Proposed Changes To GLBA Privacy Regs Raise Red Flag Among Insurers

The concern among insurers was an amendment requiring a notice to covered individuals. The amendment (Section 9-A(b)) says providing a notice to a covered individual is optional unless the individual is an insurers consumer or the individual requests a notice.

However, a section addressing the definition of consumer states that if an insurer provides notice to the plan sponsor or group policyholder or workers compensation policyholder, and does not disclose individual nonpublic personal financial information to a nonaffiliated third party, individuals would not be consumers because they would be covered by the group notice.

Insurers are assessing these amendments.

In a letter dated July 8, Steph Zielezienski, AIA assistant general counsel, writes that the AIA believes that the group is not charged with amending the privacy model, but rather interpreting it so that it is consistent with Gramm-Leach-Bliley.

He notes that the proposed amendment of 9A(b) is not a clarification, but rather, a change.

The American Council of Life Insurers, Washington, is still reviewing the working group proposals, says Jack Dolan, an ACLI spokesman.

The Health Insurance Association of America, Washington, opposes reopening the health privacy model because it does not want to see a model already in place in a number of states reopened, according to Joseph Luchok. However, on the amendments to the 1999 NAIC model, Luchok says that “we agree with the intent but we have not looked at the precise language.”

Reproduced from National Underwriter Life & Health/Financial Services Edition, July 15, 2002. Copyright 2002 by The National Underwriter Company in the serial publication. All rights reserved.Copyright in this article as an independent work may be held by the author.