Report to Congress

Under Section 319 of the

Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act

of 2003

December 2010

Federal Trade Commission

Jon Leibowitz, Chairman

William E. Kovacic, Commissioner

J. Thomas Rosch, Commissioner

Edith Ramirez, Commissioner

Julie Brill, Commissioner
Table of Contents*

Topic page

Summary 1

Overview of Design of National Study of Credit Report Accuracy 2

Sampling Procedure 3

Credit Report Review and Analysis 5

Privacy and Security of the Data 7

Conclusion 8

Attachments to the Report

Attach. 1 FTC Statement of Work for FACT Act 319 Study

Attach. 2 Federal Register Notice, July 20, 2009

Attach. 3 Federal Register Notice, October 16, 2009

Attach. 4 Privacy Impact Assessment, FTC, October 2010

___________

* Report prepared by Peter Vander Nat and Paul Rothstein, Bureau of Economics.
Report to Congress Under Sections 318 and 319 of the Fair and Accurate Credit 1

Transactions Act of 2003, Federal Trade Commission, December 2004, at 22-31. This report

may be accessed at the FTC’s Web site: http://www.ftc.gov/reports/facta/041209factarpt.pdf.

 In keeping with requirements under 5 C.F.R. § 1320.8(d), the FTC published federal 2

register notices explaining the design of the study and soliciting public comment. See, 74 Fed.

Reg. 53243 (Oct. 16, 2009); 74 Fed. Reg. 35,191 (July 20, 2009). The FTC received three

comments, available at http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/facta319study/index.shtm.

1

Summary

Pursuant to Section 319 of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (“FACT Act”),

the Commission is submitting its fourth interim report describing the progress on a national study

of credit report accuracy. The FACT Act, enacted in December 2003, amends the Fair Credit

Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq. (“FCRA”), and contains a number of provisions designed

to enhance the accuracy and completeness of credit reports. Section 319 of the FACT Act

requires the FTC to conduct “an ongoing study of the accuracy and completeness of information

contained in consumer reports prepared or maintained by consumer reporting agencies and

methods for improving the accuracy and completeness of such information.” Congress requires

the FTC to complete this study by December 2014, when a final report is due. Further, five

interim reports are required to be completed every two years from December 2004 onward, until

December 2012. 

As noted in an earlier report to Congress, this study of credit report accuracy is the first 1

to directly engage the three primary groups that participate in the credit reporting process: 

consumers, lenders/data furnishers, and the national consumer reporting agencies (“CRAs”). The

study design calls for 1,000 consumers to be randomly selected throughout the United States and

to review their credit reports with an expert that helps them to identify potential errors. Study

participants are encouraged to dispute, via the FCRA dispute process (see below), potential errors

that the expert believes could have a material effect on a person’s credit standing. Upon tracking

the outcome of all disputes, the study computes the change in the consumer’s credit score for

potential and confirmed material errors.

These data will provide a basis to analyze credit report accuracy. Importantly, the study

will estimate, within a stated margin of error, the proportion of consumers who would encounter

one or more confirmed material errors over their three credit reports from the CRAs. The study

will also reveal the main types of confirmed material errors, their relative frequencies, and the

impact of such errors on a consumer’s credit standing. 

The final study design, which was approved by OMB in December 2009, is presently in

the field. The collection phase of the study, including the contractor’s report to the FTC, is 2

expected to be finished by October 2011. The Commission expects that the next interim report to

Congress, due in December 2012, will provide a full analysis of the collected data.
 See Report to Congress Under Section 319 of the FACT Act, Federal Trade Commis- 3

sion, December 2006 and 2008, respectively. The 2006 Report reviewed the first pilot study and

the 2008 Report reviewed the second. These reports may be accessed at the FTC’s Web site:

December 2006 Report: http://www.ftc.gov/reports/FACTACT/FACT_Act_Report_2006.pdf;

December 2008 Report: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2008/12/factareport.shtm.

 The FTC’s study contractor is a research team comprised of members from the Center 4

for Business and Industrial Studies at the University of Missouri-St. Louis, the Norton School of

Family and Consumer Sciences at the University of Arizona, and the Fair Isaac Corporation. This

same research team was employed for the two pilot studies. The credentials of the research team

are appended to the December 2008 Report.

 As individuals are enrolled, they begin their participation in the study. To date, 295 5

persons are enrolled and participating in the study.

 In this report, the phrase “confirmed material error” refers to material information on a 6

credit report that a consumer alleges to be erroneous in this study and is, in fact, confirmed as

erroneous by the FCRA dispute process (the latter is discussed below). The study will provide an

estimate of the frequency of confirmed material errors based on our sample. 

2

Overview of Design of National Study of Credit Report Accuracy

The study’s overall design was informed by the results of two pilot studies. These 3

preliminary studies demonstrated the general feasibility of a methodology that employs consumer

interviews but also revealed several challenges for a national study. The challenges included

identifying methods for achieving a more representative sampling frame, increasing the response

rates, and easing the burden of completing the study. Importantly, compared to the national

average for credit scores, consumers with relatively low scores were under-represented in both

studies.

FTC staff has devised a procedure for obtaining a nationwide representative sample of

credit reports so that inferences may be drawn, up to a certain level of statistical confidence,

about the accuracy of credit reports in general. About 1,000 consumers are randomly selected

throughout the United States to review their credit reports with an expert under contract to the

FTC. With the consumer’s permission, the contractor engages the participants in an in-depth 4

review of their credit reports obtained from the three national CRAs: Equifax, Experian, and

TransUnion. The focus of the review is to identify potential errors that could have a material

effect on a person’s credit standing. All credit reports with alleged material errors are sent to an 5

analyst at the Fair Isaac Corporation (“FICO”) for an initial re-scoring, treating all of the

consumer’s allegations as provisionally true. These reports are sent for a second rescoring if

some, but not all, of the alleged material errors are confirmed by the dispute process. Two unique

features of this study are: (1) the categorization and counting of alleged and confirmed material

errors, and (2) FICO’s rescoring of credit reports to measure the impact of such errors on a 6

consumer’s credit standing. 
 The information in this sample, which is comprised of names, addresses, gender, age, and 7

initial credit scores (Vantage Scores), has been provided voluntarily and confidentially by the

CRAs. We thank the CRAs for providing this information in connection with the mandated study;

these data have laid the foundation for developing a nationally representative sample of consumers

and credit reports. This information, as well as any credit report information provided by

participants, is maintained and used by the FTC and its contractor under stringent procedures that

protect the privacy and security of the data. Most importantly, credit-related data are maintained

separately from personal identifying information; see further discussion below.

 December 2008 Report, at 9 -10. 8

 In the consumer credit market, a credit score is used to summarize the information in a 9

credit report and predict the risk of a consumer’s default on a loan or credit transaction. 

 For more detail on the methods used, see FTC Statement of Work; attached. 10

3

Sampling Procedure

The relevant population for the study is comprised of adults who have credit histories with

the national CRAs. To study these credit histories, FTC staff first obtained a very large random

sample ! names and other information of 200,100 randomly selected individuals ! from the

databases of the CRAs. This is the pool of individuals selected for possible contact and they

constitute the “master list” for the study. Most of the individuals on the master list will not 7

receive invitation letters to participate in the study, and FTC staff is sending invitations to a

considerably smaller sample (about 15%) of individuals from the master list. Based on the results

of the pilot studies, FTC staff is sending proportionally more invitations to individuals with belowaverage credit scores to ensure that these consumers are adequately represented in the study. As 8

the set of participants develops, the major demographic characteristics of the participants are

analyzed and compared to national norms. As described below, the sampling is then adjusted to

ensure that the final set of approximately 1,000 participants is representative in its characteristics

and credit scores.

A credit score is a single statistic that is used to summarize the information in a credit

report. The first step toward obtaining a representative sample of credit reports is thus to ensure 9

that the credit reports of the respondents collectively conform to the national distribution of

scores. This conformity of credit scores helps ensure that the underlying credit reports of the

solicited consumers are reflective of credit reports in general. After a substantial set of individuals

have agreed to join the study (e.g., 300 people), FTC staff will have obtained an initial sample. 

This sample will be compared with the distribution of credit scores, age, gender, and regional

diversity in the master list. Statistically significant differences between this initial sample and the

master list would reflect the impact of non-participation. From this information FTC staff will be

selectively drawing, from the master list, new individuals to be contacted in an effort to 

compensate for these differences. 10
 Staff will obtain redacted credit report information, as well as credit scores, for the full 11

class of non-respondents, i.e., consumers who were sent invitation letters and did not participate. 

For non-respondents, credit reports and scores are generated and maintained without any name,

address, or personal identifier other than ID numbers assigned for the purpose of this study. 

Using the redacted reports and related credit scores, staff can assess whether non-respondents had

significantly different credit scores or credit histories, or certain demographic differences, from

those who agreed to participate.

 In line with the experience of the pilot studies, the response rate is expected to be low 12

(around 3%). In reviewing credit reports, this study addresses matters that many consumers

consider private and personal, possibly causing a reluctance to participate. As explained above,

the design of the study allows FTC staff to obtain information about non-respondents and

determine whether they are significantly different in certain characteristics from the respondents.

4

All participation is voluntary, so the degree of representativeness cannot be fully assessed

during the development phase of the sample. A detailed review of non-respondents will provide a

further assessment of the degree to which the study has achieved a representative sample of

consumers and credit reports on a range of stated characteristics. Figure 1 summarizes the 11

development phase of the study sample.12
 In consultation with FICO’s analyst on the research team, an alleged error is deemed 13

material if the consumer alleges an error regarding any of the following: (1) negative items (such

as late payments); (2) public derogatories (such as bankruptcy or lien(s) placed on property); (3)

accounts sent to collection; (4) number of inquiries for new credit; (5) outstanding balances not

attributable to normal monthly reporting variation; (6) accounts on the report not belonging to the

person who is the subject of the report (“not mine”); or (7) duplicate entries of the same

information (e.g., late payments or outstanding obligations) that were double-counted in the

reported summaries of such items. The contractor’s review of these matters employs further

detail in each of these categories.

5

Credit Report Review and Analysis

As noted above, there has been no prior study of credit report accuracy that engages all

three of the primary participants in the credit reporting process: consumers, lenders/data

furnishers, and the CRAs. This study engages these parties and employs a nationwide random

sample of consumers and credit reports that collects data regarding: the type and quantity of

alleged material errors on credit reports, the type and quantity of confirmed material errors

determined by the FCRA dispute process, and the impact of any such confirmed errors on the

consumers’ FICO credit scores. Briefly, this information is gathered as follows. The contractor

reviews credit reports with participants to help identify alleged inaccuracies, and the research

team evaluates alleged errors for materiality. This initial review process is depicted in Figure 2. 13
 The research team does not encourage filing disputes that are not material. Nonethe- 14

less, if a consumer wants to dispute certain items (material or not), the contractor prepares a

dispute letter. The consumer signs the letter and sends it to the CRA pursuant to the FCRA,

which permits consumers to dispute any credit report item they believe to be inaccurate. After a

reinvestigation process that involves the lender/data furnisher, the CRA will: delete the disputed

item; change or modify the item (specifying the change); or maintain the item as originally

reported. A CRA may also delete a disputed item based on its own review, including the

expiration of a statutory time frame. The study tracks the outcome of all disputes. Items for

which a consumer and lender do not agree, and where the CRAs take no further action, are

treated as unresolved.

 If all of the alleged material errors are confirmed by the dispute resolution process, then 15

a second rescoring is unnecessary since it would give the same result as the first rescoring. 

(continued...)

6

Consumers who maintain that there are material errors on their credit reports are encouraged to file

a formal FCRA dispute, so as to obtain a review of these items by lenders/data furnishers and the

CRAs. Credit reports with alleged material errors are sent to FICO for an initial rescoring. After 14

the completion of a dispute, FICO performs a second rescoring of the credit report if some, but not

all, of the alleged material errors are confirmed by the dispute resolution process.15
(...continued) 15

Similarly, if none of the alleged material errors are confirmed, then a second rescoring is

unnecessary since it would give the same result as the initial FICO score. A second rescoring is

needed only when some (but not all) of the alleged material errors are confirmed by the dispute

resolution process.

 December 2006 Report, at 10. 16

 December 2008 Report, at 8-9. 17

7

These data will provide answers, at a stated level of statistical confidence, to questions

that have not been addressed by earlier studies in a reliable manner. For example, regarding all

consumer alleged errors, what proportion is material to creditworthiness? What proportion of

material allegations is confirmed as erroneous by the FCRA dispute process? If a credit report is

drawn at random, what is the probability that the report would contain one or more confirmed

material errors? Furthermore, focusing directly on consumers and their credit standing, the study

will statistically estimate the proportion of American consumers who would encounter one or

more confirmed material errors across their three credit reports. The study will reveal the main

types of confirmed material errors, their relative frequencies, and impact of such errors on a

consumer’s credit standing. Overall, the study will categorize errors by type and seriousness in

terms of potential consumer harm.

The methodology of the study gives estimates of confirmed errors that have a negative

impact on a credit report. As noted in prior reports, however, the study does not analyze two

types of data that potentially involve errors. First, it does not address possible errors that may be

in the consumers’ favor. Consumers more readily identify potential errors that hurt their credit 16

scores, and either ignore or do not recognize potential errors that improve their scores. There is

no known method in the context of a consumer review of credit reports that would be likely to

identify errors having a positive impact on a consumer’s credit report. Second, the study does not

address potential “errors of omission.” In view of the different reporting cycles of data furnishers

and the voluntary basis on which credit-related information is reported to a CRA, there may be

different reasons why a certain anticipated item is not on a credit report. We have no costeffective means of reliably assessing whether an error of omission (e.g., possibly incomplete

information) has occurred in a credit report.17

Privacy and Security of the Data

In view of the potentially sensitive nature of the information being collected by this study,

great care has been taken to establish procedures that protect the privacy and security of personal

data. Chief among these procedures are the following: maintaining credit-related data separately

from personal identifying information, requiring the FTC’s contractors to execute confidentiality

agreements, including specific contractual obligations that address the privacy and security of the

data, and limiting any data access to those personnel of the FTC and its contractors who have a

need to work with the data during the course of the study. 
 Interested parties may consult the Statement of Work, provided in Attachment One. 18

Privacy Impact Assessment for the Registration Web Site for the National Study of 19

Credit Report Accuracy, October 2010. The document may be accessed at the FTC’s Web site:

http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacyimpactassessment.shtm.

8

In connection with this study, at no point will FTC staff possess any personal identifying

information of study participants, whether of a sensitive or non-sensitive nature, and staff will not

know the identity of any participant or non-respondent. For the duration of the study, the only

parties who possess and review personal identifying information, including certain credit report

information, are: (1) the FTC’s study contractor, upon receiving the consumer’s permission to

review the individual’s credit reports, and (2) the CRAs, who have provided the master list

described above. Indeed, the CRAs collectively possess all data on the master list, while the FTC

and its contractors receive, respectively, only part of that information. The CRAs have assigned

abstract study ID numbers to all names on the master list. The FTC’s mailer (i.e., the contractor

responsible for mailing the invitation letters) has received the names, addresses, and study IDs

directly from the CRAs, and FTC study staff has received study IDs, age, gender, credit scores,

and zip codes. (See Figure 1.)

As consumers respond to the invitation letters and register with the study contractor (the

University of Missouri-St. Louis), the individuals give express permission for the contractor to

review their credit reports for accuracy. In turn, the contractor communicates to FTC staff the

participants’ study IDs, along with certain redacted credit report information. An individual’s 18

study ID is the only identifier used in communications between staff and the FTC’s contractors

about any respondent, potential respondent, or non-respondent. The FTC has published a Privacy

Impact Assessment (PIA), which gives a full review of the procedures used in this study. 

Importantly, the procedures ensure that the study does not collect, maintain, or review any

sensitive information in identifiable form.19

Conclusion

The Commission anticipates that the collection phase of the study will be finished by

October 2011 and that the December 2012 report will then provide a full review of the study’s

findings. If deemed appropriate, the December 2012 report may also include recommendations for

legislative or administrative action.
9

List of Attachments

Attach. 1 FTC Statement of Work for 319 FACT Act Study*

Attach. 2 Federal Register Notice, July 20, 2009

Attach. 3 Federal Register Notice, October 16, 2009

Attach. 4 Privacy Impact Assessment, FTC, October 2010

__________________

* During January 2010, the FTC solicited competitive bids for performing certain work for the 319

FACT Act Study. The attached document gives the Statement of Work. The complete solicitation

may be found on FedBizOps, FTC-10-Q-0007, January 22, 2010.
SOLICITATION/CONTRACT/ORDER FOR COMMERCIAL ITEMS 1. Requisition Number 

PAGE 1 OF 14 Offeror to Complete Blocks 12, 17, 23, 24, & 30 29-00454 

2. Contract No. 13. Award/Effective Date 14. Order Number 5. Solicitation Number 6. Solicitation Issue Date 

FTC-10-Q-0007 Jan 22, 2010 

7. For Solicitation la. Name Sheila Hopes b. Telephone Number (No collect calls) 8. Offer Due DatelLocal Time 

Information Call: shopcs@ftc.gov 202/326-2588 March 5, 2010 / 12:00 PM 

9. Issued By Code 0617-04 10. This Acquisition is 11. Delivery for FOB Destination Unless 12. Discount Terms Block is Marked. 

ex Unrestricted 

f-- Set-Aside % for ....-. OFFICE OF ACQUISlTION Small Business D See Schedule 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION f--

600 PENN. AVENUE N.W. ROOM 779 f-- Emerging Small Business 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580 HUBZone Small Business W 13a. This contract is a rated order under DPAS (15 CFR 700) 

....-. Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned 

f--

'-- 8(a) 13b. Rating 

NAICS: .lli.2.J..Q 14. Method of Solicitation 

Size Standard: _fXlRFQ [lIFB nRFP 

15. Deliver To Code 0617-04 16. Administered By Code 

OFFICE OF ACQUISlTION 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

600 PENN. A VENUE N. W. ROOM 779 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580 

17a. Contractor/Offeror Code Facility Code 18a. Payment Will Be Made By Code 

Telephone No. nN: n' Check if Remittance is Different and Put Such Address in Offer. 18b. Submit Invoices to Address Shown in Block 18a Unless Box Below is Checked. 

See Addendum. 

19. I 20. 21. I 22. I 23. I 24. 

ITEM NO. SCHEDULE OF SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 

J I I I 

25. Accounting and Appropriation Data 126. Total Award Amount (For Govt. Use Only) 

~ 27a. Solicitation incorporates by reference FAR 52.212-1, 52.212-4. FAR 52.212-3 and 52.212-5 are attached. Addenda ~ areU are not attached 

27b. Contract/Purchase Order incorporates by reference FAR 52.212-4.52.212-5 is attached. Addenda n are n are not attached 

28. Contractor is required to sign this document and return copies to U 29. Award of Contract: Reference. Offer 

~ Issuing Office. Contractor agrees to fumish and deliver all nems set forth or Dated . Your offer on SoHcitation (Block 5), including 

I 

otherwise identified above and on any additional sheets subject to the terms and any additions or changes which are set forth herein, is accepted as to items: conditions specified herein. 

30a. Signature of Offeror/Contractor 31 a. United States of America (Signature of Contracting Officer) 

30b. Name and Title of Signer (Type or Print) 30c. Date Signed 31b. Name of Contracting Officer (Type or Print) 31c. Date Signed 

32a. Quantity In Column 21 Has Been 

o Received 0 Inspected o Accepted, and Conforms to the Contract, Except as Noted: _________ _ 

32b. Signature of Authorized Government Representative I 32c. Date 32d. Printed Name and Hie of Authorized Govemment Representative 

32e. Mailing Address of Authorized Government Representative 32f. Telephone Number of Authorized Government Representative 

32g. E-mail of Authorized Government Representative 

33. Ship Number 34. Voucher Number 35. Amount Verified Correct 36. Payment 37. Check Number 

For 

I Partial I I Final 

38. SIR Account Number 39. SIR Voucher Number 40. Paid By 

41 a. I certify this account is correct and proper for payment 

41 b. Signature and Title of Certifying Officer 41c. Date 

D Complete 

42a. Received By (Print) 

42b. Received At (Location) 

42c. Date Rec'd (YVIMMIDD) 

D Partial D Final 

I 42d. Total Containers 

STANDARD FORM 1449 (REV 3/2005) 

Prescribed by GSA - FAR (48 CFR) 53.212 

I 
SCHEDULE Continued 

Item No Supplies/Services Quantity Unit Unit Price Amount 

Conduct a national study of the accuracy of 

consumer reports in connection with Section 319 of 

the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 

2003, Pub. L. 108-159 (2003). The national study 

plans to employ both a study contractor and a 

mailing contractor, and it further plans to obtain the 

assistance from a national credit reporting agency in 

identifying a large nationwide sample of potential 

respondents. 

Please see Section C -

Description/Specifications/Work Statement 

0001 The contractor's proposal for this study shall include I LT 

a detailed work plan. The plan shall be divided into 

six (6) periods detailing how the contractor will 

execute and complete this project over a total of 66 

weeks. Please see work statement for more details. 

Page - 2 
Table of Contents 

Page 

1. STATEMENT OF WORK .................................... ........................................................................................... 4 -14* 

*Remainder of the public solicitation is not relevant for attachment to the December 2010 Report to Congress. Complete 

solicitation may be found at Fed BizOps; Solicitation FTC IO-Q-0007; Jan 22, 2010. 

FTC-l0-Q-0007 

Page - 3 
1. STATEMENT OF WORK 

C. 1 Background 

Table of Contents 

SECTIONC 

Description/Specifications/W ork Statement 

(Study Ktr) 

Page 

The FTC plans to conduct a national study of the accuracy of consumer reports in connection 

with Section 319 of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of2003, Pub. L.108-159 (2003). 

The overall design for this study has been announced in federal register notices.) Potential 

contractors for the study may review these notices so as to better understand the context for the 

scope of work. Among other things, the notices summarize extant FTC Reports to Congress (with 

Web site references) regarding two pilot studies. In contrast to these pilot studies, the FTC now 

plans to employ both a study contractor and a mailing contractor, and it further plans to obtain the 

assistance from a national credit reporting agency in identifying a large nationwide sample of 

potential respondents. 

C.2 Scope of Work to be Performed by the Study Contractor 

Part 1. In broad terms, the required tasks are the following (further detail in Part 2): 

Task I. Describe the procedures used by the contractor to ensure that all sensitive 

data (whether in paper or electronic format) are appropriately secured, stored, 

transmitted, and ultimately disposed of, as consistent with the guidelines in the FTC's 

Safeguards Rule. 2 

Task 2. Develop a Web site at which consumers can review the steps of the study 

and, if interested, register to participate in the study, inclusive of providing an 

electronic signature for their consent to the terms of the study. For those who do not 

have Internet access, provide an alternative procedure to mail the appropriate 

disclosures and study steps to the respondent and then receive the enrollment 

information and the consumer's signed consent in paper form. 

) The respective URLs for July 2009 and October 2009 notices are: 

http://www .ftc.gov/os/fedreg/2009/july/090720nationalcollection.pdf ; 

http://www.ftc.gov/os/fedreg/2009/october/091 0 16faircreditcollection.pdf . 

2 See, http://www.ftc.govlbcp/conline/pubslbuspubs/safeguards.htm. The FTC's Safeguards Rule 

addresses three basic areas: how employees or others handling the data are managed (i.e., 

instructions, training, limitations, discipline, etc.); how information systems are secured (i.e., 

storage, transmission, disposal, etc.); and how system breaches or failures are addressed (i.e., 

prevention, detection, response, etc.). As the guidance emphasizes, the requirements of the Rule are 

designed to be flexible and each institution may implement safeguards appropriate to the 

circumstances. As part of the safeguards, the contractor and any subcontractors who are part of the 

contractor's team shall be required to sign the FTC's Nondisclosure Agreement For Contractors 

(attached). 

-4-
Table of Contents 

Task 3. Construct a nationwide random sample in a range of750 - 1,000 participants 

who have given the contractor permission to review their credit reports (re sample 

size, see detail in Part 2). Among various goals in creating the sample, chief is to 

obtain a set of consumers having a distribution of credit scores that matches, i.e., is 

not statistically different from, the national distribution of credit scores. The task of 

obtaining the desired distribution of scores is accomplished in close consultation with 

FTC staff, involving the creation of a designated database (called "FP AR"; see Part 

2). The contractor's proposal shall identify the type of score to be used; e.g., a FICO 

score or some other score. 

Task 4. State the procedure whereby study participants (hereinafter, participants or 

consumers) draw their credit reports from the three national consumer reporting 

agencies - Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion (the "CRAS,,).3 The contractor shall 

budget funds from the proceeds of the contract in order to pay for participant credit 

reports and credit scores. As further explained in Part 2, the contractor shall also 

budget funds to pay up to $50,000 for financial incentives relating to consumer 

participation (see detail on Task 4, Part 2). 

Task 5. Train and use consumer coaches who will work with the consumers to (a) 

examine their credit reports in-depth, (b) help the consumers identify potential errors, 

and (c) help clear up common misunderstandings they may have about information in 

Page 

3 The three credit reports for an individual consumer must be drawn on the same day; reports that 

pertain to different consumers may be drawn on different days. 

-5-
Table of Contents 

their reports.4 Further, the contractor shall have training materials and procedures to 

ensure that different coaches are consistent in how they instruct and interview the 

consumers. 

Page 

4 The task thus involves helping consumers distinguish between a misunderstanding and a potential 

error, and may involve educating a participant. As one example, a divorced person may not recall an 

earlier loan jointly signed with the ex-spouse; she may further believe that, after a divorce, 

information about this loan is removed from her credit report. Or, the consumer may believe that 

Credit Bureau A was deficient in its report simply because Credit Bureau B gave certain correct 

information, which was not contained in A's report. It is important that the expertise of the 

contractor includes an awareness of common consumer misunderstandings and knowing how to 

advise the consumer. 

-6-
Task 6. Present a list of credit-related factors that will be employed to identify a , 

material dispute. At a minimum, this list shall include criteria specified in Part 2. 

The contractor's proposal may present additional factors that have bearing on a 

consumer's creditworthiness (i.e., factors that have bearing on eligibility for credit, 

terms of credit, cost of insurance, etc.). The criteria shall apply to all credit scores 

and the contractor shall not use a "cut-off' score (i.e., a designated score above which 

the stated criteria would not be employed). 

Task 7. Facilitate a participant's contact with CRAs or data furnishers to dispute 

credit report items that the participant alleges to be inaccurate. For consumers who 

have alleged material errors and expressed an intention to file a dispute, the contractor 

shall prepare a dispute letter and also provide a stamped pre-addressed envelope to 

the relevant CRAs.5 The contractor will ascertain from the consumer whether the 

letter correctly describes the alleged error(s); upon confirmation, the participant shall 

sign and send the letter. (The contractor shall state and employ a procedure to discern 

whether the consumer has sent the dispute letter.) 

Task 8. Determine any changes in the participant's credit score resulting from 

changes in credit report information in the context of a dispute. As part of the 

comparison between "before" and "after" credit scores for disputed items, the 

contractor must have - and shall employ - the expertise to rescore a credit report 

regarding potential changes directly related to the contractor's review (i.e., a 

rescoring of the consumer'sJrozenfile in regard to alleged errors). As explained in 

Part 2, rescoring will apply to alleged material errors and (separately) to errors that 

are confirmed via the FCRA dispute process. 

Task 9. Budget funds from the proceeds of the contract in order to obtain new credit 

reports and scores from the CRAs for those consumers who have disputed credit 

report information. 

Task 10. As specified in Part 2, assist FTC staff in preparation for a non-response 

bias study.6 The responsibility for performing a non-response bias study in keeping 

with OMB regulations will be assumed by FTC staff. Certain data collected by the 

contractor will be useful in aiding the FTC in performing its study of the nonrespondents (see Part 2). 

In developing the procedures for implementing the tasks, the proposal shall include, where 

feasible, written protocols; specifically, it shall include written protocols for (a) the initial screening 

of respondents, (b) the in-depth review of credit report information, and (c) formats used to tabulate 

the results of each credit report review. The proposal shall also provide copies of training materials 

5 Consumers who allege immaterial errors should not be encouraged to file a dispute. Regarding 

immaterial disputes, the contractor shall still offer to prepare a dispute letter for all consumers who 

want to dispute information not deemed to have bearing on creditworthiness. Instructions on how to 

file shall be made available to all study participants. 

6 The likely need to address a potential non-response bias is discussed in the cited FRN of July 20, 

2009 (page 35194). 

FTC-10-Q-0007 

Page - 7 
for the consumer coaches and the contractor's follow up letter sent to consumers after their receipt of 

the official FTC invitation letter.7 

Part 2. Further detail and information regarding the contractor's required tasks. 

Detail on Tasks 1 & 2 (safeguarding the data and the use ofa registration Web site) 

(A) These tasks will involve a Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) undertaken by the FTC in 

cooperation with the contractor. The nature of this assessment will be similar to the PIA 

performed in the second pilot study.8 The registration Web site shall be pre-tested and ready 

for use by the end of 6 weeks from the date of a contract award. In the event that a contractor 

believes such a time frame could not be met, a detailed justification must be presented in the 

contractor's proposa1.9 

(B) In consultation with FTC staff, the registration procedure will include a page with certain 

closed- ended questions that address a consumer's experience with, or knowledge of, creditrelated matters (e.g., whether the consumer is in the market for a mortgage or car loan, ever 

looked at their credit report before, ever disputed credit report information, and other 

questions pertinent to their experience/knowledge of credit-related matters). 10 

(C) in consultation with FTC staff, a successful contract award will involve procedures that 

ensure that all credit-related data are maintained separately from personal identifying 

information and that all communications between FTC staff and the contractor regarding 

potential respondents, actual respondents, or non-respondents will occur only via abstract ID 

numbers assigned for the purpose of the study. 

Detail on Task 3 (recruitment phase of the study and the creation of the sample) 

The contractor's planning for the study shall consider two proposals for sample size, namely 

N = 750 and N =1,000. 11 For either case, the contractor shall develop a designated database, 

called the "FTC Participant Response Database" ("FP AR") in EXCEL format. FP AR will 

contain no personal identifying information; in particular, it will not contain the name, 

address, or social security number of any participant. As responses are received through the 

7 The sending of FTC invitation letters is handled by the FTC's mailing contractor. Further, in 

consultation with FTC staff, the study contractor shall send a follow up letter that identifies the study 

contractor to the consumer and reaffirms the invitation. Staff estimates that over the course of the 

study, up to 10,000 such follow up letters from the study contractor may be needed. (In addition, 

FTC mailings may include a second agency letter to certain potential respondents; this 2nd FTC letter 

would not require a follow up letter from the study contractor.) 

8 See, http://www.ftc.gov/osI2008/121P044804privacyimpactatt2.pdf. Use of the registration Web 

site for the national study cannot commence until a PIA has been completed. 

9 n/a 

10 In order to expedite this inclusion, and not as a critical element for FTC evaluation of proposals, 

potential contractors are invited to submit their formulation of related questions. 

II The study sample is potentially below the original plan of 1,000 participants. Reduction is 

uncertain at this time. 

FTC-10-Q-0007 

Page - 8 
registration Web site and the contractor has drawn the person's credit reports and scores, the 

contractor will create a (row) record for each respondent with the following initial 

information: abstract ID number (as stated in the participant's FTC invitation letter), credit 

score, ZIP code, age, gender, ethnicity/race, the date stated on the FTC letter (month-dayyear in numerical format), and the date the person replied to the letter through the registration 

Web site. The study contractor will share FP AR with FTC staff upon request. There will be 

multiple requests over the course of the recruitment phase. FTC staffwill use FPAR 

information to send successive waves of invitation letters. By targeting the letters to desired 

subsets of respondents, a sample with desirable properties will be developed; for fuller 

. context, see cited FRN, July 20, 2009 (P35194). 

Detail on Task 4 (drawing the consumer's credit reports and the payment of incentives) 

(A) FTC staff anticipates that securing the reports will involve directing the consumers to 

some Web site, e.g., the Web site(s) ofEquifax, Experian, and TransUnion, or to some other 

designated Web site that is used to draw credit reports. (As an example, see the procedure 

used in the second pilot study.) For consumers who do not have Internet access - expected to 

be a small minority of the sample - the contractor shall provide a procedure to mail 

appropriate disclosures and study steps to the respondent and then receive the enrolment 

information and the consumer's signed consent in paper form. Further, for such consumers, 

the contractor shall provide either (a) one-time Internet access to the participant for drawing 

the credit reports by providing a payment for (up to) 1 hour use at an Internet cafe or public 

library, or (b) have a procedure whereby the contractor sets up accounts with the CRAs and 

submits the consumer's information to draw the credit reports (e.g., the contractor enters the 

consumer's SSN, address, date of birth, etc.). As needed, the consent form certifying the 

consumer's agreement to the terms of the study will further provide written consent for the 

latter procedure. 

(B) FTC invitation letters will state financial incentives for consumer participation. The 

contractor shall budget funds to pay for these incentives and may use $37,500 as a reliable 

estimate for a study involving N = 750 participants and may further use $50,000 as a reliable 

estimate for N = 1,000 participants. 12 

Detail on Task 5 (use and training of consumer coaches) 

Depending on the study's sample size, the contractor's proposal shall provide in range of8 -

10 consumer coaches, so that the study sample may be divided into consumer groups of not 

more than 100 persons per group. The assignment of consumers to the coaches shall be 

randomized by a procedure set forth in the proposal. At the conclusion of the study, the 

12 The study contractor does not send the official invitation letter. To aid the contractor's planning 

for the study, FTC staff supplies the following information. Invitation letters sent to individuals with 

credit scores equal to or above a FICO- equivalent score of 700 will offer the participant $25 upon 

completion of their work. Individuals with FICO-equivalent scores below 700 will be offered $25 

upon agreeing to participate and another $50 at completion of their work. It is estimated that 

approximately half of the participants will be paid $25 and the remaining half paid $75. FTC staff 

will inform the contractor of the ID numbers of participants who qualify for the stated payments. 

The FTC will reimburse the contractor for any incentive payments beyond the guidelines stated 

above. As an example involving reimbursement, if a successful contract award is granted for 750 

participants and (hypothetically) the contractor pays $39,000 for incentives, the FTC will reimburse 

the contractor for the unexpected $1500. 

FTC-l0-Q-0007 

Page - 9 
contractor shall perfonn a statistical analysis to detennine whether study results were 

significantly different across the coaches. 13 

Detail on Task 6 (criteria for a material dispute) 

The criteria shall include the following. An alleged error is deemed material if the consumer 

alleges an error regarding any of: (1) negative items (such as late payments); (2) public 

derogatories (such as bankruptcy); (3) accounts sent to collection; (4) number of inquiries for 

new credit; (5) outstanding balances not attributable to nonnal monthly reporting variation; 

(6) accounts on the report not belonging to the person who is the subject of the report ("not 

mine"); or (7) duplicate entries of the same infonnation (e.g., late payments or outstanding 

obligations) that were double-counted in the reported summaries of such items. The 

contractor may propose additional factors that have bearing on a consumer's 

creditworthiness. 

Detail on Task 7 (contractor helps consumers with disputes of credit report infonnation) 

The proposal should include 8 -10 templates, or exemplars, of the contractor's preparation of 

consumer dispute letters (i.e., one template for each consumer coach). The use of a number 

of distinguishable templates reduces the possibility that a CRA might identify certain study 

participants by the unifonn fonnat in which disputes are expressed. 

Detail on Task 8 (rescoring of credit reports) 

First, for a consumer who alleges material error(s), a dispute shall be filed with each CRA 

that produced a report containing the alleged error(s). For each such report, the contractor 

shall rescore the original report (provisionally) as though all of the consumer's provided 

infonnation were accurate. Subsequently, upon conclusion of the dispute process, the 

contractor shall rescore each such credit report a second time after including the infonnation 

that was either changed or deleted as a result of the dispute process. 14 

Detail on Task 9 (new CRA credit reports and scores involving disputed infonnation) 

I3 To aid a contractor's planning for the study, FTC staff believes there may be 3 or 4 waves of the 

FTC invitation letter. Successive waves are expected in intervals of 4 - 5 weeks, so that all mailings 

would be completed in 4- 5 months. Staffwill coordinate these mailings with the study contractor 

according to the response rates for each prior wave. The initial wave is expected to be 3,000 FTC 

letters. In planning for the training of consumer coaches and their randomization over the set of 

participants, and recognizing that participants will also come in waves, the contractor's proposal 

should allow that at least half of the coaches be ready to engage respondents after the first wave of 

FTC mailings, and that all coaches be ready upon the second wave of mailings. Upon randomizing 

the assignment of consumers to the coaches, one would expect similar outcomes for the coaches. 

Yet, by "the luck of the draw" a certain coach may have drawn (say) consumers with relatively 

lower credit scores than others, further yielding the outcome that this group alleges relatively more 

material errors than the other groups. The purpose of subsequent analysis is to assess whether such 

(or other) notable differences occurred and to provide explanations, where feasible, for statistically 

different results. 

14 If none of the consumer's allegations lead to changes or deletions of credit report infonnation, the 

second rescoring is obviated. 

FTC-10-Q-0007 

Page - 10 
The new reports and scores from the CRAs are provided for the benefit of the consumer; the 

new scores must not be used as a "rescore" pertinent to some evaluation of the impact of any 

resolved errors (since these new scores will incorporate whatever new information has been 

adjoined to the consumer's credit report during the course of the study.) 

Detail on Task 10 (assist FTC's preparation for a non-response bias study) 

The contractor will initiate the development of a database, the "FTC Non-Response 

Database" ("FNON") in EXCEL, shortly after the recruitment phase of the study has been 

completed. FNON will contain no personally identifying information; in particular, it will 

not contain the name, address, or social security number of any individual. The content and 

use of this database is described as follows: 

(A) First, FTC staff will provide the study contractor with the ID numbers, credit 

scores, and ZIP codes of all individuals who were contacted by the mailing contractor 

(i.e., all individuals on the final SC list).15 By consulting the work accomplished in 

Task 3, the contractor will then classify all of the individuals selected for contact into 

participants and non-respondents, and thereafter construct the FTC Non-Response 

Database using the information from non-respondents. FNON will initially have the 

following items: ID number, credit score, and ZIP code. The study contractor will 

share FNON with FTC staff upon request. 

(B) After the completion of the recruitment phase of the study, the study contractor 

will receive the redacted credit histories for the set of individuals recorded in FNON, 

organized by ID number and redacted of all personal identifying information. The 

study contractor will expand FNON to include, for each ID number, the following 

information: 16 

· number of credit cards; number of active credit cards; 

· number of late payments (ever); 

· number of trade lines with 30 day late (ever), 60 day late (ever), 90+ day late 

(ever); 

· number of trade lines currently delinquent; 

· total credit card balances; total installment balances; 

· number of trades opened in past year; number of inquiries in past year; 

· number of accounts sent to collection; number of disputed trade lines; 

· number of months covering the consumer's file; 

· reported bankruptcy (yes/no); 

· other public record information (e.g., tax liens or any defaulted loans 

publicly recorded; yes/no). 

Regarding non-credit information, for each of the designated ID numbers include (a) 

age, (b) gender (if available), (c) ZIP code, (d) number of prior addresses on file, (e) 

15 See cited FRN of July 20, 2009 (page 35194 - 35195) for fuller context regarding the SC list and 

its relation to the larger SPC list. 

16 The expected number of row entries is estimated to cover 7,000 - 9000 IDs, depending on initial 

sample size of study participants (750 - 1,000; see Task 3). The contractor need not devote 

additional resources to search redacted credit histories for the required information. The information 

will be supplied to the contractor in the above manner for each ID number in FNON. 

FTC-10-Q-0007 

Page - 11 
number of AKA identities on file, and (f) employment status ("yes" if employed or 

likely to be; "no" otherwise. Information compiled in FNON shall be based on the 

most recent information as of date of request and shall not contain personal 

identifying information. 

Part 3. Deliverables 

In reference to the deliverables stated below, the contractor's proposal to execute the contract 

shall include two bids: one for performing a contract that involves N = 750 study participants and a 

second bid for a study involving N = 1000 participants. 

After all study participants have completed their work, the study contractor will use the 

information provided by the participants to expand FPAR as described and required below. 17 The 

additional information placed in the expanded FPAR will be, for each individual ID and for each 

credit report: the number and type of alleged material errors, an initial rescore of each credit report 

involving alleged material errors (provisionally, using the consumer's information as though it were 

accurate), the number and type of alleged material errors that were changed or deleted via the 

dispute process, the contractor's rescore after correction for the material errors in each credit report 

confirmed by the dispute process, additional demographic information about the participants 

obtained at the end of the study (e.g., income and educational level), and all information that is 

needed for the contractor to perform the required tabulations set forth below in this section; see, 

especially, the information related to parts (B) and (C). The contractor will deliver the updated 

FPAR to the FTC when the database is complete. 

The contractor shall submit a written report on the study within 66 weeks from the date of a 

contract award. The report shall include a description of the study design that was implemented and 

procedures used to safeguard a consumers' personal information. The report shall also: 

(A) Wherever feasible, present written copies of protocols that were employed in the 

study. At a minimum, include the protocols used for the initial screening of 

respondents, the in-depth review of credit report information, formats used for 

recording the results ofa consumer's credit report review, and copies of the materials 

used to train and instruct the consumer coaches. 

(B) Tabulate the results of the review of the participants' credit reports regarding: 

(1) types and frequency of alleged credit report errors, including both material and 

immaterial errors; further, regarding accounts that were alleged as not belonging to 

the person who is the subject of the report (i.e., "not mine"), identify instances (if 

any) in which the consumer alleged ID theft as the source ofthe error and tabulate 

such instances by frequency and type of transaction (e.g., whether the account 

involved a mortgage, automobile loan, a credit transaction, etc.); 

(2) regarding alleged material errors in a credit report, tabulate their seriousness in 

terms of a potential change in credit score (e.g., no change, 1-10 point change, 11-20 

point change, etc.) as determined by the initial rescoring of the consumer's frozen file 

(see Task 8); 

17 Again, the expanded FPAR will not contain any personally identifying information; specifically, it 

will not contain the name, address, or social security number of any participant. 

FTC-10-Q-0007 

Page - 12 
(3) for items that were changed or deleted as a result of a dispute process,18 tabulate 

the impact of such changes/deletions in terms of a change in credit score (e.g., no 

change, 1-10 point change, 11-20 point change, etc.) as determined by the second 

rescoring of the reports (see Task 8); further tabulate: 

(a) types and frequency of disputed information that was changed; 

(b) types and frequency of disputed information that was deleted, further 

indicating (where feasible) whether the deletion occurred by instruction of the 

data furnisher or by action of a CRA; 

(c) again for information that was changed or deleted via the dispute process, 

identify those instances (if any) in which one CRA changed or deleted certain 

information in keeping with the consumer's allegation and another CRA, on 

the same disputed item(s}, maintained the information as originally reported; 

further tabulate such instances by type and frequency. 

(4) for disputed information that was maintained as originally reported, 

(a) the types and frequency of such disputed information (covering both 

material and immaterial disputes); 

(b) for alleged material errors in (4), the potential impact of such disputed 

information on a consumer's credit score, as measured by the initial rescoring 

of the consumer's frozen file (again tabulated by 10 point movements in credit 

scores). 

(5) considering material differences in information across the three credit reports of a 

consumer (if any), tabulate by type and frequency those instances in which, as a result 

of a dispute, an initial difference in material information was ultimately changed or 

deleted. 

(C) Regarding Task 10, which addresses the contractor's assistance with the FTC's nonresponse bias study, the contractor shall deliver the results of the following: 

(1) a certain comparison of participants to non-respondents; specifically, the 

contractor shall test for statistically significant differences between participants and 

non-respondents on their initial credit scores and on their credit histories as listed by 

the factors in Part 2, Task 10(B); 

(2) within the class of participants, a certain comparison of "high contractor- effort" 

and "willing" participants; 19 specifically, the contractor shall test for statistically 

18 The FCRA dispute process renders an outcome for each alleged error. Briefly, by instruction of 

the data furnisher, the following outcomes may occur: delete the item, change or modify the item 

(specifying the change), or maintain the item as originally reported. Also, a CRA may delete a 

disputed item due to expiration of a statutory time frame. 

19 In consultation with FTC staff, the defining differences between high contractor-effort v. willing 

participants will focus on "difficulty factors" (such as a need for follow up phone calls) experienced 

by the study contractor in helping participants complete all the steps of the study, and upon a 

comparison of their responsiveness to the FTC mailings (i.e., to which one of the two FTC mailings 

they responded and on the elapsed time before registering for the study). 

FTC-10-Q-0007 

Page - 13 
significant differences between these two types of participants regarding their initial 

credit scores, the data regarding alleged credit report errors and their resolution 

(including results for rescoring credit report infonnation from Task 8), and on their 

credit histories as listed by the factors in Part 2, Task 10(B). 

Further Provision Regarding Deliverables. 

The FTC reserves the right to obtain separately from the contractor all data collected during 

the course of this study, including all consumer credit scores and rescores that are generated 

in the perfonnance of the required tasks. As noted above, the FTC has no intention of 

collecting any personal identifying infonnation, sensitive or otherwise, on any participant or 

non-respondent. In lieu of personal identifiers, individuals will be identified by the abstract 

ID numbers assigned for the purpose of the study. 

C.3 FTC and Contractor Documents 

The COTR will notify the contractor when all work/services required have been completed. 

The COTR will further advise the contractor regarding the ultimate disposal of the data collected by 

the study. 

C.4 Use of Data 

In December 2012, the FTC expects to report its main findings on the FACTA 319 study to 

Congress. After the release of the FTC's Report to Congress, the contractor may request 

research use of data, after removing all personal identifying infonnation. The contractor is 

pennitted to say that it perfonned the collection of the data on behalf of the FTC. If the 

contractor desires such research use, application shall be made to the COTR. It is expected 

that the agency would respond favorably to such a request. 

FTC-10-Q-0007 

Page - 14 
Federal Register/Vol. 74, No. 137/Monday, July 20, 2009/Notices 35191 

National Bank of Akron, Akron, 

Colorado. 

Applicant also has applied to retain 

voting shares of Elite Properties of 

America II, Inc.; CB&T Mortgage, LLC; 

and CB&T Wealth Management, all of 

Colorado Springs, Colorado; CB&T 

Trust, LLC, Sioux Falls, South Dakota, 

and thereby engage in, extending credit 

and servicing of loans, pursuant to 

section 225.28(b)(1); financial and 

investment advisory activities, pursuant 

to sections 225.28(b)(6)(i) and (b)(6)(v); 

and trust activities, pursuant to section 

225.28(b)(5) of Regulation Y. 

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System, July 14, 2009. 

Robert deV. Frierson, 

Deputy Secretary of the Board. 

[FR Doc. E9-17111 Filed 7-17-{)9; 8:45 am] 

BILUNG CODE 6211H11-5 

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 

Formations of, Acquisitions by, and 

Mergers of Bank Holding Companies 

The companies listed in this notice 

have applied to the Board for approval, 

pursuant to the Bank Holding Company 

Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) 

(BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 

225), and all other applicable statutes 

and regulations to become a bank 

holding company and/or to acquire the 

assets or the ownership of, control of, or 

the power to vote shares of a bank or 

bank holding company and all of the 

banks and nonbanking companies 

owned by the bank holding company, 

including the companies listed below. 

The applications listed below, as well 

as other related filings required by the 

Board, are available for immediate 

inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank 

indicated. The applications also will be 

available for inspection at the offices of 

the Board of Governors. Interested 

persons may express their views in 

writing on the standards enumerated in 

the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the 

proposal also involves the acquisition of 

a nonbanking company, the review also 

includes whether the acquisition of the 

nonbanking company complies with the 

standards in section 4 of the BHC Act 

(12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise 

noted, nonbanking activities will be 

conducted throughout the United States. 

Additional information on all bank 

holding companies may be obtained 

from the National Information Center 

website at www.ffiec.govlniC/. 

Unless otherwise noted, comments 

regarding each of these applications 

must be received at the Reserve Bank 

indicated or the offices of the Board of 

Governors not later than August 14, 

2009. 

A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago 

(Colette A. Fried, Assistant Vice 

President) 230 South LaSalle Street, 

Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414: 

1. C-B-G, Inc., West Liberty, Iowa; to 

acquire additional voting shares, 

totaling up to 50.01 percent of 

Washington Bancorp, and thereby 

indirectly acquire additional voting 

shares of Federation Bank, both of 

Washington, Iowa. 

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System, July 15, 2009. 

Robert deV. Frierson, 

Deputy Secretary of the Board. 

[FRDoc. E9-17176 Filed 7-17-09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6211H11-S 

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 

Sunshine Act Meeting 

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Board of 

Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System. 

TIME AND DATE: 10:30 a.m., Thursday, 

July 23, 2009. 

PLACE: Marriner S. Eccles Federal 

Reserve Board Building, 20th Street 

entrance between Constitution Avenue 

and C Streets, N.W., Washington, D.C. 

20551. 

STATUS: Open. 

We ask that you notify us in advance 

if you plan to attend the open meeting 

and provide your name, date of birth, 

and social security number (SSN) or 

passport number. You may provide this 

information by calling (202) 452-2474 

or you may register on-line. You may 

pre-register until close of business July 

22,2009. You also will be asked to 

provide identifying information, 

including a photo ID, before being 

admitted to the Board meeting. The 

Public Affairs Office must approve the 

use of cameras; please call (202) 452-

2955 for further information. If you need 

an accommodation for a disability, 

please contact Penelope Beattie on (202) 

452-3982. For the hearing impaired 

only, please use the Telecommunication 

Device for the Deaf (IDD) on (202) 263-

4869. 

Privacy Act Notice: Providing the 

information requested is voluntary; 

however, failure to provide your name, 

date of birth, and social security number 

or passport number may result in denial 

of entry to the Federal Reserve Board. 

This information is solicited pursuant to 

Sections 10 and 11 of the Federal 

Reserve Act and will be used to 

facilitate a search of law enforcement 

databases to confirm that no threat is 

posed to Board employees or property. 

It may be disclosed to other persons to 

evaluate a potential threat. The 

information also may be provided to law 

enforcement agencies, courts, and 

others, but only to the extent necessary 

to investigate or prosecute a violation of 

law. 

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

Discussion Agenda: 

1. Proposed Amendments to 

Regulation Z (Truth in Lending) 

Addressing Mortgage Loans and Home 

Equity Lines of Credit. 

Note: 1. The staff memo to the Board 

will be made available to the public in 

paper and the background material will 

be made available on a computer disc in 

Word format. If you require a paper 

copy of the document, please call 

Penelope Beattie on (202) 452-3982. 

2. This meeting will be recorded for 

the benefit of those unable to attend. 

Computer discs (CDs) will then be 

available for listening in the Board's 

Freedom ofInformation Office, and 

copies can be ordered for $4 per disc by 

calling (202) 452-3684 or by writing to: 

Freedom ofInformation Office, Board of 

Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System, Washington, D.C. 20551. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michelle A. Smith, Director, or Dave 

Skidmore, Assistant to the Board, Office 

of Board Members; at 202-452-2955. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: You may 

call (202) 452-3206 for a recorded 

announcement of this meeting; or you 

may contact the Board's Web site at 

http://www.federalreserve.govfor an 

electronic announcement. (The Web site 

also includes procedural and other 

information about the open meeting.) 

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System, July 16, 2009. 

Robert deV. Frierson, 

Deputy Secretary of the Board. 

[FR Doc. E9-17302 Filed 7-16-09; 4:15 pm] 

BILUNG CODE 6211H11-5 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Proposed Collection; 

Comment Request 

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission 

("FTC" or "Commission"). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The FTC plans to conduct a 

national study of the accuracy of 

consumer reports in connection with 

Section 319 ofthe Fair and Accurate 

Credit Transactions Act of 2003, Pub. 

1.108-159 (2003). This study is a followup to the Commission's two previous 
35192 Federal Register/Vol. 74, No. 137/Monday, July 20, 2009/Notices 

pilot studies.1 Before gathering this 

information, the FTC is seeking public 

comment on its proposed study. The 

FTC will consider comments before it 

submits a request for Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) review 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(PRA). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 18, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties are 

invited to submit written comments 

electronically or in paper form. 

Comments should refer to "National 

Accuracy Study: Paperwork Comment 

(FTC file no. P044804)" to facilitate the 

organization of the comments. Please 

note that your comment-including 

your name and your state-will be 

placed on the public record of this 

proceeding, including on the publicly 

accessible FTC Website, at (http;// 

www·ftc.gov/os/publiccomments.shtm). 

Because comments will be made 

public, they should not include any 

sensitive personal information, such as 

an individual's Social Security Number; 

date of birth; driver's license number or 

other state identification number, or 

foreign country equivalent; passport 

number; financial account number; or 

credit or debit card number. Comments 

also should not include any sensitive 

health information, such as medical 

records or other individually 

identifiable health information. In 

addition, comments should not include 

any "[tlrade secret or any commercial or 

financial information which is obtained 

from any person and which is privileged 

or confidential. ... ," as provided in 

Section 6(f) of the Federal Trade 

Commission Act ("FTC Act"), 15 U.S.C. 

46(f), and FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 

4.10(a)(2). Comments containing 

material for which confidential 

treatment is requested must be filed in 

paper form, must be clearly labeled 

"Confidential," and must comply with 

FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c).2 

Because paper mail addressed to the 

FTC is subject to delay due to 

heightened security screening, please 

'Reports to Congress Under Sections 318 and 319 

of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 

2003, Federal Trade Commission, December 2006 

and 2008. The reports may be accessed at the FTC's 

Web site. December 2006 Report: (http:// 

www·ftc.gov/reports/FACTACT/FACT_Act_Report_ 

2006.pdj); December 2008 Report: (http:// 

www·ftc.gov/opa/2008/12/factareport.shtm). 

2 The comment must be accompanied by an 

explicit request for confidential treatment, 

including the factual and legal basis for the request. 

and must identify the specific portions of the 

comment to be withheld from the public record. 

The request will be granted or denied by the 

Commission's General Counsel, consistent with 

applicable law and the public interest. See FTC 

Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c). 

consider submitting your comments in 

electronic form. Comments filed in 

electronic form should be submitted by 

using the following web link: (https;// 

secure.commentworks.com/ftcFACTA319study) (and following the 

instructions on the web-based form). To 

ensure that the Commission considers 

an electronic comment, you must file it 

on the web-based form at the web link 

(https;//secure.commentworks.com/ftcFACTA319study). If this Notice appears 

at (http;//www.regulations.gov/search/ 

index.jsp), you may also file an 

electronic comment through that 

website. The Commission will consider 

all comments that regulations.gov 

forwards to it. You may also visit the 

FTC Website at http;//www.ftc.govto 

read the Notice and the news release 

describing it. 

A comment filed in paper form 

should include the "National Accuracy 

Study: Paperwork Comment (FTC file 

no. P044804)" reference both in the text 

and on the envelope, and should be 

mailed or delivered to the following 

address: Federal Trade Commission, 

Office of the Secretary, Room H-135 

(Annex n, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, 

NW, Washington, DC 20580. The FTC is 

requesting that any comment filed in 

paper form be sent by courier or 

overnight service, if possible, because 

U.S. postal mail in the Washington area 

and at the Commission is subject to 

delay due to heightened security 

precautions. 

The FTC Act and other laws the 

Commission administers permit the 

collection of public comments to 

consider and use in this proceeding as 

appropriate. The Commission will 

consider all timely and responsive 

public comments that it receives, 

whether filed in paper or electronic 

form. Comments received will be 

available to the public on the FTC 

Website, to the extent practicable, at 

(http;//www·ftc.gov/os/ 

publiccomments.shtm). As a matter of 

discretion, the Commission makes every 

effort to remove home contact 

information for individuals from the 

public comments it receives before 

placing those comments on the FTC 

Website. More information, including 

routine uses permitted by the Privacy 

Act, may be found in the FTC's privacy 

policy, at (http;//www.ftc.gov/ftc/ 

privacy.shtm). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Peter Vander Nat, Economist, (202) 326-

3518, Federal Trade Commission, 

Bureau of Economics. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

319 of the Fair and Accurate Credit 

Transactions Act of 2003 ("FACT Act" 

or the "Act"), Pub. L.l08-159 (2003) 

requires the FTC to study the accuracy 

and completeness of information in 

consumers' credit reports and to 

consider methods for improving the 

accuracy and completeness of such 

information. Section 319 ofthe Act also 

requires the Commission to issue a 

series of biennial reports to Congress 

over a period of eleven years. The first 

report was submitted to Congress in 

December 2004. 3 The second report was 

submitted to Congress in December 

2006 ("December 2006 Report"), 

describing the results of a pilot study. 

The third report was submitted in 

December 2008 ("December 2008 

Report"), describing the results of a 

second pilot study. 

In July 2005, OMB approved the 

FTC's request to conduct a pilot study 

to evaluate the feasibility of a 

methodology that involves direct review 

by consumers of the information in their 

credit reports (OMB Control Number 

3084-0133),4 and the FTC conducted 

that pilot study in 2005-2006. As 

explained in the December 2006 report, 

FTC staff concluded that it was 

necessary to conduct a second pilot 

study to evaluate additional design 

elements prior to carrying out a 

nationwide survey. Upon receiving 

further OMB approval (reinstatement of 

Control No. 3084-0133), the FTC 

conducted the second pilot study in 

2007-2008. The FTC's pilot studies used 

small samples and did not rely on the 

selection of a nationally representative 

sample of credit reports; accordingly, no 

statistical projections were made. The 

FTC now plans to conduct a national 

study of the accuracy of consumer 

reports in connection with Section 319 

of the Fair and Accurate Credit 

Transactions Act of 2003, Pub. L.l08-

159 (2003). This study is a follow-up to 

the Commission's two previous pilot 

studies. 

Proposed Information Collection 

Activities 

Under the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3521, 

federal agencies must obtain approval 

from OMB for each collection of 

information they conduct or sponsor. 

"Collection of information" means 

agency requests or requirements that 

members ofthe public submit reports, 

keep records, or provide information to 

a third party. 44 U.S.C. § 3502(3), 5 CFR 

3 Report to Congress Under Sections 318 and 319 

of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 

2003, Federal Trade Commission, December 2004. 

The December 2004 Report is available at (http:// 

www·ftc.gov/reports/facta/041209factarpt.pdj). 

4 See 70 FR 24583 (May 10, 2005) for discussion 

of the initial pilot study and related public 

comments. 
Federal Register/Vol. 74, No. 137/Monday, July 20, 2009/Notices 35193 

§ 1320.3(c). Because the number of 

entities affected by the Commission's 

requests will exceed ten, the 

Commission plans to seek OMB 

clearance under the PRA. As required 

by § 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, the FTC 

is providing this opportunity for public 

comment before requesting that OMB 

grant the clearance for the proposed 

information collection. The FTC invites comments on: (1) 

whether the proposed collections of 

information are necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the FTC, 

including whether the information will 

have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of 

the agency's estimate of the burden of 

the proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; (3) 

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (4) ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on those who are to respond, including 

through the use of appropriate 

automated, electronic, mechanical, or 

other technological collection 

techniques or other forms of information 

technology (e.g., permitting electronic 

submission ofresponses). More 

generally, the FTC invites comment on 

the various design elements for a 

national study set forth below. All 

comments should be filed as prescribed 

in the ADDRESSES section above, and 

must be received on or before 

September 18, 2009. 

1. Description of the Collection of 

Information and Proposed Use 

A. Initial Pilot Study (2005-2006) 

The goal of the initial pilot study was 

to assess the feasibility of directly 

engaging consumers in an in-depth 

review of their credit reports for the 

purpose of identifying alleged material 

errors and channeling such errors 

through the Fair Credit Report Act 

("FCRA") dispute resolution process. 

The FTC's contractor for the initial pilot 

study-a research team comprised of 

members from the Center for Business 

and Industrial Studies (University of 

Missouri-St Louis), Georgetown 

University Credit Research Center, and 

the Fair Isaac Corporation-engaged 30 

randomly selected participants in an indepth review of their credit reports. 

Study participants obtained their credit 

reports and credit scores 5 from each of 

5 A credit score is a numerical summary of the 

information in a credit report and is designed to be 

predictive of the risk of default. Credit scores are 

created by proprietary formulas that render the 

following result: the higher the credit score, the 

lower the risk of default The contractor in the first 

and second pilot studies employed (and the 

proposed national study expects to employ) a score 

the three nationwide consumer 

reporting agencies (Equifax, Experian, 

TransUnion-hereinafter, the "CRAs"). 

The contractor reviewed these credit 

reports with the participants and after 

an evaluation of alleged errors for 

materiality by the research team, 

consumers were asked to channel 

disputed information through the FCRA 

dispute resolution process.6 

The first pilot study demonstrated the 

general feasibility of the consumer 

interview methodology, but also 

revealed several challenges for a 

national study.7 Challenges include 

identifying methods for achieving a 

more representative sampling frame, 

increasing the response rates, and easing 

the burden of completing the study. 

Compared to the national average for 

credit scores, consumers with relatively 

low scores were under-represented. 

Also, the majority of participants who 

alleged errors on their credit reports and 

indicated that they would file a dispute 

did not follow through with their stated 

intention to file. In consideration of 

these and other matters, the FTC 

conducted a follow-up pilot study. 

B. The Second Pilot Study (2007-2008) 

The second pilot study combined 

successful elements from the first pilot 

with new procedures designed to 

overcome shortcomings ofthe first pilot. 

Through a variety of recruitment 

channels, 4,232 people were invited to 

participate. Multiple recruitment 

methods were employed and these were 

useful in identifying differences in 

response rates and credit scores of the 

respondents across various methods of 

recruitment. Of the 4,232 individuals 

that is commonly used in credit reporting, namely 

a FICO score. 

• The FCRA dispute resolution process involves 

the review of disputed items by data furnishers and 

CRAs. The formal dispute process renders a specific 

outcome for each alleged error. By direct instruction 

of the data furnisher, the following outcomes may 

occur: delete the item, change or modify the item 

(specifying the change), or maintain the item as 

originally reported. A CRA may also delete a 

disputed item due to expiration of the statutory 

time frame (the FCRA limits the process to 30 days, 

but the time may be extended to 45 days if a 

consumer submits relevant information during the 

30-day period). These possible actions are tracked 

by a form called "Online Solution for Complete and 

Accurate Reporting" (e-OSCAR) that is used by 

CRAs for resolving FCRA disputes. A consumer 

may also dispute information directly with a data 

furnisher, as provided for by FCRA 623(a)(8). 15 

U.S.C.1681s-2(a)(8). (See also, Federal Trade 

Commission and Board of Governors of the Federal 

Reserve System, Report to Congress on the Fair 

Credit Reporting Act Dispute Process, August 2006. 

The report is available at (http://www.fie.gov/os/ 

comments/ferodispute/ 

P044808ferodisputeproeessreporttoeongress.pdfj. 

7 The FTC's December 2006 Report to Congress 

contains a more detailed review of the study and 

its results. 

contacted, 128 (3%) became 

participants. The contractor 8 helped 

participants obtain their 3 credit reports 

and conducted an in-depth review of 

the reports with each participant. The 

contractor also helped the participants 

to identify alleged inaccuracies and gave 

advice on the difference between a 

small inaccuracy and a material error 

that is likely to affect a credit score. 

Specific criteria for materiality were 

developed in consultation with Fair 

Isaac's analyst on the research team. 9 If 

the consumer alleged a material error, 

the individual was encouraged to file a 

formal FCRA dispute so as to obtain a 

review of the challenged items by data 

furnishers and CRAs. The contractor 

prepared a dispute letter for any 

consumer who wanted to file and allege 

an error, material or not (as the FCRA 

permits a consumer to dispute any 

credit report information that the person 

believes to be inaccurate). 

Regarding the results of the study, 88 

ofthe 128 participants (69%) found no 

errors in their credit reports. Of the 40 

participants who alleged one or more 

errors that they wanted to dispute, 15 

(or 12% ofthe 128) alleged a material 

error. For 7 of these latter cases, the 

FCRA dispute process rendered credit 

report changes that were made fully in 

keeping with all of the consumer's all egations. 10 

As noted above, the second pilot 

study (like the first) used a small sample 

and no statistical projections were 

made. Accordingly, no extensive 

statistical summaries were needed, nor 

were any given, in the FTC's report on 

the study. The primary purpose of the 

pilot studies was to refine the expert-

• Due to the similarity in design (i.e., second pilot was constructed as a follow-up to first) the FTC 

employed the same contractor. 

• December 2008 Report (at 3). The contractor used the following criteria for materiality: the 

consumer had a credit score less than 760 (a cutoff 

widely used to identify consumers with lowest 

credit risk and for extending credit on most 

favorable terms) AND the consumer alleged an error 

regarding any of the following matters: (i) negative 

items (such as late payments); (ii) public 

derogatories (such as bankruptcy); (iii) accounts 

sent to collection; (iv) number of inquiries for new 

credit; (v) outstanding balances not attributable to 

normal monthly reporting variation; (vi) accounts 

on the report not belonging to the person who is 

the subject of the report; or (vii) duplicate entries 

of the same information (e.g., late payments or 

outstanding obligations) that were double-counted 

in the reported summaries of such items. To 

enhance the efficiency of the study process, the 

stated criteria modify somewhat the procedure used 

in the first pilot study (contractor's report on 

second pilot study at 27). In the proposed national 

study, we do not intend to use any cutoff score for 

materiality, but plan to retain the stated categories 

as indicating a dispute material to creditworthiness. 

10 Other cases (i.e., some of the consumer's 

allegations were confirmed while other allegations 

were denied) are summarized in the December 2008 

Report (at 2 & 8). 
35194 Federal Register/Vol. 74, No. 137/Monday, July 20, 2009/Notices 

assisted survey approach for studying 

credit report information, in preparation 

for a national study. 

The second pilot study confirmed the 

importance of having the contractor 

prepare dispute letters for consumers. 

This was not done in the first pilot 

study. In the first pilot study, only 1 of 

the 3 participants who alleged material 

errors on their credit reports filed a 

dispute. In the follow-up pilot study, all 

15 of the participants who alleged 

material errors on their credit reports 

received dispute letters from the 

contractor, and the outcomes of these 

disputes are known for 12 of them. This 

is a significant improvement over the 

first pilot study. 

As noted above, multiple recruitment 

methods were used to identify 

differences in response rates and in 

credit scores of respondents across 

various methods of recruitment. The 

second pilot study confirmed the 

difficulties of obtaining adequate 

numbers of participants with belowaverage credit scores. Purely random 

sampling of potential participants 

yielded too few actual participants with 

low credit scores.11 A weighted random 

sampling approach, whereby more 

invitations were extended to groups of 

consumers who were likely to have 

lower credit scores, produced a sample 

closer to national norms.12 

The second pilot study indicated that 

it would be feasible to base a measure 

of the accuracy of credit report 

information on confirmed material 

errors via the FCRA dispute process. 

Whenever it appeared that a consumer's 

credit score could be affected by 

"correcting" an alleged material error, 

the contractor marked the credit reports 

(the frozen files) 13 with explanations of 

the discrepancies and sent copies of the 

marked reports to Fair Isaac for 

rescoring. If, via the FCRA dispute 

process, changes were subsequently 

made by CRAs and lenders in keeping 

with the consumer's allegations, these 

changed items were then designated as 

confirmed material errors. We then 

rescore the frozen file to quantify the 

impact of the confirmed error(s) on the 

consumer's credit score. The difference 

between the rescore of the frozen file 

and the original score is a meaningful 

measure of the impact of inaccurate 

credit report information. We intend to 

"Table III of the December 2008 Report (at 9). 

12Table 9 of the contractor's report (appendix to 

the December 2008 Report). 

13 The files are called "frozen" because no new 

credit information was added to the consumer's 

original credit reports obtained in the study; any 

rescoring would thus apply only to potential 

changes or actual changes that were directly related 

to the contractor's review. 

use this type of methodology in a 

national study.14 

As a final point of this summary of 

the pilot studies, the relatively low 

response rate (i.e., approximately 3% of 

the individuals contacted became 

participants) raises concern for the 

design of a national study regarding a 

potential response bias. This matter is 

addressed below. 

C. Proposed National Study 

The proposed national study seeks to 

use a large representative sample of 

credit reports so that we may draw 

inferences, up to a certain level of 

statistical confidence, about the 

accuracy of credit reports in general. 

The need to employ a representative 

sample makes the initial steps of the 

proposed study different from the 

methodology of the second pilot study; 

in other respects, the methodologies of 

the two studies are largely the same. 

Our goal is to obtain approximately 

1,000 participants who as a group 

display a diversity on credit scores and 

on major demographic characteristics in 

line with national norms. 

The relevant population for the study 

is comprised of adult members of 

households who have credit histories 

with Equifax, Experian, and/or 

TransUnion. To study these credit 

histories we propose, as a first step, to 

obtain a very large random sample (with 

an order of magnitude of 200,000 

names) from one of the consumer 

reporting agencies in order to determine 

a set of individuals selected for possible 

contact (the "SPC list").15 From this 

SPC list, FTC staff will draw a further 

and considerably smaller random 

sample (e.g., 10% sample) of 

individuals selected for contact (the "SC 

list"). 

14 Certain limitations regarding this methodology 

are discussed in the December 2008 Report (at 3 & 

4). Yet, use of the FCRA dispute process appears 

to be the only feasible way of performing a 

nationwide survey, in view of the enonnous 

difficulty and cost of attempting to ascertain the 

ultinlate accuracy regarding alleged errors. 

15 The infonnation in this sample, which would 

include names, addresses, and credit scores, is to 

be obtained under applicable law and protected 

from disclosure by, e.g., Exemption 6 of the 

Freedom ofInfonnation Act, 5 U.S.C. 552. That 

infonnation, as well as any credit reports that 

individual participants give pennission to be 

analyzed for the study, will be maintained and used 

by the FTC and its contractors subject to 

appropriate infonnation security procedures and 

safeguards (e.g., maintaining credit-related data 

separately from personal identifying infonnation, 

requiring the FTC's contractors to execute 

confidentiality agreements, and limiting access to 

those FTC and contractor staff who have a need to 

work with the data). As noted above, the study 

methodology is also designed to prevent disclosure 

of any individual's participation in the study to any 

credit reporting agency. 

There are several reasons for this twostep process. First, the vast majority of 

the names on the SPC list will not be 

sent invitations to participate and thus 

helps ensure that no CRA will know 

who is participating in the study. 

Further, using the SC list, we plan to 

send proportionally more invitation 

letters to individuals with lower credit 

scores. Use of this weighted random 

sampling approach is designed to obtain 

an ultimate set of participants having 

credit scores (specifically, the lower 

scores) in line with national norms, as 

suggested by the results of the second 

pilot study.16 

After some substantial set of 

individuals have agreed to join the 

study (300 - 400 people), we will have 

an initial sample. This sample will be 

compared with the larger SPC list on 

credit scores and geographic diversity. 

Statistically significant differences 

between this initial sample and the 

larger SPC list would reflect the impact 

of non-participation. From this 

information, we can selectively draw 

individuals from the SC list in an effort 

to compensate for these differences as 

necessary. 

As a further check on a potential bias 

in the decision to participate, we plan 

to obtain anonymized (redacted) credit 

reports (and related credit scores) 17 for 

the entire class of non-respondents, i.e., 

all the people from the SC list who 

choose not to participate. Using the 

redacted reports and related scores we 

can determine, for example, whether 

non-respondents had significantly 

different credit scores or significantly 

different credit histories from those who 

agreed to participate. 

Upon completion of the study, we 

will have a database with detailed 

demographic information about the 

participants, the type and quantity of 

alleged material errors on their credit 

reports, the type and quantity of 

confirmed material errors via the FCRA 

dispute process, and the impact of any 

such confirmed errors on the 

participants' credit scores.18 Further, by 

16 December 2008 Report (at 9 &10). 

17 These credit reports and scores will be 

generated and maintained without name, address or 

personal identifiers other than ID numbers assigned 

by the study. 

18 Using the methodology of the pilot studies, we 

expect to obtain a variety of alleged errors: incorrect 

report of late payment; multiple reports of an 

account with late payment; paid account reported 

as delinquent; closed account reported as 

delinquent; incorrect financial account reported 

("not mine"); incorrect collection balance; incorrect 

collection account reported; multiple reports of an 

account in bankruptcy; chapter 7 accounts 

discharged but reported as delinquent, as well as 

further types of alleged errors. For these same 

categories we can also tabulate confirmed material 

errors via the FCRA dispute process. As explained 
Federal Register/Vol. 74, No. 137/Monday, July 20, 2009/Notices 35195 

analyzing the redacted credit reports 

and related scores of the nonrespondents, we obtain a final check on 

the degree to which the enhanced 

procedures were effective in achieving a 

nationally representative sample of 

credit reports. 

2. Estimated Hours Burden 

Consumer participation in the 

proposed national study would involve 

an initial preparation for the in-depth 

interview and time spent by participants 

to understand, review, and if deemed 

necessary, dispute information in their 

credit reports. Invitation letters will be 

sent in progressive waves in order to 

obtain approximately 1,000 participants. 

The individuals who receive these 

letters are drawn from the SC list 

discussed above and will be asked to go 

directly to a designated Web site for 

enrollment if they wish to participate; 

registration is expected to take at most 

15 minutes per participant.19 The 

registration process thus comes to 

approximately 250 hours (reckoned at II 

4 hour for each of 1,000 consumers). 

For the purpose of calculating burden 

under the PRA regarding the review 

process of the credit reports, FTC staff 

submits the following estimates that are 

based on the contractor's experience 

with the second pilot study. Some 

participants prepare thoroughly in 

advance of the in-depth interview of 

their credit reports. In such situations, 

even complicated reports may generally 

be finished under 30 minutes. Other 

consumers may not find time for 

significant preparation in advance of the 

in-depth review, and in such cases the 

interview could take up to an hour. The 

participants in the second pilot study 

reported taking an average of 69 minutes 

(median 53 minutes) to prepare for the 

interview, with 90% taking between 10 

and 180 minutes. The interviews 

themselves took an average of 19 

minutes (median 15 minutes) with 90% 

taking between 5 and 45 minutes. 

Overall, the average combined time for 

preparation and the interview was about 

above. the rescoring of the frozen files will then 

provide the impact of any confirmed errors on the 

participants' credit scores. 

,. At the registration Web site, a person may take 

the time to read several disclosures, including a 

privacy disclosure and an outline of the various 

steps of the study that every participant agrees to 

undertake. The consumer is then asked to enter 

basic contact information (e.g., name, address, 

telephone number, best time to be contacted further 

about the study) and to enter an electronic signature 

certifying the consumer's consent to participate in 

the study. For those who may not have Internet 

access to register, the contractor would also have a 

procedure to mail the appropriate disclosures and 

study steps to the respondent and then receive back 

enrolment information and the consumer's signed 

consent in paper form. 

90 minutes (1.5 hours). For a national 

study involving 1,000 consumers, FTC 

staff thus estimates the burden hours for 

the review process to be approximately 

1,500 hours (1,000 consumers x 1.5 

hours). Further adding on the time spent 

for the registration process (0.25 hours 

per participant), the total burden hours 

come to approximately 1,750 hours. 

3. Estimated Cost Burden 

The cost per consumer for their 

participation should be negligible. 

Participation is voluntary and it will not 

require any start-up or capital 

expenditure. There is no labor time 

expenditure beyond the 1.75 hours per 

consumer estimated above. Participants 

may receive an honorarium to 

compensate them for their time. The 

amount will be determined by FTC staff 

in consultation with the contractor 

according to an analysis of customary 

procedures and a consideration of 

response rates within key categories, 

such as, response rates for consumers 

with impaired credit. As with the pilot 

studies, participants will not pay for 

their credit reports or credit scores. 

Willard Tom, 

General Counsel 

[FR Doc. E9-17147 Filed 7-17-09: 8:45 am) 

BIWNG CODE: 6750 ~l-S 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

National Institutes of Health 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request; CareerTrac 

Summary: Under the provisions of 

section 3507(a)(1)(D) of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, the Fogarty 

International Center (FIC) and National 

Institute of Environmental Health 

Sciences (NIEHS), the National 

Institutes of Health (NIH), has submitted 

to the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) a request for review and 

approval of the information collection 

listed below. This proposed information 

collection was previously published in 

the Federal Register on May 12, 2009, 

page 22172, and allowed 60-days for 

public comment. No comments were 

received from this notification regarding 

the cost and hour burden estimates. The 

purpose of this announcement is to 

allow an additional 30 days for public 

comment. 

The National Institutes of Health may 

not conduct or sponsor, and the 

respondent is not required to respond 

to, an information collection that has 

been extended, revised, or implemented 

on or after October 1, 1995, unless it 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. 

Proposed Collection: Title: 

CareerTrac. Type of Information 

Collection Request: Revision (OMB No.: 

0925-0568 Expiration: Aug. 31, 2009). 

Need and Use of Information Collection : 

This data collection system is being 

developed to track, evaluate and report 

short and long-term outputs, outcomes 

and impacts of international trainees 

involved in health research training 

programs-specifically tracking this for 

at least ten years following training by 

having Principal Investigators enter data 

after trainees have completed the 

program. The data collection system 

provides a streamlined, Web-based 

application permitting principal 

investigators to record career 

achievement progress by trainee on a 

voluntary basis. FIC and NIEHS 

management will use this data to 

monitor, evaluate and adjust grants to 

ensure desired outcomes are achieved, 

comply with OMB part requirements, 

respond to congressional inquiries, and 

as a guide to inform future strategic and 

management decisions regarding the 

grant program. 

Frequency of Response: Annual and 

periodic Affected Public: none Type of 

Respondents: Principal Investigators 

andlor their administrators funded by 

FIC and NIEHS. The annual reporting 

burden is as follows: Estimated Number 

of Respondents: 275; Estimated Number 

of Responses per Respondent: 1; 

Average Burden Hours per Response 7.5 

and Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours Requested: 2063. The annualized 

cost to respondents is estimated at 

$82,500. There are no Capital Costs to 

report. There are no Operating or 

Maintenance Costs to report. 

Request for Comments: Written 

comments andlor suggestions from the 

public and affected agencies are invited 

on one or more of the following points: 

(1) Whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the function ofthe 

agency, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

(2) The accuracy of the agency's 

estimate of the burden ofthe proposed 

collection of information, including the 

validity of the methodology and 

assumptions used; (3) Ways to enhance 

the quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and (4) 

Ways to minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on those who 

are to respond, including the use of 

appropriate automated, electronic, 

mechanical, or other technological 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology. 
Federal Register/Vol. 74, No. 199/Friday, October 16, 2009/Notices 53243 

PLACE: 800 North Capitol Street, NW., 

First Floor Hearing Room, Washington, 

DC. 

STATUS: A portion of the meeting will 

be in Open Session and the remainder 

of the meeting will be in Closed Session. 

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

Open Session 

1. Discussion of Court of Appeals 

Mandate in Landstar. 

2. Briefing on Conclusion of FY 2009 

Budget. 

Closed Session 

1. World Chance Logistics (Hong 

Kong). 

2. Lindblad Expeditions, Inc.-

Evidence of Financial Responsibility. 

3. Staff Briefing Regarding Global 

Economic Downturn and Potential 

Impact on Stakeholders. 

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE 

INFORMATION: Karen V. Gregory, 

Secretary, (202) 523-5725. 

Karen V. Gregory, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E9-25065 Filed 10-14-09; 4:15 pmJ 

BILLING CODE P 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Submission for OMB Review 

and Reinstatement of Existing 

Collection; Comment Request 

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission 

("FTC" or "Commission"). 

ACTION: Notice and request for comment. 

SUMMARY: The FTC plans to conduct a 

national study of the accuracy of 

consumer reports in connection with 

Section 319 of the Fair and Accurate 

Credit Transactions Act of 2003, Pub. 

L.108-159 (2003). This study is a followup to the Commission's two previous 

pilot studies that were undertaken to 

evaluate a potential design for a national 

study.l This is the second oftwo notices 

required under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act ("PRA"), and the 

Commission seeks additional public 

comments on its proposed national 

study before requesting Office of 

Management and Budget ("OMB") 

review of, and clearance for, the 

1 Reports to Congress Under Sections 318 and 319 

of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 

2003. Federal Trade Commission, December 2006 

and 2008. The reports may be accessed at the FTC's 

Web site. December 2006 Report: (http:// 

www.jtc.govireports/FACTACT/ 

FACT_Act_Report_2006.pdfl; December 2008 

Report: (http://www.jtc.gov/opa/2008/12/ 

factareport.shtm). 

collection of information discussed 

herein. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before November 16, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties are 

invited to submit written comments 

electronically or in paper form, by 

following the instructions in the 

Request for Comments to 30-Day Notice 

part of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION 

section below. Comments in electronic 

form should be submitted by using the 

following Web link: (https:// 

secure.commentworks.com/ftcl 

FACTA319studypra2) (and following 

the instructions on the web-based form). 

Comments in paper form should be 

mailed or delivered to the following 

address: Federal Trade Commission, 

Office ofthe Secretary, Room H-135 

(Annex n, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, 

NW, Washington, DC 20580, in the 

manner detailed in the SUPPLEMENTARY 

SECTION below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Peter Vander Nat, Economist, (202) 326-

3518, Federal Trade Commission, 

Bureau of Economics. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the 

PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520, federal 

agencies must obtain approval from 

OMB for each collection of information 

they conduct or sponsor. "Collection of 

information" means agency requests or 

requirements that members of the public 

submit reports, keep records, or provide 

information to a third party. 44 U.S.C. 

3502(3); 5 CFR 1320.3(c). 

On July 20, 2009, the FTC sought 

comment on the information collection 

requirements associated with the 

proposed national study.2 As discussed 

below under (II)(D) - Summary of and 

Response to Public Comments to 60-Day 

Notice, three comments were received 

(see (http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/ 

facta319study/index.shtm) for text of 

the comments). Pursuant to the OMB 

regulations, 5 CFR Part 1320, that 

implement the PRA, the FTC is 

providing this second opportunity for 

public comment while seeking OMB 

approval to reinstate the clearance for 

the proposed national study, which is a 

follow-up to the FTC's two prior pilot 

studies (OMB Control No. 3084-0133) 

that were undertaken to evaluate a 

potential design for a national study. All 

comments should be filed as prescribed 

in the ADDRESSES section above and in 

the Request for Comments to 30-Day 

Notice (found below at II.E.), and must 

be received on or before November 16, 

2009. 

2 74 FR 35191. 

I. Background 

Section 319 ofthe Fair and Accurate 

Credit Transactions Act of 2003 ("FACT 

Act" or the "Act"), Pub. L.108-159 

(2003) requires the FTC to study the 

accuracy and completeness of 

information in consumers' credit reports 

and to consider methods for improving 

the accuracy and completeness of such 

information. Section 319 of the Act also 

requires the Commission to issue a 

series of biennial reports to Congress 

over a period of eleven years. The first 

report was submitted to Congress in 

December 2004. 3 The second report was 

submitted to Congress in December 

2006 ("December 2006 Report"), 

describing the results of a pilot study. 

The third report was submitted in 

December 2008 ("December 2008 

Report"), describing the results of a 

second pilot study. 

In July 2005, OMB approved the 

FTC's request to conduct a pilot study 

to evaluate the feasibility of a 

methodology that involves direct review 

by consumers of the information in their 

credit reports (OMB Control Number 

3084-0133)'4 and the FTC conducted 

that pilot study in 2005-2006. As 

explained in the December 2006 report, 

FTC staff concluded that it was 

necessary to conduct a second pilot 

study to evaluate additional design 

elements prior to carrying out a 

nationwide survey. Upon receiving 

further OMB approval (reinstatement of 

Control No. 3084-0133), the FTC 

conducted the second pilot study in 

2007-2008. The FTC's pilot studies used 

small samples and did not rely on the 

selection of a nationally representative 

sample of credit reports; accordingly, no 

statistical projections were made. The 

FTC now plans to conduct a national 

study of the accuracy of consumer 

reports in connection with Section 319 

of the Fair and Accurate Credit 

Transactions Act of 2003, Pub. L.108-

159 (2003). This study is a follow-up to 

the Commission's two previous pilot 

studies. 

A. Initial Pilot Study (2005-2006) 

The goal of the initial pilot study was 

to assess the feasibility of directly 

engaging consumers in an in-depth 

review of their credit reports for the 

purpose of identifying alleged material 

errors and channeling such errors 

through the Fair Credit Report Act 

3 Report to Congress Under Sections 318 and 319 

of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 

2003, Federal Trade Commission, December 2004. 

The December 2004 Report is available at (http:// 

www.jtc.gov/reports/index.htm#2004). 

4 See 70 FR 24583 (May 10, 2005) for discussion 

of the initial pilot study and related public 

comments. 
53244 Federal Register/Vol. 74, No. 199/Friday, October 16, 2009/Notices 

("FCRA") dispute resolution process. 

The FTC's contractor for the initial pilot 

study - a research team comprised of 

members from the Center for Business 

and Industrial Studies (University of 

Missouri-St Louis), Georgetown 

University Credit Research Center, and 

the Fair Isaac Corporation - engaged 30 

randomly selected participants in an indepth review of their credit reports. 

Study participants obtained their credit 

reports and credit scores5 from each of 

the three nationwide consumer 

reporting agencies (Equifax, Experian, 

TransUnion - hereinafter, the "CRAs"). 

The contractor reviewed these credit 

reports with the participants and after 

an evaluation of alleged errors for 

materiality by the research team, 

consumers were asked to channel 

disputed information through the FCRA 

dispute resolution process. 6 

The first pilot study demonstrated the 

general feasibility of the consumer 

interview methodology, but also 

revealed several challenges for a 

national study.7 Challenges include 

identifying methods for achieving a 

more representative sampling frame, 

increasing the response rates, and easing 

the burden of completing the study. 

Compared to the national average for 

credit scores, consumers with relatively 

low scores were under-represented. 

Also, the majority of participants who 

alleged errors on their credit reports and 

indicated that they would file a dispute 

did not follow through with their stated 

5 A credit score is a numerical summary of the 

information in a credit report and is designed to be 

predictive of the risk of default. Credit scores are 

created by proprietary formulas that render the 

following result: the higher the credit score, the 

lower the risk of default. The contractor in the first 

and second pilot studies employed (and the 

proposed national study expects to employ) a score 

that is commonly used in credit reporting, namely 

a FICO score. 

S The FCRA dispute resolution process involves 

the review of disputed items by data furnishers and 

CRAs. The formal dispute process renders a specific 

outcome for each alleged error. By direct instruction 

of the data furnisher, the following outcomes may 

occur: delete the item, change or modify the item 

(specifying the change), or maintain the item as 

originally reported. A CRA may also delete a 

disputed item due to expiration of the statutory 

time frame (the FCRA limits the process to 30 days, 

but the time may be extended to 45 days if a 

consumer submits relevant information during the 

30-day period). These possible actions are tracked 

by a form called "Online Solution for Complete and 

Accurate Reporting" (a-OSCAR) that is used by 

CRAs for resolving FCRA disputes. A consumer 

may also dispute information directly with a data 

furnisher, as provided for by FCRA 623(a)(8). 15 

U.S.C.1681s-2(a)(8). (See a/so, Federal Trade 

Commission and Board of Governors of the Federal 

Reserve System, Report to Congress on the Fair 

Credit Reporting Act Dispute Process, August 2006. 

The report is available at (http://www.fie.gov/ 

reports/index.htm#2006). 

7 The FTC's December 2006 Report to Congress 

contains a more detailed review of the study and 

its results. 

intention to file. In consideration of 

these and other matters, the FTC 

conducted a follow-up pilot study. 

B. The Second Pilot Study (2007-2008) 

The second pilot study combined 

successful elements from the first pilot 

with new procedures designed to 

overcome shortcomings of the first pilot. 

Through a variety of recruitment 

channels, 4,232 people were invited to 

participate. Multiple recruitment 

methods were employed and these were 

useful in identifying differences in 

response rates and credit scores of the 

respondents across various methods of 

recruitment. Of the 4,232 individuals 

contacted, 128 (3%) became 

participants. The contractorS helped 

participants obtain their 3 credit reports 

and conducted an in-depth review of 

the reports with each participant. The 

contractor also helped the participants 

to identify alleged inaccuracies and gave 

advice on the difference between a 

small inaccuracy and a material error 

that is likely to affect a credit score. 

Specific criteria for materiality were 

developed in consultation with Fair 

Isaac's analyst on the research team.9 If 

the consumer alleged a material error, 

the individual was encouraged to file a 

formal FCRA dispute so as to obtain a 

review of the challenged items by data 

furnishers and CRAs. The contractor 

prepared a dispute letter for any 

consumer who wanted to file and allege 

an error, material or not (as the FCRA 

permits a consumer to dispute any 

credit report information that the person 

believes to be inaccurate). 

Regarding the results of the study, 88 

of the 128 participants (69%) found no 

errors in their credit reports. Of the 40 

participants who alleged one or more 

errors that they wanted to dispute, 15 

8 Due to the similarity in design (i.e., second pilot 

was constructed as a follow-up to first) the FTC 

employed the same contractor. 

• December 2008 Report (at 3). The contractor 

used the following criteria for materiality: the 

consumer had a credit score less than 760 (a cutoff 

widely used to identify consumers with lowest 

credit risk and for extending credit on most 

favorable terms) AND the consumer alleged an error 

regarding any of the following matters: (i) negative 

items (such as late payments); (ii) public 

derogatories (such as bankruptcy); (iii) accounts 

sent to collection; (iv) number of inquiries for new 

credit; (v) outstanding balances not attributable to 

normal monthly reporting variation; (vi) accounts 

on the report not belonging to the person who is 

the subject of the report; or (vii) duplicate entries 

of the same information (e.g., late payments or 

outstanding obligations) that were double-counted 

in the reported summaries of such items. To 

enhance the efficiency of the study process, the 

stated criteria modify somewhat the procedure used 

in the first pilot study (contractor's report on 

second pilot study at 27). In the proposed national 

study, we do not intend to use any cutoff score for 

materiality, but plan to retain the stated categories 

as indicating a dispute material to creditworthiness. 

(or 12% ofthe 128) alleged a material 

error. For 7 of these latter cases, the 

FCRA dispute process rendered credit 

report changes that were made fully in 

keeping with all of the consumer's 

allegations.1o 

As noted above, the second pilot 

study (like the first) used a small sample 

and no statistical projections were 

made. Accordingly, no extensive 

statistical summaries were needed, nor 

were any given, in the FTC's report on 

the study. The primary purpose of the 

pilot studies was to refine the expertassisted survey approach for studying 

credit report information, in preparation 

for a national study. 

The second pilot study confirmed the 

importance of having the contractor 

prepare dispute letters for consumers. 

This was not done in the first pilot 

study. In the first pilot study, only 1 of 

the 3 participants who alleged material 

errors on their credit reports filed a 

dispute. In the follow-up pilot study, all 

15 of the participants who alleged 

material errors on their credit reports 

received dispute letters from the 

contractor, and the outcomes of these 

disputes are known for 12 of them. This 

is a significant improvement over the 

first pilot study. 

As noted above, multiple recruitment 

methods were used to identify 

differences in response rates and in 

credit scores of respondents across 

various methods of recruitment. The 

second pilot study confirmed the 

difficulties of obtaining adequate 

numbers of participants with belowaverage credit scores. Purely random 

sampling of potential participants 

yielded too few actual participants with 

low credit scores.11 A weighted random 

sampling approach, whereby more 

invitations were extended to groups of 

consumers who were likely to have 

lower credit scores, produced a sample 

closer to national norms.12 

The second pilot study indicated that 

it would be feasible to base a measure 

of the accuracy of credit report 

information on confirmed material 

errors via the FCRA dispute process. 

Whenever it appeared that a consumer's 

credit score could be affected by 

"correcting" an alleged material error, 

the contractor marked the credit reports 

(the frozen files)13 with explanations of 

10 Other cases (i.e., some of the consumer's 

allegations were confirmed while other allegations 

were denied) are summarized in the December 2008 

Report (at 2 & 8). 

11 Table III of the December 2008 Report (at 9). 

12 Table 9 of the contractor's report (appendix to 

the December 2008 Report). 

13 The files are called "frozen" because no new 

credit information was added to the consumer's 

original credit reports obtained in the study; any 
Federal Register/Vol. 74, No. 199/Friday, October 16, 2009/Notices 53245 

the discrepancies and sent copies of the 

marked reports to Fair Isaac for 

rescoring. If, via the FCRA dispute 

process, changes were subsequently 

made by CRAs and lenders in keeping 

with the consumer's allegations, these 

changed items were then designated as 

confirmed material errors. The frozen 

file would then be re-scored to quantify 

the impact of the confirmed error(s) on 

the consumer's credit score. The 

difference between the rescore of the 

frozen file and the original score would 

be a meaningful measure of the impact 

of inaccurate credit report information. 

We intend to use this type of 

methodology in a national study.14 

As a final point of this summary of 

the pilot studies, the relatively low 

response rate (i.e., approximately 3% of 

the individuals contacted became 

participants) raises concern for the 

design of a national study regarding a 

potential response bias. This matter is 

addressed below. 

II. Proposed National Study 

A. Description of the Collection of 

Information and the Proposed Use 

The proposed national study seeks to 

use a large representative sample of 

credit reports so that we may draw 

inferences, up to a certain level of 

statistical confidence, about the 

accuracy of credit reports in general. 

The need to employ a representative 

sample makes the initial steps ofthe 

proposed study different from the 

methodology of the second pilot study; 

in other respects, the methodologies of 

the two studies are largely the same. 

Our goal is to obtain approximately 

1,000 participants who as a group 

display a diversity on credit scores and 

on major demographic characteristics in 

line with national norms. 

The relevant population for the study 

is comprised of adult members of 

households who have credit histories 

with Equifax, Experian, and/or 

TransUnion. To study these credit 

histories we propose, as a first step, to 

obtain a very large random sample (with 

an order of magnitude of 200,000 

names) from one of the consumer 

reporting agencies in order to determine 

a set of individuals selected for possible 

rescoring would thus apply only to potential 

changes or actual changes that were directly related 

to the contractor's review. 

14 Certain limitations regarding this methodology 

are discussed in the December 2008 Report (at 3 & 

4). Yet, use of the FCRA dispute process appears 

to be the only feasible way of performing a 

nationwide survey, in view of the enormous 

difficulty and cost of attempting to ascertain the 

ultimate accuracy regarding alleged errors. 

contact (the "SPC list").15 From this 

SPC list, FTC staff will draw a further 

and considerably smaller random 

sample (e.g., 10% sample) of 

individuals selected for contact (the" SC 

list"). 

There are several reasons for this twostep process. First, the vast majority of 

the names on the SPC list will not be 

sent invitations to participate and thus 

helps ensure that no CRA will know 

who is participating in the study. 

Further, using the SC list, we plan to 

send proportionally more invitation 

letters to individuals with lower credit 

scores. Use of this weighted random 

sampling approach is designed to obtain 

an ultimate set of participants having 

credit scores (specifically, the lower 

scores) in line with national norms, as 

suggested by the results of the second 

pilot study.16 

After some substantial set of 

individuals have agreed to join the 

study (300 - 400 people), we will have 

an initial sample. This sample will be 

compared with the larger SPC list on 

credit scores and geographic diversity. 

Statistically significant differences 

between this initial sample and the 

larger SPC list would reflect the impact 

of non-participation. From this 

information, we can selectively draw 

individuals from the SC list in an effort 

to compensate for these differences as 

necessary. 

As a further check on a potential bias 

in the decision to participate, we plan 

to obtain anonymized (redacted) credit 

reports (and related credit scores)17 for 

the entire class of non-respondents, i.e., 

all the people from the SC list who 

choose not to participate. Using the 

redacted reports and related scores we 

can determine, for example, whether 

non-respondents had significantly 

different credit scores or significantly 

15 The information in this sample, which would 

include names, addresses, and credit scores, is to 

be obtained under applicable law and protected 

from disclosure by, e.g., Exemption 6 of the 

Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552. That 

information, as well as any credit reports that 

individual participants give permission to be 

analyzed for the study, will be maintained and used 

by the FTC and its contractors subject to 

appropriate information security procedures and 

safeguards (e.g., maintaining credit-related data 

separately from personal identifying information, 

requiring the FTC's contractors to execute 

confidentiality agreements, and limiting access to 

those FTC and contractor staff who have a need to 

work with the data). As noted above, the study 

methodology is also designed to prevent disclosure 

of any individual's participation in the study to any 

credit reporting agency. 

16 December 2008 Report (at 9 &10). 

17 These credit reports and scores will be 

generated and maintained without name, address or 

personal identifiers other than ID numbers assigned 

by the study. 

different credit histories from those who 

agreed to participate. 

Upon completion of the study, we 

will have a database with detailed 

demographic information about the 

participants, the type and quantity of 

alleged material errors on their credit 

reports, the type and quantity of 

confirmed material errors via the FCRA 

dispute process, and the impact of any 

such confirmed errors on the 

participants' credit scores.18 Further, by 

analyzing the redacted credit reports 

and related scores ofthe nonrespondents, we obtain a final check on 

the degree to which the enhanced 

procedures were effective in achieving a 

nationally representative sample of 

credit reports. 

B. Estimated Hours Burden 

Consumer participation in the 

proposed national study would involve 

an initial preparation for the in-depth 

interview and time spent by participants 

to understand, review, and if deemed 

necessary, dispute information in their 

credit reports. Invitation letters will be 

sent in progressive waves in order to 

obtain approximately 1,000 participants. 

The individuals who receive these 

letters are drawn from the SC list 

discussed above and will be asked to go 

directly to a designated Web site for 

enrollment if they wish to participate; 

registration is expected to take at most 

15 minutes per participant,19 The 

registration process thus comes to 

approximately 250 hours (reckoned at 

1/4 hour for each of 1,000 consumers). 

For the purpose of calculating burden 

under the PRA regarding the review 

process of the credit reports, FTC staff 

18 Using the methodology of the pilot studies, we 

expect to obtain a variety of alleged errors: incorrect 

report of late payment; multiple reports of an 

account with late payment; paid account reported 

as delinquent; closed account reported as 

delinquent; incorrect financial account reported 

("not mine"); incorrect collection balance; incorrect 

collection account reported; multiple reports of an 

account in bankruptcy; chapter 7 accounts 

discharged but reported as delinquent, as well as 

further types of alleged errors. For these same 

categories we can also tabulate confirmed material 

errors via the FCRA dispute process. As explained 

above, the rescoring of the frozen files will then 

provide the inlpact of any confirmed errors on the 

participants' credit scores. 

1 9 At the registration Web site, a person may take 

the time to read several disclosures, including a 

privacy disclosure and an outline of the various 

steps of the study that every participant agrees to 

undertake. The consumer is then asked to enter 

basic contact information (e.g .. name, address, 

telephone number, best time to be contacted further 

about the study) and to enter an electronic signature 

certifying the consumer's consent to participate in 

the study. For those who may not have Internet 

access to register, the contractor would also have a 

procedure to mail the appropriate disclosures and 

study steps to the respondent and then receive back 

enrolment information and the consumer's signed 

consent in paper form. 
53246 Federal Register/Vol. 74, No. 199/Friday, October 16, 2009/Notices 

submits the following estimates that are 

based on the contractor's experience 

with the second pilot study. Some 

participants prepare thoroughly in 

advance of the in-depth interview of 

their credit reports. In such situations, 

even complicated reports may generally 

be finished under 30 minutes. Other 

consumers may not find time for 

significant preparation in advance of the 

in-depth review, and in such cases the 

interview could take up to an hour. The 

participants in the second pilot study 

reported taking an average of 69 minutes 

(median 53 minutes) to prepare for the 

interview, with 90% taking between 10 

and 180 minutes. The interviews 

themselves took an average of 19 

minutes (median 15 minutes) with 90% 

taking between 5 and 45 minutes. 

Overall, the average combined time for 

preparation and the interview was about 

90 minutes (1.5 hours). For a national 

study involving 1,000 consumers, FTC 

staff thus estimates the burden hours for 

the review process to be approximately 

1,500 hours (1,000 consumers x 1.5 

hours). Further adding on the time spent 

for the registration process (0.25 hours 

per participant), the total burden hours 

come to approximately 1,750 hours. 

C. Estimated Cost Burden 

The cost per consumer for their 

participation should be negligible. 

Participation is voluntary and it will not 

require any start-up or capital 

expenditure. There is no labor time 

expenditure beyond the 1.75 hours per 

consumer estimated above. Participants 

may receive an honorarium to 

compensate them for their time. The 

amount will be determined by FTC staff 

in consultation with the contractor 

according to an analysis of customary 

procedures and a consideration of 

response rates within key categories, 

such as, response rates for consumers 

with impaired credit. As with the pilot 

studies, participants will not pay for 

their credit reports or credit scores. 

D. Summary of and Response to Public 

Comments to Prior 60-Day Notice 

The commenters were the Consumer 

Oata Industry Association (COIA), Mr. 

Chris Hoofnagle of the Berkeley Center 

for Law & Technology, and Privacy 

Times submitted by Mr. Evan Hendricks 

(and signed by additional parties). No 

comments addressed the cost and hour 

burden estimates nor challenged the 

need or the importance of the study. 

Overall, the comments addressed the 

qualifications of any potential 

contractor, the universe of participants 

to be covered by the study, and some 

concerns about specific parts of the 

methodology of the study. 

The comment from the COIA, 

submitted by Mr. Stuart Pratt, is 

generally supportive while expressing 

certain concerns. The COIA (at 2) 

believes that the FTC's use of consumer 

interviews combined with the FCRA 

dispute process "compares favorably to 

the flawed methodology employed by 

consumer groups in their 'studies' of 

credit report accuracy." The COIA 

recommends the FTC highlight these 

differences in its communications about 

the study. As discussed above, in its 

2004 Report to Congress, the FTC 

reviewed all prior studies and created a 

design for a national study to 

specifically address certain 

shortcomings of prior approaches. In an 

upcoming report to Congress about the 

results of the national study, the FTC 

will again point out the ways in which 

the study has addressed prior 

shortcomings. 

The COIA (at 1) expresses the concern 

that the methodology may over-sample 

consumers with low credit scores; it 

recommends the ultimate study group 

have credit scores that "are reflective of 

the distribution of scores in the 

databases of the nationwide consumer 

reporting agencies." FTC staff agrees 

with the stated recommendation. As 

discussed in the referenced FR notice of 

July 20, 2009 (at 35194), the second 

pilot study confirmed that purely 

random sampling of potential 

participants yields too few actual 

participants with low credit scores. In 

the national study, invitation letters will 

be sent in progressive waves, and 

proportionally more invitation letters 

will be sent to groups having lower 

credit scores. Based on our knowledge 

of the second pilot study and also the 

knowledge that will be gained from the 

response rates of the earlier waves of 

letters in the national study, FTC staff 

will be able to adjust subsequent waves 

of letters to the potential respondents in 

certain score ranges so as to achieve a 

total set of respondents whose credit 

scores are indeed in line with national 

norms. It is possible, although not very 

likely, that the methodology could 

render a set of respondents having too 

many people with low scores. However, 

since the national distribution of credit 

scores is known (with great refinement), 

there are recognized statistical 

procedures to ultimately correct any 

over-sampling of low scores (should it 

occur) and to ensure the statistical 

reliability of the results, including the 

reliability of the results for the 

population as a whole.

20 

20 See, for example, Harnett, Donald L .. Statistical 

Methods (3rd ed.J, Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 

1984 (pages 253-254). 

The COIA (at 1) also expresses a 

concern for reaching out to consumers 

who do not have Internet access. As 

explained in the FR notice of July 20, 

2009 (at 35195), participants will use 

the Internet to register for the study. 

However, for those who may not have 

Internet access, thecontractor will also 

have a procedure to mail the 

appropriate disclosures and the study 

steps tothe respondent and then receive 

enrollment information and the 

consumer's signed consent inpaper 

form. The in-depth review of the credit 

reports with the participants will occur 

over thetelephone and does not require 

Internet access. The COlA (at 2) recommends that 

upon assessing errors by a change in 

credit score that is attributable to certain 

errors, the FTC also include measures 

on how a change in score wouldimpact 

a consumer's interest rate or other credit 

decisions; e.g., some changes in credit 

scorewould keep a consumer in the 

same "band of risk" determined by the 

lender, while other changescould place 

the consumer in a more favorable band 

of risk and thus allow the lender to 

proffer anoticeably better interest rate. 

FTC staff agrees with this 

recommendation. In reporting theresults 

of the study to Congress, staff fully 

intends to include the type of 

discussion andassociated measures here 

indicated. The comment from the Berkeley 

Center for Law & Technology, submitted 

by Mr. Chris Hoofnagle, strongly 

supports the FTC's announced goal of 

acquiring "1000 participants who as 

agroup display a diversity on credit 

scores and on major demographic 

characteristics in line withnational 

norms." The commenter further 

recommends, regarding the 

qualifications of anypotential 

contractor, that the entity be highly 

qualified to perform consumer surveys 

and that itbe a neutral entity (i.e., have 

no stake in the outcome of the study). 

FTC staff readily concurswith the 

expressed concern. The FTC will 

publically solicit competitive bids for 

performing thestudy in keeping with a 

detailed scope of work (to be 

announced). Staff will carefully review 

thecredentials associated with each bid 

and proposal and will seek a contractor 

who is highlyqualified to perform the 

required work and who has no stake in 

the outcome of the study. 

The comment letter from Mr. Evan 

Hendricks of Privacy Times (signed by 

additional parties) covers several of the 

concerns noted above and addressed 

there (e.g., qualificationsof the study 

contractor and the need for a diverse set 

of credit scores reflective of national 
Federal Register IVoI. 74, No. 199/Friday, October 16, 2009 I Notices 53247 

norms). The commenter further 

recommends that the study pay special 

attention to the matter of data matching 

procedures, covering such maters as the 

use of Social Security Numbers and 

partial matches on consumer identifiers. 

The matter of data matching procedures 

has been reviewed in the 2004 Report to 

Congress, and staff does not anticipate 

that this study will specifically address 

the internal data matching procedures 

used by credit bureaus. However, the 

contractor will keep a detailed narrative 

regarding each participant, including 

specific errors alleged and their 

subsequent disposition. In tabulating 

the types of confirmed errors via the 

dispute process, the study will acquire 

a great deal of information on the main 

sources of error in credit reports.21 

Further, in regard to an expressed 

concern from Mr. Hendricks about 

recognizing rn theft as an important 

source of error, the category of alleged 

error called "not mine" will be 

separated into the subcategories of 

"mixed file" and "rn theft." 

E. Request for Comments to Current 30-

Day Notice 

Interested parties are invited to 

submit written comments electronically 

or in paper form. Comments should 

refer to "National Accuracy Study: 

Paperwork Comment (FTC file no. 

P044804)" to facilitate the organization 

of comments. Please note that your 

comment - including your name and 

your state - will be placed on the 

public record of this proceeding, 

including on the publicly accessible 

FTC Web site, at (http://www.ftc.gov/os/ 

publiccomments.shtm). 

Because comments will be made 

public, they should not include any 

sensitive personalinformation, such as 

an individual's Social Security Number; 

date of birth; driver's licensenumber or 

other state identification number, or 

foreign country equivalent; passport 

number;financial account number; or 

credit or debit card number. Comments 

also should not includeany sensitive 

health information, such as medical 

records or other individually 

identifiable health information. In 

addition, comments should not include 

any "[tlrade secret or any commercial 

orfinancial information which is 

obtained from any person and which is 

privileged or confidential ... ," as 

provided in Section 6(f) of the Federal 

Trade Commission Act ("FTC Act"), 15 

U.S.C. 46(f), and Commission Rule 

4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2). Comments 

21 See referenced Federal Register Notice at 

35193 (note 9) and at 35194 (note 18) for the types 

of errors to be tabulated. 

containing material for which 

confidential treatment is requested must 

be filed in paper form, must be clearly 

labeled "Confidential," and must 

comply with FTC Rule 4.9(c).22 

Because paper mail addressed to the 

FTC is subject to delay due to 

heightened security screening, please 

consider submitting your comments in 

electronic form. Comments filed in 

electronic form should be submitted by 

using the following Web link: (https:// 

secure.commentworks.com/ftc/ 

FACTA319studypra2) (and following 

the instructions on the web-based form). 

To ensure that the Commission 

considers an electronic comment, you 

must file it on the web-based form at the 

Web link: (https:// 

secure.commentworks.com/ftcl 

FACT A319studypra2). If this Notice 

appears at (http://www.regulations.gov), 

you may also file an electronic comment 

through that Web site. The Commission 

will consider all comments that 

regulations.gov forwards to it. 

A comment filed in paper form 

should include the "National Accuracy 

Study: Paperwork Comment (FTC file 

no. P044804)" reference both in the text 

and on the envelope, and should be 

mailed or delivered to the following 

address: Federal Trade Commission, 

Office of the Secretary, Room H-135 

(Annex n, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, 

NW, Washington, DC 20580. The FTC is 

requesting that any comment filed in 

paper form be sent by courier or 

overnight service, if possible, because 

U.S. postal mail in the Washington area 

and at the Commission is subject to 

delay due to heightened security 

precautions. 

Comments on any proposed filing, 

recordkeeping, or disclosure 

requirements that are subject to 

paperwork burden review under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act ("PRA") 

should additionally be submitted to: 

Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs, Office of Management and 

Budget ("OMB"), Attention: Desk 

Officer for Federal Trade Commission. 

Comments should be submitted via 

facsimile to (202) 395-5167 because 

U.S. postal mail at the OMB is subject 

to delays due to heightened security 

precautions. 

The FTC Act and other laws the 

Commission administers permit the 

22 The comment must be accompanied by an 

explicit request for confidential treatment, 

including the factual and legal basis for the request, 

and must identify the specific portions of the 

comment to be withheld from the public record. 

The request will be gran ted or denied by the 

Commission's General Counsel, consistent with 

applicable law and the public interest. See FTC 

Rule 4.9(c), 16 CPR 4.9(c). 

collection of publiccomments to 

consider and use in this proceeding as 

appropriate. The Commission will 

considerall timely and responsive 

public comments that it receives, 

whether filed in paper or electronic 

form. Comments received will be 

available to the public on the FTC's Web 

site, to the extentpracticable, at (http:// 

www·ftc.gov/os/publiccomments.shtm). As a matter of discretion, the 

Commission makes every effort to 

remove home contact information for 

individuals from thepublic comments it 

receives before placing those comments 

on the FTC's Web site. More 

information, including routine uses 

permitted by the Privacy Act, may be 

found in the FTC'sprivacy policy, at 

(http://www·ftc.gov/ftclprivacy.shtm ). 

David C. Shonka, 

Acting General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. E9-24992 Filed 10-15-09; 8:45 am) 

BILUNG CODE 675CH114 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

[File No. 092 3140J 

Directors Desk LLC; Analysis of 

Proposed Consent Orders To Aid 

Public Comment 

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed consent agreement. 

SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this 

matter settles alleged violations of 

federal law prohibiting unfair or 

deceptive acts or practices or unfair 

methods of competition. The attached 

Analysis to Aid Public Comment 

describes both the allegations in the 

draft complaint and the terms of the 

consent order - embodied in the 

consent agreement - that would settle 

these allegations. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before November 5, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties are 

invited to submit written comments 

electronically or in paper form. 

Comments should refer to "Directors 

Desk, File No. 092 3140" to facilitate the 

organization of comments. Please note 

that your comment - including your 

name and your state - will be placed 

on the public record of this proceeding, 

including on the publicly accessible 

FTC website, at (http://www.ftc.gov/os/ 

publiccomments.shtm). 

Because comments will be made 

public, they should not include any 

sensitive personal information, such as 

an individual's Social Security Number; 

date of birth; driver's license number or 

other state identification number, or 

foreign country equivalent; passport 
Federal Trade Commission 

Privacy Impact Assessment 

for the 

Registration Web Site for FTC's National Study of Credit Report Accuracy 

October 2010 
1. System Overview 

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is conducting a nationwide study on the accuracy of 

information contained in consumer credit reports, as required by Section 319 of the Fair 

and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003. Researchers at the University of Missouri-St. 

Louis (the "University"or "UMSL"), which is serving as lead contractor for the FTC for this 

study, will be creating and using a Web site to register individuals who volunteer to participate 

("registration Web site").' Researchers will also create and maintain a database of anonymized 

credit reporting data obtained with the consent of such individuals. Researchers will use this 

data to analyze the accuracy of such credit reports, and to summarize their research results 

(without disclosure of any individual data) for the FTC's report to Congress. As required by the 

E-Govemment Act of2002, the FTC is posting this privacy impact assessment (PIA) to explain 

to the public what information its researchers will be collecting and maintaining electronically 

about individuals, why it is being collected, and how it will be safeguarded to protect its privacy. 

The study will review certain credit report infonnation, and various procedures are in place to 

protect consumer privacy as much as possible. Notably, the employed procedures ensure that 

the study will not collect, maintain, or review any sensitive information in identifiable fonn. A 

summary of the procedures and safeguards is given here, along with references to sections where 

specific matters are addressed. 

As noted above, the FTC's researchers will be using a Web site in order to register individuals 

who will have been previously invited by mail to participate voluntarily in the FTC's study. (A 

similar registration method was used in the second pilot study, which prepared for this national 

study.2) The purpose of the Web site presently being created is three-fold: (1) to detennine that 

the individual is eligible to participate (e.g., 21 or older); (2) to confinn that the individual 

knows and consents to the tenns of participation (e.g., to have their credit reports reviewed for 

accuracy by the FTC's research team), and (3) to register the individuals who qualify and 

consent. The study group will comprise approximately 1,000 individuals. 

By enrolling for the study at GMSL's registration Web site, an individual will be authorizing the 

FTC's researchers to obtain that individual's credit report data - which will be redacted as 

explained below- from a private third-party industry entity, Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO), and 

to use such data to perform the Congressionally mandated study.3 

I See note 6 regarding the members of the research team. 

2 This Privacy Impact Assessment is similar to one perfonned earlier for a second pilot 

study; Registration Web Site/or the FACTA Credit Report Accuracy Study- Privacy Impact 

Assessment (Febnlary 2008). It may be accessed at http://ftc.gov/os/2008/02/08022pia.pdf. 

3 FICO maintains individual credit reporting data compiled from the national credit 

reporting agencies, and will be the source of the credit report data to be used in this study. 

(continued ... ) 

1 
Participation in the study is voluntary, and there is no consequence for not participating. Study 

participants will provide very limited personal information to the registration Web site, mainly 

contact intormation such as name, address, telephone nwnber, and email address (see Section 2.1 

below). At the registration Web site, the person must also enter his or her assigned study ID 

number - a unique number communicated to the consumer in the FTC's invitation letter -

thereby identifying that individual as a solicited consumer. The individual is informed that this 

study ill. the individual's email address, and an assigned password, randomly generated by the 

site, will be used (see detail in Sections 2.1 and 2.3) at FICO's Web site (www.myfico.com) 

operated by FICO in cooperation with national credit reporting agencies, so that researchers and 

the study participant will have access to the individual's credit report data. lbrough that site, 

study participants will also receive copies of their credit reports and scores free of charge. 

The University researchers assigned to the study will print a copy of a participant's credit reports 

from myFICo.com so that they may review these reports for accuracy with the consumer. These 

credit reports are partially redacted; i.e., date of birth is suppressed and most of the digits of the 

consumer's SSN and of any account numbers are also suppressed in printing the report. In 

preparation for the review, University researchers will mail copies of these same reports to the 

participants. Credit report information that a participant alleges to be erroneous and that is 

material to creditworthiness is entered into a separate research database (Section 2.1) in the 

same redacted fonn in which it was received. This information will be provisionally re-scored 

(see note 6), and the challenged information will also disputed by the study participant through a 

formal industry dispute process.4 Both the outcome of these disputes and the re-scoring of the 

challenged information are entered into the research database. 

Critical to the protection of the consumer's privacy and the safeguarding ofinformation is the 

separation between the registration Web site database and the research database of redacted 

credit report data to be used in the study.s The only information common to both databases is 

the set of study IDs. Each database is encrypted and password-protected." 

J( ... continued) 

Neither the FTC, nor its research team, controls or operates the FICO Web site, which is funded 

and maintained by private sources. FICO will not be collecting or maintaining credit report data 

on behalf of the FTC, and their privacy practices and policies are not covered by this PIA. 

4 The study employs a dispute process set forth by the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), 

which allows consumers to dispute credit report items that they believe to be erroneous. The 

methodology for the study is set forth in a Federal Register Notice of July 20,2009, 74 Fed. Reg. 

35193, which includes a description of the FCRA dispute process. 

5 Additional information stored in this database is discussed in Section 2.1. 

6 Access to the registration database is granted to designated University researchers. who 

receive administrative passwords to perform their assigned work. Certain of these researchers 

(continued ... ) 

2 
Only the University researchers and no other individuals or entities will have access to the data 

collected by the registration Web site or to the credit report database. Registration Web site data 

will associate participants' study IDs with their respective names and addresses, but this 

database does not contain information such as financial account numbers, SSNs, drivers' license 

numbers, or similarly sensitive information. The separate research database containing credit 

report data will associate such data with individual study IDs, but it will contain no other direct 

personal identifiers. Any electronic transmission of the information in these databases between 

persons assigned to the study, i.e., between or among University researchers, FTC staff., and 

FICO staff involved in the re-scoring process, will occur only ih an encrypted and passwordprotected form. The handling and storage of data has also been designed to minimize a risk to 

participants from illegal hacking or intrusion. 

At the conclusion of the study, the contractor will transfer the data from the research database to 

the FTC, identified only by study IDs and no other personal identifiers that could be used to reidentify individual participants. Importantly, the registration database, which relates a person's 

study ID to his or her personal identifying information, is not provided to the FTC (nor to 

anyone; see Section 3.3), and the contractor will be instructed to destroy the registration 

database. At the conclusion of the study, no personal identifiers that could be used to re-identify 

indi vidual study participants will exist. (Section 7 addresses the destruction of the study's 

mailing list, to further eliminate the possibility of re-identification.) 

2. Information Collected and Stored within the System 

2.t What information is to be collected, used, disseminated, or maintained by the 

system? 

Regarding individuals who meet the study criteria7 and who give consent to have their 

6( ... continued) 

are located at the University of Arizona (hereinafter, UA); the UA researchers are formally 

subcontracted under the lead contractor, UMSL. The UA researchers assist in reviewing credit 

reports with participants. All procedures for researchers who review reports with consumers are 

the very same, whether researchers are at UMSL or UA (hereinafter, collectively University 

researchers). Regarding the research database, each university has its local component, again 

with identical procedures. Over the course of the study, and by means of encrypted and 

password-protected files, UA's research database is progressively merged with the one at 

UMSL; collectively the research database. By separate agreement with FICO, the University 

researchers will also be working with FICO staff who will provisionally re-score material credit 

report information that study participants allege to be erroneous. FICO will have no access to 

any of data collected by the researchers other than redacted credit report data that the researchers 

will transmit to FICO for such provisional re-scoring (see Section 2.1.) 

7 At a screen that occurs before consent to the study is requested, the consumer is asked 

(continued ... ) 

3 
credit reports reviewed for accuracy with the research team (explained further below), the 

registration Web site will collect (or generate) and maintain the following information: 

(a) first name, (b) last name, (c) address (street, city, state, zip code), (d) phone number, 

(e) best time for calling (evenings, mornings, etc.), (f) email address, (g) a study ID 

number, and (h) an assigned password (randomly generated by the site and to be used 

subsequently in the study; see below). 

The participant's study ID, which is provided in the FTC's invitation letter, is used by an 

individual to enter the registration Web site and is collected by this site. As explained 

below in Sections 2.3 and 2.8, the participant's email address, the password generated 

and assigned by the site, and the study ID are subsequently used for obtaining credit 

reports and scores at FICO's Web site, myFICo.com. 

Certain credit report information is collected in the course of the study. As noted earlier, 

University researchers print copies of participant credit reports from myFICo.com in 

order to review the reports for accuracy with the consumer. These reports are obtained 

by the researchers in a partially redacted form (i.e., date of birth is suppressed and most 

of the digits of the consumer's SSN and of any account numbers are also suppressed 

upon printing the reports).s 

Items that affect creditworthiness and that are alleged to be in error by a participant are 

placed, in the redacted form received, in the collective research database.

9 Additional 

items recorded there are: a provisional rescoring by FICO of the challenged items; [0 the 

7( ... continued) 

to confirm ("yes / no") that the person is 21 or older, has a credit card or has used some form of 

credit, and is currently not employed by a credit bureau. 

S Printed copies of these credit reports, along with any notes taken during the telephone 

interview, are maintained in a locked filing cabinet, further placed in a locked U ni versity office. 

9 Over the course of the study, two local components of the research databases are 

maintained; one at UMSL, anther at UA. The type and format of data which UMSL researchers 

place in their local component of the database are the same as for UA. All data placed in either 

database are recorded only by study IDs. Periodically, via encrypted and password-protected 

files, the anonymized data under the study IDs from UA are row-added to UMSL's database. 

10 As noted earlier, see note 6, files with consumer alleged errors are subject to rescoring 

by Fair Isaac. University researchers will electronically transmit to Fair Isaac copies of files 

with any alleged "corrections" imposed. Before transmitting such files, the researchers ensure 

that all identifying infom:tation, if any, such as names, addresses, employer names, have been 

removed (further, the information is already redacted as described above). Only a study ID is 

used as the file identifier. Fair Isaac electronically returns the rescored file to University 

(continued ... ) 

4 
outcome of disputes I I; the participant's original credit scores from the three national 

credit bureaus upon drawing the reports; discrepancies among the three reports; 12 brief 

notes about a consumer that critically affected participation (e.g., moved out of the 

country, illness, divorce, death of a family member); and certain demographic 

information collected at the conclusion of the study. 13 Again, all data placed in the 

research database are recorded only under study IDs. The database (both the UMSL and 

UA components) are encrypted and password-protected, and they do not contain any 

personal identifYing information. 

The University server for the registration Web site collects log information (e.g., IP 

address, date and time of visit) of individuals who visit the Web site, with or without 

registering for the study. 

2.2 What are the sources of the information in the system? 

The contact infonnation collected at the registration Web site (listed in Section 2.1) is 

obtained from individuals who voluntarily submit that information upon agreeing to 

participate in the study. The source for the consumer's assigned password (to be used at 

FICO's Web site) is the registration Web site, which randomly generates a unique 

password for each study participant. The source for a participant's study ID is the FTC 

invitation letter to the consumer. The source for demographic and similar information 

discussed in Section 2.1 is the participant, who again voluntarily submits the information. 

The source for the collected credit report information is myFICO.com, a Web site where 

study participants (as well as the public) may access their credit reports. The source tor 

any re-scored data is also FICO. The source for miscellaneous notes that may added to 

'O( ... continued) 

researchers. These transmissions occur in small batches; they are password-protected and do not 

involve personal identifYing information, sensitive or otherwise. The resulting rescored items 

are entered in the research database. 

1\ Outcomes of disputes are recorded as follows: item(s) deleted from a credit report by 

lender or data furnisher; item(s) changed in the report (with specific changes); item(s) kept as 

originally reported; and item(s) deleted by CRA due to the expiration of a statutory time frame. 

12 Examples are the following: one report lists an account as open and active, another 

report lists it as closed; one report lists a certain payment as late, another lists it as on time; one 

report lists a stated lien as discharged, another lists it as undischarged; and more generally, any 

infonnation that is clearly discrepant among the three reports. 

13 There is a concluding survey that collects a participant's gender, ethnicity, income 

level, educational level, and similar such demographic information. 

5 
the research database are the FTC's researchers and the participants. 14 

2.3 Why is the information being collected, used, disseminated, or maintained? 

The reasons or purpose(s) ofinfonnation collection at the registration Web site all relate 

to executing the FTC's national study. (1) to detennine that an individual is eligible to 

participate (e.g., is 21 or older); (2) to confinn that the individual knows and consents to 

the tenns of participation (e.g., to have their credit reports reviewed for accuracy by the 

FTC's research team), and (3) to register those individuals who qualifY and consent. 

The collected contact information will allow the FTC's researchers to communicate with 

study participants. Once the infonnation has been collected by the registration Web site, 

a screen infonns the participant they will be hyperlinked to the myFICOcom Web site 

maintained by Fair Isaac in order to obtain credit reports and scores. Before being 

hyperlinked from the registration site to FICO's Web site, the person's study ID is 

electronically transferred to FICO's site; the ID authenticates the person to FICO as a 

valid study participant who is also eligible for free reports and scores. Thus, an 

important purpose of the study ID is to ensure that the registration Web site, as well as 

the related site at FICO, is used only by solicited consumers. 

Although procedures at myFICOcom are not covered by this PIA, they are presented for 

a fuller understanding of the steps in the study. In order to set up an account at FICO's 

Web site, a person (whether study participant or not), needs to enter the following: name, 

address, SSN, age, a login ID, a password, and also answer certain security questions 

before any credit reports are provided (e.g., latest mortgage payment, car payment, or 

similar such questions tailored to the consumer's credit report). Study participants have 

been told at the registration site that their login ID at FICO is their email address and that 

their password is the one pre-assigned at registration. Upon completion of this procedure 

participants may view their credit reports and scores on line for 35 days at no charge and 

may also download these reports. 

In agreeing to the study, the consumer has given pennission to the University researchers 

to draw their credit reports and to review them with the consumer. IS A further purpose of 

the study lD is to enable University researchers to obtain (i.e., print) duplicate copies of 

the participant's credit reports and scores by entering their study ID and an administrative 

14 Distinctions between participant access and public access are discussed below. 

15 This agreement is con finned twice; first at the registration Web site (further discussed 

in Section 4.1) and then at FICO. As part of setting up a participant account at myFICOcom, 

there is a screen that again requests the consumer's consent to the terms of the study. The person 

responds by clicking either "I agree" or "I do not agree." If a person chooses "I do not agree," a 

new screen informs them that they are not eligible to receive free reports and scores through the 

study, and refers them back to FICO's home page. 

6 
password. This latter password, which pertains uniquely to the study, is created and 

administered by FICO. The purpose of the credit report and other data in the research 

database is to analyze the accuracy of such data and for reporting to Congress (without 

disclosure of individual data). 

2.4 How is the information collected? 

All information collected at the registration Web site is collected electronically through 

various screens at the site, and similarly so for information collected at myFICo.com in 

connection with the study. Some information in the research database is manually 

entered by the FTC's researchers (e.g., notes). 

For consumers who do not have Internet access but wish to participate in the study, a 

special procedure is planned. The invitation letter provides a toll-free number that 

solicited consumers may call if they have questions. This call center is administered by 

University research associates, who can assist consumers with the registration process. 

If a solicited consumer has no Internet access, a research associate may complete the 

registration procedure over the telephone with the consumer's permission, inclusive of 

establishing their account at myFICo.com. 16 Tn view of the rntemet's ubiquitous 

presence, we expect this special procedure would apply to at most a small minority of 

participants, if any. 

2.5 How will the information be checked for accuracy and timeliness (currency)? 

After the registration procedure and the consumer's receipt of their credit reports, a 

University researcher telephones the individual to review the credit report information 

and the contact information. If, at some subsequent point, individuals believe that their 

registration information is incorrect or out-of-date, they may simply communicate the 

new information to the FTC's research team at busrcsc2@umsl.edu or by calling the 

calling the toll free number. 

2.6 Is the system using technologies in ways that the FTC has not previously 

employed (e.g., monitoring software, Smart Cards, etc.)? If so, how does the 

16 When a solicited consmner calls for assistance with registration, the associate will 

confirm that the person has received the FTC invitation letter (and ask for the study ID) and also 

confirm that the person has no Internet access (e.g., via a friend, neighbor, or public library). 

Upon confirmation, and with the consumer's permission, the associate would enter the contact 

information at the registration Web site on the consumer's behalf, and also enter the information 

required at FICO's Web site (described earlier). To confirm the consumer's permission for this 

enrollment, the individual would mail back a signed (prepared) consent form, where the latter is 

included in all FTC invitation letters. No credit report would be accessed until the associate has 

received the signed consent form. The consumer's SSN would be used once in setting up the 

account at myFICo.com and no record of the SSN would be kept. 

7 
use of this technology affect individuals' privacy? 

The system does not use technology that has not been previously employed, save at one 

point: in contrast to the pilot studies, the national study will use an electronic transfer of a 

participant's study ID to FICO's portal, which will identify the person as having enrolled 

at the University's registration Web site (a study participant). This transfer is encrypted 

and posses no appreciable threat to a participant's privacy or infonnation collected by the 

study. 17 

2.7 What law or regulation permits the collection of this information? 

The Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003, which directs the FTC to do a 

study of credit report accuracy, pennits the collection of infonnation for the purpose of 

the study. 

2.8 Considering the type of information collected and sources of collection, what 

privacy risks were identified and how were these risks mitigated? 

This study involves a review of certain credit report information. As noted throughout, 

various procedures are in place to protect consumer privacy as much as possible, 

recognizing that the consumer has given permission for this review. An important 

mitigation of privacy risk is the fact that the study will not collect or review any sensitive 

personal identifying information. 

As noted earlier, the registration Web site collects consumer contact infonnation (name, 

address, telephone number, email address, best time to call), a study ID, and an assigned 

password. After credit reports have been drawn and printedJ8 and reviewed with the 

consumer over the telephone, certain credit data (see earlier Section 2.1) are placed by 

University researchers in the research database after having removed all personal 

identifying information from that data, which is further partially redacted as described 

earlier. The resulting infonnation is maintained and associated only with study ID. Also, 

the procedures and contractual obligations ensure that only the researchers who are 

assigned to interview consumers about their credit reports, and no other researchers (e.g., 

FTC staff assigned to the study or FICO staffwho will re-score credit data), will know 

the personal identity of any participant. To further mitigate privacy risks, any 

communications about participant infonnation between University researchers and FTC 

staff, or between University researchers and FICO staff, will occur only via study IDs. 

17 Study IDs are transferred, one at a time, to FICO's portal after a person enrolls at the 

registration Web site. If any study ID were captured by an unwanted source, it would not be 

sufficient (see Section 2.3) to obtain any participant credit report infonnation. 

18 As noted earlier, printed copies are stored in a locked filing cabinet, that is further 

located in a locked office. 

8 
Regarding credit report information that is downloaded from myFICO.com, this avenue is 

provided by myFICo.com to any consumer who has set up an account at that site. J9 The 

privacy risk associated with participants obtaining their credit report information in this 

study via myFICo.com is essentially the same as what may apply to any consumer who 

would use that site.20 Consumers may visit myFICo.com to read the site's privacy policy 

and learn more about FICO's privacy and security procedures and practices. 

As noted earlier, critical to the protection of consumer privacy and safeguarding the 

information collected by the FTC's researchers in this study is the separation between 

two types of data: individual registration data and credit report data. Each type is 

maintained in a separate, encrypted, and password-protected database. Access is granted 

only to those who need to use the information in the course of the study. There are also 

specific contractual obligations about the collection, storage, transmission, and disposal 

of all information pertaining to the study. The procedures regarding the collection, 

storage, transmission, and disposal of data have been designed to minimize the risk from 

ilJegal hacking, intrusion, or misuse of data. (See Section 6 (Security).) 

3. Use and Access to Data in the System 

3.1 Describe how information in the system will or may be used. 

Contact information collected by the registration Web site from study participants (name, 

address, telephone number, and email address) will be used to establish and maintain 

contact with participants in the study. The study ID is used by a person to enter the 

registration Web site and also (as one element) in establishing an account at 

myFICo.com to obtain credit reports and scores. The University researchers also use the 

study ID at FICO's Web site, along with an administrative password, to print a copy of 

participant credit reports in preparation for a review of the reports with the consumer. 

The study ID is thus used to relate a participant to his or her credit report information. 

The resulting credit data will be analyzed for accuracy and used by researchers in 

19 The privacy and security of FICO's Web site is not covered by this PIA, since neither 

the FTC nor its researchers are using that site to collect or maintain information on individuals 

for the FTC. Nonetheless, the FTC notes that the information accessible on that site can only be 

viewed or downloaded; there is no avenue on that site by which researchers (or consumers) are 

permitted to change the information stored there by FICO. Consumers may seek to change their 

credit information through normal credit reporting procedures that affect any consumer's credit 

history, or through the FCRA dispute process, which allows a consumer to dispute his or her 

credit report information. 

20 For study participants, there is an electronic transfer of study ID (discussed above), the 

risk of which is being mitigated by security controls (e.g., encryption); also, participant date of 

birth will be suppressed when the credit reports are printed from the site, which further enhances 

privacy protection. 

9 
preparing the FTC's required report to Congress. 

3.2 Which internal entities will have access to the information? 

The registration Web site data will be accessed by University researchers for the 

purposes described above and will not be transferred to the FTC or become part of any 

agency (or government) records. Likewise, Web site logs maintained by the University 

researchers will not be transferred to the FTC or made any part of FTC records. 

The research database (discussed in Section 2.1) will be accessible by University 

researchers assigned to the study. Over the course of the study this information will also 

shared with certain FTC staff (Le., those assigned to the study) by means of participant 

study IDs. These shared data will thus be anonymous in nature; nonetheless, they will be 

electronically transferred in encrypted and password-protected files. 

FICO will not be given access to participant contact information collected through the 

registration Web site, even though participants themselves will need to provide certain 

personal identifying information (described earlier) in order to establish an account at 

FICO's Web site to receive credit reports and scores. Further, FICO has no access (nor 

any need for access) to the research database. 

3.3 Which external entities will have access to the information? 

There are no external entities that will have access to any of the information collected or 

maintained by the study, except for disclosures, if any, that may be required by law, e.g., 

subpoena or other legal process. Although the FTC's will use the data in the 

preparation of the report that the FTC is mandated to submit to Congress, the report will 

not include or disclose any individually identifiable data. 

4. Notice and Access for Individuals 

4.1 How will individuals be informed about what information is collected, and 

how this information is used and disclosed? 

Participants receive several forms of notice before their consent to the collection of any 

information is requested. First, the FTC's invitation letter used to solicit consumers 

outlines the majors steps of the study and provides a copy of the consumer consent form, 

which further highlights the type of information to be collected, how it would be used, 

and what the consumer agrees to in connection with the study. Further, the registration 

Web site, to which the consumer is directed via the letter, provides the FTC's privacy 

policy that is employed in the study. The policy is accessible by a hyperlink from the top 

bar placed at every screen of the site. The policy explains what information is collected 

by the site, why it is collected, how it will be used, how the information is secured, and 

other matters. Third, also at the registration Web site, the first three screens - which 

cannot be skipped by the consumer in moving through the site - provide a summary of 

10 
the study and various steps that a participant would agree to. All of this infonnation is 

provided before the individual is requested to agree to the terms of the study or to give 

any contact infonnation. 

4.2 Do individuals have the opportunity and/or right to decline to provide 

information? 

Participation is voluntary and anyone may decline to provide the requested infonnation. 

Consumers are informed that if they decline to provide information that is needed for the 

study. then they cannot qualify to be participants. 

4.3 Do individuals have the right to consent to particular uses of the 

information? If so, how would an individual exercise this right? 

No. At the registration screen that requests the consumer's consent to the study, the 

consumer responds by clicking "I agree" or "I do not agree." Should a person forget to 

click one of these options, a special prompt is given and the person cannot proceed until 

this action is completed. For those who click "I agree," a new screen requests the contact 

infonnation (discussed earlier). 

4.4 What are the procedures that allow individuals to gain access to their own 

information? 

As noted earlier, individuals who believe that their contact information is incorrect or 

out-of-date during the course of the study may simply communicate this to the FTC's 

research team at busresc2@umsJ.edu (or, absent email, call a toll free number to talk to a 

research associate). Further, paper copies of participant credit reports (as described 

earlier) are mailed to participants by University researchers for the subsequent review of 

credit report accuracy over the telephone. but consumers will not have direct access to 

the research database maintained by the research team.21 (See also Section 8 regarding 

Privacy Act procedures for requesting access to agency records, if any, containing an 

individual's data) 

4.5 Discuss the privacy risks associated with the process of providing individuals 

access to their own records and how those risks are mitigated. 

Consumers do not have direct electronic access to their data in the registration Web site, 

except to enter registration data. (Likewise, as noted above, they have no direct 

electronic access to the credit report database containing their redacted credit report data, 

which is accessible only to researchers.) Regarding a person's access to the registration 

information that they have provided, the privacy risk is negligible. The consumer's 

21 Although myFICO.com is not covered by this PIA, we note that a participant's account 

at myFICO.com permits participants to view their credit reports online for 35 days. 

11 
provided information consists of name, address, email address, phone number, and best 

time to call. If the latter were changed/captured by an unwanted person, it would not be 

sufficient to change or grant access to a participant's credit reports at FICO's Web site.22 

Further, regarding the mailed credit reports to a participant, these reports are redacted in 

the manner described earlier, which mitigates privacy risk regarding unwanted 

interception of this information.23 

5 Web Site Privacy Issues 

5.1 Describe any tracking technology used by tbe Web site and whether the 

technology is persistent or temporary (e.g., session cookie, persistent cookie, 

Web beacon). Currently, persistent tracking technology is not approved for 

use by tbe FTC (see 5.2). 

The University server for the registration Web site collects (i.e., preserves) "log" 

information (e.g., IP address, date and time of visit) of individuals who visit the 

Web site. "Cookies" (i.e., small text files placed and stored on the user's 

computer by the Web site, which can be used to collect and maintain information 

about the user's activities on the Web site) are non-persistent; they are deleted 

automatically when the user closes the Web browser by which the information is 

collected. 

5.2 If a persistent tracking technology is used, ensure that the proper issues are 

addressed (issues outlined in the FTC's PIA guide). 

No persistent tracking technology is used. 

5.3 If personal information is collected through a Web site, page, or online form 

accessible through the Internet, is appropriate encryption used? If not, 

explain. 

All collected information is encrypted under https (a secure Internet protocol). 

5.4 Explain how the public will be notified oftbe Privacy Policy. 

The privacy policy is posted at the registration Web site; it is accessible by a 

hyperlink from the top bar at every screen of the site. It is machine readable 

(P3P-compliant). 

22 As noted above, any consumer who requests credit reports at myFICo.com needs to 

enter the person's name, address, age, SSN, a login ID, a password (as well as answer certain 

security questions). As also explained earlier, neither SSN nor age is collected by this study. 

23 First class mail is normally used for credit reports that are mailed by national CRAs; 

first class mail is also used by the study contractor. 

12 
5.5 Considering any Web site or Internet issues, please describe any privacy 

risks identified and how they have been mitigated. 

This matter is addressed in Sections 2.8 and 4.5. 

5.6 If the Web site will collect personal information from children under 13, or 

be directed at such children, explain how it will comply with the Children's 

Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). 

The Web site will solicit and collect information only from those who identify 

themselves as 21 years or older; thus, COPPA does not apply. 

6 Security of .Information in the System 

6.1 Are all IT security requirements and procedures required by federal law 

being followed to ensure that information is appropriately secured? 

Yes. The contractor warrants and agrees that it shall not use any non-FTC 

network or facility (e.g., commercial, corporate, university) to store or process 

Sensitive Information on behalf ofthe FTC, unless such network or facility is an 

information system currently certified and accredited under the Federal 

Information Security Management Act (FISMA), or such network or facility 

otherwise has adequate administrative. technical, physical and procedural 

controls, including a program of continuous monitoring to ensure such controls 

remain in place and fully operational, to ensure the security (i.e., confidentiality, 

integrity and availability) of Sensitive Information stored or processed for the 

FTC using such network or facility. 

6.2 Has a Certification & Accreditation been completed for the system or 

systems supporting the program? 

No. The registration Web site and the related screen at FICO's site that validates 

certain consumers as study participants (via the secure transfer of study IDs) are 

designed solely for the purpose of this study and their use will end within six 

months from the initiation of participant enrollment. 

6.3 Has a risk assessment been conducted on the system? 

A risk assessment in association with a Certification and Accreditation has not 

been completed. However, information security procedures to be used during this 

national study, covering both the registration and research database, were 

successfully tested and employed during the second pilot study of credit report 

13 
accuracy which involved its own PIA.24 Interested parties may also consult FTC 

December 2008 Report to Congress, which reviews the procedures and findings 

of the second pilot study and is accessible at: 

http://www. ftc. gov/opa/1 008/ 12!tactareport.shtm). 

6.4 Does the project employ technology that may raise privacy concerns? If so, 

please discuss its implementation. 

Privacy concerns are not raised by the project's technology, which employs no 

unusual technology. 

6.S What procedures are in place to determine which users may access the 

system and are they documented? 

Access to both the registration and research databases is granted on a need-toknow basis within the FTC and the Universities conducting this study. There are 

also specific and detailed policy and procedures attached to the contract 

concerning safeguards for all data collected during the course ofthis study. 

6.6 Describe what privacy training is provided to users either generally or 

specifically relevant to the program or system. 

The contract requires that privacy training be provided to all University 

researchers prior to their participation in the study. The contractor provided a 

description of the privacy training, and the FTC has determined that the course 

content is commensurate to the categorization of the data to be handled during the 

study. Additionally, the contractor shall verify the successful completion of the 

privacy training for all University researchers involved in this study. 

6.7 What auditing measures and technical safeguards are in place to prevent the 

misuse of data? 

The University has an Information Security Program, which is described at 

http://infosec.missouri.eduJ.25 To the extent possible, the FTC has reviewed the 

documents available at this website. These documents describe policies which 

24 Registration Web Site/or the FACTA Credit Report Accuracy Study-Privacy Impact 

Assessment (February 2008); it may be accessed at http://ttc.gov/os/200S/02/08012pia.pdt: In 

terms of technology, the main point of difference is that the national study will employ a secure 

electronic transfer of a study ill number, which identifies a person as a solicited consumer. No 

such electronic transfer was used in the second pilot study. For the rest, the technology and 

study procedures are the same. 

25 An audit of this security system was performed by Price Waterhouse three years ago. 

14 
are commensurate with the sensitivity level of the data being created, used, 

stored, and transmitted by the University. 

6.8 State that any questions regarding the security of the system should be 

directed to the FfC's Chief Information Security Officer. 

Any questions regarding the security of the system should be directed to the 

FTC's Chief Information Security Officer. 

7 Data Retention 

7.1 For what period of time will data collected by this system be maintained? 

Data will be collected throughout the course of the study, which (by contract) is 

expected to run 66 weeks; the data would be maintained for this same period. 

7.2 What are the plans for destruction or disposal of the information? 

At the conclusion of the study, the FTC will require that the registration database, 

as well paper copies of credit reports and related notes, be destroyed; electronic 

data to be permanently deleted and data in paper form to be shredded. Credit data 

from the research database will be securely transferred to the FTC, and such data 

are anonymized, associated only with individual study IDs and no other personal 

identifiers. Further, the FTC's third party mailer, hired to send the invitation 

letters to consumers, will be instructed to destroy the mailing list when it is no 

longer needed. (All mailings are expected to be finished by six months from the 

initiation of the study; thereafter, the mailing list has no further use and it will be 

destroyed.) 

7.3 Describe any privacy risks identified in the data retention and disposal of the 

information, and describe how these risks have been mitigated. 

Any retention of data would occur only in de-identified form, so that such data 

cannot be tied to any individual. The data disposal methods to be used will not 

require transfer to or access by others that could present specific privacy risks. 

Importantly, the FTC never receives a copy of the registration database, which 

contains the consumer's contact information associated with their study IDs. 

Thus, the FTC will not have any ability to re-identify the participants, as the 

agency will not receive any information that could allow it to do so. Such reidentification is not necessary for this study. All analysis of the study will 

address only the anonymous and redacted data in the research database. 

8 Privacy Act 

8.1 Will the data in the system be retrieved by a personal identifier? 

15 
Yes. As noted above, contact information in the registration database is 

associated with study ID number, as well as a person's name and address. Study 

participants who believe that their contact information is incorrect or out-of-date 

can communicate new information to the research team (see Section 2.5). 

Likewise, credit data in the research database will be associated with and 

retrieved by individual study ID, where necessary. 

8.2 Is the system covered by an existing Privacy Act System of Records notice 

(SORN)? 

Although registration data and the credit report data can be retrieved by certain 

anonymized personal identifiers, the FTC is not taking custody and control of 

individuals' data in identifiable form. Nonetheless, to the extent that such records 

are deemed legally subject to the Privacy Act as agency records, those records 

would be covered by the SORN that applies to the agency's nonpublic legal 

program records (FTC 1-1). http://www.ftc.govifoiallistotbaysystems.shtm In 

addition, to the extent that the data are deemed to be system user data, the SORN 

covering such records (VII-3) would apply. 

Moreover, the FTC's invitation letter and the registration Web site present 

appropriate privacy notices, consistent with the Privacy Act. This disclosure 

(notice) is the following. 

Privacy Act Statement. Congress has directed the FTC to do this study, and The 

Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of2003 permits the collection of 

information from you for the purpose of this study. The FTC's researchers will 

be collecting this information, but the FTC does not intend to make any of your 

personal information part of its own records. To the extent that the Privacy Act of 

1974 applies, your information would be treated as part of the agency's legal 

records system. You can read about routine uses of such records on the FTC's 

Web site (http://www.ftc.gov/foiaJsysnotli-l.pdfor 

http://www.ftc.gov/toia/sysnotli-l.wpd). Your participation is completely 

voluntary, but please understand that if you choose not to provide information 

that we need for the study, then you cannot qualify to be a participant. 

9 Privacy Policy 

16 
9.1 Confirm that the coUection, use, and disclosure of the information in this 

system has been reviewed to ensure consistency with the FTC's privacy policy. 

The collection, use, and disclosure of the infonnation in this system has been 

reviewed to ensure consistency with the FTC's privacy policy. 

10 Approval and Signature Page 

Prepared for the Business Owners of the System by: 

Peter J Vander Nat, Ph.D. 

FTC Bureau of Economics 

Review: 

Alexander C. Tang, Attorney 

Office of the General Counsel 

Marc Groman 

Chief Privacy Officer 

Margaret Mech 

Chief Infonnation Security Officer 

Approved: 

PatBak 

Acting Chief Infonnation Officer 

Date: ___ _ 

Date: -----

Date: ______ _ 

Date: -------

Date: ______ _