HB3436 would create a new West Virginia Genetic Information Privacy Act governing how entities collect, use, disclose, store, and delete genetic data and biological samples. The bill applies to businesses and organizations that offer consumer genetic testing or otherwise collect, use, or analyze genetic data, and it requires them to provide clear privacy notices, obtain express consent for collection and use, and secure separate consent for certain disclosures, including sharing with third parties, research uses, marketing, and sale of genetic data. It also gives consumers rights to access, delete, revoke consent, and request destruction of biological samples.
The bill includes several exclusions and special rules. It generally does not apply to certain HIPAA-covered health information when separate informed consent is obtained, to some research activities conducted under federal human-subject protections, or to governmental agency uses, although it adds a restriction that beginning January 1, 2027, government collection, storage, use, or dissemination of genetic data must be authorized by specific state law or a search warrant. It also bars disclosure of genetic data to health, life, or long-term care insurers or employers without express consent, restricts storage in sanctioned or foreign-adversary countries, and limits transfer or storage outside the United States without resident consent.
If enacted, the bill would add a new article to the West Virginia Code establishing a standalone privacy regime for genetic information and consumer DNA-related data. It would impose compliance duties on genetic testing companies, laboratories, data processors, and other entities handling genetic data, while creating consumer rights and disclosure restrictions that go beyond general privacy law. The Attorney General would have exclusive enforcement authority and could seek actual damages, costs, attorney fees, and a statutory penalty of $2,500 per violation of the core privacy requirements.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials, the overall sentiment appears to be privacy-protective and consumer-focused, with the bill framed as a safeguard for sensitive genetic information. The structure of the proposal suggests support for stronger limits on commercial use, law-enforcement access, and secondary sharing of DNA data. No contrary viewpoints are documented in the provided record.
The main points of potential contention are the bill’s broad consent and notice requirements, its restrictions on marketing, sale, and third-party disclosure of genetic data, and its limits on government access. Businesses in the direct-to-consumer genetic testing, health data, and research sectors may view the compliance obligations and enforcement penalties as burdensome, especially the separate consent requirements and retention/destruction rules. Privacy advocates are likely to support the bill’s protections, while law-enforcement and some governmental users may object to the warrant-or-specific-law requirement for government handling of genetic data beginning in 2027.