On July 9, 2009, Missouri Governor Jay Nixon signed House Bill 62 (“HB 62”), making the Show-Me State the 45th state with an information security breach notification law on the books. The new law takes effect on August 28, 2009. But Missouri’s new law isn’t the only new data breach notification requirement on the horizon. Amendments to existing data breach notice laws in three other states, Texas, Maine and North Carolina, will also become effective soon.
Missouri: HB 62 includes many provisions that are similar to other state laws requiring notice to individuals when the security of their personal information has been compromised. For example, HB 62 includes a “material risk of harm” trigger. In other words, a business is not required to notify Missouri residents if, after an appropriate investigation or consultation with relevant law enforcement authorities, the business determines that identity theft is not likely to result from the breach. In addition, a business is not required to notify state residents if the personal information compromised was encrypted. Like some other state laws, HB 62 also requires notice to the Missouri Attorney General and national consumer reporting agencies if more than 1,000 Missouri residents are notified, and allows the Attorney General to seek actual damages or civil penalties from persons that fail to comply with the law.
HB 62 applies to the “typical” categories of personal information, including Social Security numbers, driver’s license numbers and information that would permit access to an individual’s financial accounts. But unlike most other state data breach notification laws, HB 62 also applies to medical and health insurance information, including an individual’s medical history, mental or physical condition, treatment or diagnosis, health insurance policy number and any other unique identifier used by a health insurer. Previously, only laws in California, Arkansas and Texas (see below) applied to this kind of information.
Texas: On June 19, 2009, Texas Governor Rick Perry signed House Bill 2004 (“HB 2004”), which expanded the scope of Texas’ data breach notification law to include public sector entities and health information. Specifically, HB 2004 amends the definition of “sensitive personal information” to include health care information, such as information about an individual’s physical or mental health or payment for health care services. The bill also amends the definition of “breach of system security” to reach breaches of encrypted information “if the person accessing the data has the key required to decrypt the data.” Finally, HB 2004 makes the state’s breach notice obligations applicable to public sector entities and nonprofit athletic and sports associations.
North Carolina: As of October 1, 2009, entities doing business in North Carolina will be required to both provide more detailed data breach notices to individuals and be more forthcoming with the state’s attorney general. North Carolina Senate Bill 1017 (“SB 1017”), signed by Governor Bev Perdue on July 27, 2009, amends North Carolina’s data breach notification law in two significant ways. First, SB 1017 requires notice to the attorney general anytime a business notifies North Carolina residents of a breach. Previously, such notice had been required only for breaches affecting more than 1,000 people. Second, notices to individuals affected by a breach will now be required to include a telephone number for the business providing the notice; toll-free numbers and addresses for the national credit reporting agencies; and toll-free numbers, addresses and web site addresses for the Federal Trade Commission and the North Carolina Attorney General’s Office along with a statement that individuals can learn about preventing identity theft from these sources. These new requirements build on top of existing mandates to (1) describe the incident, the type(s) of personal information unlawfully obtained and the actions being taken to prevent further unauthorized access; (2) provide a telephone number that the recipient may call for further information and assistance; and (3) advise affected individuals to remain vigilant by reviewing account statements and monitoring free credit reports.
Maine: For information about the recent amendment to Maine’s breach notification law, soon to become effective, see our prior blog post.
Since Missouri’s new law and these important updates need to be added to the smorgasbord of state data breach notification laws, it is probably a good time to revisit “The List” of such laws. Here it is!
Arkansas (ARK. CODE ANN. § 4-110-101 et seq.)
Connecticut (CONN. GEN. STAT. § 36a-701b)
District of Columbia (D.C. CODE § 28-3851)
Idaho (IDAHO CODE ANN. § 28-51-104 et seq.)
Kansas (KAN. STAT. ANN. § 50-7a01-02)
Maine (ME. REV. STAT. ANN. tit. 10, §1346 et seq.; see also L.D. 970)
Missouri (HB 62, tentatively codified at MO. REV. STAT. § 407.1500)
Montana (MONT. CODE ANN. § 30-14-1704)
New York (N.Y. GEN. BUS. LAW § 899-aa)
North Carolina (N.C. GEN. STAT. § 75-65; see also SB 1017)
Oregon (OR. REV. STAT. § 646A.600 et seq.)
Pennsylvania (73 PA. STAT. § 2303)
South Carolina (S.C. CODE ANN. § 39-1-90)
Tennessee (TENN. CODE ANN. § 47-18-21)
Texas (TEX. BUS. & COM. CODE ANN. § 521.001 et seq.; see also HB 2004)
Utah (UTAH CODE ANN. § 13-44-101 et seq.)
Virginia (Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-186.6)
West Virginia (W. Va. Code § 46A-2A-101 et seq.)