PBSA Mid-Year 2026: NY Regulatory Updates Every CRA Should Track

The PBSA Mid-Year Conference descends on Washington, D.C., bringing together screening professionals focused on compliance, legislation, and the regulatory forces shaping our industry. For CRAs with significant New York volume, this year's conference arrives at a pivotal moment.

New York has always been the most complex state for criminal background screening. In 2026, that complexity is compounding: Clean Slate implementation is underway, the patchwork of local Fair Chance laws continues expanding, and Article 23-A compliance requirements are under increased scrutiny. Add intensifying FCRA enforcement and emerging AI regulations, and CRAs face a regulatory environment that demands attention.

Whether you're attending PBSA Mid-Year or following from afar, this preview covers the New York-specific regulatory developments every CRA should be tracking - and what they mean for your operations.

Clean Slate Implementation: Where We Stand

The New York Clean Slate Act took effect on November 16, 2024, giving the Unified Court System until November 16, 2027, to seal all eligible conviction records. We're now deep into the implementation window, and CRAs should understand what's happening behind the scenes.

Implementation Progress

The three-year implementation timeline exists because the technical requirements are genuinely complex. Courts must gather conviction records from every jurisdiction in the state, connect each conviction to incarceration and supervision records, verify eligibility criteria, and build automated sealing systems. Given New York's fragmented court structure - over 1,200 local courts with varying record-keeping practices - this is a massive undertaking.

As of early 2026, the Unified Court System is actively building these processes. CRAs should expect:

• Gradual sealing of eligible records throughout 2026 and 2027

• Inconsistent timing across jurisdictions as different courts implement at different paces

• Increased dispute volume as applicants believe records should be sealed before processing is complete

• Data source lag as third-party databases and court systems update at different rates

What CRAs Should Monitor

The Unified Court System will publish the manual review request form by November 16, 2027. Before that deadline, individuals whose records should have been sealed but weren't can request a review. CRAs should prepare for:

• Consumer disputes citing NY Clean Slate eligibility

• Questions from clients about what Clean Slate means for their industry

• The need to verify whether specific records have actually been sealed versus merely being eligible

Key conference topic: Expect Clean Slate implementation updates and cross-state comparisons at PBSA Mid-Year. New York joins eleven other states with Clean Slate laws, each with implementation nuances that affect multi-state CRA operations.

New York's Fair Chance Patchwork: A Compliance Maze

New York's ban-the-box landscape remains one of the most complex in the country. State-level protections under NYSHRL Section 296(16) and Article 23-A layer with increasingly stringent local ordinances, creating a compliance maze for CRAs serving clients across multiple New York jurisdictions.

The Current Landscape

New York City Fair Chance Act: The most expansive ban-the-box law in the country. Employers with four or more employees cannot inquire about criminal history until after a conditional offer. The 2021 amendments added protections for pending criminal cases and convictions during employment, requiring analysis of seven NYC Fair Chance factors before adverse action.

Buffalo Fair Screening Ordinance: Prohibits employers with 15+ employees from inquiring about criminal convictions before a first interview.

Rochester Ordinance: Similar structure to Buffalo with local variations in timing and thresholds.

Suffolk County and Westchester County: Additional local requirements with jurisdiction-specific exemptions and timing restrictions.

Article 23-A: The Foundation

Underlying all New York fair chance requirements is Article 23-A of the Correction Law, which mandates an eight-factor individualized assessment before any adverse employment action based on criminal history:

1. New York's public policy encouraging employment of people with criminal records

2. The specific duties and responsibilities of the position

3. The bearing, if any, of the conviction on fitness for the position

4. Time elapsed since the offense

5. Age at the time of the offense

6. Seriousness of the offense

7. Legitimate interest in protecting property and safety

8. Evidence of rehabilitation

CRA implication: Your clients need to understand these requirements, and many will look to their CRA for guidance. While CRAs don't conduct Article 23-A analyses, providing clients with educational resources about their obligations positions you as a compliance partner.

FCRA Enforcement: Accuracy Under the Microscope

FCRA litigation continues its upward trajectory, with class action filings increasing year over year. For CRAs operating in New York, the state's unique court structure creates specific accuracy challenges that regulators and plaintiffs' attorneys are increasingly scrutinizing.

The Name-Matching Problem

The CFPB's November 2021 advisory opinion made clear that name-only matching procedures create unacceptable risks of mistaken identity. In New York, this problem is compounded by:

Fragmented data sources: Criminal records exist across county courts, local courts, and state repositories - each with varying data quality and identifier availability.

NYS OCA exact-match requirements: The Office of Court Administration's Criminal History Record Search (CHRS) requires precise name matching. Name variations, spelling differences, and clerical errors can cause records to be missed - or worse, attributed to the wrong individual.

Common name challenges: In a state with over 19 million residents, common names generate multiple potential matches across fragmented systems.

CRAs must implement procedures that go beyond simple name matching - using multiple identifiers (name, DOB, SSN, address) to ensure accurate attribution before reporting criminal records.

Dispute Resolution Under Scrutiny

FCRA Section 611 requires CRAs to conduct reasonable reinvestigation when consumers dispute information. With Clean Slate implementation creating new categories of disputes ("this record should have been sealed"), CRAs need robust dispute handling processes that:

• Distinguish between "eligible for sealing" and "actually sealed"

• Verify current record status with primary sources

• Document reinvestigation steps thoroughly

• Respond within required timelines

Key conference topic: PBSA Mid-Year typically features sessions on FCRA compliance, dispute handling best practices, and enforcement trends. Given recent settlement activity, expect heightened focus on accuracy procedures and documentation requirements.

Emerging Issue: AI Regulation and Automated Decision-Making

2025 saw a wave of state AI legislation affecting employment decisions, and 2026 will bring implementation and enforcement. For CRAs using automated tools in their screening processes, this emerging regulatory framework demands attention.

States including Colorado, Utah, Texas, and others have enacted AI laws affecting consequential decisions - including employment and tenancy eligibility. These laws typically require:

• Disclosure when AI tools contribute to decisions

• Human oversight mechanisms

• Bias auditing requirements

• Consumer notification when interacting with AI systems

While New York hasn't enacted comprehensive AI legislation yet, New York City's Local Law 144 (effective July 2023) requires bias audits for automated employment decision tools used by NYC employers. CRAs serving NYC clients should understand how their tools and processes interact with these requirements.

Key conference topic: AI regulation is a hot topic across the PBSA agenda. Expect sessions on federal preemption questions, state-by-state compliance requirements, and practical implementation guidance for CRAs.

The Bottom Line

New York's regulatory environment for criminal background screening has never been more complex - or more consequential. Clean Slate implementation, Fair Chance law expansion, FCRA enforcement trends, and emerging AI regulations create a landscape that demands active monitoring and proactive adaptation.

The PBSA Mid-Year Conference provides an invaluable opportunity to engage with these issues alongside industry peers, legal experts, and regulators. For CRAs with significant New York volume, the investment in staying current on these developments pays dividends in reduced compliance risk, stronger client relationships, and competitive differentiation.

The screening companies that thrive in this environment will be those that position themselves as compliance partners - not just data providers. That positioning starts with understanding the regulatory landscape and communicating it effectively to clients.

Will you be at PBSA Mid-Year?

If you'd like to discuss how New York's regulatory changes affect your operations - or learn more about how Pointer File NY™ addresses the state's unique screening challenges - we'd welcome the conversation.