BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  SB 1166
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   August 4, 2010

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                Felipe Fuentes, Chair

                  SB 1166 (Simitian) - As Amended:  August 2, 2010 

          Policy Committee:                              JudiciaryVote:7-3

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program:  
          No     Reimbursable:               

           SUMMARY  

          This bill establishes additional notification requirements  
          following a security breach of a computerized data system.  
          Specifically, this bill:

          1)Requires the notification required by state agencies and  
            private entities following a security breach to contain  
            specified information, including the types of personal  
            information believed to have been breached, a general  
            description of the breach, whether notification was delayed  
            due to a law enforcement investigation, and toll-free phone  
            numbers and addresses of major credit reporting agencies if  
            the breach exposed a social security number or a driver's  
            license or California identification card number.

          2)Requires the notification to also include, if possible to  
            determine at the time the notice is provided, any of the  
            following:  (a) the date of the breach; (b) the estimated date  
            of the breach; or (c) the date range within which the breach  
            occurred.

          3)Provides state agencies and private entities discretion to  
            include in the breach notification:

             a)   Information on steps taken to protect individuals whose  
               personal information has been breached.

             b)   Advice on what such individuals can do to protect  
               themselves.

          4)Exempts a private entity from the above notification  
            requirements if the entity complies with data breach  








                                                                  SB 1166
                                                                  Page  2

            notification requirements in the federal Health Information  
            Technology and Clinical Health Act.

          5)Requires a state agency or private entity that is required to  
            notify more than 500 California residents of a breach to  
            electronically submit a copy of the notification, excluding  
            any personally identifiable information, to the Attorney  
            General.

          6)Requires the breach notification to be submitted, in the case  
            of a state agency, to the Office of Information Security  
            within the office of the State Chief Information Officer, and  
            in the case of a private entity, to the Office of Privacy  
            Protection within the State and Consumer Services Agency.

           

          FISCAL EFFECT  

          Minor absorbable costs for state agencies to comply with the  
          specified notification requirements.

           COMMENTS  

           1)Purpose  . Under existing law, a person, business, or state  
            agency that keeps, maintains, or leases computerized data that  
            contains personal information must notify anyone whose  
            personal information is compromised as a result of a data  
            breach.  The law permits the person, business, or state agency  
            to use "substitute notice" if the number of persons affected  
            would make personal notice prohibitively expensive or  
            impractical, or if the affected person's contact information  
            is not available. Beyond these provisions, existing law does  
            not create any requirements as to the form and content of the  
            required notices. This bill seeks to correct that deficiency.

           2)Prior Legislation  . SB 20 (Simitian) of 2009, an almost  
            identical bill with no registered opposition, was vetoed. The  
            governor argued, in part, that "there is no evidence that  
            there is a problem with the information provided to consumers"  
            in the event of a data breach. 

            Three other similar, but more expansive bills-SB 364  
            (Simitian) of 2008, AB 1656 (Jones) of 2008, and AB 779  
            (Jones) of 2007 were also vetoed.








                                                                  SB 1166
                                                                  Page  3


           Analysis Prepared by  :    Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081