Street Harrisburg, PA 17102

Dear Mr. Steeley:

We are writing regarding disturbing information we have recently obtained about the refusal of federal student loan servicers to cooperate with Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or “the Bureau”) oversight and supervision after receiving December 2017 guidance from the U.S. Department of Education (ED or “the Department”). In response to a letter we sent in April 2019, CFPB Director Kraninger revealed, “student loan servicers have declined to produce information requested by the Bureau for supervisory examinations,”1 following the release of the ED guidance. We request that, to the extent your company is failing to cooperate with the CFPB, you cease this obstruction immediately, and we ask that you provide answers to our questions on this matter no later than May 28, 2019.

On December 27, 2017, the Department issued a policy memorandum entitled, “Ownership of and Access to U.S Department of Education Records and Data,” which provided guidance to all federal loan servicers, private collection agencies, and other Department contractors that participate in federal student aid programs regarding records.2 This guidance required, “any request from any third party for Department records to which a contractor has access must be made directly to the Department.”3

The December 2017 guidance effectively directed student loan servicers to withhold information from state and federal law enforcement agencies seeking to enforce consumer protection laws, including the CFPB, state Attorneys General, and other state and federal banking regulators. Last month, a coalition of 22 state Attorneys General wrote to the Department, revealing that the Department has rejected routine requests for student loan information by states and urging the Department to reverse this policy guidance.4 State and federal law enforcement must have access to the information they need to do their jobs and protect student loan borrowers from illegal, unfair, abusive, or deceptive practices,

1 Letter to Sens. Warren, Brown, Gillibrand, Durbin, Whitehouse, and Menendez from CFPB Director Kathy Kraninger, April 23, 2019. 2 Memorandum from Patrick A. Bradfield, “Ownership of and Access to U.S. Department of Education Records and Data,” Department 27, 2017, https://static.politico.com/51/1f/0f805fd04c2eb035bcd79f9200be/december-27-2017- servicer-memo.pdf . 3 Ibid. 4 Letter from Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, et. al., to ED Secretary Betsy DeVos, April 4, 2019, http://www.marylandattorneygeneral.gov/News%20Documents/Final%20AGs%20Letter%20to%20DOE%204.4.19. pdf . and to c11force consumer protection laws that fall outside of the Departme11t'sjl1risdiction. No Department policy guidance cm1 absol\'e servicers of their legal responsibility to complJ' with state and federal consun1er protectio11 law.

On April 2, 2019, several Senators \\.Tote to CFPB Director Kathy Kraninger seeking information about CFPB's 011going oversigl1t of student loan servicers, and the effects of the December 2017 guidance and other new ED and CFPB policies on tl1ese efforts.5

Director Kraninger responded to this letter on April 23, 2019, contirmi11g that tl1e Cf'PB ''has conducted several exams of st11de11t loan servicers since Decen1ber 2017."6 'fhis response, however, also raised several concerns about tl1e consequences of ED policies put in place O\.'Cr the last several years, including the Depa1iment's ter1nination of a CFPB-ED Memorandurn of lJndcrsta11ding and the December 2017 policy guidance:

Since December 2017, student loru1 sen.ricers l1ave decli11ed to produce inforn1ation reqltcsted by tl1e Bureau for supervisory exan1inations related to Direct Loans and Federal Fa1nily Education I.,oan Program (FFELP) loans held by the Depart1ne11t based on the Depmtme11t's gltida11ce.7

Tl1c response also noted, "the Bureau 11as pursued options that wo1tld have permitted it to obtain infotmation from student loan servicers necessary for supervisory examinations of Direct loans and Depart1uent-held I~FELP loans."8 ,

1'his is disturbi11g news. It reveals that tJ1e Depruiment, under Secretary DeVos, has removed the most potc11t weapon from the CFPB's arsenal to tight illegal behavior and mistrcat1nent of borrowers by student loa11 servicers, a11d that federal student loa11 servicers, who are paid by the federal government, are ignoring federal regulators' requests for information. It also appears to indicate that - at a tin1e when independent watchdogs have identified major and ongoing compliance proble1ns \Vitl1 the student loan program and the failure of the Depa1tment to adet1uately O\'Crsee the progran1- servicers have been complicit in these effo1ts.9

'I'o address our concerns about this matter, we ask that you provide answers to the following questions:

5 Letter to CFPB Director r

2 I. When ai1d on ho\v many occasions since Decen1ber 2017 has tl1e CFPB requested data or info1mation from your company in connection \vith examination or supervision activities? a. Please provide all written co1nmunjcations between your co1npai1y and the Department since· Decen1ber 2017 in connection with CFPB exan1ination or supervision activities.

2. According to an April 9, 2018 letter fron1 the CI:;'PB to a federal judge, the CFPB requested information during discovery in its enforcement action agai11st Navie11t; however, the Depat1ment instructed Navient to decline to provide this inforn1atio11 ai1d indicated tl1at CFPB needed to obtain a court order to get it. 10 A federal judge had to i11tervene to compel Navient to con1pl)' witl1 the- Bt1reat1's request for documents jn discovery duri11g the course of the Bureau's law enforce1nent action. 11 a. Whe11 and on ho\\' tnany occasio11s since Decen1ber 2017 has t11e CFPB requested or demanded data or infonnatio11 fro1n yottr co1n_pany in com1ection with an investigatio11, lawsuit, or otl1er enforcement action related to federal student loans? b. Please provide all Vl'Titten co111111unications bet\.vcen yottr company and the Department since December 2017 in connection with any investigation, la\vsuit, or other enforcetncnt action by the Cl7PB.

3. According to Jul:y 2018 court docun1ents, the Pennsylvania Higher Ed11cation Assistance Agency has resisted tl1e Connectict1t l)epart1nent ofB·anki11g's request for inforn1atio11_. 12 relying also 011 the Department's December 2017 tnemorandum. a. \\1he11 and on how many occasions since Decen1ber 2017 l1as a state banl(ing regulator req11ested data or info1111ation from your con1pany in connection \Vith examination or supervision activities related to federal student loans? b. Please provide all writte11 commtmications bet\veen your con1pany and tl1e Department since Decen1ber 2017 in connectio11 witl1 examination or supervision activities by state ba11king regulators.

4. According to August 2018 court doc11ments, -Navient has also denied Attor11eys General in Washington and Pennsylvania access to important docu1nents i11 discover;' during state enforcement actions against tl1e company, again rclyit1g also on the Departme11t's

10 Letter frotn CFPB to The Honorable Judge Robe1t D. Mariani. Re: CFPB v. Navient Corp., et aL, Case No. 3: 17- CV-00101-RDM. April 9, 2018. https://\V\VW.courtlistener.co1nfrecap/gov .uscourts.pamd. l 10329/gov.uscourts.panid. ! I 0329.84.0.pdf 11 Men1orandum Opinion, The Honorable Judge Robert D. Mariani. CFPB v. Navient C-orp., et al., Case No. 3: 17- CV-00101-RDM. May 4, 2018. https://\V\VW .courtlistener.co1n/recap/gov .uscourts.pamd. J I 0329/gov.uscourts.paind. 11 0329 .88.0 1.pdf 12 Con1plaint for I)ecJaratory and [njunctive Relief, Plaintiff Pennsylvania f1igher Education Assistance Agency v. Jorge L. Perez, in his official capacity as Corn missioner of the Connecticut Departn1ent of Banking, et al., Case 3:18-cv-01114-MPS. July2, 2018. https://w\VW .court] istener.com/rccap/gov.uscourts.ctd. J 16659/gov .uscourts.ctd.126659 .1.0.pdf 3 Dece1nber 2017 1nernorandtin1. 13 The courts 11a\'e consiste11tly ordered Navient to produce tl1ese records and co1nply witl1 law enforcetnent. 14 a. When and on how ma11y occasions since December 2017 has a state Attorney General requested or de1nanded data or infonnation from your company in coruiection with any investigation, \awsttit, or ot11er enforcement action related to federal student loans? b. Please provide all .writte11 con11ntn1ications bet\vee11 your co1npany and tl1e Departtnent since December 2017 in connection \Vith any investigation, lawsuit, or other enforcement action by a state Attorne)' General.

5. Has your company failed to pro,vide all reqttested infor1nation on any oftl1e occasions referred to in Q11estions 1-4? ff so,

a. On what occasion(s) did your company fail to provide requested information? b. Wl1at requested inforn1atio11 did your company fail to provide? c. Why did yotir company fail to provide this requested info1mation? d. I.Jas your company provided this infonnatio11 to the Department? e. Has your company provided this infor1nation to any other federal or State entit)', such as a state's Attorney General or state banking regtdator? f. In cases where your company has refused to provide infonnation requested by C.I~PB, did tl1e Bureau purstte other options? And if so, what were these options and what was your response?

6. Did vou co1n1nLmicate witl1 'ED officials about the Privacy Act guidru1ce in advance of the Dece1nber 2017 release? a. If so, what was t11e nature of that comn1unication? b. Please provide copies and records of all e-111aiL men1ora11da, or a11y other verbal or written comn1unications of or related to these discussions.

7. I-lave you com1nu11icated with ED officials about the Privacy Act guidance since tl1e December 2017 release? a. If so, \vhat was the nature of that co1n1nunication? b. Please provide copies and records of all e-mail, men1oranda, or any other verbal or written comtnunications of or related to these discussions.

8. Please provide copies of all internal co1nmunicatio11s related to Cl"PB con1pliance inatters, state banking regulator compliance n1atters, or state Attorneys General actio11s and the December 2017 Educatio11 Depa1i1nent Privacy Act guidru1ce.

Please provide answers no later tl1an May 28, 2019.

u Letter fro1n Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro to The 1-lonorable Robert D. Mariani, Re: Common\vcalth of Pennsylvania v. Navient Corporation et al., No.3: l 7-cv-01814-RDM. August l 7, 2018. https://v.iww .courtlistener.co1n/recap/gov.uscourts.pamd. l l 3587/gov.uscourts.pa1nd. l l3587 .35.0.pdf; i.i Men1orandum Opinion, The Honorable Judge Robert D. Mariani. Co1nmonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Navient Corp., ct al., Case No. 3: !7-cv-OJ 814-RDM. October 17, 2018. https://www .courtlfstener.co1n/recap/gov.uscourts.pamd. ! 13587/gov.uscourts.pamd. l 13587 .44.0.pdf 4 Sincerely,

ited States Senator United States Senator

Kirsten Gillibrand R~~c.t~·L·e..Durbm United States Senator United States Senator

United States Senator