BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 2636
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB
2636 (Linder and Dababneh)
As Amended August 16, 2016
Majority vote
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |80-0 |(May 31, 2016) |SENATE: |36-0 |(August 19, |
| | | | | |2016) |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: HEALTH
SUMMARY: Allows an official, if an electronic request for a
certified copy of a birth, death, or marriage record is made, to
accept an electronic verification of identity of the applicant
using a remote identity proofing process, as specified, or a
notarized statement of identity, to ensure the applicant is
authorized under law to receive that record. Specifies that the
multilayered remote identity proofing process for the electronic
verification authentication must: 1) meet or exceed the
National Institute of Standards and Technology electronic
authentication guideline for multilayered remote identity
proofing; 2) meet the verification requirements, as specified;
3) meet or exceed the information security requirements of the
Uniform Electronic Transactions Act, as specified; and, 4)
retain for each electronic verification, a record of the
applicant whose identity has been verified and the steps taken
to verify the identity. Requires, by January 1, 2019, the State
Registrar and any city and county that fulfills electronic
requests for these vital records without being provided a
AB 2636
Page 2
notarized statement that the requester is an authorized person
to report to the Attorney General and the Legislature specified
nonpersonally identifiable information.
The Senate amendments add a January 1, 2021 sunset date,
authorize the Department of Public Health (DPH) to implement and
administer the provisions of this bill through an all-county
letter or similar instructions, as specified, and make other
technical and conforming changes.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee:
1)DPH: Potential staffing costs of about $275,000 (General Fund
(GF)or Special Fund*) through 2020 to support two positions
should the DPH opt to establish a secure online verification
process. The estimated costs would support two positions to
manage a vendor contract for payment processing and
reconciling, as well as modifications to the current customer
request tracking system. The cost to contract with a private
vendor to provide the electronic authentication system and the
public interface for accepting electronic applications is
undetermined at this time.
2)County registrar/recorder: Potentially significant one-time
and ongoing non-reimbursable local costs (local funds) for
local agencies to establish and operate a secure online
verification process.
3)Vital records fee revenue: Potential shift of fee revenues
collected by the state and local agencies should the DPH opt
to establish an electronic verification system. Data through
fiscal year 2013-14 indicates that counties have historically
processed more than 90% of certified copy requests for vital
records each year. The adoption of an online verification
system by the DPH could increase state fee revenues, and
reduce the volume and demand for services in the counties,
AB 2636
Page 3
resulting in reduced local fee revenues and unknown impacts on
local operations.
4)Attorney General: Potential minor one-time costs (GF) to
accept the information reported by local agencies on the
electronic verification process.
*Health Statistics Special Fund
COMMENTS: According to the author, individuals seeking vital
records in California suffer longer wait times and pay
significantly higher fees than individuals seeking records in
most other states due to outdated statutes that govern vital
records request policies. The author states that county and
local staff are significantly burdened by current policies that
dictate that a vital records request may only be partially
competed online, followed by a notarized affidavit submitted on
paper. This hybrid system of online requesting means,
practically, that a vital records request cannot be processed
without countless of hours of county staff time wasted because
staff must manually attach related documents for each individual
request as supporting documentation is submitted. The author
further asserts that California's policies are drastically out
of step with national trends to increase access to vital
government services through online technologies, as 34 other
states and 171 local jurisdictions allow for digital
authentication of vital records requests online as a standard
matter of practice.
Electronic authentication (e-authentication) is the process of
establishing confidence in user identities electronically
presented to an information system. E-authentication presents a
technical challenge when this process involves the remote
AB 2636
Page 4
authentication of individual people over an open network (i.e.
the Internet), for the purpose of electronic government and
commerce. The National Institute of Standards and Technology,
under the United States Department of Commerce, released
guidelines in 2013 to provide technical guidance to agencies to
allow an individual to remotely authenticate his or her identity
to a federal information technology system. These guidelines
address only traditional, widely implemented methods for remote
authentication based on secrets. With these methods, the
individual whose identity is authenticated proves that he or she
knows or possesses some secret information.
Analysis Prepared by: Rosielyn Pulmano / HEALTH / (916)
319-2097 FN: 0004334