BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
In the matter of the amendment of ARM 23.3.148 pertaining to release of driving records
NOTICE OF AMENDMENT
TO: All Concerned Persons
1. On May 27, 2010, the Department of Justice published MAR Notice No. 23-3-216 pertaining to the public hearing on the proposed amendment of the above-stated rule at page 1237 of the 2010 Montana Administrative Register, Issue Number 10.
2. The department has amended the following rule as proposed: ARM 23.3.148.
3. The department has thoroughly considered the comments and testimony received. A summary of the comments received and the department's responses are as follows:
COMMENT #1: Does "one business entity," as used in the rule, encompass a whole insurance company, including a company's separate insurance departments such as fire and auto?
RESPONSE #1: An insurance company is considered one business entity under the rule, regardless of whether the record or abstract is used for separate departments.
COMMENT #2: Can "business entity" be clarified to cover larger trade name entities to prevent greater and unnecessary costs to Montana policyholders?
RESPONSE #2: As noted in response to comment # 1, "business entity" under the rule covers larger trade name entities, including separate departments such as fire and auto, and thus further clarification is unnecessary.
COMMENT #3: The rule will prevent vendors from offering monitoring services, which are allowed by 61-11-515, MCA, which alert insurers to any updates made to previously purchased Motor Vehicle Division ("MVD") records.
RESPONSE #3: Nothing in the rule prohibits a driver monitoring service with appropriate alerts to underlying requestors, a service that currently exists from the department for a fee of 15 cents per record per month. See 61-11-105(5) and (6) MCA. Instead, the rule will prevent information aggregators from acquiring MVD records and then reselling the records to multiple users.
COMMENT #4: 61-11-515, MCA, specifically contemplates that MVD records will be sold and thus used for multiple purposes.
RESPONSE #4: While 61-11-515, MCA, does contemplate the sale of MVD records, it does not state that these records may be sold for multiple purposes or to multiple entities. By limiting the sale of MVD records to a "single use," this rule meets the purpose of the Montana Driver Privacy Protection Act ("the Act"), "to create a more restrictive state version of the federal prohibition on release and use of certain personal information from state motor vehicle records [and] to protect an individual's privacy . . . ." 61-11-502, MCA. It also fulfills the rulemaking requirement of "providing for oversight of sale or disclosure of personal information to third parties." 61-11-516(3), MCA.
COMMENT #5: The rule would not add any additional protection for driver information beyond what already exists in the Act and the Montana insurance code.
RESPONSE #5: On the contrary, this rule will provide additional protections to the privacy and accuracy of drivers' information by ensuring that a MVD record represents the current status of a driver at the time the record is requested.
COMMENT #6: This rule will generate increased costs to insurers, and consequently for consumers of insurance products.
RESPONSE #6: The department disagrees for the reasons stated in responses 1 and 3 above. The rule should not directly affect insurers, but instead will prevent resellers from acquiring a MVD record and then reselling the information to multiple business entities.
By /s/ Steve Bullock /s/ J. Stuart Segrest
STEVE BULLOCK J. STUART SEGREST
Attorney General Rule Reviewer
Department of Justice
Certified to the Secretary of State September 13, 2010.