District Circular Letters
March 30, 2001
BANKING SUPERVISION AND REGULATION:
Equal Credit Opportunity
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
12 CFR Part 202: Regulation B; Docket No. R-1040
SUMMARY: The Board is adopting an interim final rule amending
Regulation B, which implements the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, to establish
uniform standards for the electronic delivery of disclosures required
by the act and regulation. The rule provides guidance on the timing and
delivery of electronic disclosures to ensure that applicants have adequate
opportunity to access and retain required information. (Similar rules
are being adopted under other consumer financial services regulations
administered by the Board.) Under the rule, creditors may deliver disclosures
electronically if they obtain applicants' affirmative consent in accordance
with the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act. In
addition, the regulation is revised to allow creditors to provide disclosures
in foreign languages. The rule is being adopted as an interim rule to
allow for additional public comment.
DATES: The interim rule is effective March 30, 2001; however,
to allow time for any necessary operational changes, the mandatory compliance
date is October 1, 2001. Comments must be received by June 1, 2001.
ADDRESSES: Comments, which should refer to Docket No. R-1040,
may be mailed to Ms. Jennifer J. Johnson, Secretary, Board of Governors
of the Federal Reserve System, 20th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20551 or mailed electronically to regs.comments@federalreserve.gov.
Comments addressed to Ms. Johnson may also be delivered to the Board's
mail room between 8:45 a.m. and 5:15 p.m. weekdays, and to the security
control room at all other times. The mail room and the security control
room, both in the Board's Eccles Building, are accessible from the courtyard
entrance on 20th Street between Constitution Avenue and C Street, N.W.
Comments may be inspected in room MP-500 in the Board's Martin Building
between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., pursuant to the Board's Rules Regarding
the Availability of Information, 12 CFR part 261.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Natalie E. Taylor or John C.
Wood, Counsel, or Minh-Duc Le, Attorney, Division of Consumer and Community
Affairs, at (202) 452-2412 or (202) 452-3667.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), 15 U.S.C. 1691 et seq.,
makes it unlawful for creditors to discriminate in any aspect of a credit
transaction on the basis of sex, race, color, religion, national origin,
marital status, age (provided the applicant has the capacity to contract),
because all or part of an applicant's income derives from public assistance,
or because an applicant has in good faith exercised any right under the
Consumer Credit Protection Act. The Board's Regulation B (12 CFR part
202) implements the act.
The ECOA and Regulation B require that some disclosures be provided in
writing, presuming that creditors provide paper documents. Under the Electronic
Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (E-Sign Act), however,
electronic documents and signatures have the same validity as paper documents
and handwritten signatures.
Board Proposals Regarding Electronic Disclosures
Over the past few years, the Board has published several interim
rules and proposals regarding the electronic delivery of disclosures.
In 1996, after a comprehensive review of Regulation E (Electronic Fund
Transfers), the Board proposed to amend the regulation to permit financial
institutions to provide disclosures by sending them electronically (61
FR 19696, May 2, 1996). Based on comments received on the 1996 proposal,
on March 25, 1998, the Board published an interim rule permitting the
electronic delivery of disclosures under Regulation E (63 FR 14528) and
similar proposals under Regulation B (63 FR 14552) and other financial
services regulations administered by the Board. The 1998 interim rule
and proposed rules were similar to the 1996 proposed rule under Regulation
E.
The 1998 proposals and interim rule allowed depository institutions,
creditors, lessors, and others to provide disclosures electronically if
the consumer agreed, with few other requirements. For ease of reference,
this background section uses the terms "institutions" and "consumers."
Industry commenters generally supported the Board's 1998 proposals and
interim rule, but many of them sought specific revisions and additional
guidance on how to comply with the disclosure requirements in certain
transactions and circumstances. In particular, they expressed concern
that the rule did not specify a uniform method for establishing that an
"agreement" was reached for sending disclosures electronically. Consumer
advocates, on the other hand, generally opposed the 1998 proposals and
the interim rule. They believed that consumer protections in the proposals
were inadequate, especially in connection with transactions that are typically
consummated in person (such as automobile loans and leases, home-secured
loans, and door-to-door credit sales).
September 1999 Proposals
In response to comments received on the 1998 proposals, the Board published
revised regulatory proposals in September 1999 under Regulations
B, E, M, Z, and DD (64 FR 49688, 49699, 49713, 49722 and 49740, respectively,
September 14, 1999) (collectively, the "1999 proposals"), and an interim
rule under Regulation DD (64 FR 49846). The interim rule under Regulation
DD allowed depository institutions to deliver disclosures on periodic
statements electronically if the consumer agrees.
Generally, the 1999 proposals required institutions to use a standardized
form containing specific information about the electronic delivery of
disclosures so that consumers could make informed decisions about whether
to receive disclosures electronically. If the consumer affirmatively consented,
most disclosures could be provided electronically. To address concerns
about potential abuses, the 1999 proposals generally would have required
disclosures to be given in paper form when consumers transacted business
in person. The proposals contained rules for disclosures that are made
available to consumers at an institution's Internet web site (governing,
for example, how long disclosures must remain posted at a web site).
Comments on the September 1999 Proposals The Board received letters
representing 115 commenters expressing views on the revised proposals.
Industry commenters generally supported the Board's approach of establishing
federal rules for a uniform method of obtaining consumers' consent to
the receipt of electronic disclosures instead of deferring to state law.
Still, many sought specific additional guidance and in some cases wanted
more flexibility. They were concerned about the length of time the proposals
would have required electronic disclosures to remain available to a consumer
at an institution's Internet web site or upon request. In addition, they
believed the proposed rule requiring paper disclosures for mortgage loans
closed in person was not sufficiently flexible. Consumer advocates believed
the 1999 proposals addressed many of their concerns about the 1998 proposals.
Nevertheless, they urged the Board to incorporate greater protections
for consumers, such as restricting the delivery of electronic disclosures
to only those consumers who initiate transactions electronically.
The Board also obtained views through four focus groups with individual
consumers, conducted in the Washington-Baltimore metropolitan area. Participants
reviewed and commented on the format and content of the proposed sample
consent forms, as well as on alternative revised forms.
Federal Legislation Addressing Electronic Commerce
On June 30, 2000, the President signed the E-Sign Act, which was enacted
to encourage the continued expansion of electronic commerce. The E-Sign
Act generally provides that electronic documents and signatures have the
same validity as paper documents and handwritten signatures. The act contains
special rules for the use of electronic disclosures in consumer transactions.
Consumer disclosures may be provided in electronic form only if the consumer
affirmatively consents after receiving certain information specified in
the statute.
The Board and other government agencies are permitted to interpret the
E-Sign Act's consumer consent requirements within prescribed limits, but
may not impose additional requirements for consumer consent. In addition,
agencies generally may not re-impose a requirement for using paper disclosures
in particular transactions, such as those conducted in person.
The consumer consent provisions in the E-Sign Act became effective October
1, 2000, and did not require implementing regulations. Thus, financial
institutions are currently permitted to use electronic disclosures under
Regulations B, E, M, Z and DD if the consumer affirmatively consents in
the manner required by section 101(c) of the E-Sign Act. Under section
101(c)(5) of the E-Sign Act, consumers who consented prior to the effective
date of the act to receive electronic disclosures as permitted by any
law or regulation, are not subject to the consent requirements.
II. The Interim Rule
The Board is adopting an interim final rule to establish uniform standards
for the electronic delivery of disclosures required under Regulation B.
Consistent with the requirements of the E-Sign Act, creditors generally
must obtain applicants' affirmative consent to provide disclosures electronically.
The interim rules also establish uniform requirements for the timing
and delivery of electronic disclosures. Disclosures may be sent by e-mail
to an electronic address designated by the applicant, or they may be made
available at another location, such as an Internet web site. If the disclosures
are not sent by e-mail, applicants must receive a notice alerting them
to the availability of the disclosures. Disclosures posted on a web site
must be available for at least 90 days, to allow applicants adequate time
to access and retain the information. With regard to the timing of electronic
disclosures, for disclosures that must be provided at application, applicants
are required to access the disclosures before submitting the application.
Under the interim rule, creditors must make a good faith attempt to redeliver
electronic disclosures that are returned undelivered, using the address
information available in their files. Similar rules are being adopted
under Regulations E, M, Z, and DD.
III. Request for Comment
The interim rules include most of the revisions that were part of the
1999 proposals and were not affected by the E-Sign Act. The Board is adopting
these rules with some minor changes discussed below. The rules are adopted
as interim rules, to allow commenters to present new information or views
not previously considered in the context of the 1998 and 1999 proposals.
Since the Board's 1999 proposals were issued, more institutions have gained
experience in offering financial services electronically. The Board believes
that additional comments, beyond those previously considered in connection
with the Board's earlier proposals, might inform the Board whether any
developments in technology or industry practices have occurred that warrant
further changes in the rules. The comment period ends on June 1, 2001.
The Board expects to adopt final rules on a permanent basis prior to October
1, 2001.
Interpreting E-Sign Provisions
Under section 104(b) of the E-Sign Act, the Board and other government
agencies are permitted to interpret the act, within prescribed limits.
The Board may issue rules that interpret how the E-Sign Act's consumer
consent requirements apply for purposes of the laws administered by the
Board. Also, the Board may, by regulation, exempt a particular category
of disclosures from the E-Sign Act's consumer consent requirements if
it will eliminate a substantial burden on electronic commerce without
creating material risk for consumers.
The Board requests comment on whether the Board should exercise its
authority under the E-Sign Act in future rulemakings to interpret the
consumer consent provisions or other provisions of the act, as they affect
the Board's consumer protection regulations. Comment is requested on whether
the statutory provisions relating to consumer consent are sufficient,
or whether additional guidance is needed. For example, is interpretative
guidance needed concerning the statutory requirement that applicants confirm
their consent electronically in a manner that reasonably demonstrates
they can access information in the form to be used by the creditor? Is
clarification needed on the effect of applicants withdrawing their consent,
or on requesting paper copies of electronic disclosures? Creditors must
also inform applicants of changes in hardware or software requirements
if the change creates a material risk that the applicant will not be able
to access or retain the disclosure. The Board solicits comment on whether
regulatory standards are needed for determining a "material risk" for
purposes of Regulation B and financial services laws administered by the
Board, and if so what standards should apply.
Under section 104(d) of the E-Sign Act, the Board is authorized to exempt
specific disclosures from the consumer consent requirements of section
101(c) of the E-Sign Act, if the exemption is necessary to eliminate a
substantial burden on electronic commerce and will not increase the material
risk of harm to consumers. The Board requests comment on whether it should
consider exercising this exemption authority.
Study on Adapting Requirements to Online Banking and Lending
The E-Sign Act eliminated legal impediments to the use of electronic
records and signatures. The Board requests comment on whether other legislative
or regulatory changes are needed to adapt current requirements to online
banking and lending and facilitate electronic delivery of consumer financial
services.
The comments may assist the Board in future efforts to update the regulations.
The comments may also be used in connection with a study required under
the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999. That act requires the federal bank
supervisory agencies to conduct a study of banking regulations that affect
the electronic delivery of financial services and to submit to the Congress
a report recommending any legislative changes that are needed to facilitate
online banking and lending.
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis
Pursuant to its authority under section 703 of the ECOA, the Board amends
Regulation B to establish uniform standards for the use of electronic
communication to provide disclosures required by this regulation. Electronic
disclosures can effectively reduce compliance costs without adversely
affecting consumer protections. To the extent that a creditor may make
electronic disclosures available at its Internet web site instead of providing
the disclosures directly to the applicant, the Board finds that such an
exception is warranted, acting pursuant to its authority under section
703(a)(1) of the ECOA. Below is a section-by-section analysis of the rules
for providing disclosures by electronic communication, including references
to changes in the official staff commentary.
Section 202.4 General Rules
4(b) Foreign Language Disclosures
To provide consistency among the regulations, as proposed, § 202.4(b)
permits creditors to provide disclosures in languages other than English
as long as disclosures in English are available to applicants who request
them.
Section 202.9 Notifications
9(h) Duties of Third Parties
Under § 202.9(g), when an application for credit is submitted through
a third party to more than one creditor and no credit is offered (or the
applicant does not expressly accept or use any credit offered) each creditor
taking adverse action must provide the notice required by § 202.9(a),
but may do so through a third party. Third parties may use electronic
communication to provide required disclosures, provided the requirements
of § 202.17 are satisfied. This guidance is provided in new §
202.9(h).
Section 202.17 Requirements for Electronic Communication
17(a) Definition
As adopted, the definition of the term "electronic communication" remains
substantially unchanged from the 1999 proposals. Section 202.17(a) limits
the term to a message transmitted electronically that can be displayed
on equipment as visual text; an example is a message displayed on a personal
computer monitor screen. Thus, audio- and voice-response telephone systems
are not included. Creditors that accommodate vision-impaired applicants
by providing disclosures that do not use visual text must also provide
disclosures using visual text.
Some commenters asked for clarification that the definition was not intended
to preclude the use of devices other than personal computers, which also
can display visual text. The equipment on which the text message is received
is not limited to a personal computer, provided the visual display used
to deliver the disclosures meets the "clear and conspicuous" format requirement,
discussed below.
17(b) General Rule
Effective October 1, 2000, the E-Sign Act permits creditors to provide
disclosures using electronic communication, if the creditor complies with
the consumer consent requirements in section 101(c). Under section 101(c)
of the E-Sign Act, creditors must provide specific information about the
electronic delivery of disclosures before obtaining the consumer's affirmative
consent to receive electronic disclosures. The consent requirements in
the E-Sign Act are similar but not identical to the Board's 1999 proposal.
Section 202.17(b) sets forth the general rule that creditors subject to
Regulation B may provide disclosures electronically if the creditor complies
with section 101(c) of the E-Sign Act. Pursuant to the Board's authority
under section 703(a) of the ECOA, § 202.17(b) applies to consumer
and business credit applicants.
The E-Sign Act authorizes the use of electronic disclosures. It does
not affect any requirement imposed under the ECOA other than a requirement
that disclosures be in paper form, and it does not affect the content
or timing of disclosures. Electronic disclosures are subject to the regulation's
format, timing and retainability rules and the clear and conspicuous standard.
Comment 17(b)-1 contains this guidance.
Presenting Disclosures in a Clear and Conspicuous Format
The interim final rule imposes a new clear and conspicuous standard for
electronic disclosures under Regulation B. See § 202.17(b). (As part
of a comprehensive review of Regulation B, the Board proposed in August
1999 to apply the standard to all disclosures required to be in writing
(64 FR 44581, August 16, 1999).) Commenters generally supported the standard;
most believed a consistent standard should apply to all of the regulations.
A creditor must provide electronic disclosures using a clear and conspicuous
format. Also, in accordance with the E-Sign Act: (1) the creditor must
disclose the requirements for accessing and retaining disclosures in that
format; (2) the applicant must demonstrate the ability to access the information
electronically and affirmatively consent to electronic delivery; and (3)
the applicant must provide the disclosures in accordance with the specified
requirements. Comment 17(b)-2 contains this guidance.
Commenters posed a few questions about the applicability of the clear
and conspicuous standard to particular situations. Some asked whether
electronic advertisements or other unrelated promotional information may
appear on the same screen as mandatory disclosures that are posted on
an Internet web site. Except to the extent required by the regulation,
disclosures do not have to be provided separately from other information.
Advertisements should not be integrated into the text of the disclosure
in a manner that violates the clear and conspicuous standard.
Commenters also had questions about the use of navigational tools with
electronic disclosures. For example, some believed that such tools might
be helpful in directing consumers to related information that explains
the terminology used in the disclosures. Many Internet web sites use navigational
tools that are conspicuous through the use of bold text, larger fonts,
different colors, underlining, or other methods of highlighting. Such
tools are not per se prohibited so long as they are not used in a manner
that would violate the clear and conspicuous standard.
Providing Timely Disclosures
Disclosures delivered electronically must comply with existing timing
requirements under the ECOA and Regulation B. See, for example, §§202.5a,
202.9, and 202.13. Commenters on the Board's 1999 proposals requested
specific guidance that an electronic disclosure would be considered timely
based on the time it is sent by e-mail or posted on an Internet web site,
regardless of when the consumer receives or reads the disclosure.
Under the interim final rule, consistent with rules for disclosures that
are sent by postal mail, disclosures provided by e-mail are timely when
they are sent by the required time. Disclosures posted at an Internet
web site are timely if, by the required time, the creditor both makes
the disclosures available at that location and, in accordance with §
202.17(d)(2), sends a notice alerting the applicant that the disclosures
have been posted. For example, under § 202.9, a creditor must provide
a notice of action taken within 30 days of receiving a completed application.
For an adverse action notice posted on the Internet, a creditor must both
post the notice and notify the applicant of its availability within 30
days of receiving the completed application. Comment 17(b)-3(ii) contains
this guidance.
Certain disclosures must be provided at the time of application. For
example, if the creditor's procedures permit the applicant to apply for
a mortgage loan on-line, the applicant must be required to access the
disclosures required under § 202.13 before submitting the application.
A link to the disclosures satisfies the timing rule if the applicant
cannot bypass the disclosures before submitting the application. Or, the
disclosures in this example must automatically appear on the screen, even
if multiple screens are required to view the entire disclosure. Comment
17(b)-3 contains this guidance, as proposed, but has been expanded.
The on-line mortgage loan example was used in the supplementary information
of the September 1999 proposed rule to illustrate the timing requirements.
Some commenters expressed concern that the example required creditors
to provide in writingon the applicationthe information required
by § 202.13. These commenters asked the Board to clarify that the
information required by § 202.13(a) may be requested separately after
the creditor begins processing the application.
Regulation B currently requires a creditor that receives an application
for a mortgage loan, where the credit will be secured by the dwelling,
to request "as part of the application" certain applicant characteristic
information. See § 202.13(a). The official staff commentary further
provides that a creditor may collect the § 202.13(a) information
on the application form itself or on a separate form that refers to the
application. See comment 13(b)-1. Thus, while § 202.13(a) requires
creditors to collect the required information prior to submission of an
application, a creditor need not request the information on the application
itself. Accordingly, for a dwelling-secured mortgage loan taken over the
Internet, the creditor need not include the request on the actual application.
A link to the disclosure satisfies the rule if the applicant cannot bypass
the disclosure before submitting the application. Or, the information
must automatically appear on the screen. In addition, while the disclosure
required by § 202.13(c) may be provided orally or in writing, for
a mortgage loan taken over the Internet the disclosure would have to appear
on the screenalthough not on the application form itselfor
be accessed before the application is submitted to the creditor.
Some commenters asked the Board to clarify whether there is a requirement
to request monitoring information for mortgage loan applications taken
over the Internet. The Regulation B commentary currently provides that
for purposes of the requirements of § 202.13(a), a creditor may treat
an application taken through an electronic medium without video capability
as a telephone or mail application. Where applications are taken
by telephone, a creditor is not required to request applicant characteristic
information; where taken by mail, the information must be requested, but
the creditor is not required to make a special request if the applicant
did not provide the information. See comment 13(b)-3(i)(A), (B). (Creditors
should note, however, that in the August 1999 review of Regulation B,
the Board proposed to require creditors to treat applications taken through
an electronic medium without video capability as taken by mail (64 FR
44581).)
Some industry commenters believed that requiring disclosures to automatically
appear or be accessed by the applicant is cumbersome and unnecessary.
Some commenters suggested that the Board allow the required disclosures
to be accessible via a clearly marked navigational tool; they believe
that once the tool is provided, the disclosure should be deemed to have
been provided to the applicant.
The ECOA and Regulation B require that disclosures be provided to applicants.
It is not sufficient for creditors to provide a bypassable navigational
tool that merely gives applicants the option of receiving the disclosures.
Such an approach reduces the likelihood that applicants will notice and
receive the disclosures. The interim final rule ensures that applicants
actually see disclosures provided electronically so that they have the
opportunity to read the disclosures in a timely fashion.
Commenters on the various proposals requested guidance regarding the
creditor's duty in cases where a creditor cannot provide timely disclosures
because an automated loan machine or other automated equipment controlled
by the creditor malfunctions or otherwise fails to operate properly. Where
the creditor controls the equipment and disclosures are required at that
time, a creditor might not be liable for failing to provide timely disclosures
if the defense in § 202.14(c) of Regulation B is available.
Providing Disclosures in a Form the Consumer May Keep
With one exception (§ 202.9(a)(3)(i)(B), regarding business credit),
retainability is a new standard for disclosures under Regulation B. (In
August 1999, the Board requested comment on whether a retainability standard
should apply to all disclosures and information required by Regulation
B to be in writing (64 FR 44581).) Electronic disclosures required to
be in writing are subject to this requirement. Comment 17(b)-4 contains
guidance on this requirement.
Applicants may communicate electronically with creditors through a variety
of means and from various locations. Depending on the location (at home,
at work, in a public place such as a library), an applicant may not have
the ability at a given time to preserve ECOA disclosures presented on-screen.
To ensure that applicants have an adequate opportunity to access and retain
the disclosures, the creditor also must send them to the applicant's designated
e-mail address or make them available at another location, for example,
on the creditor's Internet web site, where the information may be retrieved
at a later date.
Where the creditor controls the equipment providing the electronic disclosures
(for example, an automated loan machine or computer terminal located in
the creditor's lobby), the creditor must ensure that the applicant has
the opportunity to retain the required information. Comment 17(b)-5 contains
guidance on this requirement.
17(c) When Consent is Required
Under the E-Sign Act, consumers must affirmatively consent before they
receive electronic disclosures "relating to a transaction" if the disclosures
are required by law or regulation to be in writing. Under Regulation B,
the consent requirement has been expanded to include both consumer and
business applicants. Some disclosures required to be in writing may be
included on or with an application provided to applicants for certain
credit regardless of whether the applicant applies for the loan (§§
202.5a(a)(2)(i) (notice of right to copy of appraisal), 202.9(a)(3)(i)(B)
(notice of right to a statement of reasons), and 202.13(a) (request for
monitoring information)). Section 202.17(c) is added to make clear
that an applicant's affirmative consent is not required before creditors
use electronic communication to provide these disclosures on or with an
application.
17(d) Address or Location to Receive Electronic Communication
Consistent with the 1999 proposals, the interim rule provides that creditors
may deliver electronic disclosures by sending them to an applicant's e-mail
address. Alternatively, the rule provides that creditors may make the
disclosures available at another location such as an Internet web site.
If the creditor makes a disclosure available at such a location, the creditor
effectively delivers the disclosure by sending a notice alerting the applicant
when the disclosure can be accessed and making the disclosure available
for at least 90 days. The time period for keeping disclosures available
at a location such as a creditor's Internet web site under the interim
rule differs from the 1999 proposals, based on commenters' concerns as
discussed below.
17(d)(1)
For purposes of § 202.17(d), an applicant's electronic address is
an e-mail address that is not limited to receiving communication transmitted
solely by the creditor, as proposed. This guidance is contained in comment
17(d)(1)-1.
An electronic address would not include systems that permit communication
only between the consumer and the creditor, for example, home-banking
programs that allow consumers to communicate directly with a creditor
on-line with the use of a computer and modem. Thus, disclosures provided
using systems such as home-banking programs are treated in the same manner
as disclosures made available at an Internet web site, and a notice alerting
the applicant when disclosures are posted must be sent by e-mail, or to
a postal address, at the creditor's option.
17(d)(2)
Under § 202.17(d)(2)(i) of the interim rule, for disclosures made
available at an Internet web site, a notice alerting the applicant when
disclosures are posted must be sent by e-mail (or to a postal address,
at the creditor's option). Section 202.17(d)(2)(i) requires that the alert
notice identify the account involved and the address or other location
where the disclosure is available. Comment 17(d)(2)-1 provides guidance
on the level of detail required in identifying the account.
As proposed, under § 202.17(d)(2)(ii) of the interim rule, disclosures
provided at an Internet web site must remain available for at least 90
days. The requirement seeks to ensure that applicants have adequate time
to access and retain a disclosure under a variety of circumstances, such
as when an applicant may not be able for an extended period of time to
access the information due to computer malfunctions, travel, or illness.
The 90-day period is uniform for all disclosures, for ease of compliance.
Comment 17(d)(2)-2 is added to provide that during this period, the actual
disclosures must be available to the applicant, but the creditor has discretion
to determine whether they should be available at the same location for
the entire period.
Some industry commenters believed the 90-day time period is reasonable
and feasible. About an equal number of commenters believed it was too
burdensome and costly; some of these commenters suggested periods that
ranged from 30 to 60 days.
The Regulation B proposal provided that after the 90-day time period,
disclosures would be available upon applicants' request, for 25 months,
in the same format as initially provided to the applicant. The 25-month
period is consistent with a creditor's duty to retain records that evidence
their compliance. Consumer advocates supported the proposed retention
period; some recommended that disclosures should be available upon request
for the length of the contractual relationship with the applicant.
Industry commenters strongly opposed the 25-month period. Many believed
that keeping copies of electronic disclosures actually provided to applicants
for that period of time would be costly and burdensome. Moreover, industry
commenters believed that once an applicant has accessed the disclosures,
the applicant rather than the creditor should have the duty to retain
them for future reference. They also noted that under existing record
retention requirements applicable to paper disclosures, a creditor need
only demonstrate compliance with the rules, but need not retain copies
of the actual disclosures provided to applicants.
The requirement for creditors to provide duplicate disclosures upon request
for 25 months has not been adopted. A creditor's duty to retain evidence
of compliance for 25 months remains unchanged.
17(d)(3) Exceptions
Section 202.17(d)(3) is added to make clear that the requirements of
paragraphs (i) and (ii) of § 202.17(d)(2) do not apply to the disclosure
required under § 202.13(a).
17(e) Redelivery
Industry commenters on the 1998 proposal asked for clarification that
sending the electronic disclosures complies with the regulation, and that
institutions are not required to confirm that the consumer actually received
them. Consumer advocates asked that institutions be required to verify
the delivery of disclosures by return receipt, in the case of e-mail.
In the 1999 proposals, the Board solicited comment on the need for and
the feasibility of such a requirement.
Consumer advocates believe that e-mail systems are not yet sufficiently
reliable, and that safeguards are necessary to ensure that consumers actually
receive disclosures. Industry commenters stated that a return receipt
requirement would be costly and burdensome, and would require creditors
to monitor return receipts in every case to determine that individual
consumers received the disclosures.
Section 101(c) of the E-Sign Act requires that consumers consent electronically,
or confirm their consent electronically, in a manner that reasonably demonstrates
that the consumer can access the information that the creditor will be
providing. This requirement seeks to verify at the outset that the consumer
is actually capable of receiving the information in the electronic format
being used by the creditor. After the consumer consents, the E-Sign Act
also requires creditors to notify consumers of changes that materially
affect consumers' ability to access electronic disclosures.
The interim rule does not impose a verification requirement because
the cost and burden associated with verifying delivery of disclosures
would not be warranted. When electronic disclosures are returned undelivered,
however, § 202.17(e) imposes a duty to attempt redelivery (either
electronically or to a postal address) based on address information in
the creditor's own files. Unlike paper disclosures delivered by postal
service, there generally is no commonly-accepted mechanism for reporting
a change in electronic address or for forwarding e-mail. Where a creditor
actually knows that the delivery of an electronic disclosure did not take
place, the creditor should take reasonable steps to effectuate delivery
in some way. For example, if an e-mail message to the applicant (containing
an alert notice or other disclosure) is returned as undeliverable, the
redelivery requirement is satisfied if the creditor sends the disclosure
to a different e-mail address or postal address that the creditor has
on file. Sending the disclosures a second time to the same electronic
address would not be sufficient if the creditor has a different address
for the applicant on file. Comment 17(e)-1 provides this guidance.
This redelivery requirement is limited to situations where the electronic
communication cannot be delivered and does not apply to situations where
the disclosure is delivered but, for example, cannot be read by the applicant
due to technical problems with the applicant's software. A creditor's
duty to redeliver a disclosure under § 202.17(e) does not affect
the timeliness of the disclosure. Creditors comply with the timing requirements
of the regulation when a disclosure is initially sent in a timely manner,
even though the disclosure is returned undelivered and the creditor is
required under § 202.17(e) to take reasonable steps to attempt redelivery.
17(f) Electronic Signatures
The E-Sign Act provides that electronic signatures have the same validity
as handwritten signatures. Section 106 of the act defines an electronic
signature. Section 202.17(f) is added to incorporate the E-Sign Act's
definition of electronic signature into the regulation. To comply with
the E-Sign Act, an electronic signature must be executed or adopted by
an applicant with the intent to sign the record. Accordingly, regardless
of the technology used to meet this requirement, the process must evidence
the applicant's identity. Comment 17(f)-1 provides this guidance.
Additional Issues
Document Integrity
The interim rule does not impose document integrity standards. Consumer
advocates and others expressed concerns that electronic documents can
be altered more easily than paper documents. They say that consumers'
ability to enforce rights under the consumer protection laws could be
impaired, in some cases, if the authenticity of disclosures they retain
cannot be demonstrated.
Institutions are generally required to retain evidence of compliance
with the Board's consumer regulations. Accordingly, the Board requested
comment on the feasibility of requiring institutions to have systems in
place capable of detecting whether or not information has been altered,
or to use independent certification authorities to verify disclosure documents.
Consumer advocates strongly supported document integrity requirements
(including the use of certification authorities) that would apply to all-electronic
disclosures. Signatures, notary seals, and verification procedures such
as recordation are used to protect against alterations for transactions
memorialized in paper form. Consumer advocates believe that comparable
verification procedures are needed for electronic disclosures as well.
Industry commenters opposed mandatory document integrity standards for
electronic disclosures. Because the technology in this area is still evolving,
they believe that mandatory standards would be premature. Others believe
that imposing document integrity standards or requiring the use of certification
authorities would be costly to implement.
The Board recognizes the concerns about document integrity, but believes
it is not practicable at this time to impose document integrity standards
for consumer disclosures or mandate the use of independent certification
authorities. Effective methods may be too costly. Other less costly methods
may deter alterations in some cases, but would not necessarily ensure
document integrity.
Moreover, the issue of document integrity affects electronic commerce
generally and is not unique to the written disclosures required under
the consumer protection laws administered by the Board. Section 104(b)(3)
of the E-Sign Act authorizes federal or state regulatory agencies to specify
performance standards to assure the accuracy, record integrity, and accessibility
of records that are required to be retained, but prohibits the agencies
from requiring the use of a particular type of software or hardware in
order to comply with record retention requirements. Technology is likely
to develop to protect electronic contracts and other legal documents.
Thus, it seems premature for the Board to specify any particular standards
or methods for consumer disclosure at this time.
V. Form of Comment Letters
Comment letters should refer to Docket No. R-1040, and, when possible,
should use a standard typeface with a font size of 10 or 12. This will
enable the Board to convert the text to machine-readable form through
electronic scanning, and will facilitate automated retrieval of comments
for review. Also, if accompanied by an original document in paper form,
comments may be submitted on 3 1/2 inch computer diskettes in any IBM-compatible
DOS- or Windows-based format.
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The Board has reviewed these interim amendments to Regulation B, in accordance
with section 3(a) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.SC. 604). Two
of the three requirements of a final regulatory flexibility analysis under
the Act are (1) a succinct statement of the need for and the objectives
of the rule and (2) a summary of the issues raised by the public comments,
the agency's assessment of those issues, and a statement of the changes
made in the final rule in response to the comments. These two areas are
discussed above.
The third requirement of the analysis is a description of significant
alternatives to the rule that would minimize the rule's economic impact
on small entities and reasons why the alternatives were rejected. This
interim final rule is designed to provide creditors with an alternative
method of providing disclosures; the rule will relieve compliance burden
by giving creditors flexibility in providing disclosures required by the
regulation. Overall, the costs of providing electronic disclosures are
not expected to have significant impact on small entities. The expectation
is that providing electronic disclosures may ultimately reduce the costs
associated with providing disclosures.
VII. Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3506; 5 CFR 1320 Appendix A.1), the Board reviewed the rule under the
authority delegated to the Board by the Office of Management and Budget.
The Federal Reserve may not conduct or sponsor, and an organization is
not required to respond to, this information collection unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control number is 7100-0201.
The collection of information that is revised by this rulemaking is found
in 12 CFR Part 202. This information is mandatory (15 U.S.C. 1691 et
seq.) to evidence compliance with the requirements of Regulation
B and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA). The respondents/recordkeepers
are creditors. Creditors are required to retain records for twenty-five
months (12 months for business credit). This regulation applies to all
types of creditors, not just state member banks. However, under Paperwork
Reduction Act regulations, the Federal Reserve accounts for the burden
of the paperwork associated with the regulation only for state member
banks. Other agencies account for the paperwork burden on their respective
constituencies under this regulation.
The revisions provide that creditors may deliver disclosures electronically
upon obtaining applicants' affirmative consent in accordance with the
E-Sign Act. The revisions also provide guidance to creditors on the timing
and delivery of electronic disclosures, to ensure that applicants have
adequate opportunity to access and retain the information.
With respect to state member banks, it is estimated that there are 1000
respondent/recordkeepers and an average frequency of 4,767 responses per
respondent each year. The current annual burden is estimated to be 125,678
hours. No comments specifically addressing the burden estimate were received,
therefore, the numbers remain unchanged. There is estimated to be no additional
cost burden and no capital or start up cost associated with the interim
final rule.
Because the records would be maintained at state member banks and the
notices are not provided to the Federal Reserve, no issue of confidentiality
arises under the Freedom of Information Act.
The Board has a continuing interest in the public's opinions of the Federal
Reserve's collections of information. At any time, comments regarding
the burden estimate, or any other aspect of this collection of information,
including suggestions for reducing the burden, may be sent to: Secretary,
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 20th and C Streets,
N.W., Washington, DC 20551; and to the Office of Management and Budget,
Paperwork Reduction Project (7100-0200), Washington, DC 20503.
VIII. Solicitation of Comments Regarding the Use of "Plain Language"
Section 722 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 requires the Board
to use "plain language" in all proposed and final rules published after
January 1, 2000. The Board invites comment on whether the interim rule
is clearly stated and effectively organized, and how the Board might make
the rule easier to understand.
List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 202
Aged, Banks, banking, Civil rights, Credit, Federal Reserve System, Marital
status discrimination, Penalties, Religious discrimination, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Sex discrimination.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Board amends Regulation
B, 12 CFR part 202, as set forth below:
PART 202 EQUAL CREDIT OPPORTUNITY (REGULATION B)
1. The authority citation for part 202 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 1691-1691f.
2. Section 202.4 is revised as follows:
§ 202.4 General rules.
(a) Rule prohibiting discrimination. A creditor shall
not discriminate against an applicant on a prohibited basis regarding
any aspect of a credit transaction.
(b) Foreign language disclosures. Disclosures may be made in languages
other than English, provided they are available in English upon request.
3. Section 202.9 is amended by adding a new paragraph (h) to read as
follows: § 202.9 Notifications.
(h) Duties of third parties. A third party may use electronic
communication in accordance with the requirements of § 202.17, as
applicable, to comply with the requirements of paragraph (g) of this section
on behalf of a creditor.
4. Part 202 is amended by reserving a new § 202.16 and adding
a new
§ 202.17 to read as follows:
§ 202.16 [Reserved].
§ 202.17 Requirements for electronic communication.
(a) Definition. Electronic communication means a message
transmitted electronically between a creditor and an applicant in a format
that allows visual text to be displayed on equipment, for example, a personal
computer monitor.
(b) General rule. In accordance with the Electronic Signatures
in Global and National Commerce Act (the E-Sign Act) (15 U.S.C. §
7001 et seq.) and the rules of this part, a creditor may
provide by electronic communication any disclosure required by this part
to be in writing. Disclosures provided by electronic communication must
be provided in a clear and conspicuous manner and in a form the applicant
may retain.
(c) When consent is required. For disclosures required by this
part to be in writing, a creditor shall obtain an applicant's affirmative
consent in accordance with the requirements of the E-Sign Act. Disclosures
under §§ 202.5a(a)(2)(i), 202.9(a)(3)(i)(B), and 202.13(a) are
not subject to this requirement if provided on or with the application.
(d) Address or location to receive electronic communication. A
creditor that uses electronic communication to provide disclosures required
by this part shall:
(1) Send the disclosure to the applicant's electronic address; or
(2) Make the disclosure available at another location such as an Internet
web site; and
(i) Alert the applicant of the disclosure's availability by sending a
notice to the applicant's electronic address (or to a postal address,
at the creditor's option). The notice shall identify the account involved
and the address of the Internet web site or other location where the disclosure
is available; and
(ii) Make the disclosure available for at least 90 days from the date
the disclosure first becomes available or from the date of the notice
alerting the applicant of the disclosure, whichever comes later.
(3) Exceptions. A creditor need not comply with paragraph (d)(2)(i)
and (ii) of this section for the disclosure required by § 202.13(a).
(e) Redelivery. When a disclosure provided by electronic communication
is returned to a creditor undelivered, the creditor shall take reasonable
steps to attempt redelivery using information in its files.
(f) Electronic signatures. An electronic signature as defined
under the E-Sign Act satisfies any requirement under this part for an
applicant's signature or initials.
5 In Supplement I to Part 202, a new § 202.16 is reserved and
a new § 202.17 is added to read as follows:
SUPPLEMENT I TO PART 202OFFICIAL STAFF INTERPRETATIONS
Section 202.16[Reserved]
Section 202.17Electronic Communication
17(b) General rule.
1. Relationship to the E-Sign Act. The E-Sign Act authorizes the
use of electronic disclosures. It does not affect any requirement imposed
under this part other than a provision that requires disclosures to be
in paper form, and it does not affect the content or timing of disclosures.
Electronic disclosures are subject to the regulation's format, timing,
and retainability rules and the clear and conspicuous standard. For example,
to satisfy the clear and conspicuous standard for disclosures, electronic
disclosures must use visual text. The clear and conspicuous and retainability
requirements apply to all disclosures provided electronicallythose
expressly required by the act and regulation to be in writing, and those
provided in writing where the creditor has the option to give the disclosure
orally or in writing.
2. Clear and conspicuous standard. A creditor must provide electronic
disclosures using a clear and conspicuous format. Also, in accordance
with the E-Sign Act:
i. The creditor must disclose the requirements for accessing and retaining
disclosures in that format;
ii. The applicant must demonstrate the ability to access the information
electronically and affirmatively consent to electronic delivery; and
iii. The creditor must provide the disclosures in accordance with the
specified requirements.
6. Timing and effective delivery.
i. When an applicant applies for credit on-line. When a creditor
permits an applicant to apply for credit on-line, the applicant must be
required to access the disclosures required at application before submitting
the application. A link to the disclosures satisfies the timing rule if
the applicant cannot bypass the disclosures before submitting the application.
Or the disclosures must automatically appear on the screen, even if multiple
screens are required to view all of the information. The creditor is not
required to confirm that the applicant has read the disclosures.
ii. Appraisals and adverse action. Disclosures provided by e-mail
are timely based on when the disclosures are sent. Disclosures posted
at an Internet web site, such as adverse action notices or copies of appraisals,
are timely when the creditor has both made the disclosures available and
sent a notice alerting the applicant that the disclosures have been posted.
For example, under § 202.9, a creditor must provide a notice of action
taken within 30 days of receiving a completed application. For an adverse
action notice posted on the Internet, a creditor must post the notice
and notify the applicant of its availability within 30 days of receiving
the applicant's completed application.
4. Retainability of disclosures. Creditors satisfy the requirement
that disclosures be in a form that the applicant may keep if electronic
disclosures are delivered in a format that is capable of being retained
(such as by printing or storing electronically). The format must also
be consistent with the information required to be provided under section
101(c)(1)(C)(i) of the E-Sign Act about the hardware and software requirements
for accessing and retaining electronic disclosures.
5. Disclosures provided on creditor's equipment. A creditor that
controls the equipment providing electronic disclosures to applicants
(for example, a computer terminal in a creditor's lobby or an automated
loan machine at a public kiosk) must ensure that the equipment satisfies
the regulation's requirements to provide timely disclosures in a clear
and conspicuous format and in a form that the applicant may keep. For
example, if disclosures are required at the time of an on-line application,
the disclosures must be sent to the applicant's e-mail address or must
be made available at another location such as the creditor's Internet
web site, unless the creditor provides a printer that automatically prints
the disclosures.
17(d) Address or Location to Receive Electronic Communication.
Paragraph 17(d)(1)
1. Electronic address. An applicant's electronic address is an
e-mail address that is not limited to receiving communication transmitted
solely by the creditor.
Paragraph 17(d)(2)
1. Identifying account involved. A creditor may identify a specific
account in a variety of ways and is not required to identify an account
by reference to the account number. For example, where the applicant has
only one credit card account, and no confusion would result, the creditor
may refer to "your credit card account." If the applicant has two
credit card accounts, the creditor may, for example, differentiate accounts
based on the card program or by using a truncated account number.
2. 90-day rule. The actual disclosures provided to an applicant
must be available for at least 90 days, but the creditor has discretion
to determine whether they should be available at the same location for
the entire period.
17(e) Redelivery.
1. E-mail returned as undeliverable. If an e-mail to the applicant
(containing an alert notice or other disclosure) is returned as undeliverable,
the redelivery requirement is satisfied if, for example, the creditor
sends the disclosure to a different e-mail address or postal address that
the creditor has on file for the applicant. Sending the disclosures a
second time to the same electronic address is not sufficient if the creditor
has a different address for the applicant on file.
17(f) Electronic signatures.
1. Relationship to the E-Sign Act. The E-Sign Act provides that
electronic signatures have the same validity as handwritten signatures.
Section 106 of the act defines an electronic signature. To comply with
the E-Sign Act, an electronic signature must be executed or adopted by
an applicant with the intent to sign the record. Accordingly, regardless
of the technology used to meet this requirement, the process must evidence
the applicant's identity.
By order of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, March
29, 2001.
(signed) Robert deV. Frierson
Robert deV. Frierson,
Associate Secretary of the Board.
All circulars and documents are available on the Internet through the
Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco's Internet site, at http://www.frbsf.org/banking/letters/.
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF SAN FRANCISCO
|