North Dakota breach notification lookup
Use this North Dakota breach notification lookup as an incident-triage clock, not as legal advice. It shows the fields Policywright has verified for North Dakota: statute citation, stated notification deadline, residents or regulators who may need notice, consumer-reporting-agency threshold, consumer-notice trigger, official source links, and the last verified date.
Last verified 2026-08-13. Not legal advice.
| Field | Verified value | Use in the incident file |
|---|---|---|
| Statute | N.D. Cent. Code ch. 51-30, including §§ 51-30-02 and 51-30-03 | Link the decision record to the official citation |
| Deadline | Resident and Attorney General notices in the most expedient time possible and without unreasonable delay, consistent with law-enforcement delay and measures needed to determine scope and restore integrity; data maintainers notify owners/licensees immediately after discovery if personal information was or is reasonably believed to have been acquired. | Sort multi-state response work by the shortest stated clock |
| Residents | North Dakota residents whose unencrypted personal information was, or is reasonably believed to have been, acquired by an unauthorized person after discovery or notification of the breach. | Identify whether affected residents receive notice |
| Regulator | Notify the North Dakota Attorney General by mail or electronic mail when a breach of the security system exceeds 250 individuals. | Record AG or regulator portal review |
| Consumer-reporting agencies | The reviewed North Dakota Chapter 51-30 materials did not verify a separate statewide nationwide-consumer-reporting-agency notice trigger for general breaches. | Check whether the affected count crosses a CRA threshold |
| Consumer trigger | North Dakota requires Attorney General notice by mail or electronic mail for any breach of the security system exceeding 250 individuals; the Attorney General may enforce Chapter 51-30 through the state's consumer-fraud enforcement chapter. | Tie notice analysis to the statutory trigger, not an unsupported assumption |
What this state lookup shows
North Dakota fields are rendered from the verified state dataset only when the field exists. No deadline is inferred when the data does not state one.
N.D. Cent. Code ch. 51-30, including §§ 51-30-02 and 51-30-03 is the statute citation retained for this lookup, and the state page links to the official statute source when available.
North Dakota requires Attorney General notice by mail or electronic mail for any breach of the security system exceeding 250 individuals; the Attorney General may enforce Chapter 51-30 through the state's consumer-fraud enforcement chapter. The consumer trigger matters because the clock usually starts only after a legally meaningful incident analysis, not merely because an IT alert appeared.
The last verified date for this North Dakota lookup is 2026-08-13. Use that date as a prompt to refresh counsel review before making a live notification decision.
How to use it during an incident
Start with containment and evidence preservation, then identify affected resident states and compare the shortest stated deadline first.
A practical incident file should record discovery time, encryption status, systems involved, affected consumer count, vendor involvement, and the person responsible for counsel review.
For North Dakota, the WISP should say where the notification decision log lives, who contacts counsel, who checks the regulator portal, and who approves any consumer notice before it is sent.
This lookup pairs with the Incident Response Plan because the plan owns the workflow: intake, escalation, containment, preservation, notice analysis, communications, and final review.
How it fits the WISP
A WISP should not guess at state-law outcomes; it should make the breach-review path fast, documented, and source-linked.
Pair this lookup with the North Dakota WISP requirements page so the firm's written program names the state-aware incident path before an event happens.
Policywright keeps the breach clock separate from the policy packet: the lookup tells you what to review, while the generated packet assigns owners, evidence records, remediation steps, and review cadence.
Not legal advice. A qualified lawyer should confirm whether the incident facts meet a statutory definition, whether substitute notice or regulator notice applies, and whether another state or federal rule changes the timeline.
FAQ
Is this North Dakota lookup legal advice?
No. It is a source-linked lookup for incident planning and should be reviewed with qualified counsel before relying on it in a live notification decision.
What if affected residents live outside North Dakota?
Use the multi-state lookup page and include every state where affected residents may live. The comparison table sorts selected states by the shortest stated deadline first.
Does this replace the FTC Safeguards Rule notice analysis?
No. State notice review is separate from the federal Safeguards Rule and 16 CFR 314.4(j) analysis. A serious incident file should preserve both review tracks.