[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 121 (Friday, June 24, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37700-37724]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-13671]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION

12 CFR Part 1022

[Docket No. CFPB-2022-0023]
RIN 3170-AB12


Prohibition on Inclusion of Adverse Information in Consumer 
Reporting in Cases of Human Trafficking (Regulation V)

AGENCY: Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Bureau) is amending 
Regulation V, which implements the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), to 
address recent legislation that assists consumers who are victims of 
trafficking. This final rule establishes a method for a victim of 
trafficking to submit documentation to consumer reporting agencies, 
including information identifying any adverse item of information about 
the consumer that resulted from certain types of human trafficking, and 
prohibits the consumer reporting agencies from furnishing a consumer 
report containing the adverse item(s) of information. The Bureau is 
taking this action as mandated by the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2022 to assist consumers who are victims of 
trafficking in building or rebuilding financial stability and personal 
independence.

DATES: This final rule is effective July 25, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel Tingley, Counsel; Lanique 
Eubanks or Brandy Hood, Senior Counsels, Office of Regulations, at 202-
435-7700 or https://reginquiries.consumerfinance.gov/. If you require 
this document in an alternative electronic format, please contact 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

[[Page 37701]]

I. Summary of the Final Rule

    The Bureau is adopting several amendments to Regulation V to 
implement new section 605C of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA),\1\ 
added by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 
(2022 NDAA).\2\ In brief, section 605C provides that a consumer 
reporting agency may not furnish a consumer report containing any 
adverse item of information concerning a consumer that resulted from a 
severe form of trafficking in persons or sex trafficking if the 
consumer has provided trafficking documentation to the consumer 
reporting agency.\3\ Under section 605C, the Bureau is required to 
issue implementing regulations within 180 days of the enactment of the 
2022 NDAA. Section 605C is effective 30 days after the Bureau issues 
its final implementing regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. For ease 
of reference, section 605C of the FCRA is generally referred to as 
``section 605C'' throughout this notice.
    \2\ National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 
(2022 NDAA), Public Law 117-81, section 6102, 135 Stat. 2383-84 
(2021) (to be codified at 15 U.S.C. 1681c-3), https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ81/PLAW-117publ81.pdf. The sponsors 
of this section of the 2022 NDAA and some advocates refer to this 
law as the ``Debt Bondage Repair Act,'' in reference to H.R. 2332 
(introduced in the 117th Congress on Apr. 1, 2021).
    \3\ For purposes of this rule, the terms ``severe forms of 
trafficking in persons'' and ``sex trafficking'' will be referred to 
individually (as defined in the section-by-section analysis of Sec.  
1022.142(b)) or collectively as ``trafficking.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Bureau is amending Regulation V as follows:
     Create new section 1022.142 in subpart O, the subpart on 
miscellaneous duties of consumer reporting agencies, to add the 
provisions implementing section 605C;
     Apply the new section to any ``consumer reporting agency'' 
as defined in section 603(f) of the FCRA, namely nationwide consumer 
reporting agencies, nationwide specialty consumer reporting agencies, 
and all other consumer reporting agencies;
     Define terms including, in particular, ``trafficking 
documentation,'' ``severe forms of trafficking in persons,'' ``sex 
trafficking,'' and ``victim of trafficking'';
     Clarify that ``trafficking documentation'' includes 
certain determinations made by a non-governmental organization or 
member of a human trafficking task force when authorized by a Federal, 
State, or Tribal governmental entity, and that, for purposes of the new 
section, documentation by a State governmental entity includes 
documentation at both the State and local level;
     Permit a consumer to self-attest as a victim of 
trafficking if the document or an accompanying document is signed or 
certified by a Federal, State, or Tribal governmental entity, a court 
of competent jurisdiction, or the representatives of these entities;
     Clarify that a document filed in a court of competent 
jurisdiction is an acceptable determination that a consumer is a victim 
of trafficking where: (1) a central issue in the case is whether the 
consumer is a victim of trafficking; and (2) where the court has 
conducted an initial review of the victim's claim for purposes of a 
motion to dismiss or motion for summary judgment and the result is in 
favor of the victim; and
     Establish procedures explaining how consumers should 
submit the required documentation to consumer reporting agencies, what 
actions a consumer reporting agency must perform when it receives that 
documentation, the limited circumstances under which a consumer 
reporting agency may ask for additional information, written policies 
and procedures, and recordkeeping requirements to monitor compliance.

II. Background

A. Trafficking in the United States

    According to the United States Department of State (State 
Department), in the United States human traffickers compel victims to 
engage in commercial sex and to work in legal and non-legal industries 
and sectors, including, for example, agriculture, janitorial services, 
construction, landscaping, restaurants, factories, child care, care for 
persons with disabilities, domestic work, salon services, massage 
parlors, peddling and begging, and drug smuggling and distribution.\4\ 
As the State Department has noted, it is difficult to find reliable 
statistics related to human trafficking for a number of reasons, 
including the hidden nature of the crime and barriers to identifying 
victims of trafficking and sharing information about them.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ U.S. Dep't of State, About Human Trafficking, https://www.state.gov/humantrafficking-about-human-trafficking (last visited 
June 20, 2022).
    \5\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Congress enacted the first significant Federal legislation 
addressing human trafficking in 2000. The Trafficking Victims 
Protection Act of 2000 \6\ (TVPA) established the ``three Ps'' 
framework for combating human trafficking by providing increased 
protections for victims, enhanced tools to prosecute perpetrators of 
trafficking, and additional resources for prevention.\7\ Among other 
things, the TVPA added new criminal provisions prohibiting ``severe 
forms of trafficking in persons.'' This term includes two components of 
human trafficking defined to include sex trafficking of children or by 
force, fraud, or coercion of adults, as well as forced labor 
trafficking with respect to involuntary servitude, peonage, debt 
bondage, or slavery, commonly referred to as ``sex trafficking'' and 
``labor trafficking,'' respectively.\8\ Since 2000, Congress has 
reauthorized the TVPA on several occasions and continued to dedicate 
additional tools and resources to the fight against trafficking on a 
regular basis, including the creation and funding of the National Human 
Trafficking Hotline.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Publish Law 106-386, 114 Stat. 1464.
    \7\ U.S. Dep't of Just., Key Legislation, https://www.justice.gov/humantrafficking/key-legislation (last visited June 
20, 2022).
    \8\ Id.; see also 18 U.S.C. 1589 through 1591.
    \9\ See, e.g., William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims 
Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, Public Law 110-457, 122 
Stat. 5044; Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act of 2015, Public 
Law 114-22, 129 Stat. 227 (creating the National Human Trafficking 
Hotline by directing the Secretary of Health and Human Services 
(HHS) to make grants for a national communication system to assist 
victims of severe forms of trafficking in persons in communicating 
with service providers and give priority to grant applicants that 
have experience in providing telephone services to victims of severe 
forms of trafficking in persons).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Efforts by the United States Government to respond to the needs of 
victims of trafficking recognize that victims have both immediate and 
longer-term needs, including the need to improve financial stability to 
support their long-term independence.\10\ Adverse consumer report 
information resulting from having been trafficked can reduce the 
ability of victims \11\ to

[[Page 37702]]

take basic steps to obtain housing and employment and to move toward 
greater financial stability and independence.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Coordination Collaboration Capacity, Federal Strategic 
Action Plan on Services for Victims of Human Trafficking in the 
United States 2013-2017 (Jan. 2014), at 9, https://ovc.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh226/files/media/document/FederalHumanTraffickingStrategicPlan.pdf.
    \11\ The Bureau recognizes that some individuals and advocates 
prefer the term ``survivor'' to ``victim.'' As the Department of 
Justice (DOJ) has explained, ``[b]oth terms are important and have 
different implications when used in the context of victim advocacy 
and service provision. For example, the term `victim' has legal 
implications within the criminal justice process and refers to an 
individual who suffered harm as a result of criminal conduct. The 
laws that give individuals particular rights and legal standing 
within the criminal justice system use the term `victim.' . . . 
`Survivor' is a term used widely in service providing organizations 
to recognize the strength and courage it takes to overcome 
victimization.'' See Training & Tech. Assistance Ctr., Off. for 
Victims of Crime, U.S. Dep't of Just., Human Trafficking Task Force 
e-Guide, https://www.ovcttac.gov/taskforceguide/eguide/1-understanding-human-trafficking/13-victim-centered-approach/(last 
visited June 20, 2022). In this final rule, the Bureau is using the 
term ``victim'' because that is the wording of section 6102 of the 
2022 NDAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. The Fair Credit Reporting Act

    The FCRA, enacted in 1970 and significantly amended in 1996, 2003, 
2010, and 2018, regulates consumer reporting. It was enacted to protect 
consumers by preventing the transmission of inaccurate information in 
consumer reports and establishing confidential and responsible credit 
reporting practices.\12\ The FCRA's statutory scheme was designed to 
ensure that consumer reporting agencies adopt reasonable procedures for 
meeting the needs of commerce in a manner which is fair and equitable 
to consumers and protects the confidentiality, accuracy, relevancy, and 
proper utilization of consumer information.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Guimond v. Trans Union Credit Info. Co., 45 F.3d 1329, 1333 
(9th Cir. 1995).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 1681(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Together with its implementing regulation, Regulation V,\14\ the 
FCRA creates a regulatory framework for furnishing, using, and 
disclosing information in reports associated with credit, insurance, 
employment, and other decisions made about consumers. In doing so, the 
FCRA and Regulation V impose obligations on entities that qualify as 
``consumer reporting agencies.'' They also impose obligations on those 
who use consumer report information or furnish information to consumer 
reporting agencies (furnishers).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 12 CFR part 1022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022

    Section 6102 of the 2022 NDAA amended the FCRA by inserting a new 
section 605C, based on an earlier bill known as the Debt Bondage Repair 
Act.\15\ Section 605C(b) provides that a consumer reporting agency may 
not furnish a consumer report containing any adverse item of 
information concerning a consumer that resulted from a severe form of 
trafficking in persons or sex trafficking if the consumer has provided 
trafficking documentation to the consumer reporting agency. As 
described in more detail in the section-by-section analysis below, 
section 605C(a) provides statutory definitions for a number of the 
terms, including from the TVPA. Section 605C(c)(1) directs the Bureau 
to issue implementing rules within 180 days of enactment, and section 
605C(c)(2) mandates that the rules must establish a method by which 
consumers must submit trafficking documentation to consumer reporting 
agencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See note 2 supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Summary of the Rulemaking Process

    On April 8, 2022, the Bureau published a proposed rule in the 
Federal Register to implement section 605C.\16\ The comment period 
ended on May 9, 2022. In response to the proposal, the Bureau received 
over 60 comments from survivors of trafficking, consumers, consumer 
groups, anti-trafficking advocacy groups, industry trade associations, 
and others.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See 87 FR 20771 (Apr. 8, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Many commenters expressed general support for the proposed rule, 
discussing, for example, the importance of section 605C's goal of 
helping victims of trafficking recover financially. Some commenters 
expressed general support for the proposed rule and stated that they 
believed the proposal would help victims regain access to credit, 
employment, housing, bank accounts, utilities, and other services. The 
Bureau also received requests from commenters to alter, clarify, or 
remove specific provisions of the proposed rule, with some comments 
focusing on issues relating to potential fraud or abuse and others 
focusing on revisions that would permit more consumers to take 
advantage of the proposed amendments. As discussed in more detail 
below, the Bureau has considered these comments in adopting this final 
rule.

IV. Legal Authority

    The Bureau is issuing this final rule pursuant to its authority 
under the FCRA, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer 
Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act),\17\ and section 6102 of the 2022 NDAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act 
(Dodd-Frank Act), Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Dodd-Frank Act Section 1022(b) and the FCRA

    Section 1022(b)(1) of the Dodd-Frank Act authorizes the Bureau to 
prescribe rules as may be necessary or appropriate to enable the Bureau 
to administer and carry out the purposes and objectives of the Federal 
consumer financial laws, and to prevent evasions thereof.\18\ Effective 
July 21, 2011, section 1061 of the Dodd-Frank Act transferred to the 
Bureau the rulemaking and certain other authorities of the Federal 
Trade Commission (FTC) and the prudential banking regulators (i.e., the 
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (FRB), the Federal 
Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the National Credit Union 
Administration (NCUA), and the Office of the Comptroller of the 
Currency (OCC)) relating to specific ``enumerated consumer laws'' 
listed in the Dodd-Frank Act, including most rulemaking authority under 
the FCRA.\19\ Likewise, section 1088 of the Dodd-Frank Act made 
conforming amendments to the FCRA, transferring rulemaking authority 
under much of the FCRA to the Bureau.\20\ As amended by the Dodd-Frank 
Act, section 621(e) of the FCRA authorizes the Bureau to issue 
regulations as may be necessary or appropriate to administer and carry 
out the purposes and objectives of the FCRA, and to prevent evasions 
thereof or to facilitate compliance therewith.\21\ The Bureau is 
issuing this final rule pursuant to its authority under Sec.  
1022(b)(1) of the Dodd-Frank Act and section 621(e) of the FCRA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Id. Sec.  1022(b)(1), 124 Stat. 1980 (codified at 12 U.S.C. 
5512(b)(1)).
    \19\ Id. Sec.  1061(b)(5)(A), 124 Stat. 2037 (codified at 12 
U.S.C. 5581(b)(5)(A)). Section 1002(12)(F) of the Dodd-Frank Act 
designates most of the FCRA (codified at 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.) as 
an ``enumerated consumer law'' except with respect to sections 
615(e) and 628 (codified at 15 U.S.C. 1681m(e), 1681w). Dodd-Frank 
Act Sec.  1002(12)(F), 124 Stat. 1957 (codified at 12 U.S.C. 
5481(12)(F)).
    \20\ Dodd-Frank Act Sec.  1088, 124 Stat. 2086 (codified at 15 
U.S.C. 1681 et seq.).
    \21\ Id. Sec.  1088(a)(10)(E), 124 Stat. 2090 (codified at 15 
U.S.C. 1681s(e)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022

    Section 6102(a) of the 2022 NDAA directs the Bureau to issue a rule 
implementing the new section 605C. Section 6102(c) provides that the 
rule issued to implement section 605C shall be limited to preventing a 
consumer reporting agency from furnishing a consumer report containing 
any adverse item of information about a consumer (as such terms are 
defined, respectively, in section 603 of the FCRA (15 U.S.C. 1681a)) 
that resulted from trafficking.

V. Section-by-Section Analysis

Section 1022.142 Prohibition on Inclusion of Adverse Information in 
Consumer Reporting in Cases of Human Trafficking

142(a) Scope
    The Bureau proposed to apply the requirement to prohibit the 
furnishing of adverse items of information about victims of trafficking 
to any ``consumer reporting agency'' as defined in section 603(f), as 
directed by section 6102(c) of the 2022 NDAA. Consistent with section 
6102(c) of the 2022 NDAA, the Bureau proposed to apply new Sec.  
1022.142 to any ``consumer reporting agency'' as

[[Page 37703]]

defined in section 603(f) of the FCRA. Thus, consistent with section 
603(f), the requirement prohibiting a consumer reporting agency from 
furnishing any adverse items of information about a consumer that 
resulted from a severe form of trafficking in persons or sex 
trafficking applies to all consumer reporting agencies, including the 
nationwide consumer reporting agencies, nationwide specialty consumer 
reporting agencies, and all other consumer reporting agencies such as 
those focused on employment screening, tenant screening, check and bank 
screening, personal property insurance, medical, low-income and 
subprime, supplementary reports, utilities, retail, and gaming.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ A list of many self-identified consumer reporting companies 
is available on the Bureau's website at https://www.consumerfinance.gov/consumer-tools/credit-reports-and-scores/consumer-reporting-companies/companies-list/ (last visited June 20, 
2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A few commenters addressed the proposed scope. Consumer advocate 
commenters generally supported applying the requirement to all consumer 
reporting agencies. However, one industry commenter suggested that the 
final rule should provide an exception for resellers, as defined by 
section 603(u) of the FCRA, that do not maintain a consumer file, 
similar to the exception from the requirement to block information 
resulting from identity theft in section 605B(d) of the FCRA. The 
commenter reasoned that these resellers do not maintain a file on 
consumers and, therefore, do not have the means to block such 
information for use in future consumer reports.
    For the reasons discussed below, the Bureau is finalizing Sec.  
1022.142(a) as proposed. Section 6102(c) of the NDAA provides that any 
rule issued by the Bureau to implement section 605C applies to all 
consumer reporting agencies. Unlike the identity theft provision 
identified by the commenter,\23\ the FCRA does not except or exempt any 
types of consumer reporting agencies from this prohibition. Even if a 
reseller does not maintain a file on consumers, if the reseller has 
received a request to block information from a consumer, the reseller 
can comply by ensuring that any consumer report it provides does not 
contain items of adverse information requested by the consumer to be 
blocked. Thus, the Bureau declines to provide exceptions for any types 
of consumer reporting agencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

142(b) Definitions
142(b)(1) Appropriate Proof of Identity
    Section 605C is silent regarding whether and how consumers must 
establish their identity when submitting trafficking documentation to a 
consumer reporting agency. The Bureau proposed to define ``appropriate 
proof of identity'' as proof of identity that meets the requirements in 
Sec.  1022.123.\24\ This section, which concerns proof of identify for 
consumers regarding identity theft, fraud and active duty alerts, 
consumer report information blocks, and truncation of Social Security 
numbers, provides that consumer reporting agencies must develop and 
implement reasonable requirements specifying what information consumers 
must provide to constitute proof of identity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See 12 CFR 1022.123.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Bureau received several comments supporting the proposed 
approach. Multiple commenters observed that trafficking survivors often 
lack documentation that is frequently requested for proof of identity, 
such as a driver's license, bank account statements, or utility bills. 
Two commenters observed that many victims of trafficking may make use 
of State-run address confidentiality programs, which shield the actual 
addresses of victims of certain offenses in public records.\25\ For 
these reasons, several commenters insisted on the importance of 
requiring consumer reporting agencies to accept non-documentary means 
of proof of identity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See, e.g., N.Y. Dep't of State, Address Confidentiality 
Program, https://dos.ny.gov/address-confidentiality (last visited 
June 20, 2022) (explaining that New York's address confidentiality 
program is available to victims of human trafficking).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A small number of comments recommended alterations to the 
definition. Some individual consumers and consumer groups called for 
the Bureau to describe a universal method to ensure all consumer 
reporting agencies are held to the same standard when identifying 
victims and proposed that the Bureau mandate the use of alternative 
methods of identification validation. One commenter stated that the 
Bureau should clarify Regulation V or provide other guidance to 
prohibit excessive requirements for identification in order to ensure 
that Congress's intent to protect trafficking survivors is not 
undermined. This commenter emphasized that consumer reporting agencies 
currently demand unnecessary amounts of identification or reject a 
consumer's proof for minor discrepancies, and that these demands are 
not commensurate with the risk of harm arising from misidentifying the 
consumer. Additionally, another consumer group suggested providing 
consumer reporting agencies with a safe harbor for reasonable proof of 
identity procedures to offset the adoption of conservative and 
inflexible procedures to mitigate criticism consumer reporting agencies 
are not rigorous enough in their proof of identity standards.
    For the reasons discussed below, the final rule adopts Sec.  
1022.142(b)(1) as proposed, with additional clarifying text. Given the 
particular needs and challenges of consumers, a universal, one-size-
fits-all standard specified in detail by the Bureau may not be a 
workable solution. Section 1022.123 of Regulation V requires consumer 
reporting agencies to develop and implement ``reasonable'' requirements 
for what information consumers shall provide to constitute proof of 
identity that are sufficient to enable the consumer reporting agency to 
match consumers with their files and adjust the information to be 
commensurate with an identifiable risk of harm arising from 
misidentifying consumers. Section 1022.123 describes these requirements 
with respect to section 605A (identity theft prevention and fraud and 
active duty alerts), section 605B (consumer report information blocks), 
and section 609(a)(1) (truncation of Social Security numbers) of the 
FCRA. The final rule clarifies that, as used in Sec.  1022.142, the 
requirements in Sec.  1022.123 should be applied for purposes of 
section 605C.
    The Bureau recognizes that the reasonableness of proof of identity 
requirements depends on the context and may differ between consumers 
trying to resolve problems caused by, for example, identity theft and 
those who are victims of trafficking. The Bureau also recognizes the 
importance of matching consumers who are victims of trafficking with 
their files and adjusting information to be commensurate with an 
identifiable risk of harm arising from misidentifying the consumer. 
Accordingly, the Bureau is clarifying that the requirements in Sec.  
1022.123 should be used for purposes of section 605C and tailored to 
the needs of victims of trafficking for purposes of establishing a 
consumer's identity. The Bureau expects consumer reporting agencies to 
explore and implement a risk-based approach to verifying a consumer's 
identity through both ``documentary'' \26\ and ``non-

[[Page 37704]]

documentary'' means.\27\ The Bureau will also monitor the 
identification procedures for victims of trafficking to ensure consumer 
reporting agencies are not applying excessive requirements for 
identification and that the standards protect the confidentiality and 
personal safety of survivors. Moreover, appropriate proof of identity 
for the purposes of this section requires consumer reporting agencies 
to develop reasonable requirements for victims of trafficking, 
recognizing the challenges many victims might face in establishing 
proof of identity by conventional methods used for other purposes. The 
Bureau expects consumer reporting agencies to develop standards 
specific to victims of trafficking such that Congress's intent to 
protect survivors of trafficking is not undermined.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Consumer reporting agencies could, for example, require 
consumers to provide a social security number or card issued by the 
Social Security Administration, a certified or official copy of a 
birth certificate issued by the entity authorized to issue the birth 
certificate, or a copy of a driver's license, an identification card 
issued by the motor vehicle administration, or any other government 
issued identification.
    \27\ The Bureau encourages consumer reporting agencies to confer 
with consumer groups, anti-trafficking advocacy groups and survivors 
of trafficking for information on the types of identification, 
including by non-documentary means, and confirmation questions a 
victim of trafficking could easily answer to prove their identity. 
Consumer reporting agencies should refer to the customer 
identification program requirements for banks in 31 CFR 1020.220 for 
examples.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

142(b)(2) Consumer Report
    Proposed Sec.  1022.142(b)(2) defined the term ``consumer report'' 
to have the same meaning as that provided in section 603(d) of the 
FCRA. The use of this definition is directed by section 6102(c) of the 
2022 NDAA which provides that the Bureau's rule shall be limited to 
preventing a consumer reporting agency from furnishing a consumer 
report containing any adverse item of information about a consumer that 
resulted from trafficking as the terms are defined in section 603 of 
the FCRA.
    The Bureau did not receive any comments on proposed Sec.  
1022.142(b)(2) and is finalizing it as proposed.
142(b)(3) Consumer Reporting Agency
    Proposed Sec.  1022.142(b)(3) defined ``consumer reporting agency'' 
to have the meaning provided in section 603(f) of the FCRA. The use of 
this definition is directed by section 6102(c) of the 2022 NDAA.
    The Bureau did not receive any comments on proposed Sec.  
1022.142(b)(3) and is finalizing it as proposed.
142(b)(4) Severe Forms of Trafficking in Persons
    Proposed Sec.  1022.142(b)(4) adopted the definition of ``severe 
forms of trafficking in persons'' set forth in section 605C(a)(2) from 
section 103 of the TVPA.\28\ Under that definition, the term ``severe 
forms of trafficking in persons'' means:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ Section 605C(a)(2) provides that the term ``severe forms of 
trafficking in persons'' has the same meaning given in section 103 
of the TVPA, Pub. L. 106-386, 114 Stat. 1464, 1470, which is 
currently codified at 22 U.S.C. 7102(11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (i) Sex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by 
force, fraud, or coercion, or in which the person induced to perform 
such act has not attained 18 years of age; or
    (ii) The recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or 
obtaining of a person for labor or services, through the use of force, 
fraud, or coercion for the purpose of subjection to involuntary 
servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery.
    The language in the first paragraph of this definition is commonly 
referred to as the ``sex trafficking'' component, and the language in 
the second paragraph is commonly referred to as the ``labor 
trafficking'' component.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ Off. on Trafficking in Persons, U.S. Dep't of Health & 
Human Servs., Fact Sheet: Human Trafficking, https://www.acf.hhs.gov/otip/fact-sheet/resource/fshumantrafficking (last 
visited June 20, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Bureau received few comments on this proposed definition.\30\ 
One consumer group stated that there may be circumstances where this 
definition is overly narrow, arguing that all forms of trafficking in 
persons or sex trafficking should be included as ``severe forms of 
trafficking in persons.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ One commenter argued that the sex trafficking component of 
the definition of ``severe forms of trafficking in persons'' 
rendered the separate inclusion of victims of ``sex trafficking'' 
under this rule redundant and confusing. The Bureau disagrees, for 
the reasons explained in the section-by-section analysis of Sec.  
1022.142(b)(7) below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Bureau is finalizing this definition as proposed. Section 
605C(a)(2) provides that the term ``severe forms of trafficking in 
persons'' has the meaning given in section 103 of the TVPA, which is 
the definition set out above and in the proposed rule. Consistent with 
the statute, the Bureau is adopting this definition in the final rule.
142(b)(5) Sex Trafficking
    Proposed Sec.  1022.142(b)(5) adopted the definition of ``sex 
trafficking'' set forth in section 605C(a)(2).\31\ Under that 
definition, the term ``sex trafficking'' means the recruitment, 
harboring, transportation, provision, obtaining, patronizing, or 
soliciting of a person for the purpose of a commercial sex act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ Section 605C(a)(2) provides the term ``sex trafficking'' 
has the same meaning given in section 103 of the TVPA, Public Law 
106-386, 114 Stat. 1464, codified at 22 U.S.C. 7102. This definition 
was amended by section 108 of the Justice for Victims of Trafficking 
Act of 2015, Public Law 114-22, 129 Stat. 227, 238-39. This 
definition is currently codified at 22 U.S.C. 7102(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Bureau received one comment on this definition which is 
discussed in the section-by-section analysis of Sec.  1022.142(b)(7) 
below.
142(b)(6) Trafficking Documentation
    Section 605C(a)(1) defines ``trafficking documentation'' as 
documentation of--a determination that a consumer is a victim of 
trafficking, made by a Federal, State, or Tribal governmental entity, 
or--by a court of competent jurisdiction and documentation that 
identifies items of adverse information that should not be furnished by 
a consumer reporting agency because the items resulted from a severe 
form of trafficking in persons or sex trafficking of which the consumer 
is the victim. The Bureau proposed to incorporate this statutory 
definition with certain modifications regarding documentation 
identifying a consumer who is a victim of trafficking involving a 
``court of a competent jurisdiction.'' Proposed Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i) 
described documentation requirements for a determination that a 
consumer is a victim of trafficking (victim determination) and proposed 
Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(ii) described documentation requirements for 
identified adverse items of information. Accordingly, the Bureau is 
naming Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i) as ``victim determination'' and Sec.  
1022.142(b)(6)(ii) as ``identified adverse items of information'' to 
make it clear that ``trafficking documentation'' under section 605C 
consists of two components: victim determinations and identified 
adverse items of information. Each component is discussed in the 
section-by-section analysis below.
142(b)(6)(i) Victim Determination
142(b)(6)(i)(A)
    Section 605C(a)(1)(A)(i) provides the term ``trafficking 
documentation'' means documentation of--a determination that a consumer 
is a victim of trafficking made by a Federal, State, or Tribal 
governmental entity. The Bureau proposed to adopt this statutory 
definition of ``trafficking documentation.'' Under this definition, a 
determination made by a Federal, State, or Tribal governmental entity 
in the form of documentation that a consumer is a victim of trafficking

[[Page 37705]]

would have satisfied the requirements in proposed Sec.  
1022.142(b)(6)(i)(A). As noted in the proposed rule, the Bureau found 
through outreach that documentation directly identifying a person as a 
victim of trafficking is scarce and is primarily limited to foreign-
born persons, a fact echoed by many commenters.\32\ The Bureau also 
learned that victims of trafficking are often not identified and thus 
many victims will not have documentation directly determining that they 
are a victim of trafficking. For these reasons, as discussed further 
below, the Bureau sought comment on multiple possible ways a consumer 
might be able to document a determination by a governmental entity that 
a consumer is a victim of trafficking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ For example, HHS issues certification letters to foreign 
national adults who have experienced a severe form of trafficking in 
persons after receiving notification that the Department of Homeland 
Security (DHS) has granted the person a continued presence, a T 
visa, or that a bona fide T visa application has not been denied. 
This certification letter provides that foreign national adult 
victims of trafficking are eligible for certain Federal and State 
benefits (health insurance, housing, food assistance, cash 
assistance, Federal student financial aid). United States citizens 
and lawful permanent residents do not need a Certification Letter to 
access services and benefits available to victims of trafficking and 
such as a letter identifying persons as victims of trafficking is 
generally not provided to United States citizens or permanent 
residents. This information is available at https://www.acf.hhs.gov/otip/victim-assistance/certification (last visited June 20, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Bureau has considered the comments and is adopting Sec.  
1022.142(b)(6)(i)(A), with revisions to provide that victim 
determinations include those made by certain non-governmental entities 
and human trafficking task forces authorized by a Federal, State, or 
Tribal governmental entity to make such determinations and that 
documentation by a ``State governmental entity'' includes documentation 
at both the State and local level.
    Non-Governmental Organizations and Other Non-Governmental Sources. 
In the proposed rule, the Bureau noted programs in which government 
agencies grant money to certain organizations to assist victims of 
trafficking. The Bureau discussed how, for example, the Office for 
Victims of Crime (OVC) in the Department of Justice (DOJ) is the 
largest Federal funder of services for human trafficking victims in the 
United States.\33\ However, the Bureau understands this office does not 
make or document determinations as to who is a victim of trafficking. 
Instead, non-governmental organizations that receive grants from the 
OVC to provide services to clients make determinations that individuals 
are victims of trafficking, in some cases even when the person does not 
self-identify as a victim.\34\ The Bureau sought comments about whether 
and how such non-governmental sources of information might be 
considered in making a determination that a consumer is a victim of 
trafficking under section 605C. Specifically, the Bureau asked for 
comments on whether entities that receive funding from a governmental 
entity, and are subject to the terms and conditions of a government 
program, may provide documentation in the form of a determination 
identifying a person as a victim of trafficking that would satisfy 
section 605C(a)(1)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ A map and list of OVC-funded human trafficking services and 
task forces is available on OVC's website at https://ovc.ojp.gov/program/human-trafficking/map (last visited June 20, 2022). HHS also 
provides funding to various organizations offering trafficking 
assistance to victims. A list of the grantees is available at 
https://www.acf.hhs.gov/otip/grants (last visited June 20, 2022).
    \34\ Off. for Victims of Crime, U.S. Dept of Just., OVC Human 
Trafficking Program FAQs, at comment 33 ``Can I provide services to 
a client who does not self-identify as a victim of human 
trafficking?'', https://ovc.ojp.gov/program/human-trafficking/ovc-human-trafficking-program-faqs (last visited June 20, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commenters were largely in favor of treating determinations that 
individuals are victims of trafficking made by non-governmental sources 
receiving government money as determinations made by a governmental 
entity, with few exceptions. One consumer group commenter suggested 
that the Bureau should broaden the allowable categories of 
documentation to show that the consumer is a trafficking survivor. The 
commenter suggested that the Bureau promulgate a definition that 
includes documentation from government-funded organizations under 
section 605C itself, or that the Bureau use its broad general 
rulemaking authority under section 621(e) to prescribe regulations as 
may be necessary or appropriate to administer and carry out the 
purposes and objectives of the FCRA. The commenter observed that 
trained professionals who work in these organizations are generally in 
the best position to speak with a client, understand their personal 
background and history, and assess whether the consumer is a victim of 
trafficking. An anti-trafficking advocacy group commenter stated that 
trafficking survivors may have no or extremely limited interactions 
with government agency personnel since trafficking-specific services 
are primarily outsourced to non-governmental organizations rather than 
administered by government agencies in the United States and that 
social service providers at non-governmental agencies regularly conduct 
trafficking assessments and are often better positioned to identify 
trafficking survivors.
    An industry group commenter agreed with the Bureau's preliminary 
assessment discussed in the proposed rule that non-governmental sources 
might be best suited to provide support for a determination that a 
consumer is a victim as compared to a government agency or a court. 
However, the commenter noted the risk for potential fraud and suggested 
that the Bureau be cognizant of the fraudulent use of identity theft 
reports under section 605B of the FCRA. The commenter suggested that if 
the Bureau were to include determinations made by non-governmental 
entities it should require that the entities be legitimate non-profit 
organizations supported by government funding subject to the terms and 
conditions of a government program and that these entities submit 
trafficking documentation in good faith on behalf of a victim with the 
permission and knowledge of the victim. The commenter further suggested 
that consumer reporting agencies should be provided with a way to 
verify that the entity is a legitimate non-profit organization and has 
the victim's permission to act on the victim's behalf by, for example, 
requiring these non-governmental sources to provide notice to the 
Bureau which could be used by a consumer reporting agency for 
verification purposes.
    An individual commenter who regularly provides legal representation 
to victims of trafficking encouraged the Bureau to include human 
trafficking task force members \35\ as entities that can provide a 
determination that a consumer is a victim of trafficking. The commenter 
stated that governmental entity personnel do not typically work 
directly with a consumer in the context of their victimization and that 
task force members--who usually include service providers that 
regularly screen and work closely with victims to provide housing, 
medical care, financial assistance, counseling, legal aid, and other 
recovery services--may be better positioned to attest to a consumer's 
victim status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ As explained in more detail below, multidisciplinary task 
forces made up of local law enforcement agencies, victim service 
providers, and Federal and State investigative, enforcement, and 
regulatory agencies are a common approach to combatting human 
trafficking in many jurisdictions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A national membership group representing prosecutors asked the 
Bureau to provide a broad definition of ``trafficking documentation'' 
to encompass victims who may not yet have come into contact with the

[[Page 37706]]

criminal justice system or with an appropriate service provider. The 
commenter recommended the Bureau allow for documentation that applies 
to instances when a victim may receive mental or medical care or 
evidence the person has been identified by law enforcement as a victim 
of trafficking in an investigation. This commenter noted that the 
burden of verifying the documented victim determinations should lie 
with the consumer reporting agency as the entity reviewing the consumer 
request to ensure that such victim service provider or law enforcement 
agency was in contact with the individual victim and stated the Bureau 
or the appropriate consumer reporting agency should ensure the 
identification of the victim is authentic.
    One anti-trafficking advocacy group commenter that receives grants 
from State and Federal programs suggested that a statement from a 
grantee organization confirming that a consumer seeking relief under 
this rule is receiving services as a human trafficking victim should 
qualify as a determination that the consumer is a victim of 
trafficking. This commenter also urged the Bureau to provide that 
documented referrals by a government entity to a program providing 
specialized services to human trafficking survivors should similarly 
qualify as documentation of trafficking victimization.
    One sex workers and anti-trafficking advocacy group stated that 
non-governmental organizations should not be required to prepare 
certifications to be signed by governmental funding entities, because 
these organizations are not generally required to disclose the identity 
of victims and this would raise confidentiality concerns. This 
commenter mentioned that non-governmental organizations may be 
prohibited from providing a determination that a consumer is a victim 
of trafficking because of pre-existing statutory language concerning 
restrictions on certifications of United States citizens or lawful 
permanent residents who are victims of severe forms of trafficking.\36\ 
A large banking industry trade group did not specifically oppose 
including documentation from non-governmental entities receiving 
governmental funding, but recommended the Bureau advocate for the 
development of a compassionate and reliable means of providing 
documentation set forth in section 605C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ 22 U.S.C. 7105(b)(1)(F) (``Nothing in this section may be 
construed to require United States citizens or lawful permanent 
residents who are victims of severe forms of trafficking to obtain 
an official certification from the Secretary of Health and Human 
Services in order to access any of the specialized services 
described in this subsection or any other Federal benefits and 
protections to which they are otherwise entitled.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Bureau is finalizing Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i)(A) with certain 
modifications. The Bureau finds the definition of ``trafficking 
documentation'' includes a determination made by a Federal, State, or 
Tribal governmental entity and is adopting this definition by 
renumbering Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i)(A) to Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i)(A)(1) 
for these governmental entities. The reference to a court of competent 
jurisdiction has been moved to Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i)(B), as discussed 
below in the section-by-section analysis.
    The Bureau created new Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i)(A)(2) to clarify 
that trafficking documentation includes a determination that a consumer 
is a victim of trafficking made by a non-governmental organization or 
member of a human trafficking task force, including victim service 
providers affiliated with the organization or task force, when 
authorized by a Federal, State, or Tribal governmental entity to make 
such a determination.
    The Bureau agrees that trained professionals providing services to 
victims of trafficking, including those affiliated with a trafficking 
task force, are often best suited to identify and make determinations 
that a person has been or is being trafficked.\37\ The Bureau 
understands that Federal, State, and Tribal governmental entities often 
rely on the expertise these non-governmental organizations--including 
multi-disciplinary human trafficking forces--possess in making victim 
determinations. For instance, as of fiscal year 2020, there were over 
47 multi-disciplinary trafficking task forces using an enhanced 
collaborative model to combat human trafficking.\38\ OVC and the Bureau 
of Justice Assistance in the DOJ use this model to: (1) employ victim-
centered approaches to identifying trafficking survivors; (2) provide 
services to victims of all forms of human trafficking; and (3) 
investigate and process all forms of trafficking. These task force 
stakeholders are usually law enforcement, prosecutors, victim services 
providers, and others at the local, State, and Federal levels,\39\ who 
work with victim service providers affiliated with the task forces to 
provide services to victims of trafficking such as counseling, housing, 
referral to medical services, and financial assistance.\40\ Typically, 
victims of trafficking are referred to victim service providers for 
services from medical providers, other victim service providers, law 
enforcement, and community organizations and members. Often these 
victim service providers will conduct an initial screening and 
assessment to determine whether the person has experienced human 
trafficking followed by performing a victim-centered comprehensive 
assessment used to identify services and assistance programs. Under 
this model, non-governmental organizations or members in a human 
trafficking task force could provide an individual with a documented 
determination after an initial screening and assessment if authorized 
to do so by a Federal, State, or Tribal governmental entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ The Bureau notes that the TVPA also recognizes the 
important role of non-governmental organizations by requiring HHS 
and DOJ, in establishing a program to assist United States citizens 
and lawful permanent residents, to consult with non-governmental 
organizations that provide services to victims of severe forms of 
trafficking in the United States. See 22 U.S.C. 7105(f).
    \38\ Nat'l Inst. of Just, Off. of Just. Programs, U.S. Dep't of 
Just., Federally Backed Human Trafficking Task Force Model Yields 
Progress, and Opportunities for Continued Growth, https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/federally-backed-human-trafficking-task-force-model-yields-progress (last visited June 20, 2022).
    \39\ Off. of Just. Programs, U.S. Dep't of Just., National 
Criminal Justice Reference Sheet (May 2021), at 15, https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/300863.pdf. Other participants 
involved in task forces and viewed as integral to anti-trafficking 
work are non-government and non-profit organizations, coalition and 
community awareness groups, healthcare agencies, child welfare and 
family services, and housing and homeless agencies.
    \40\ Id. at 21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Bureau concludes that the purpose of section 605C--to help 
survivors of human trafficking restore their credit and gain access to 
consumer financial products and services--is better served by providing 
in the final rule that non-governmental organizations and members in a 
human trafficking task force, including service providers affiliated 
with these entities, may make determinations that a consumer is a 
victim of trafficking if authorized to do so by a Federal, State, or 
Tribal governmental entity. This means that where a Federal, State, or 
Tribal governmental entity has authorized non-governmental 
organizations or members in a human trafficking task force to make a 
determination that a consumer is a victim of trafficking, documentation 
of that determination by one of these entities satisfies the 
trafficking documentation definition under Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i)(A). 
The Bureau interprets the authorization by Federal, State, or Tribal 
governmental entities as having effectively delegated authority to 
these non-governmental organizations

[[Page 37707]]

and human trafficking task forces along with service providers 
affiliated with these entities. The Bureau concludes that victim 
determinations made by a non-governmental organization, human 
trafficking task force, or a non-governmental-affiliated victim service 
provider in the form of identifying an individual as a victim of 
trafficking must be accepted by consumer reporting agencies if 
authorized to make such a determination by a Federal, State, or Tribal 
governmental entity.
    The final rule does not limit Federal, State, and Tribal 
governmental entities to authorizing only those non-governmental 
entities and human trafficking task forces that receive funding from 
these governmental entities. Nor does the final rule prescribe how a 
Federal, State, or Tribal governmental entity may authorize non-
governmental organizations to make victim determinations, but certain 
factors such as whether non-governmental organizations and human 
trafficking task forces receive government funding and are subject to 
the terms and conditions of a government program could be a factor 
evaluated by a governmental entity. To clarify, the final rule does not 
permit a non-governmental entity or human trafficking task force to 
provide an authorization to make a victim determination under this 
section for itself or another entity. Instead, the authorization must 
be made by a Federal, State, or Tribal governmental entity, and each 
governmental entity may establish their own criteria for making such 
authorizations. The Bureau has concluded that victim determinations 
made by a non-governmental organization, human trafficking task force, 
or victim service provider affiliated with an organization or task 
force must be accepted by consumer reporting agencies if the entity has 
been authorized to make such a determination by a Federal, State, or 
Tribal governmental entity.
    The Bureau understands there may be concerns with non-governmental 
organizations or members of human trafficking task forces, including 
affiliated victim service providers, providing attestations or 
certifications to be signed by these entities because doing so may 
raise confidentiality concerns and these entities are not generally 
required to disclose the identity of victims. The final rule does not 
require governmental entities or non-governmental organizations to 
submit such documentation. Rather, the final rule permits a consumer to 
submit a victim determination from a governmental entity or a non-
governmental organization or human trafficking task force authorized by 
a governmental entity in order to block adverse items of information 
that resulted from a severe form of trafficking in persons or sex 
trafficking. Moreover, under the final rule the decision to obtain a 
victim determination is with the victim and the final rule does not 
require or permit anyone to submit a victim determination to a consumer 
reporting agency without the permission of the victim.
    One commenter questioned whether non-governmental organizations may 
be prohibited from providing a determination that a consumer is a 
victim of trafficking because of pre-existing statutory language 
concerning restrictions on certifications of United States citizens or 
lawful permanent residents who are victims of a severe form of 
trafficking in persons.\41\ The Bureau does not believe that this 
provision of the TVPA conflicts with section 605C or the final rule 
since section 605C, among other things, does not require an official 
certification from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in 
order to block adverse items of information from a consumer report that 
resulted from having been trafficked.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ 22 U.S.C. 7105(b)(1)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Bureau is adopting Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i)(A) under section 
605(c) as well as under its authority under section 621(e) of the FCRA, 
which authorizes the Bureau to prescribe regulations that promote 
accuracy and fairness in credit reporting, and under the general 
rulemaking authority granted the Bureau under Sec.  1022(b)(1) of the 
Dodd-Frank Act.
    State governmental entity. The Bureau proposed treating 
documentation of a determination that a consumer is a victim of 
trafficking by a ``State governmental entity'' as including 
documentation created at either the State or local level. The Bureau 
noted that local law enforcement, as part of a local government, may 
have documentation of a determination identifying victims of 
trafficking, including, but not limited to, items in a police report. 
The Bureau noted that there are Federal and State victims' rights acts 
in addition to Tribal codes that depend on a determination that a 
victim has been identified as such, including by Federal, State, 
Tribal, or local jurisdictions.\42\ The Bureau also noted that some 
State laws explicitly contemplate local entities making this 
determination for victims of sex trafficking which triggers various 
rights for the victim and obligations for the government under State 
and Federal law.\43\ The Bureau further noted, however, that the local 
entity may not always share that determination with State, Federal, or 
Tribal governmental entities and thus that some victims of trafficking 
would not be able to utilize such documentation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ See, e.g., Victims' Rights & Restitution Act of 1990, 42 
U.S.C. 10607; Crime Victims' Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. 3771. In these 
Federal statutes and in some State laws, victims' rights attach 
during an investigation (and independent of trial) and therefore 
rely on a law-enforcement determination, which is quite often made 
by a local governmental entity.
    \43\ See, e.g., 23 Pa. Cons. Stat. sec. 5702(a) (requiring 
county agencies to report to law enforcement children whom they 
``identif[y] as being a sex trafficking victim'' within 24 hours); 
Va. Code Ann. sec. 9.1-116.5 (creating a statewide Sex Trafficking 
Response Coordinator who is responsible for ``creat[ing] a statewide 
plan for local and State agencies to identify and respond to victims 
of sex trafficking'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Bureau solicited comments on whether it should interpret the 
phrase ``a determination that a consumer is a victim of trafficking 
made by a Federal, State, or Tribal governmental entity'' to mean any 
determination, including those made by local government officials, 
where a Federal, State or Tribal governmental entity could reasonably 
be construed as making a determination that a consumer is a victim of 
trafficking. The Bureau also sought comments concerning the nature of 
information on trafficking in the possession of local governments, the 
extent to which such information is or might usefully be shared with 
Federal, State, and Tribal governmental entities, and the sort of 
documentation generated by these governmental entities.
    Commenters were largely in favor of including documentation 
generated by local governmental entities. Specifically, one commenter 
stated that local governmental entities at all levels, including county 
and municipal law enforcement and prosecutors, are in as much of a 
position to identify victims of trafficking as State and Federal 
government entities. Another commenter agreed with the Bureau's 
proposed treatment of local governmental entities and stated their 
belief that a police report could serve as an example of documentation 
establishing a person as a victim of trafficking. One association of 
State attorneys general expressed support for the Bureau's proposed 
interpretation to include both State and local law enforcement agencies 
as entities that can make determinations of a victim's status under 
State law because of their

[[Page 37708]]

collaboration on victim advocacy and enforcement work.
    A commenter representing banks expressed concern with treating a 
local governmental entity as ``State governmental entity.'' This 
commenter contended that the Bureau's reference to treating 
documentation from local law enforcement, such as police reports, as a 
determination identifying victims of trafficking undermines and is 
contrary to the intent of the statute providing that consumer reports 
be accurate and reliable.
    The Bureau is finalizing its proposal that documentation of a 
determination that a consumer is a victim of trafficking made by a 
``State governmental entity'' includes documentation created at either 
the State or local level. The Bureau finds that local law enforcement, 
as part of a local government, may have documentation of a 
determination identifying victims of trafficking, including, but not 
limited to, items in a police report. This is particularly relevant 
since there is not a uniform mechanism in place within most 
governmental entities to provide lawful permanent residents and United 
States citizens with a certification that a person is a victim of 
trafficking. In furtherance of assisting survivors of human trafficking 
in restoring their credit and obtaining access to consumer financial 
products, and the integral role of local law enforcement in the 
identification and investigation of sex trafficking, the Bureau 
concludes that it is imperative for local governments, including local 
law enforcement, to possess the ability to make documented victim 
determinations for purposes of this rule.\44\ This means victim 
determinations made by local governmental entities could include victim 
advocates within local prosecutorial or local law enforcement agencies 
and offices administering specific services for victims of trafficking, 
such as address confidentiality programs within State attorney general 
offices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ An evaluation of multi-disciplinary human trafficking task 
forces identified law enforcement as leading half of the task forces 
and as the most frequently cited referral stream to victim service 
providers. William Adams et al., Evaluation of the Enhanced 
Collaborative Model to Combat Human Trafficking, Technical Report 
(May 2021), at 10, 14, 22, https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/300863.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Bureau is concerned that a narrower definition could 
substantially limit the availability of documentation for victims of 
trafficking to submit to consumer reporting agencies. Interpreting 
documentation of a determination that a consumer is a victim of 
trafficking by a ``State governmental entity'' to include local 
government entities will further the statutory goal of preventing 
consumer reporting agencies from furnishing consumer reports containing 
adverse items of information about a consumer that resulted from 
trafficking.
    The Bureau agrees with commenters that local law enforcement, as 
typically the lead investigative agency, is often in the best position 
to identify victims of sex trafficking. In response to comments and to 
facilitate compliance, the Bureau interprets final Sec.  
1022.142(b)(6)(i)(A)(1) as providing that documented victim 
determinations made by a local governmental entity must be treated as 
made by a State governmental entity for purposes of this rule.
    In adopting this interpretation, the Bureau concludes that the 
final rule will promote the purposes of section 605C by ensuring 
victims are able to block adverse items of information resulting from 
trafficking and further promote the accuracy and reliability of 
consumer reports. The Bureau foresees victim determinations made by 
local governments as likely being initiated by local law enforcement 
after having interviewed victims of trafficking when receiving 
referrals (from hotlines, tip lines, other law enforcement agencies, 
victim service providers, other government agencies), performing sting 
operations, or conducting routine traffic stops. The Bureau's adoption 
of this interpretation is further supported by its regulatory authority 
under section 621(e) of the FCRA, which authorizes the Bureau to 
prescribe regulations that promote accuracy and fairness in credit 
reporting, and the general rulemaking authority granted under section 
1022(b)(1) of the Dodd-Frank Act.
142(b)(6)(i)(B)
    Section 605C(a)(1)(A)(ii) provides the term ``trafficking 
documentation'' means documentation of--by a court of competent 
jurisdiction. The Bureau stated in the proposal it was incorporating 
this statutory definition of ``trafficking documentation'' with certain 
clarifying interpretations regarding documentation identifying a 
consumer who is a victim of trafficking involving a ``court of 
competent jurisdiction,'' and to clarify that the documentation may 
consist of one or more documents as long as the collective 
documentation satisfies the definition. To implement this, the Bureau 
proposed to include two categories of documentation involving a ``court 
of competent jurisdiction'' in the definition of ``trafficking 
documentation.'' The first category of documents concerning a ``court 
of competent jurisdiction'' is documentation, in the form of a 
determination, that the consumer is a victim of trafficking made by a 
court of competent jurisdiction in proposed Sec.  
1022.142(b)(6)(i)(A).\45\ The second category is documentation 
consisting of documents filed in a court of competent jurisdiction 
indicating that a consumer is a victim of trafficking in proposed Sec.  
1022.142(b)(6)(i)(B).\46\ The Bureau sought comments on whether it 
should clarify in the regulation what documents filed in a court of 
competent jurisdiction indicating that a consumer is a victim of 
trafficking means. For example, the Bureau asked if a filing in a court 
or a court opinion in which a consumer's status as a victim of 
trafficking is an accepted fact, but not the central issue in the case, 
could be considered a ``determination'' sufficient to satisfy section 
605C(a)(1)(A)(ii) and whether such an interpretation would allow more 
victims of trafficking to make use of the procedure created by section 
605C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ Examples of court documents made by a court of competent 
jurisdiction could be a restitution order that provides a victim of 
trafficking with restitution after a criminal conviction or a 
criminal record relief court order (such as a vacatur, expungement, 
or sealing of records) where victims of trafficking may obtain an 
order to clear convictions of criminal offenses the victims were 
forced to commit.
    \46\ In the proposed rule, the Bureau stated an example of a 
document filed in a court of competent jurisdiction indicating a 
consumer is a victim of trafficking could be where victims of 
trafficking file suit against their traffickers where they identify 
as a victim of trafficking. A prior iteration of section 6102 of the 
2022 NDAA in H.R. 2332 (introduced in the 117\th\ Congress) and S. 
2040 (introduced in the 117\th\ Congress) provided that 
``trafficking documentation'' included ``documentation of . . . a 
determination by a court of competent jurisdiction that a consumer 
is a victim of trafficking.'' This language was subsequently changed 
and enacted into law to instead read ``documentation of . . . by a 
court of competent jurisdiction.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Many commenters supported including a broad variety of court 
documents in the definition, including court documents in which a 
consumer's status as a victim of trafficking is an accepted fact, but 
not the central issue in the case. Several industry commenters, 
however, expressed concern that the approach would permit consumers to 
block adverse items of information based only on unverified 
allegations. One commenter stated the indicator of reliability would be 
significantly higher if the document has to be filed under penalty of 
perjury, such as verified petitions, affidavits, deposition 
transcripts, and trial transcripts. Other commenters expressed concerns 
about perpetrators

[[Page 37709]]

of crimes using this provision to block accurate criminal record 
information relied upon by potential employers and landlords.
    The Bureau is finalizing Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i)(B) by modifying 
the regulatory text concerning language associated with a court of 
competent jurisdiction. First, the category of court documentation, in 
the form of a determination, that the consumer is a victim of 
trafficking made by a court of competent jurisdiction in proposed Sec.  
1022.142(b)(6)(i)(A) is moved to Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i)(B). The Bureau 
believes these court documents could include criminal record relief 
orders (sealing, expungement, or vacatur of records), civil suit 
decisions involving human trafficking, and restitution orders. Due to 
the sensitive nature involving victims of trafficking and because the 
Bureau does not believe the details surrounding one's victimization 
must be provided to consumer reporting agencies, consumer reporting 
agencies must accept these documents with redactions that omit any 
details that exceed what is sufficient to confirm an individual has 
been identified as a victim of trafficking.
    The second category of court documentation in proposed Sec.  
1022.142(b)(6)(i)(B) consisted of documents filed in a court of 
competent jurisdiction indicating that a consumer is a victim of 
trafficking. After reviewing the comments, the Bureau is modifying 
language in proposed Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i)(B) to clarify documents 
filed in a court of competent jurisdiction where a central issue in the 
case is whether the consumer is a victim of trafficking and the court 
has, at a minimum, affirmed the consumer's claim either by accepting 
certain pieces of evidence which are assumed to be true or finding that 
there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact supporting a 
judgment in favor of the victim as a matter of law constitutes an 
acceptable victim determination under section 605C. The Bureau believes 
this could include instances where victims of trafficking sue their 
traffickers using private right of action provisions under Federal or 
State victim protection laws where the court has conducted an initial 
review of the victim's claim for purposes of a motion to dismiss or 
motion for summary judgment and the result is in favor of the victim. 
This approach could also allow more victims the opportunity to obtain a 
victim determination even in instances where the civil suit was 
dismissed without prejudice or not pursued because of intimidation by 
the trafficker against the victim.
    The Bureau is not interpreting documentation filed in a court of 
competent jurisdiction to include court documents filed where the 
consumer's status as a victim of trafficking is not a central issue in 
the case. However, the Bureau believes that in many such cases a 
consumer would be able to provide documentation obtained by other 
means. For example, court records where a trafficker is being 
criminally prosecuted for a crime other than for trafficking, but where 
the consumer is identified as a victim of trafficking would not meet 
the definition under Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i)(B). However, a consumer 
often may instead be able to obtain a copy of the law enforcement 
affidavit or other documented statements from a governmental entity or 
entity with delegated authority from a governmental entity filed in the 
criminal court proceedings on behalf of the prosecution which would 
then constitute a victim determination made by a governmental entity 
under Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i)(A).
    One of the primary purposes of section 605C is to assist victims of 
trafficking by restoring their credit and helping them obtain access to 
consumer financial products and services which will prevent 
revictimization and place the victims on a path to financial stability. 
The Bureau is aware that some victims, given the nature of their 
victimization and subsequent involvement in crimes they were forced to 
commit as a result of having been trafficked, are apprehensive to 
interact with and obtain relief from a governmental entity or a court. 
The Bureau finds that accepting documents filed in a court of competent 
jurisdiction where the consumer's status as a victim of trafficking is 
a central issue and the court's actions after an initial review of the 
consumer's claim passes a level of verification from the court will 
prevent a consumer reporting agency from furnishing a consumer report 
containing adverse information about a consumer that resulted from 
trafficking. This provision of the rule is also supported by the 
Bureau's regulatory authority under section 621(e) of the FCRA, which 
authorizes the Bureau to prescribe regulations that promote accuracy 
and fairness in credit reporting, and on the general rulemaking 
authority granted the Bureau under section 1022(b)(1) of the Dodd-Frank 
Act. Therefore, the Bureau concludes that documentation filed in a 
court of competent jurisdiction where the consumer's status as a victim 
of trafficking is a central issue and the court has, at a minimum, 
affirmed the consumer's claim either by accepting certain pieces of 
evidence which are assumed to be true or finding that the there is no 
genuine dispute as to any material fact supporting a judgment in favor 
of the victim as a matter of law satisfies section 605C.
142(b)(6)(i)(C)
    The Bureau is adding Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i)(C) to the final rule 
to provide that a signed statement by the consumer attesting that the 
consumer is a victim of trafficking is an acceptable victim 
determination if such statement or an accompanying document is signed 
or certified by a representative of an entity described in Sec.  
1022.142(b)(6)(i)(A) and (B). In the proposed rule, the Bureau did not 
propose a provision to describe the specific types of documents that 
could serve as a determination that a consumer is a victim of 
trafficking. However, the Bureau asked for feedback on whether an 
attestation or documentation submitted to a Federal, State, or Tribal 
governmental entity by a person who self-identifies as a victim of 
trafficking, or by another person or entity acting on that person's 
behalf, may constitute a documented determination. The Bureau also 
sought comment on the types of documents that could serve as a 
``determination that a consumer is a victim of trafficking.'' The 
Bureau stated it has not identified any standard ``determination'' 
procedures or forms in use by any governmental entities or courts 
concerning human trafficking for persons who are not foreign national 
adults (i.e., United States citizens or lawful permanent residents).
    The Bureau received few comments on whether to include a person's 
self-attestation as a victim of trafficking or an attestation by 
another person or entity acting on that person's behalf. One anti-
trafficking organization deemed self-attestation the best approach 
while providing the least restrictions and the most confidentiality. A 
consumer advocacy group and a group focused on assisting victims of 
trafficking, domestic violence, and sexual violence requested the 
Bureau permit self-attestation of trafficking if an authorized third 
party (such as an employee in a government-funded organization that 
serves survivors, a government employee, or court personnel) signs off 
on the self-attestation after performing an interview or assessment. 
This commenter also suggested that in the alternative, the Bureau could 
provide that the authorized third party may write a simple attestation/
certification identifying the name of the survivor and

[[Page 37710]]

that the survivor is a victim of trafficking.
    An industry group representing banks urged the Bureau to not permit 
self-attestations for purposes of establishing a consumer is a victim 
of trafficking. This commenter stated that Congress did not provide for 
an attestation in section 605C, unlike section 605B in reporting 
identity theft, and that the text of section 605C requires the victim 
determinations to be made by a ``Federal, State, or Tribal governmental 
entity.'' The commenter also noted that allowing a person to self-
attest to being a victim of trafficking or someone acting on their 
behalf may lead to abuse by permitting persons who fraudulently self-
identify as victims of trafficking to block accurate information.
    A consumer group and anti-trafficking organization requested the 
Bureau provide a specific non-exhaustive list of example documents that 
would prove a consumer is a victim of trafficking. The consumer group 
stated that if an enumerated list of acceptable documentation is not 
provided then the rule may not be sufficiently concrete and clear to 
require the consumer reporting agencies to implement section 605C's 
protections effectively. The commenter urged the Bureau to clarify that 
a victim who does not have such documents would still qualify for 
relief under section 605C by providing alternative forms of 
documentation. Another commenter recommended the Bureau create a form 
similar to a declaration of a law enforcement officer used to provide 
that a person is a victim of trafficking.\47\ The commenter also urged 
the Bureau to create a sample attestation form that can be used by 
organizations that receive government funding, so that the 
organizations will have a template document for producing the 
trafficking documentation required by the rule. An industry group also 
requested examples of acceptable ``victim determinations'' and 
recommended the Bureau issue an interim final rule with an open comment 
period to allow industry members to continue to provide feedback on 
this point, which will further help victims in identifying appropriate 
documentation to be provided to consumer reporting agencies. A 
commenter representing a group of anti-trafficking organizations stated 
victims of trafficking should be able to obtain documentation through 
State human trafficking coordinators or by showing that they have 
sought a benefit or access to a program that they qualify for on the 
basis of their victimization (e.g., crime victim compensation or 
address confidentiality programs).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ U.S. Customs & Immigr. Servs., Dep't of Homeland Sec., Form 
I-914 Application for T Nonimmigrant Status, Supp. B, Declaration of 
Law Enforcement Officer for Victim of Trafficking in Persons (Dec. 
2, 2021), https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/forms/i-914supb.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Bureau has considered the comments and is modifying the final 
rule by permitting a consumer to self-attest as a victim of trafficking 
if the statement or an accompanying document is signed or certified by 
a Federal, State, or Tribal governmental entity or court of competent 
jurisdiction, or representative of an entity authorized by a Federal, 
State, or Tribal governmental entity or court of competent jurisdiction 
to provide victim determinations. Specifically, Sec.  
1022.142(b)(6)(i)(C) provides that a victim determination includes 
documentation of a signed statement by the consumer attesting that the 
consumer is a victim of trafficking if such statement is also signed by 
a representative of an entity described in Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i)(A) 
or (B). The Bureau concludes that the statute requires only that the 
consumer provide documentation of a determination that they are a 
victim of trafficking made by a Federal, State, or Tribal governmental 
entity or documentation of or by a court of competent jurisdiction. For 
purposes of submitting trafficking documentation to consumer reporting 
agencies, consumers are not required to reveal the details of their 
trafficking to consumer reporting agencies since doing so may cause 
some consumers to suffer additional harm. Therefore, the Bureau 
concludes that so long as a self-attestation made by a consumer is 
supported by a determination made by a Federal, State, or Tribal 
governmental entity or a court of competent jurisdiction, as described 
in Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i)(A) or (B), it satisfies the trafficking 
documentation requirement as provided by Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i)(C).
    The Bureau is finalizing Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i) without adding to 
the text of the regulation a non-exhaustive list of documents that 
serve as a ``determination that a consumer is a victim of trafficking'' 
or a model self-attestation form. However, the Bureau notes that a 
victim may self-attest by making a statement to the effect that ``I 
attest that I am a victim of trafficking for purposes of section 605C 
of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The signature of [NAME], employee of 
[ORGANIZATION] certifies this statement.'' The Bureau believes this 
approach affords the greatest flexibility to victims of trafficking 
seeking to gather and submit to consumer reporting agencies the 
documentation of determinations specified in section 605C(a)(1)(A). The 
Bureau may consider issuing interpretations in the future that provide 
specific examples to provide clarity on the types of ``determinations'' 
that establish a consumer is a ``victim of trafficking,'' such as by 
issuing advisory opinions or consumer education materials. To clarify, 
the Bureau's decision to not provide an exhaustive list of example 
documents or a self-attestation form does not mean victims of 
trafficking should not submit or consumer reporting agencies should not 
accept certain documents referenced by commenters to establish a victim 
determination under Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i)(A).\48\ The Bureau 
encourages victims of trafficking to utilize pre-existing documentation 
that may be accessible based on their participation in certain victim 
assistance programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ For example, one commenter referenced the following 
documents as consisting of victim determinations: (1) Certification 
Letters (issued by HHS); (2) Child Eligibility Letters (issued by 
HHS)); (3) Continued Presence (issued by DHS); (4) T Visas (issued 
by United States Citizenship and Immigration Services); (5) Bona 
fide T Visa application; (6) U Visas with a Form I-918 Supplemental 
B filled out indicating that the victim experienced human 
trafficking; (7) Restitution orders; (8) Crime victim compensation; 
(9) Criminal record relief court orders; (10) Civil suit decisions 
related to human trafficking (such as suits brought by victims of 
trafficking through the TVPA's private right of action provisions); 
and (11) Documents issued by State government agencies (such as a 
Notice of Confirmation as a Human Trafficking Victim in New York 
State issued by New York State's Office of Temporary and Disability 
Assistance).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

142(b)(6)(ii) Identified Adverse Items of Information
    In the proposed rule, the Bureau incorporated section 
605(C)(a)(1)(B), the second component of ``trafficking documentation,'' 
into proposed Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(ii). Section 605(C)(a)(1)(B) 
provides that ``trafficking documentation'' is documentation that 
identifies items of adverse information that should not be furnished by 
a consumer reporting agency because the items resulted from a severe 
form of trafficking in persons or sex trafficking of which the consumer 
is a victim.
    The Bureau did not propose to prescribe what an ``adverse item of 
information'' in a consumer report is, because it may vary depending on 
the weight each individual user of a consumer report gives to certain 
items of information as well as the consumer's individual 
circumstances. The Bureau stated this information could include the 
evaluation of factors enumerated in section 603(d) of the FCRA on 
consumer

[[Page 37711]]

reports such as: credit worthiness, credit standing, credit capacity, 
character, general reputation, personal characteristics, or mode of 
living. The Bureau also stated that victims of trafficking may wish to 
have items of information blocked from their consumer report that are 
the result of trafficking because they do not believe those items 
accurately reflect them even if the item does not result in, for 
example, a lower credit score or less favorable evaluation by a user. 
In the proposed rule, the Bureau provided examples of adverse items of 
information that include records containing derogatory information, 
such as payment delinquencies or defaults reported to a consumer 
reporting agency on a loan or large purchase, records of coerced debt 
where a loan is taken out by a victim of trafficking under force or 
threat, records of criminal arrests and convictions, and records of 
evictions or non-payment of rent.
    Consumer and anti-trafficking groups as well as individual 
commenters largely supported the proposed rule's approach of allowing 
consumers to determine which items of adverse information resulted from 
trafficking without requiring further documentation connecting the 
information to trafficking. Numerous individuals, anti-trafficking, and 
consumer groups urged the Bureau to permit victims to identify adverse 
items of information that could have been reported to consumer 
reporting agencies during and after the period during which a victim 
was under the control of the trafficker and that resulted from having 
been trafficked. A consumer group stated that consumer reporting 
agencies often reject disputes from consumers if a family member, 
attorney, or third party assists the consumer. This consumer group 
urged the Bureau to require consumer reporting agencies to accept 
requests from third parties using a document authorizing the third 
party to act on a consumer's behalf along with identification of the 
third party such as a driver's license. An anti-trafficking advocacy 
group suggested that consumer reporting agencies should be required to 
identify which information would be deemed adverse and required to 
block that information since they are likely in a better position to 
evaluate what is adverse information than the victim of trafficking.
    Several industry groups expressed concerns, arguing that a broad, 
vague definition might lead to inconsistent application by consumer 
reporting agencies and that certain factual items should not be deemed 
``adverse items of information,'' such as non-expunged criminal 
records. The commenters also urged the Bureau to require consumers to 
specify the time period during which they were trafficked and state the 
reason why each item resulted from trafficking. The commenters also 
stated that allowing consumers to identify items of adverse information 
and prohibiting consumer reporting agencies from evaluating whether 
those identified items resulted from trafficking may permit fraud. 
These commenters asked the Bureau to consider limiting the ability to 
submit trafficking documentation resulting from trafficking to the 
victim, an attorney acting in the capacity as attorney for the victim, 
or an individual employed by a non-profit counseling agency approved by 
the Bureau and acting under a power of attorney for the victim in order 
to avoid potential fraud and requests submitted without the victim's 
authorization or knowledge.
    An industry group commented that a consumer who requests criminal 
records to be blocked should provide a court order consisting of a 
determination that a consumer was a victim of a severe form of 
trafficking in persons at the time the crime was committed. This 
commenter also encouraged the Bureau to exclude from being blocked 
information that the consumer has identified as resulting from 
trafficking where the information being reported relates to the 
revocation or failure to renew a professional license or certification 
by a State entity and the reason for the revocation or failure to renew 
will not be evident from the records. A few industry groups asked the 
Bureau to create a form to include the adverse items of information 
along with contact information, a description of the trafficking, list 
of adverse items with a statement on how each item resulted from 
trafficking, when the trafficking occurred, and a pre-printed statement 
that the consumer is making the statement under penalty of perjury.
    The Bureau is adopting Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(ii) with revisions to 
clarify that, in addition to the consumer, a representative designated 
by the consumer may identify items of adverse information that should 
not be furnished by a consumer reporting agency and that the consumer 
must provide a preferred contact method relating to the consumer's 
request to block adverse information that resulted from trafficking. 
The text below in this section-by-section analysis also discusses the 
Bureau's response to comments asking the Bureau to define what an 
``adverse item of information'' in a ``consumer report'' is and the 
request for the Bureau to create a form that a consumer could use to 
identify adverse information.
    The Bureau is revising the text of the rule in Sec.  
1022.142(b)(6)(ii) to specifically provide that the documentation, 
which may consist of a statement prepared by the consumer, identifying 
adverse items of information may also be prepared by a designated 
representative on behalf of the consumer. However, the final rule 
provides that the designated representative cannot be a credit repair 
organization as defined in section 403(3) of the Credit Repair 
Organizations Act or an entity that would be a credit repair 
organization, but for section 403(3)(B)(i) of the Credit Repair 
Organizations Act.\49\ The Bureau notes this approach will reinforce 
the need for consumer reporting agencies to accept trafficking 
documentation, as required under Sec.  1022.142(d)(1), from third 
parties identified as assisting with or acting on behalf of the 
consumer while acknowledging the concern raised by some commenters of 
potential abuse and fraud.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ 15 U.S.C. 1679a(3); 15 U.S.C. 1679a(3)(B)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(ii)(A) contains language from the proposed 
rule providing that the documentation submitted to consumer reporting 
agencies must include items of adverse information that should not be 
furnished by a consumer reporting agency because the items resulted 
from a severe form of trafficking in persons or sex trafficking of 
which the consumer is a victim.
    New Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(ii)(B) provides that documentation 
identifying the adverse items of information must also contain a 
preferred method for a consumer reporting agency to contact the 
consumer. As explained in the section-by-section analysis of Sec.  
1022.142(f) below, the final rule requires a consumer reporting agency 
to provide written or electronic notice to the consumer within five 
days of reaching a final determination on a submission. Many commenters 
underscored that victims of trafficking frequently have a heightened 
need to keep their location confidential as well as to ensure their 
request to block information is not communicated to a location where 
their trafficker may be able to receive the information. The Bureau is 
concerned that fear of a victim's safe address or phone number reaching 
their trafficker may deter some victims from seeking to block adverse 
information. For this reason, the final rule provides that victims of 
trafficking must submit a preferred method of contact for use by the 
consumer

[[Page 37712]]

reporting agency. Consumer reporting agencies are required to use that 
method of contact and are prohibited from using that information for 
any purpose other than to communicate about the consumer's request as 
described in Sec.  1022.142 (d) through (f). The Bureau also 
understands some consumers who are victims of trafficking may prefer to 
provide the physical or email address contact information of the 
consumer's designated representative instead of the consumer's contact 
information. Accordingly, consumer reporting agencies must use the 
preferred method of contact identified by consumer pursuant to Sec.  
1022.142(b)(6)(ii) for communications under Sec.  1022.142 (d) through 
(f) even if the preferred contact is the consumer's designated 
representative and not the consumer.
    The Bureau concludes that a victim of trafficking is in the best 
position to reliably identify which adverse items of information 
resulted from being trafficked. The Bureau is adopting the proposed 
rule's approach of not defining what an ``adverse item of information'' 
in a ``consumer report'' is, because it may vary depending on the 
weight each individual user of a consumer report gives to certain items 
of information as well as the consumer's individual circumstances and 
adding this language to the rule. The Bureau notes this approach will 
allow a victim of trafficking the opportunity to include adverse items 
of information that may not affect credit status, but resulted from 
victimization. As discussed below under Sec.  1022.142(c) of the final 
rule, the Bureau is not adopting any exceptions to the requirement that 
consumer reporting agencies block adverse information that resulted 
from trafficking. Under the final rule, if a consumer has identified 
information resulting from trafficking as adverse, a consumer reporting 
agency must block that information. For example, the Bureau is 
concerned that some trafficking documentation may reference the time 
period the consumer was trafficked, but the consumer may request to 
block adverse items of information that arose after the victim was 
trafficked. A consumer who has been trafficked may have, for example, 
incurred debt or been evicted as a consequence of financial strain that 
was the result of having been trafficked. Under the final rule a 
consumer reporting agency must block adverse items of information that 
the consumer identifies as having resulted from trafficking and may not 
choose to only block adverse items of information that are the same or 
overlap with the time period the consumer was trafficked.
    The Bureau received requests from a few commenters to create a form 
that a consumer could use to identify adverse information. Commenters 
suggested that the form could include information such as the 
consumer's personal information, contact information, period of time 
the consumer was trafficked, items of adverse information with an 
explanation why the information is the result of trafficking, 
identification of who is submitting the form, and the signature of the 
victim subject to penalty of perjury. The Bureau understands the ease 
of access a form could provide to consumers as well as to consumer 
reporting agencies and may determine to issue guidance in the future. 
However, the final rule provides flexibility to consumers by only 
requiring that consumers identify adverse items of information that 
resulted from trafficking, and the Bureau has determined that there is 
no need to include a form in the final rule.
142(b)(7) Victim of Trafficking
    Proposed Sec.  1022.142(b)(7) adopted the definition of ``victim of 
trafficking'' set out in section 605C(a)(3), which defines the term as 
a person who is a victim of a ``severe form of trafficking in persons'' 
or ``sex trafficking.'' Several individual commenters recommended that 
the Bureau use the term ``survivor'' rather than ``victim.'' These 
commenters observed that many believe that the use of ``survivor'' 
minimizes any stigma associated with victimhood and empowers 
individuals who have suffered harm from trafficking.
    One advocacy group suggested that the Bureau remove the reference 
to victims of sex trafficking in this definition, leaving only a victim 
of ``severe forms of trafficking in persons'' within the definition of 
a ``victim of trafficking.'' This commenter argued that the reference 
to ``sex trafficking'' is unneeded and may lead to confusion because 
``severe forms of trafficking in persons'' already includes a sex 
trafficking component. According to the commenter, ``severe forms of 
trafficking in persons'' is the term generally used in Federal law to 
define eligibility for services and protections, and there is no 
Federal offense of ``sex trafficking'' as it is defined in the TVPA, 22 
U.S.C. 7102(12), thus there are no ``victims'' of that offense.
    The Bureau is finalizing this definition as proposed. First, this 
rule uses the term ``victim'' primarily because that is the wording of 
section 6102 of the 2022 NDAA and the TVPA.\50\ While the Bureau 
recognizes that the term ``survivor'' is preferred by many individuals, 
service providers, and advocacy groups in other contexts, ``victim'' is 
used more commonly in laws giving individuals rights and formal 
standing within the justice system.\51\ Second, regarding the inclusion 
of ``sex trafficking'' in the definition of ``victim of trafficking,'' 
section 605C(a)(3) expressly provides that ``victim of trafficking'' 
means a person who is a victim of (1) a severe form of trafficking in 
persons or (2) sex trafficking. As discussed in the section-by-section 
analysis of Sec.  1022.142(b)(5) above, ``sex trafficking'' means the 
recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, obtaining, 
patronizing, or soliciting of a person for the purpose of a commercial 
sex act. Only some kinds of sex trafficking are included within the 
definition of ``severe forms of trafficking in persons,'' namely sex 
trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, 
or coercion, or in which the person induced to perform such act has not 
attained 18 years of age. The Bureau concludes that the inclusion of a 
victim of sex trafficking within the definition of ``victim of 
trafficking'' is not superfluous or likely to lead to confusion. 
Indeed, the fact that Congress expressly included victims of sex 
trafficking as victims of trafficking suggests that Congress intended 
the scope of this rule to apply more broadly than just to victims of 
severe forms of trafficking in persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ Consistent with the TVPA, the Bureau is interpreting 
section 605C to mean that a ``victim'' is a person who was subjected 
to an act or practice described in the definitions of ``severe forms 
of trafficking in persons'' and ``sex trafficking.'' A person who 
engaged in or perpetrated a severe form of trafficking in persons or 
sex trafficking--but who was not subjected to such an act or 
practice by another person--is not a ``victim'' of those acts or 
practices.
    \51\ See note Error! Bookmark not defined. supra; Training & 
Tech. Assistance Ctr., Off. for Victims of Crime, U.S. Dep't of 
Just., Human Trafficking Task Force e-Guide, https://www.ovcttac.gov/taskforceguide/eguide/1-understanding-human-trafficking/13-victim-centered-approach (last visited June 20, 
2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Bureau understands that ``severe forms of trafficking in 
persons,'' as defined in the TVPA, 22 U.S.C. 7102(11), is often the 
definition used to define trafficking under Federal law.\52\ The Bureau 
expects that many, if not

[[Page 37713]]

most, victims of trafficking seeking to make use of the procedure set 
out in this section will have documentation identifying them as victims 
of conduct that qualifies as a ``severe form of trafficking in 
persons'' which includes components of ``sex trafficking'' and ``labor 
trafficking,'' as opposed to ``sex trafficking'' as defined in the 
TVPA, 22 U.S.C. 7102(12). However, the Bureau is concerned that 
limiting the definition of ``victim of trafficking'' to only victims of 
sex trafficking as defined in a ``severe form of trafficking in 
persons'' could potentially limit the scope of the remedy created by 
this section, in direct contradiction to the plain language of the 
statute. Additionally, even if there is no Federal criminal offense of 
``sex trafficking'' as defined in the TVPA, a person could still be 
identified as a victim of the conduct meeting that definition.\53\ 
Finally, the Bureau does not believe that the inclusion of victims of 
sex trafficking in general within this definition is likely to lead to 
confusion among consumers, even if eligibility for other programs and 
services is limited to victims of severe forms of trafficking, since 
all victims who qualify for those other programs and services will also 
be eligible under this section. For these reasons, the Bureau finalizes 
this definition as proposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ See, e.g., 8 CFR 214.11(b) (explaining that a person must 
be ``a victim of a severe form of trafficking in persons'' to be 
eligible for a temporary T-1 immigration benefit); Off. to Monitor & 
Combat Trafficking in Persons, U.S. Dep't of State, 2021 Trafficking 
in Persons Report (Jun. 2021), at 26-27, https://www.state.gov/reports/2021-trafficking-in-persons-report/ (describing the 
``acts,'' ``means,'' and ``purpose'' elements of sex trafficking 
under Federal law).
    \53\ Notably, many States have sex trafficking statutes that 
deviate from Federal law, such that a person may be legally 
identified as a perpetrator or victim of conduct that meets the 
statutory definition of ``sex trafficking'' under Federal law. 
Training & Tech. Assistance Ctr., Off. for Victims of Crime, Dep't 
of Just., Human Trafficking Task Force e-Guide: State Laws, https://www.ovcttac.gov/taskforceguide/eguide/1-understanding-human-trafficking/14-human-trafficking-laws/state-laws/ (last visited June 
20, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

142(c) Prohibition on Inclusion of Adverse Information of Trafficking 
Victims
    Section 605C(b) provides that a consumer reporting agency may not 
furnish a consumer report containing any adverse item of information 
about a consumer that resulted from a severe form of trafficking in 
persons or sex trafficking if the consumer has provided trafficking 
documentation to the consumer reporting agency. Proposed Sec.  
1022.142(c) would have adopted this statutory language. The Bureau 
sought comments on whether this provision warrants further 
clarification.
    The Bureau received several comments on this aspect of the 
proposal. Consumer and anti-trafficking advocacy groups were largely in 
favor of blocking all items of adverse information, including criminal 
convictions and eviction histories. Several individual commenters asked 
the Bureau to apply the final rule to victims of domestic violence, 
arguing that there are similarities in financial hardship between 
victims of domestic violence and human trafficking. An industry 
commenter asked the Bureau to clarify that the types of adverse 
information that should be excluded from a consumer report is limited 
to only those adverse items that were related to the trafficking. 
Similarly, another industry commenter urged the Bureau to require 
victims to provide sufficient information to identify the adverse 
information that must be removed. The commenter also suggested that 
information on criminal convictions should require additional 
documentation in the form of a court order showing that the record has 
been expunged or the conviction underlying the record was reversed. 
This commenter urged the Bureau to consider including a specific 
exception permitting a consumer reporting agency to provide a Federal, 
State, or local law enforcement agency with access to the blocked 
information as provided for in section 605B(f) of the FCRA concerning 
identity theft information. Further, this commenter argued that 
information related to the revocation or non-renewal of required 
professional licenses or certifications should be excluded from the 
final rule because it is factual in nature and that the reason for 
revocation or non-renewal will not be evident from the records. They 
also asked the Bureau to create an exemption similar to section 605B(f) 
of the FCRA that would allow consumer reporting agencies to provide 
blocked information to law enforcement agencies.
    After considering the comments, the Bureau is finalizing Sec.  
1022.142(c) as proposed with minor technical revisions. The Bureau 
concludes that the final rule applies to all types of adverse 
information, including criminal and license records, and should not 
contain an exception for law enforcement agencies to access such 
information.\54\ The statute does not exclude adverse information about 
licensure, criminal convictions, or any other type of adverse 
information from this provision. Excluding these categories of 
information would contradict the purpose of section 605C and the final 
rule. The Bureau understands that a large number of victims of 
trafficking have a criminal record as a result of being trafficked. 
According to a recent study, a criminal record impacts one's current or 
prospective employment opportunities because of background checks, 
family law issues involving visitation and child custody, the ability 
to obtain safe and affordable housing, medical care in the form of 
discrimination by healthcare providers, education where college 
applicants are required to answer criminal history questions as part of 
the admissions process, student loans as eligibility for Federal aid 
may be suspended if convicted of a drug offense, and immigration 
relief.\55\ Thus, the Bureau finds that such information is clearly 
``adverse,'' and if the criminal history is a result of trafficking the 
Bureau concludes that it must be blocked. Applying Sec.  1022.142 to 
all types of adverse information is consistent with section 605C and 
will provide victims with the best ability to secure financial 
integration and independence. Similarly, section 605C does not contain 
an exception for consumer reporting agencies to provide blocked 
information to law enforcement agencies and the Bureau concludes that 
such an exception is not warranted because such information would be 
blocked only after a consumer obtained a victim determination by an 
entity pursuant to Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ The Bureau notes, however, that there are limited 
circumstances in which law enforcement agencies are able to obtain 
certain consumer report and consumer file information from consumer 
reporting agencies notwithstanding any other provision of the FCRA. 
See sections 626 and 627 of the FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681u, 1681v.
    \55\ Polaris, State Report Cards: Grading Criminal Record Relief 
Laws for Survivors of Human Trafficking (Mar. 2019), at 6-7, https://polarisproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Grading-Criminal-Record-Relief-Laws-for-Survivors-of-Human-Trafficking.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Bureau also declines to expand the final rule to cover victims 
of domestic violence who have not been victims of ``severe forms of 
trafficking in persons'' or ``sex trafficking.'' Congress did not apply 
section 605C to victims of domestic violence. Moreover, section 6102(c) 
of the 2022 NDAA limits the Bureau's present rulemaking to preventing a 
consumer reporting agency from furnishing a consumer report containing 
any adverse item of information about a consumer that resulted from 
``trafficking'' which section 605C defines as ``severe forms of 
trafficking in persons'' and ``sex trafficking'' under the TVPA. This 
does not mean, however, that consumers who are victims of domestic 
violence cannot be victims of trafficking if they otherwise meet the 
definition.
    As explained in the proposal, the Bureau interprets Sec.  
1022.142(c) to mean that a consumer reporting agency may not furnish 
any adverse item of information in a consumer report to the extent such 
information resulted from the consumer's involvement in a severe

[[Page 37714]]

form of trafficking in persons or sex trafficking and the consumer 
submitted trafficking documentation to the consumer reporting agency. 
In other words, this provision applies to information contained in the 
consumer report, and not the furnishing of a consumer report more 
generally. A consumer reporting agency may furnish a consumer report 
about a consumer who is a victim of trafficking so long as the report 
does not contain information that is required to be blocked by Sec.  
1022.142. The Bureau concludes that final Sec.  1022.142(c) is 
sufficiently clear because: (1) section 1022.142(b)(6)(ii)(A) limits 
the definition of ``trafficking documentation'' to documentation that 
identifies any items of adverse information that should not be 
furnished by a consumer reporting agency because the items resulted 
from a severe form of trafficking in persons or sex trafficking of 
which the consumer is a victim; and (2) section 1022.142(e)(4), 
described in the section-by-section analysis below, clarifies that a 
consumer reporting agency may decline to block, or may rescind any 
block of, adverse information if the consumer reporting agency cannot 
properly identify the adverse items of information under Sec.  
1022.142(b)(6)(ii).
142(d) Method of Submission to Consumer Reporting Agencies
142(d)(1)-(d)(3)
    Proposed Sec.  1022.142(d) established a method for consumers to 
submit trafficking documentation to consumer reporting agencies, as 
required in section 605C(c)(2). Proposed Sec.  1022.142(d)(1) stated 
that consumer reporting agencies must provide mailing addresses for a 
consumer to submit required documentation and may also establish a 
secure online portal for submissions. The proposed rule specifically 
required consumer reporting agencies to accept documentation sent to: 
(1) the mailing, and if applicable, website address used for disputes 
under section 611 of the FCRA; and (2) the new dedicated mailing 
address and, if applicable, a website address a consumer reporting 
agency must maintain to block adverse items of information resulting 
from trafficking. Proposed Sec.  1022.142(d)(2) provided that a 
consumer reporting agency must add information on its publicly 
available website stating how submissions for the blocking of adverse 
items of information resulting from trafficking can be submitted. 
Proposed Sec.  1022.142(d)(3) provided that consumer reporting agencies 
must allocate a reasonable amount of personnel to respond to consumer 
inquiries about the process for and status of submissions at the 
existing toll-free number for disputes under section 611 of the FCRA 
and establish a separate toll-free telephone number dedicated to 
addressing submissions from consumers seeking to block adverse items of 
information resulting from trafficking. For the reasons discussed 
below, the Bureau is finalizing Sec.  1022.142(d) largely as proposed, 
with revisions to clarify consumer reporting agencies are required to 
provide and accept submissions at two mailing addresses and these 
addresses must be provided to a consumer and consumer representative as 
described in Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(ii), submissions must consist of an 
appropriate proof of identification under Sec.  1022.142(b)(1) and 
trafficking documentation under Sec.  1022.142(b)(6), and to address 
comments received regarding application of the toll-free telephone 
number requirement to all consumer reporting agencies.
    One consumer group commented in support of the requirement to 
accept trafficking documentation at both existing addresses used for 
disputes under section 611 and dedicated addresses established to 
accept submissions under this section. Comments from industry groups 
varied. One financial institution recommended that the Bureau require 
consumer reporting agencies to use either the address used for section 
611 disputes or a dedicated address for trafficking, while two trade 
associations recommended that the Bureau require the use of existing 
channels to limit costs for consumer reporting agencies and complexity 
for consumers. Another trade association recommended that the Bureau 
limit the requirement for additional mailing addresses (and web 
addresses, if applicable) and a toll-free number to only nationwide 
consumer reporting agencies as defined in section 603(p) of the 
FCRA.\56\ A different trade association stated its opposition to 
requiring consumer reporting agencies to create a toll-free number for 
submissions under this section. This commenter argued that since the 
existing toll-free number requirement for disputes is only applicable 
to nationwide consumer reporting agencies under section 609(c)(1)(B), 
requiring a toll-free number for disputes is beyond the scope of this 
rulemaking and would be an unnecessary, new expense that may lead to 
consumer confusion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ Section 603(p) defines ``consumer reporting agency that 
compiles and maintains files on consumers on a nationwide basis'' 
(also known as a ``nationwide consumer reporting agency'') as 
follows:
    ``a consumer reporting agency that regularly engages in the 
practice of assembling or evaluating, and maintaining, for the 
purpose of furnishing consumer reports to third parties bearing on a 
consumer's credit worthiness, credit standing, or credit capacity, 
each of the following regarding consumers residing nationwide:
    (1) Public record information.
    (2) Credit account information from persons who furnish that 
information regularly and in the ordinary course of business.'' 15 
U.S.C. 1681a(p). The three consumer reporting agencies that meet 
that definition are Equifax, TransUnion, and Experian.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Several consumer groups urged the Bureau to require consumer 
reporting agencies to post detailed information about how information 
submitted by trafficking survivors is accessed, used, stored, and 
protected on relevant websites. Another consumer group recommended 
requiring consumer reporting agencies to provide links to other 
resources, such as information about available civil legal services, 
confidential mailing addresses, public benefits assistance, and the 
National Human Trafficking Hotline.
    For the reasons discussed below, the Bureau is finalizing Sec.  
1022.142(d) with revisions to the proposal. Final Sec.  1022.142(d)(1) 
clarifies that a consumer reporting agency must provide two mailing 
addresses for a consumer, or consumer representative as described in 
Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(ii), to send a submission consisting of an 
appropriate proof of identification under Sec.  1022.142(b)(1) and 
trafficking documentation under Sec.  1022.142(b)(6). The final rule 
also provides that a consumer reporting agency may establish a secure 
online website portal for a consumer to upload a submission. This means 
if a consumer reporting agency intends to accept a submission 
electronically, it must create a secure online website portal and 
provide information on its website informing consumers where to upload 
the submission. New Sec.  1022.142(d)(1) requires consumer reporting 
agencies to accept a submission sent to: (1) the mailing, and if 
applicable, website address used for disputes under section 611 of the 
FCRA; and (2) the mailing address and, if applicable, the website 
address dedicated to blocking adverse items of information resulting 
from a severe form of trafficking in persons or sex trafficking under 
Sec.  1022.142.
    The Bureau finds that the small costs related to requiring consumer 
reporting agencies to establish a mailing address (or website address, 
if applicable) specifically dedicated to trafficking are justified by 
the benefits this approach would provide to consumers. Allowing 
consumer reporting agencies to use either their existing address under

[[Page 37715]]

section 611 of the FCRA for disputes or a new address to receive 
documentation from victims of trafficking would add confusion and 
complexity for consumers, particularly if the consumer reporting agency 
does not make clear the distinction between disputes and block requests 
for victims of trafficking under this section. Additionally, the Bureau 
is concerned about the potential confusion caused by various consumer 
reporting agencies taking different approaches. These concerns are 
equally valid for all types of consumer reporting agencies, so the 
Bureau declines to apply this requirement to only the nationwide 
consumer reporting agencies under section 603(p) of the FCRA. The 
Bureau has determined that requiring all consumer reporting agencies to 
establish dedicated addresses for each procedure will allow consumers 
to make use of this section most efficiently and effectively at a 
relatively low cost.
    Section 1022.142(d)(2) of the final rule provides that a consumer 
reporting agency must add information on its publicly available website 
stating how submissions for the blocking of adverse items of 
information resulting from a severe form of trafficking in persons or 
sex trafficking should be provided to a consumer reporting agency.
    For Sec.  1022.142(d)(3), the Bureau agrees, however, with comments 
recommending that the toll-free telephone number requirement be limited 
to nationwide consumer reporting agencies. As noted by several industry 
commenters, nationwide consumer reporting agencies are currently 
required to have toll-free telephone numbers at which personnel are 
accessible to consumers during normal business hours under section 
609(c)(1)(B) of the FCRA,\57\ so this requirement adds minimal extra 
expense for those agencies. Requiring nationwide consumer reporting 
agencies to make personnel available by phone to answer questions about 
this process will provide significant benefits to consumers. Providing 
an avenue for consumers to ask questions before submitting trafficking 
documentation will make the process more efficient, and allowing 
consumers to check the status of their submissions will allow them to 
confirm that the process is working as intended. The Bureau recognizes 
that the costs associated with staffing a toll-free telephone number 
are greater for consumer reporting agencies that are not already 
subject to a similar requirement, and the Bureau anticipates that 
smaller, non-nationwide consumer reporting agencies are likely to 
receive less contact from consumers. For those reasons, the Bureau has 
limited the scope of this requirement to nationwide consumer reporting 
agencies as provided for in Sec.  1022.142(d)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ See 15 U.S.C. 1681g(c)(1)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Bureau declines to adopt further requirements requiring 
consumer reporting agencies to post detailed information about how 
information submitted by victims of trafficking is accessed, used, 
stored, and protected. The Bureau's primary focus is on ensuring that 
information on how a consumer may submit documentation to the consumer 
reporting agency is made publicly available to consumers in a clear, 
easy-to-understand format. Requiring other information risks making 
that information more difficult for a consumer to find. If a consumer 
reporting agency wishes to include information about other resources 
for victims of trafficking, such as links to the National Human 
Trafficking Hotline, relevant government agencies, or other service 
providers, it may do so, but the Bureau declines to impose such a 
requirement.
142(e)-(h) Overview
    In order to fully implement the consumer protection provisions of 
section 605C, the Bureau looked at pre-existing statutory and 
regulatory requirements concerning the procedures used by consumers in 
reporting identity theft and in disputing the accuracy of information 
in consumer files and consumer reports and the obligations those 
regulations place on consumer reporting agencies to identify what 
aspects of those regulations might be useful in helping a consumer 
seeking to report items of adverse information that result from a 
severe form of trafficking in persons or sex trafficking of which the 
consumer is a victim.
    Section 1022.142(e) through (h) set forth below describe: (1) 
provisions to address the blocking of adverse information identified by 
the consumer, a requirement to notify the consumer and attempt to 
resolve deficiencies, the timing of the final determination, and 
limited situations in which the consumer reporting agency may decline 
or rescind a block; (2) the obligations of consumer reporting agencies 
to notify the consumer of the outcome with respect to the submission; 
(3) a record retention requirement of seven years from the date the 
submission is received by consumer reporting agencies; and (4) a 
requirement that consumer reporting agencies establish and maintain 
written policies and procedures to ensure and monitor compliance with 
section 605C and these implementing regulations. The Bureau proposed 
these procedural requirements under its authority in section 621(e) of 
the FCRA to prescribe regulations that are necessary and appropriate to 
administer and carry out the purposes and objectives of the FCRA, and 
to prevent evasions or to facilitate compliance.\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ Section 605C does not expressly address these issues, but 
they are addressed in other statutory and regulatory provisions that 
apply to other processes for identity theft and disputing 
information in a consumer report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

142(e) Block of Adverse Information Resulting From Trafficking
142(e)(1)-(e)(3)
    In the proposed rule, the Bureau acknowledged consumer reporting 
agencies may encounter difficulty confirming certain information 
submitted by consumers. Under proposed Sec.  1022.142(e), the Bureau 
proposed to provide consumer reporting agencies with the authority to 
decline to act, or to rescind action (if applicable) on a submission. 
This provision is similar to section 605B(c) of the FCRA, which allows 
a consumer reporting agency to decline to block information relating to 
a consumer, or to rescind any block, if the consumer reporting agency 
makes certain reasonable determinations. The Bureau also sought 
feedback on the use or adoption of procedures in the existing process 
in Regulation V for consumer reporting agencies that make reasonable 
requests for additional information for the purpose of determining the 
validity of alleged identity theft.\59\ As discussed in more detail in 
the section-by-section analysis of Sec.  1022.142(f) below, the Bureau 
also proposed in Sec.  1022.142(f)(1) to require a consumer reporting 
agency to provide written notice to a consumer of the results of a 
submission within five calendar days of receipt of the submission (or, 
if rescinding a previously applied block, five calendar days after 
rescinding). The Bureau requested comment on whether additional 
clarification on the manner in which a consumer reporting agency must 
notify the consumer and attempt to resolve any deficiencies in the 
submission of trafficking documentation is warranted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ See 12 CFR 1022.3(i)(1)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Bureau also sought comment on whether the adverse items of 
information should simply be blocked from being reported as proposed, 
or should be deleted from the consumer's file (or the file be modified 
as appropriate).\60\ Additionally, the Bureau

[[Page 37716]]

requested comment on whether a consumer reporting agency should be 
required to notify a furnisher about the consumer's trafficking 
documentation submission to prevent a consumer reporting agency from 
furnishing a consumer report containing any adverse item of information 
about a consumer that resulted from a severe form of trafficking in 
persons or sex trafficking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \60\ Section 611(a)(5) of the FCRA takes the latter approach 
with respect to successfully disputed information. 15 U.S.C. 
1681i(a)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In relation to comments on the proposed five-calendar-day notice 
period in Sec.  1022.142(f), an industry group stated the timeframe for 
blocking the adverse information is insufficient and should be separate 
from the timeframe to notify the victim. This commenter urged the 
Bureau to adopt timing that mirrors section 605B of the FCRA for ease 
of implementation and allow at least four business days for blocking 
and five business days to provide notice to the consumer after the 
placement or rejection of a requested block to provide notice to a 
consumer. The commenter also requested that the Bureau modify the 
timing from calendar days to business days to account for Federal 
holidays and weekends.
    In response to the request for comment on whether information 
should be blocked from being reported, deleted, or modified as 
appropriate, a consumer advocate commenter was supportive of deletion 
of the adverse information to ensure it was not accidentally reinserted 
or did not reappear after being ``soft deleted'' or suppressed. An 
industry commenter stated the Bureau should require the consumer 
reporting agency or furnisher to delete the items of adverse 
information or modify the credit file with some indication to align 
with current identity theft disputes procedures instead of suppressing 
the information. A commenter encouraged the Bureau to require adverse 
information to be blocked, not deleted, because the blocked information 
could be useful to law enforcement and prosecutors who are prosecuting 
traffickers. However, this commenter suggested that the information 
should be maintained in a secure fashion that can only be accessed 
through proper legal service. The commenter also suggested that 
consumer reporting agencies should be required to either flag that 
information has been suppressed without disclosing the reason for the 
suppression or suppress the information without any flag. One consumer 
group suggested that in some cases it may be better for the consumer if 
the item is not deleted because permanent deletion of consumer 
information could be detrimental to the consumer's record and the act 
of deleting the information will likely result in reinsertion because a 
furnisher is likely to provide it again. This commenter encouraged the 
Bureau to issue regulations that could require a consumer reporting 
agency to do what is in the best interest of the consumer on blocking 
or deletion.
    Commenters were divided on whether consumer reporting agencies 
should be required to notify a furnisher of an item of adverse 
information when it receives a submission from a consumer. One 
individual commenter, a financial institution, a consumer group, and an 
industry group supported notification because it would prevent the 
furnisher from re-furnishing the information to that consumer reporting 
agency and from providing the information to other agencies, providing 
more benefits to consumers. Two other consumer groups and three 
industry trade associations opposed furnisher notification, citing 
concerns about the further dissemination of sensitive consumer 
information and potential compliance obligations that it would place on 
furnishers that receive this information. Two consumer groups advocated 
for allowing a consumer to opt in or out of furnisher notification at 
the time of submission, arguing that this approach would attain many of 
the benefits of automatic notification while allowing victims to 
control the dissemination of their personal information.
    The Bureau has considered the comments, and for the reasons set 
forth below, is finalizing Sec.  1022.142(e) with several revisions and 
is renumbering the section. The Bureau is moving proposed Sec.  
1022.142(e), which addresses the authority to decline or rescind a 
block, to Sec.  1022.142(e)(4) and renaming final Sec.  1022.142(e) to 
reflect that it addresses the blocking of adverse information resulting 
from trafficking. The Bureau is further finalizing the rule with new 
Sec.  1022.142(e)(1) through (e)(3) to cover the block of adverse 
information identified by the consumer as resulting from a severe form 
of trafficking in persons or sex trafficking, the requirement to notify 
the consumer and attempt to resolve deficiencies, and the final 
determination on blocking the reporting of adverse information 
identified by the consumer as resulting from a severe form of 
trafficking in persons or sex trafficking. These new provisions cover 
timing and procedural questions raised in response to the Bureau's 
request for feedback on the adoption of procedures used for identity 
theft in Regulation V for supplemental requests. The Bureau is also 
finalizing the rule without also requiring the deletion of adverse 
information in a consumer's file resulting from a severe form of 
trafficking in persons or sex trafficking or notification to 
furnishers.
    The Bureau is implementing a multi-step process that a consumer 
reporting agency must follow when it receives a submission under Sec.  
1022.142(d)(1). First, Sec.  1022.142(e)(1) provides that a consumer 
reporting agency has four business days from receipt of the consumer's 
submission to block items of adverse information identified by the 
consumer or their representative from appearing in a consumer report. 
The Bureau concludes that four business days provides consumer 
reporting agencies with adequate time to institute a block of the items 
of adverse information identified by the consumer or their 
representative. Action within this timeframe is important since the 
Bureau recognizes a consumer may be in urgent need of housing or 
employment that could be facilitated by the block of the adverse 
information.
    Second, the Bureau is imposing a time period of five business days 
under which a consumer reporting agency must notify the consumer and 
attempt to resolve any deficiency in the consumer's submission in new 
Sec.  1022.142(e)(2)(i). The Bureau recognizes in some cases the 
submission may not be complete, and the consumer reporting agency may 
need to obtain additional information from the consumer on a case-by-
case basis in order to confirm the submission is complete. Section 
1022.142(e)(2)(i) of the final rule provides that a consumer reporting 
agency is required to notify the consumer and attempt to resolve any 
deficiencies limited to instances where: (1) the consumer reporting 
agency cannot reasonably confirm the appropriate proof of identity for 
the consumer and, if applicable, the consumer's representative under 
Sec.  1022.142(b)(1); (2) the consumer did not provide documentation 
consisting of a victim determination under Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i); or 
(3) the consumer reporting agency cannot properly identify the adverse 
items of information under Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(ii). The final rule 
also provides that a consumer reporting agency may not ask for 
information on the validity of the facts or circumstances detailed in 
the contents of the submitted trafficking documentation establishing 
the consumer is a victim of trafficking or whether the identified 
adverse information resulted from a severe form of trafficking in 
persons or sex trafficking under Sec.  1022.142(b)(6).
    Third, Sec.  1022.142(e)(2)(ii) provides a consumer reporting 
agency with a maximum of 25 business days after

[[Page 37717]]

receiving the consumer's submission under Sec.  1022.142(d)(1) to make 
a final determination on whether the submission is complete in order to 
perform the final determination of the block under Sec.  1022.142(e)(3) 
or decline to block or rescind any block under Sec.  1022.142(e)(4). 
The Bureau expects consumer reporting agencies to make any requests for 
clarifying information as expeditiously as possible (and limited to the 
reasons in Sec.  1022.142(e)(2)(i)) in order to allow consumers with an 
adequate amount of time to provide the requested information. For 
example, the Bureau expects a consumer reporting agency to send a 
request for additional information, if needed to complete the 
submission, to the preferred method of contact identified by the 
consumer required by Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(ii)(B). If the consumer 
reporting agency does not receive a response from the consumer, the 
consumer reporting agency must send an additional request to the 
consumer with sufficient time for a response within the 25-business day 
limit for a final determination in Sec.  1022.142(e)(2)(ii). The 
Bureau's timeframe for action by the consumer reporting agency reflects 
a balance between the four-business-day timeframe for a consumer 
reporting agency to block the reporting of information in the context 
of alleged identity theft (under section 605B) and the 30-day timeframe 
a consumer reporting agency generally has to conduct a reasonable 
reinvestigation of the completeness or accuracy of a disputed item 
(under section 611). The Bureau concludes that these timeframes are 
reasonable and addresses concerns noted by commenters.
    Fourth, Sec.  1022.142(e)(3) requires the consumer reporting agency 
to initiate a block (if the consumer reporting agency lacked enough 
information to perform a block under Sec.  1022.142(e)(1)) or maintain 
a block initiated pursuant to Sec.  1022.142(e)(1) upon confirming the 
completion of the consumer's submission and in accordance with the 
requirements of Sec.  1022.142(e)(2).
    The Bureau is not requiring consumer reporting agencies to notify a 
furnisher about the consumer's submission in the final rule. The Bureau 
requested comment on requiring a consumer reporting agency to notify 
the furnisher of the block in order to give a furnisher the opportunity 
to cease furnishing the blocked information to the consumer reporting 
agency that provided the notification. In the proposed rule, the Bureau 
evaluated whether this could then help ensure that blocked information 
is not refurnished and reinserted in a consumer report and help prevent 
the adverse items of information from being furnished by other consumer 
reporting agencies. However, the Bureau is declining to require 
notification to furnishers given the serious privacy and data security 
concerns raised by commenters who noted a risk that information that is 
passed to a furnisher could more easily reach a trafficker and put the 
consumer at risk. The Bureau encourages consumer reporting agencies to 
develop a process to ensure the reinsertion of adverse items resulting 
from a severe form of trafficking in persons or sex trafficking after 
being blocked from the consumer's file does not occur. However, the 
Bureau cautions that consumer reporting agencies should not provide 
furnishers with information about the consumer's request or the reason 
for the block.
    The final rule also does not require consumer reporting agencies to 
delete adverse items of information identified by the victim of 
trafficking from the consumer's credit file. The Bureau has determined 
that requiring consumer reporting agencies to delete that information 
would be counterproductive because, as explained above, the final rule 
does not require a consumer reporting agency to notify the furnisher of 
adverse information that a consumer has submitted the required 
documentation. If the information is deleted, but the furnisher is not 
provided with a reason, there is a substantial risk that the 
information will be reinserted into the report, whereas a block without 
deletion makes it more likely that the consumer reporting agency will 
not include the adverse information in future reports after the 
information is confirmed to remain blocked in Sec.  1022.142(e)(3).
142(e)(4) Authority To Decline or Rescind a Block
    In the proposed rule, the Bureau stated consumer reporting agencies 
may encounter difficulty confirming certain information submitted by 
consumers. Under proposed section 1022.142(e), the Bureau proposed to 
provide consumer reporting agencies with the authority to decline to 
act, or to rescind action (if applicable) on a submission. The proposed 
provision was similar to section 605B(c) of the FCRA, which allows a 
consumer reporting agency to decline to block information relating to a 
consumer, or to rescind any block, if the consumer reporting agency 
makes certain reasonable determinations.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Sec.  1022.142(e) provided that a consumer reporting 
agency may decline to block, or may rescind any block, of adverse items 
of information resulting from a severe form of trafficking in persons 
or sex trafficking where: (1) the consumer reporting agency requests 
and cannot reasonably confirm the appropriate proof of identity under 
Sec.  1022.142(b)(1); (2) the consumer cannot provide documentation 
under Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i); or (3) the consumer reporting agency 
cannot properly identify the adverse items of information under Sec.  
1022.142(b)(6)(ii).
    The section-by-section analysis of Sec.  1022.142(e) of the 
proposed rule discussed how the Bureau is not proposing to interpret 
section 605C as giving a consumer reporting agency the discretion to 
contest the merits of the submitted trafficking documentation, if such 
documentation meets the definition in section 605C(a) and in proposed 
Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i). In the section-by-section analysis of Sec.  
1022.142(e) in the proposed rule, the Bureau did not propose to 
interpret section 605C as giving a consumer reporting agency the 
discretion to challenge a consumer's determination that an adverse item 
of information resulted from a severe form of trafficking in persons or 
sex trafficking under Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(ii). However, the Bureau 
sought comments on these approaches.
    The Bureau proposed to clarify in Sec.  1022.142(e) that consumer 
reporting agencies can request appropriate proof of identity of the 
consumer who is a victim of trafficking as defined in Sec.  
1022.142(b)(1) and that consumer reporting agencies can decline or 
rescind a block if it cannot reasonably confirm the appropriate proof 
of identity. Proposed Sec.  1022.142(e) also required a consumer 
reporting agency, prior to exercising its authority to decline or 
rescind a block, to notify the consumer and attempt to resolve any 
deficiency in the consumer's submission.
    The Bureau received comments from industry and consumer advocates 
on certain aspects of this provision. Several consumer advocates 
supported the Bureau's proposed approach and urged the Bureau not to 
give consumer reporting agencies discretion to decide whether consumers 
were victims of trafficking beyond confirming that the consumer has 
provided required trafficking documentation and identified the adverse 
information that resulted from trafficking. At least one consumer 
advocate urged the Bureau to provide an enumerated list of acceptable

[[Page 37718]]

documentation, prohibit a consumer reporting agency from rejecting that 
documentation, and expressly state that a consumer reporting agency 
cannot reject a request for any reason other than those listed in Sec.  
1022.142(e). The same commenter also asked that the final rule 
specifically state that a consumer reporting agency cannot decline to 
block adverse information because the consumer reporting agency 
questions the merits of the submitted trafficking documentation or the 
consumer's determination that an adverse item of information resulted 
from trafficking. An industry commenter generally supported the 
proposed provision, but asked that the reasons for rescinding or 
declining a block be expanded to cover two additional scenarios: (1) a 
material misrepresentation of fact; and (2) criminal record information 
if the victim is required to register as a sex offender.
    For the reasons discussed below, the Bureau is adopting its 
proposal by renumbering proposed Sec.  1022.142(e) to Sec.  
1022.142(e)(4) and by clarifying the limited circumstances under which 
a consumer reporting agency may decline or rescind a block. New Sec.  
1022.142(e)(4) provides that a consumer reporting agency may only 
decline or rescind a block only if the consumer reporting agency cannot 
reasonably confirm the appropriate proof of identity for the consumer 
and, if applicable, the consumer's representative under Sec.  
1022.142(b)(1), the consumer cannot provide documentation consisting of 
a victim determination under Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i), or the consumer 
reporting agency cannot properly identify the adverse items of 
information under Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(ii). This means a consumer 
reporting agency can request appropriate proof of identity of the 
consumer who is a victim of trafficking as defined in Sec.  
1022.142(b)(1) and, if applicable, the consumer's representative, and 
that consumer reporting agencies can decline or rescind a block if it 
cannot reasonably confirm the appropriate proof of identity. Similar to 
the section-by-section analysis of Sec.  1022.142(e) in the proposed 
rule, the Bureau does not interpret section 605C as giving the consumer 
reporting agency the discretion to contest the merits of the submitted 
trafficking documentation, if it meets the definition in section 
605C(a) and in Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(i), nor does it interpret the 
statute as giving a consumer reporting agency the discretion to 
challenge a consumer's determination that an adverse item of 
information resulted from a severe form of trafficking in persons or 
sex trafficking under Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(ii). Accordingly, the Bureau 
is amending the text of new Sec.  1022.142(e)(4) to provide that a 
consumer reporting agency may not decline to block or rescind any block 
of adverse information identified by the consumer or if applicable, the 
consumer's representative, based on the validity of the facts or 
circumstances detailed in the contents of the submitted trafficking 
documentation under Sec.  1022.142(b)(6) of this section.
    Section 1022.142(e)(4) also provides that a consumer reporting 
agency may decline or rescind a block only after the consumer is 
notified using the method of contact specified by the consumer in Sec.  
1022.142(b)(6)(ii)(B) and the consumer reporting agency attempted to 
resolve any deficiency in the consumer's submission as required in 
Sec.  1022.142(e)(2). The Bureau believes requiring consumer reporting 
agencies to notify the consumer and attempt to resolve any deficiencies 
in the consumer's submission will facilitate compliance and is 
appropriate to prevent a consumer reporting agency from furnishing a 
consumer report containing any adverse item of information about a 
consumer that resulted from trafficking by providing consumers an 
opportunity to complete their submission or correct mistakes with 
respect to information or documentation they provide initially and 
making it less likely that a consumer reporting agency will decline to 
block or a rescind a block in error. In doing so, the Bureau is relying 
on its regulatory authority under section 621(e) of the FCRA, which 
authorizes the Bureau to prescribe regulations that promote accuracy 
and fairness in credit reporting, and on the general rulemaking 
authority granted the Bureau under section 1022(b)(1) of the Dodd-Frank 
Act.
    The Bureau concludes that giving consumer reporting agencies 
additional discretion to evaluate the validity of the facts or 
circumstances detailed in the contents of trafficking documentation, as 
defined in Sec.  1022.142(b)(6), would make it difficult for consumers 
to understand how to properly submit a request, may decrease the 
Bureau's ability to monitor for compliance, and could also lead to 
invalid reasons for declining or rescinding a block. As discussed in 
more detail above in the section-by-section analysis of Sec.  
1022.142(c), Congress did not provide an exception for criminal 
convictions and the final rule does not provide such an exception. The 
Bureau also concludes that the final rule should not provide a material 
misrepresentation of fact as a reason a consumer reporting agency may 
decline or rescind a block since the Bureau does not interpret section 
605C(a)(1) as permitting a consumer reporting agency to make factual 
determinations on whether a consumer is a victim of trafficking or if 
adverse items of information identified by the consumer resulted from a 
severe form of trafficking in persons or sex trafficking. The Bureau 
also finds doing so could lead to confusion and result in improper 
denials if the consumer reporting agency inappropriately concludes that 
a material misrepresentation of fact was made. Accordingly, the Bureau 
is finalizing the proposed rule, with the clarifications noted above.
142(f) Notification to Consumer of Actions Taken in Response to the 
Consumer's Submission
    The Bureau proposed in Sec.  1022.142(f)(1) to require a consumer 
reporting agency to provide written notice to a consumer of the results 
of a submission within five calendar days of receipt of the submission 
(or, if rescinding a previously applied block, five calendar days after 
rescinding). As proposed, Sec.  1022.142(f)(2) would have required a 
consumer reporting agency to provide notice in writing informing the 
consumer that the review of the submission is completed, a statement 
explaining the outcome, a consumer report provided at no cost to the 
consumer that is based upon the consumer's revised file (if 
applicable), a description of the procedures used to determine the 
outcome, a method for contacting the consumer reporting agency to 
appeal the determination or revise the submission to cure any of the 
noted reasons for declining to block the requested adverse information, 
and the web page consumers can use to submit complaints to the Bureau.
    The Bureau received mixed comments on the proposed notice 
requirements. Several individual and consumer group commenters 
expressed their general support for the proposal. Two industry trade 
associations objected to the proposed five-calendar-day notice period. 
One of these commenters specifically urged the Bureau to mirror section 
605B of the FCRA for ease of implementation and allow at least four 
business days for blocking and five business days to provide notice to 
the consumer. This commenter also argued that the requirement to 
provide written notice is beyond the scope of the rulemaking directed 
by section 605C. The other commenter stated five days is an 
insufficient time to require consumer

[[Page 37719]]

reporting agencies to provide a written notice for documents that are 
submitted, but not rescinded. This commenter also proposed the Bureau 
change ``provide'' to ``send'' to address the delivery time that is not 
typically within the control of a consumer reporting agency. One 
consumer group recommended that the Bureau require consumer reporting 
agencies to use a preferred mailing address provided by the victim 
because of safety and privacy concerns. An industry trade association 
made a similar request, noting that consumer reporting agencies may not 
have a current address or contact information for the consumer.
    Multiple individual commenters and consumer groups supported 
requiring a consumer reporting agency to automatically send a revised 
consumer report to the consumer. Other commenters recommended that the 
Bureau require consumer reporting agencies to provide instructions for 
obtaining a current copy of their credit report rather than 
automatically mailing a copy, in accordance with existing procedures to 
protect the privacy of victims. One industry commenter questioned how 
this requirement would apply to consumer reporting agencies like 
background screeners that do not maintain a file from which to draft 
new reports. The Bureau also received several comments urging the 
adoption of other requirements not addressed in the proposal. One 
consumer group commenter urged the Bureau to require a consumer 
reporting agency to include in the notice details on the appeals 
process if a request is declined, and another opposed allowing the 
consumer reporting agency to demand specific additional items of 
information before it would approve a trafficking block.
    For the reasons discussed below, the Bureau is finalizing Sec.  
1022.142(f) largely as proposed, with some revisions to address certain 
comments received regarding timing requirements. As described above, 
Sec.  1022.142(e) of the final rule adopts certain timeframes for the 
consumer reporting agency to block the reporting of information after 
receipt of documentation from the consumer. Final Sec.  1022.142(f) has 
been modified to account for the timing requirements in new Sec.  
1022.142(e) by changing the allotted time for a consumer reporting 
agency to provide notice to the consumer from five calendar days after 
receipt of the submission to five business days after a final 
determination on a consumer's submission under Sec.  1022.142(e)(3) 
(or, if rescinding a previously applied block, five business days after 
rescinding under Sec.  1022.142(e)(4)) in order to improve 
implementation of this section.
    The Bureau concludes that the contents of the notice required by 
Sec.  1022.142(f) are appropriately tailored to providing consumers the 
information they need to ensure that their submission was handled 
correctly by the consumer reporting agency. This information ensures 
that the consumer is provided with a thorough explanation of the 
outcome and the appeals process, and providing a copy of the revised 
consumer report allows the consumer to verify that the correct items 
have been blocked. Moreover, requiring a notice to the consumer on how 
to submit a complaint to the Bureau will facilitate compliance and is 
appropriate to prevent a consumer reporting agency from furnishing a 
consumer report containing any adverse item of information about a 
consumer that resulted from trafficking by providing consumers with the 
information they need to determine if a consumer reporting agency 
declined to block or a rescind a block in error and with information 
about how to get any such error corrected.
    If the consumer is not notified of the outcome by the consumer 
reporting agency, the consumer would either have to separately request 
a copy of their credit report, perhaps incurring a fee, or wait to see 
if they are subject to an adverse action the next time their consumer 
report is used, which may mean missing out on credit, employment, or 
housing opportunities. Many victims of trafficking will be in 
particularly urgent need of housing, employment, or credit, and knowing 
within a reasonable time that a consumer reporting agency has blocked 
adverse items of information may facilitate a victim's ability to 
obtain these vital services. The Bureau also finds that these 
requirements in Sec.  1022.142(f) are necessary to prevent a consumer 
reporting agency from furnishing a consumer report containing any 
adverse item of information about a consumer that resulted from 
trafficking because it provides consumers with the opportunity to 
review the outcome and, if the consumer reporting agency incorrectly 
rejected a submission, to dispute that outcome.
    The Bureau recognizes that certain consumer reporting agencies may 
not maintain a file from which they produce reports, including some 
background screeners. The final text accounts for this situation, as it 
requires the consumer reporting agency to provide a report ``that is 
based upon the consumer's revised file (if applicable) as a result of 
the consumer's submission.'' \62\ Accordingly, the Bureau declines to 
adopt a special exception for consumer reporting agencies that do not 
maintain files on consumers. Finally, the Bureau adopts a minor 
clarification that the notice must be sent by the preferred 
communication method specified by the consumer in the submission as 
provided for in Sec.  1022.142(b)(6)(ii)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ Emphasis added.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

142(g) Record Retention
    Proposed Sec.  1022.142(g) would have required a consumer reporting 
agency to retain evidence of submissions under section 605C. The 
proposal would have also required a consumer reporting agency to 
maintain documentation concerning the outcome of the submissions, 
reasons for declining or rescinding to act (if applicable), and 
compliance with Sec.  1022.142. In the proposed rule, consumer 
reporting agencies would have needed to retain this information for a 
period of seven years after the date the submission by the consumer is 
received. Under section 605 of the FCRA, most adverse information would 
be excluded from consumer reports after seven years automatically.
    The Bureau received comments from individuals, industry, and 
consumer groups on this proposed provision. While most commenters 
supported a record retention requirement, all who commented suggested 
revisions. A few commenters suggested that record retention 
requirements should be extended to 10 years because certain 
bankruptcies may be reported for 10 years. Another commenter suggested 
that consumer reporting agencies should be required to publish their 
policies on recordkeeping and data collection. Similarly, a consumer 
advocate urged the Bureau to provide additional information about the 
data protection obligations of consumer reporting agencies so that 
survivors understand how their information will be protected. The 
commenter also suggested that the Bureau communicate any exceptions to 
the general record retention rule so that survivors can better 
determine whether they want to submit a request.
    Two industry commenters opposed the proposed record retention 
requirements because they believe that the requirements are 
antithetical to current data privacy and data security regulation and 
could increase the scope of, and risk related to, a data breach. They 
suggested that the requirements are too broad or too long, and one 
suggested that victims may hesitate to provide information because 
victims

[[Page 37720]]

may fear that their information will be shared with others. One 
commenter argued that submitted information should be destroyed under 
standard data retention timeframes, which are often much shorter than 
seven years. The other commenter suggested aligning record retention 
requirements with the statute of limitations or statute of repose for 
the FCRA.
    For the reasons stated below, the Bureau is finalizing Sec.  
1022.142(g) with minor revisions to cross references within the rule. 
The final rule provides that a consumer reporting agency must retain 
evidence of submissions and compliance with this section for a period 
of seven years after the consumer's submission, which the Bureau has 
determined is an appropriate period of time to require consumer 
reporting agencies to retain records. The Bureau concludes that it is 
not appropriate to tie record retention requirements to the statute of 
limitations or statute of repose because it would unnecessarily 
complicate the requirements. Those time periods can be difficult to 
determine and provide less clarity for all involved. While some adverse 
information remains on a consumer report for longer than seven years, 
the Bureau has determined that seven years strikes the right balance 
because most adverse information will be excluded from a consumer 
report after seven years.
    The Bureau finds that requiring consumer reporting agencies to 
maintain records of compliance will enable the Bureau to assess 
consumer reporting agencies' compliance with the rules. This 
requirement will also facilitate compliance by supporting effective and 
efficient enforcement of the rule in order to prevent a consumer 
reporting agency from furnishing a consumer report containing any 
adverse item of information about a consumer that resulted from a 
severe form of trafficking in persons or sex trafficking.
    The final rule contains several clarifying revisions, including one 
technical correction to clarify that the record retention requirements 
apply to all submissions sent to the mailing or website address made 
available under Sec.  1022.142(d)(1). The final rule also clarifies the 
types of evidence that must be retained under this section by including 
cross-references to actions taken by a consumer reporting agency under 
Sec.  1022.142(e)(1) through (e)(3) and (f) as well as the reasons 
provided under Sec.  1022.142(e)(4) for declining to block or 
rescinding any block of items of adverse information identified by the 
consumer.
142(h) Policies and Procedures To Ensure and Maintain Compliance
    Proposed Sec.  1022.142(h) required consumer reporting agencies to 
establish and maintain written policies and procedures reasonably 
designed to ensure and monitor the compliance of the consumer reporting 
agency and its employees with the requirements of this section. Rather 
than proposing a one-size-fits-all approach, proposed Sec.  1022.142(h) 
specified that these written policies and procedures must be 
appropriate to the nature, size, complexity, and scope of the 
activities of the consumer reporting agency and its employees. For 
example, consumer reporting agencies must develop policies and 
procedures that address how requests are evaluated and processed, and 
the limited circumstances a consumer reporting agency may decline or 
rescind a block under Sec.  1022.142(e).
    The Bureau received few comments on this provision. A consumer 
advocate recommended requiring policies and procedures to detail how 
trafficking-specific information will be used, shared, and protected 
and making such policies and procedures available to review before 
submitting a request. One commenter asked the Bureau to specify 
penalties for failing to comply with this provision.
    The Bureau is finalizing Sec.  1022.142(h) as proposed. The Bureau 
believes requiring consumer reporting agencies to maintain written 
policies and procedures is necessary to administer the rule by enabling 
the Bureau to assess consumer reporting agencies' compliance with the 
rule and to facilitate compliance in order to prevent a consumer 
reporting agency from furnishing a consumer report containing any 
adverse item of information about a consumer that resulted from human 
trafficking. Written policies and procedures will help consumer 
reporting agencies ensure they have developed practices that fully 
implement the requirements of this section that are tailored to the 
nature, size, complexity, and scope of the activities of the consumer 
reporting agency and its employees. The Bureau understands that some, 
if not all, consumer reporting agencies have pre-existing policies and 
procedures to ensure compliance of the FCRA and Regulation V and these 
policies and procedures also describe how consumer's information 
submitted to them will be used, shared, and protected.
    The Bureau expects consumer reporting agencies to make information 
available to consumers who are victims of trafficking information on 
how their submission of information will be used, shared, and 
protected. The Bureau believes this is particularly important given the 
treatment and harm inflicted upon victims of trafficking by their 
trafficker.

VI. Effective Date

    Pursuant to section 6102(c) of the 2022 NDAA, the amendments to the 
FCRA shall go into effect 30 days after the Bureau issues a final rule. 
In accordance with procedures for the issuance of Bureau rules, a final 
Bureau rule is deemed to be issued on the earlier of ``(a) [w]hen the 
final rule is posted on the Bureau's website; or (b) [w]hen the final 
rule is published in the Federal Register.'' \63\ This means the 
effective date of section 605C could be based on the date the final 
rule is posted on the Bureau's website instead of the date the final 
rule is published in the Federal Register, if posting on the Bureau's 
website is first. Under section 553(d) of the Administrative Procedure 
Act,\64\ the required publication or service of a substantive rule must 
be made not less than 30 days before its effective date, with certain 
exceptions not applicable here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \63\ 12 CFR 1074.1.
    \64\ 5 U.S.C. 553(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the proposed rule, the Bureau proposed an effective date of 30 
days after the date of the final rule's publication in the Federal 
Register so that the final rule would take effect at the same time as 
section 605C. The Bureau received two comments requesting a later 
effective date to give the industry more time to implement the rule. 
One commenter explained that this extra time is needed to allow the 
consumer reporting agencies to train employees and implement necessary 
compliance controls.
    The Bureau has considered these comments and has determined that, 
as proposed, the final rule will become effective 30 days after 
publication in the Federal Register. Thus, the final rule will take 
effect as close to the effective date of section 605C as possible. The 
Bureau finds that an effective date of a rule that is contemporaneous 
to the statutory effective date will avoid uncertainty for consumers 
who are victims of trafficking as well as for consumer reporting 
agencies. To the extent a consumer reporting agency receives a 
submission between any time period that section 605C is in effect and 
the effective date of the rule, the Bureau expects consumer reporting 
agencies to otherwise comply with section 605C(b)

[[Page 37721]]

by not furnishing a consumer report containing any adverse item of 
information about a consumer that resulted from a severe form of 
trafficking in persons or sex trafficking if the consumer has provided 
trafficking documentation to the consumer reporting agency.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \65\ Consumer reporting agencies could look to new section 
1022.142 on how to handle submissions between the statutory and rule 
effective date to the extent there is a gap.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. Dodd-Frank Act Section 1022(b)(2) Analysis

    In developing this final rule, the Bureau has considered the rule's 
potential benefits, costs, and impacts in accordance with section 
1022(b)(2)(A) of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 
(CFPA).\66\ In developing the final rule, the Bureau has consulted or 
offered to consult with the prudential banking regulators (the FDIC, 
FRB, NCUA, and OCC) and the Bureau of Indian Affairs, several offices 
in the DOJ, the Office on Trafficking in Persons in HHS, Department of 
Homeland Security (DHS), and the FTC, including regarding consistency 
of this rule with any prudential, market, or systemic objectives 
administered by those agencies, in accordance with section 
1022(b)(2)(B) of the CFPA. Most commenters did not specifically address 
the Bureau's proposed section 1022(b) analysis; the Bureau discusses 
those comments that were relevant to the analysis below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \66\ 12 U.S.C. 5512(b)(2)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Bureau expects that the final rule will benefit consumers who 
are victims of a severe form of trafficking in persons or sex 
trafficking and have adverse information on file with a consumer 
reporting agency as a result of that trafficking. The benefits to 
individual consumers who are victims of trafficking could be 
considerable--adverse information from consumer reporting agencies 
could negatively affect a consumer's ability to obtain housing, 
employment, credit, or other immediate and longer-term services 
necessary to support long-term independence and financial stability.
    Conversely, the final rule will impose costs on consumer reporting 
agencies in the form of compliance costs associated with processing 
requests from consumers to block adverse information and effecting the 
necessary blocks. While the Bureau does not have data to quantify these 
costs, the Bureau expects the costs of complying with the requirements 
of the final rule to be small in magnitude. Consumer reporting agencies 
are already required by 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 to have systems in place to 
accept reports of identity theft, and to respond to those reports by 
suppressing information on any consumer reports. Consumer reporting 
agencies also have systems in place to address treatment of inaccurate 
and unverifiable information as required by 15 U.S.C. 1681i(a)(5) and 
concerning the notice of results of reinvestigation under 15 U.S.C. 
1681i(a)(6). This rule's procedural requirements are modeled on these 
requirements.
    Some industry commenters noted that the proposed requirement to 
have a dedicated toll-free phone number to receive requests to block 
adverse information related to trafficking would be particularly 
burdensome for smaller consumer reporting agencies, as the regime for 
identity theft block requests only requires the nationwide consumer 
reporting agencies to maintain a dedicated toll-free phone number. The 
Bureau has modified this provision in the final rule to only impose 
this requirement on consumer reporting agencies that already maintain a 
dedicated toll-free number for identity theft. As a result, the final 
rule will not impose this cost on covered persons.
    Although the Bureau characterizes qualitatively the nature of the 
benefits to consumers and the costs to firms above, it is not able to 
quantify the overall magnitude of the likely costs and benefits of the 
proposed rule. Quantifying these costs and benefits would require an 
estimate of the number of consumers likely to submit information to 
support a block under the rule in a typical year. Not all victims of 
trafficking will necessarily have adverse information with a consumer 
reporting agency, and among those who do, not all will make a 
submission or be able to provide the required documentation.\67\ For 
instance, a report by the non-profit Polaris, cited by both industry 
and consumer advocate commenters, found that 26 percent of trafficking 
victims had bank accounts or credit cards fraudulently opened in their 
names.\68\ While illustrating the importance of the problem this rule 
is intended to address, this statistic also indicates that not all 
victims of trafficking necessarily have adverse information with a 
consumer reporting agency. The Bureau does not have a way to estimate 
the number of trafficking victims who will make a request, and 
according to the State Department, there is no reliable estimate of the 
annual number of trafficking victims in the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \67\ This may occur if the consumer is not aware of the adverse 
information or is not seeking any product or service that might rely 
on a consumer report including that information (e.g., if the 
adverse information relates to credit and the consumer is not 
currently seeking new credit). In addition, although the proposed 
rule is intended to make the submission process as straightforward 
as possible for victims of trafficking and intends to conduct 
outreach to ensure that victims are aware of their rights, consumers 
may not utilize the reporting process if they do not know their 
right to make a request, because they lack the required 
documentation, or because they believe the process to be more costly 
in time and effort than the potential benefits of blocking the 
adverse information.
    \68\ Polaris Project, On-Ramps, Intersections, and Exit Routes 
(July 2018), at 23, https://polarisproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/A-Roadmap-for-Systems-and-Industries-to-Prevent-and-Disrupt-Human-Trafficking-Financial-Industry.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To provide a rough sense of scale, the Bureau compares available 
statistics on human trafficking in the United States to statistics on 
identity theft, which have a similar treatment under the FCRA as under 
the final rule. In 2020, the National Human Trafficking Hotline made 
8,701 referrals for potential victims of trafficking.\69\ For 
comparison, the FTC received nearly 1.4 million complaints related to 
identity theft in 2020.\70\ Both the number of referrals from the 
National Human Trafficking Hotline and the number of identity theft 
complaints to the FTC likely undercount the true incidence of 
trafficking and identity theft, respectively. However, given that not 
all victims of trafficking will have adverse information with a 
consumer reporting agency, it seems reasonable to assume that the 
annual number of consumer submissions to consumer reporting agencies 
under the final rule would be at least two orders of magnitude less 
than the volume similar requests related to identity theft. As a 
result, the Bureau expects that although the benefits of the final rule 
to individual consumers who are victims of trafficking may be 
considerable, the aggregate benefits to consumers and the aggregate 
costs to consumer reporting agencies are likely to be small.\71\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \69\ Off. to Monitor & Combat Trafficking in Persons, U.S. Dep't 
of State, 2021 Trafficking in Persons Report (Jun. 2021), https://www.state.gov/reports/2021-trafficking-in-persons-report/.
    \70\ Fed. Trade Comm'n, Consumer Sentinel Network Data Book 2020 
(Feb. 2021), at 7, https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/reports/consumer-sentinel-network-data-book-2020/csn_annual_data_book_2020.pdf.
    \71\ It is possible that consumer reporting agencies may incur 
some costs associated with submissions from individuals who claim 
fraudulently that adverse items of information in their consumer 
reports result from a severe form of trafficking in persons or sex 
trafficking of which they allege to be a victim. Given the 
documentation requirements in the proposed rule, the Bureau does not 
expect this would happen often. One individual commenter 
specifically supported this assessment, asserting that the 
documentation requirements in the Proposed Rule would reduce or 
eliminate the possibility of fraud.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 37722]]

    The final rule may increase consumer access to credit, to the 
extent that consumers who are victims of trafficking and have adverse 
information related to that trafficking present on a credit report, and 
blocking that adverse information makes it easier for those consumers 
to obtain credit.
    The final rule will not have a unique impact on insured depository 
institutions or insured credit unions with less than $10 billion in 
assets described in section 1026(a) of the Dodd-Frank Act. Finally, the 
final rule would not have a unique impact on rural consumers.

VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to conduct an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) and a 
final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) of any rule subject to 
notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements, unless the head of the 
agency certifies that the rule will not, if promulgated, have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.\72\ The Bureau also is subject to certain additional 
procedures under the RFA involving the convening of a panel to consult 
with small business representatives prior to proposing a rule for which 
an IRFA is required.\73\ The final rule will apply to all consumer 
reporting agencies, including all those that are small businesses under 
the RFA. However, it is unlikely that any small business will 
experience a significant economic impact as a result of the rule. As 
discussed in section VII above, the number of submissions for blocking 
adverse information each year are likely to be small, and consumer 
reporting agencies are already required to have processes in place for 
processing similar requests due to existing requirements related to 
identity theft and dispute procedures under section 611 of the FCRA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \72\ 5 U.S.C. 601 through 612.
    \73\ 5 U.S.C. 609.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, the Director certifies that this final rule will not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. Thus, a FRFA is not required for this final rule.

IX. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA),\74\ Federal 
agencies are generally required to seek approval from the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) for data collection, disclosure, and 
recordkeeping requirements (collectively, information collection 
requirements) prior to implementation. Under the PRA, the Bureau may 
not conduct or sponsor, and, notwithstanding any other provision of 
law, a person is not required to respond to, an information collection 
unless the information collection displays a valid control number 
assigned by OMB. As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork 
and respondent burden, the Bureau conducts a preclearance consultation 
program to provide the general public and Federal agencies with an 
opportunity to comment on the information collection requirements in 
accordance with the PRA. This helps ensure that the public understands 
the Bureau's requirements or instructions, respondents can provide the 
requested data in the desired format, reporting burden (time and 
financial resources) is minimized, information collection instruments 
are clearly understood, and the Bureau can properly assess the impact 
of information collection requirements on respondents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \74\ 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This final rule amends 12 CFR part 1022 (Regulation V). The 
Bureau's OMB control number for Regulation V is 3170-0002. As described 
below, the final rule creates the following new information collection 
requirements in Regulation V:
     The final rule will require consumer reporting agencies to 
accept trafficking and other documentation from consumers, process the 
submissions, and block any adverse item of information identified by 
the consumer that resulted from a severe form of trafficking in persons 
or sex trafficking under Sec.  1022.142(d)-(e). Consumer reporting 
agencies will be required to inform consumers of their decision and 
actions with respect to the submission under Sec.  1022.142(f).
     The final rule requires consumer reporting agencies to 
retain evidence of all submissions by consumers pursuant to these 
regulations, including actions taken in response to the submissions, 
reasons for declining or rescinding the block requests, and compliance 
with this section for a seven-year period under Sec.  1022.142(g).
     The final rule requires consumer reporting agencies to 
establish and maintain written policies and procedures reasonably 
designed to ensure and monitor the compliance of the consumer reporting 
agency and its employees with the requirements of this rule under Sec.  
1022.142(h).
    The collections of information contained in this final rule, and 
identified as such, have been submitted to OMB for review under section 
3507(d) of the PRA. A complete description of the information 
collection requirements (including the burden estimate methods) is 
provided in the information collection request (ICR) that the Bureau 
has submitted to OMB under the requirements of the PRA. A separate 
comment period on the information collections concluded on June 17, 
2022. OMB received no comments.
    Title of Collection: Regulation V: Fair Credit Reporting Act.
    OMB Control Number: 3170-0002.
    Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
    Affected Public: Private Sector; Federal, State, and Tribal 
Governments.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: The Bureau does not have enough 
information to estimate the number of respondents and is assuming de 
minimis. The Bureau requested comment on this assumption, but received 
no comments addressing this point.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: The Bureau does not have 
enough information to know how frequently this collection will occur or 
the burden it will impose. The Bureau received no comments directly 
addressing the burden of this collection. Two industry trade 
associations submitted comments arguing for a shorter record retention 
period under Sec.  1022.142(g), but neither commenter argued that the 
proposed requirement was too burdensome or provided an estimate of the 
burden of the proposed requirement in terms of time or financial 
resources.
    If OMB has not approved the new information collection requirements 
prior to publication of the final rule in the Federal Register, the 
Bureau will publish a separate notification in the Federal Register 
announcing OMB's approval prior to the effective date of the final 
rule.
    The Bureau has a continuing interest in the public's opinion of its 
collections of information. At any time, comments regarding the burden 
estimate, or any other aspect of the information collection, including 
suggestions for reducing the burden, may be sent to the Consumer 
Financial Protection Bureau (Attention: PRA Office), 1700 G Street NW, 
Washington, DC 20552, or by email to [email protected].
    Where applicable, the Bureau will display the control number 
assigned by OMB to any documents associated with any information 
collection requirements adopted in this rule.

[[Page 37723]]

X. Congressional Review Act

    Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act,\75\ the Bureau will 
submit a report containing this rule and other required information to 
the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller 
General of the United States prior to the rule's published effective 
date. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has designated 
this rule as not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \75\ 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 1022

    Banks, banking, Consumer protection, Credit unions, Holding 
companies, National banks, Privacy, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Savings associations.

Authority and Issuance

    For the reasons set forth above, the Bureau amends Regulation V, 12 
CFR part 1022, as set forth below:

PART 1022--FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT (REGULATION V)

0
1. Revise the authority citation for part 1022 to read as follows:

    Authority:  12 U.S.C. 5512, 5581; 15 U.S.C. 1681a, 1681b, 1681c, 
1681c-1, 1681c-3, 1681e, 1681g, 1681i, 1681j, 1681m, 1681s, 1681s-2, 
1681s-3, and 1681t; Sec. 214, Pub. L. 108-159, 117 Stat. 1952.

Subpart O--Miscellaneous Duties of Consumer Reporting Agencies

0
2. Add Sec.  1022.142 to read as follows:


Sec.  1022.142   Prohibition on inclusion of adverse information in 
consumer reporting in cases of human trafficking.

    (a) Scope. This section applies to any consumer reporting agency as 
defined in section 603(f) of the FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681a(f).
    (b) Definitions. For purposes of this section:
    (1) Appropriate proof of identity means proof of identity that 
meets the requirements in Sec.  1022.123, for purposes of section 605C 
of the FCRA.
    (2) Consumer report has the meaning provided in section 603(d) of 
the FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681a(d).
    (3) Consumer reporting agency has the meaning provided in section 
603(f) of the FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681a(f).
    (4) Severe forms of trafficking in persons has the meaning provided 
in section 103 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, 22 
U.S.C. 7102(11).
    (5) Sex trafficking has the meaning provided in section 103 of the 
Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, as amended by section 108 
of the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act of 2015, 22 U.S.C. 
7102(12).
    (6) Trafficking documentation means one or more documents that 
satisfy paragraphs (b)(6)(i) and (ii) of this section:
    (i) Victim determination. Documentation that:
    (A) Is of a determination that a consumer is a victim of 
trafficking made by a:
    (1) Federal, State, or Tribal governmental entity; or
    (2) Non-governmental organization or members of a human trafficking 
task force, including victim service providers affiliated with the 
organization or task force, authorized by a Federal, State, or Tribal 
governmental entity to make such a determination;
    (B) Is of a determination that a consumer is a victim of 
trafficking made by a court of competent jurisdiction or determination 
consisting of documents filed in a court of competent jurisdiction 
where a central issue in the case is whether the consumer is a victim 
of trafficking and the court has, at a minimum, affirmed the consumer's 
claim either by accepting certain pieces of evidence which are assumed 
to be true or finding that the there is no genuine dispute as to any 
material fact supporting a judgment in favor of the victim as a matter 
of law; or
    (C) Is of a signed statement by the consumer attesting that the 
consumer is a victim of trafficking if such statement or an 
accompanying document is signed or certified by a representative of an 
entity described in paragraph (b)(6)(i)(A) or (B) of this section.
    (ii) Identified adverse items of information. Documentation, which 
may consist of a statement prepared by the consumer or by any 
designated representative on behalf of a consumer (except for a credit 
repair organization as defined in section 403(3) of the Credit Repair 
Organizations Act, 15 U.S.C. 1679a(3), or an entity that would be a 
credit repair organization, but for section 403(3)(B)(i) of the Credit 
Repair Organizations Act, 15 U.S.C. 1679a(3)(B)(i)), that:
    (A) Identifies any items of adverse information that should not be 
furnished by a consumer reporting agency because the items resulted 
from a severe form of trafficking in persons or sex trafficking of 
which the consumer is a victim; and
    (B) Must contain a preferred method for a consumer reporting agency 
to contact the consumer electronically or in writing such as an email 
address or physical address where mail can be received. A consumer 
reporting agency shall use only the consumer's preferred method of 
contact for communications under paragraphs (d), (e), and (f) of this 
section about the consumer's submission and shall not use the 
consumer's preferred contact information for any other purpose.
    (7) Victim of trafficking means a person who is a victim of a 
severe form of trafficking in persons or sex trafficking.
    (c) Prohibition on inclusion of adverse information of trafficking 
victims. A consumer reporting agency may not furnish a consumer report 
containing any adverse item of information about a consumer that 
resulted from a severe form of trafficking in persons or sex 
trafficking if the consumer has provided trafficking documentation as 
defined under paragraph (b)(6) of this section to the consumer 
reporting agency.
    (d) Method of submission to consumer reporting agencies. (1) 
Mailing and website address. A consumer reporting agency must provide 
two mailing addresses for a consumer or consumer representative, as 
described in paragraph (b)(6)(ii) of this section, to send a submission 
consisting of an appropriate proof of identification under paragraph 
(b)(1) of this section and trafficking documentation under paragraph 
(b)(6) of this section. A consumer reporting agency may also establish 
a secure online website portal for a consumer to upload a submission. A 
consumer reporting agency must accept a submission sent to the mailing 
and, if applicable, website address used for disputes under section 611 
of the FCRA, and must accept a submission sent to a mailing and, if 
applicable, website address dedicated to blocking adverse items of 
information resulting from a severe form of trafficking in persons or 
sex trafficking under this section.
    (2) Disclosing methods for submission. A consumer reporting agency 
must add information on its publicly available website stating how 
submissions for the blocking of adverse items of information resulting 
from a severe form of trafficking in persons or sex trafficking should 
be provided to a consumer reporting agency.
    (3) Toll-free telephone number. A consumer reporting agency that 
compiles and maintains files on consumers on a nationwide basis, as 
defined in section 603(p) of the FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681a(p), must:
    (i) Allocate a reasonable amount of personnel to respond to 
consumer inquiries about the process for and status of a consumer's 
submission at the toll-free telephone number used for

[[Page 37724]]

disputes under section 611 of the FCRA; and
    (ii) Establish a toll-free telephone number dedicated to addressing 
submissions from consumers seeking to block adverse items of 
information resulting from a severe form of trafficking in persons or 
sex trafficking under this section.
    (e) Block of adverse information resulting from trafficking. (1) 
Block upon receipt of the submission. Except as otherwise provided in 
this section, within four business days of receipt of the consumer's 
submission under paragraph (d)(1) of this section, a consumer reporting 
agency must block the reporting of any adverse item of information 
identified by the consumer (or their representative) as resulting from 
a severe form of trafficking in persons or sex trafficking.
    (2) Requirement to notify the consumer and attempt to resolve 
deficiencies. (i) In general. Within five business days of receipt of 
the consumer's submission under paragraph (d) of this section, a 
consumer reporting agency must notify a consumer if additional 
information is necessary for the purpose of completing the submission 
and attempt to resolve any deficiency in the consumer's submission. A 
consumer reporting agency may only request additional information where 
the consumer reporting agency cannot reasonably confirm the appropriate 
proof of identity under paragraph (b)(1) of this section for the 
consumer or, if applicable, the consumer's representative, the consumer 
did not provide victim determination documentation under paragraph 
(b)(6)(i) of this section, or the consumer reporting agency cannot 
properly identify the adverse items of information under paragraph 
(b)(6)(ii) of this section. A consumer reporting agency may not, 
however, ask for information on the validity of the facts or 
circumstances detailed in the contents of the submitted trafficking 
documentation establishing the consumer is a victim of trafficking or 
whether the identified adverse information resulted from a severe form 
of trafficking in persons or sex trafficking under paragraph (b)(6) of 
this section.
    (ii) Timing of final determination. A consumer reporting agency 
must make a final determination on the consumer's submission no later 
than 25 business days after receiving the submission provided in 
paragraph (d)(1) of this section.
    (3) Final determination of the block. Upon confirming completion of 
the submission from the consumer under paragraph (d)(1) of this section 
and in accordance with the requirements under paragraph (e)(2) of this 
section, the consumer reporting agency must initiate or maintain the 
action described in paragraph (e)(1) of this section by blocking the 
reporting of the items of adverse information on the consumer.
    (4) Authority to decline or rescind a block. A consumer reporting 
agency may decline to block, or may rescind any block of, adverse items 
of information resulting from a severe form of trafficking in persons 
or sex trafficking, in accordance with the timing requirements under 
paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this section, only where the consumer reporting 
agency cannot reasonably confirm the appropriate proof of identity 
under paragraph (b)(1) of this section for the consumer, and, if 
applicable, the consumer's representative, the consumer cannot provide 
documentation consisting of a victim determination under paragraph 
(b)(6)(i) of this section, or the consumer reporting agency cannot 
properly identify the adverse items of information under paragraph 
(b)(6)(ii) of this section. A consumer reporting agency may not, 
however, decline to block or rescind any block of adverse information 
identified by the consumer or if applicable, the consumer's 
representative, based on the validity of the facts or circumstances 
detailed in the contents of the submitted trafficking documentation as 
defined in paragraph (b)(6) of this section. A consumer reporting 
agency may decline or rescind a block only after notifying the consumer 
using the method of contact specified by the consumer in paragraph 
(b)(6)(ii)(B) of this section and attempting to resolve any deficiency 
in the consumer's submission as required in paragraph (e)(2) of this 
section.
    (f) Notification to consumer of actions taken in response to the 
consumer's submission--(1) In general. A consumer reporting agency must 
provide written or electronic notice to a consumer of actions performed 
in response to a consumer's submission no later than five business days 
after a final determination on a consumer's submission under paragraph 
(e)(3) of this section (or, if rescinding a previously applied block, 
five business days after rescinding under paragraph (e)(4) of this 
section). The consumer reporting agency must use the method of contact 
specified by the consumer in paragraph (b)(6)(ii)(B) of this section.
    (2) Contents. The notice must include the following:
    (i) A statement that the review of the submission is completed;
    (ii) A statement of the outcome of the submission, including the 
reason(s) if the consumer reporting agency declined to block the 
adverse information identified by the consumer, or rescinded such a 
block, under paragraph (e)(4) of this section;
    (iii) A consumer report, provided at no cost to the consumer, that 
is based upon the consumer's revised file (if applicable) as a result 
of the consumer's submission;
    (iv) A description of the procedure used to determine the outcome;
    (v) A method for contacting the consumer reporting agency to appeal 
the determination or revise the submission to cure any of the noted 
reasons for declining to block the adverse information identified by 
the consumer; and
    (vi) The web page consumers can use to submit complaints to the 
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
    (g) Record retention. For a period of seven years after the 
consumer's submission is received at the mailing or website address 
made available under paragraph (d)(1) of this section, a consumer 
reporting agency must retain evidence of all such submissions and 
compliance with this section, including the actions taken by the 
consumer reporting agency under paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(3), and 
(f) of this section and the reasons provided under paragraph (e)(4) of 
this section for declining to block or rescinding any block of items of 
adverse information identified by the consumer.
    (h) Policies and procedures to ensure and maintain compliance. A 
consumer reporting agency must establish and maintain written policies 
and procedures reasonably designed to ensure and monitor the compliance 
of the consumer reporting agency and its employees with the 
requirements of the paragraphs in this section. These written policies 
and procedures must be appropriate to the nature, size, complexity, and 
scope of the activities of the consumer reporting agency and its 
employees.

Rohit Chopra,
Director, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2022-13671 Filed 6-23-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-AM-P