Focus on Legislation: Creating a Natural Disaster Safety Board
Bi-partisan legislation is moving through the House and Senate
The National Transportation Safety Board – charged by Congress to investigate every civil aviation accident in the United States and to make recommendations for future safety – has an enviable track record. From 2010-2022 there were just two fatal accidents (and two total fatalities) of flights operated by U.S. air carriers, out of 122.1 million departures.1 Since 1967 the NTSB has investigated over 153,000 aviation accidents and made 15,730 safety recommendations, the large majority of which have been implemented. The NTSB’s approach, built around ‘go teams’ of technical experts who arrive on-scene quickly after accidents and collect perishable data, has become a model for similar safety organizations worldwide.
Inspired by the success of the NTSB, federal lawmakers in 2023 introduced bi-partisan legislation in the House and Senate that would establish a similar agency to investigate the causes of ‘natural’ disaster events.2 Will 2024 be the year that a National Disaster Safety Board is established? Where does the idea originate, and how would the board operate?
A (Very) Brief History of Disaster Commissions
The idea of establishing an independent and non-partisan research capacity for studying disasters has been proposed in different forms over the years and from different corners of the disaster management world. In broad terms the idea of comparatively investigating the ‘root causes’ of U.S. disasters has been around for decades, and organizations like the Natural Hazards Center and the Disaster Research Center were established with those goals in-mind. Major disaster events have also periodically led to demands for the establishment of ad-hoc investigative bodies. After Hurricane Katrina destroyed much of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast in 2005 there were urgent (but unsuccessful) calls to establish for an independent and non-partisan commission to investigate.3 Similar efforts were made after Hurricanes Irma and Maria devastated Puerto Rico and after the deadly Maui wildfires.
There have also been calls for a full-fledged investigative organization that go back over a decade. In 2009 Charles Jenning from the Christian Regenhard Center for Emergency Response Studies proposed something akin to a permanent investigative body, though centered in a university and focused on disaster responders.4 Researchers at major universities have worked to secure funding to establish permanent disaster research ‘field stations’ that would collect long-term data on risk and recovery. Scott Knowles, historian and author of the excellent The Disaster Experts, and his colleagues have been especially effective in advocating for the concept of a disaster safety board in recent years.
Legislation to establish a natural disaster safety board was introduced in Congress in 2020; the House successfully passed a version of the legislation in 2022 but the bill stalled in the Senate. In late 2023, U.S. Senators Bill Cassidy (R-LA) and Brian Schatz (D-HI) reintroduced the Disaster Learning and Life Saving Act. The next day, Representatives Katie Porter and Nancy Mace reintroduced companion legislation in the House, now titled the Natural Disaster Safety Board Act. These bills have a long and diverse list of supporters that include former FEMA Administrators Craig Fugate, Pete Gaynor and Brock Long; BPC Action, which works closely with its partner organization the Bi-Partisan Policy Center and its Disaster Response Reform Task Force; the National Low-Income Housing Coalition; Enterprise Community Partners; and the Association of State Floodplain Managers.
These continuing and bipartisan efforts by lawmakers makes it seem at least plausible that we could see such a board in the near future. What would it look like, and how would it operate?
A Summary of the Disaster Learning and Life Saving Act of 2023
Senate bill 3338 details the establishment, authority, staffing and operation of a Natural Disaster Safety Board. The full-text of its companion bill in the House (H.R. 6450) is not yet available, but based on its earlier language it seems likely that the two are largely identical.
I would encourage you to read the full-text of the bill, but here is my quick summary of some key parts:
Purpose - the NDSB is described as having 5 purposes:
(1) to reduce loss of life, injury, and economic injury caused by future incidents by learning from natural hazards, including the impacts and underlying factors of such incidents, in a standardized way;
(2) to maintain a focus that is future-looking and national in scope, by applying what the Board learns through the trends that emerge from the incidents the Board reviews nationally to prevent loss of life, or human or economic injury, not only in the affected jurisdiction, but nationally, as the Board determines relevant;
(3) in carrying out reviews, analyses, and recommendations, not to be accusatory in nature and the Board shall not seek to find blame in any individual or organization, or second-guess any relevant authorities;
(4) to address systemic causes behind the loss of life and human or economic injury in incidents, including by recommending the augmentation of resources available to entities responsible for managing incident consequences; and
(5) while preventing economic injury as part of the mission of the Board, when relevant, to prioritize efforts that focus on lifesaving and injury prevention, especially in disproportionately impacted communities, as its work determines them to be.
Authority to Review - generally speaking, the legislation directs the Board to investigate disaster events that cause 10 or more fatailities or other events as decided by the members. It further requires that the Board determine by majority vote whether each incident given a major disaster declaration should be investigated.
Supoena Authority - the NDSB would be given the authority to conduct hearings, administer oaths, and require necessary witnesses and evidence ‘by supoena or otherwise.’
Recommendations and Responses - Based on their investigations, the NDSB could issue recommendations and would be required to identify the relevant entity responsible for making the change called for. The Board would publish the responses of those entitites publicly, and assess whether the responses adequately reduce the risk of future losses. Federal departments and agencies identified in a recommendation would be required to respond within 90 days about whether they would be adopting the recommendation in whole, in part, or not at all, and an explantation of their decision.
Disproportionately Impacted Communities - the NDSB would be required to develop findings that would benefit the prevention of damages among socially vulnerable populations. It would also be required to:
…publish information regarding the number of fatalities and injuries, and the facts and circumstances surrounding them, disaggregated by race, color or ethnicity, religion, nationality, sex, age, disability, English proficiency, occupation, or economic status, and other demographic characteristics that the Board may determine appropriate.
Leadership and Staffing - the NDSB would be composed of 7 members, appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. The members would be chosen from a list of 14 individuals provided by both houses of Congress, with ‘not more than 4 members…appointed from the same political party.’
The legislation provides some broad guidance on the qualifications of potential members:
(B) all members shall be appointed on the basis of technical qualification, professional standing, and demonstrated knowledge in emergency management, fire management, emergency medical services, public health, physical sciences, social science, behavioral science, or architectural and engineering with post-disaster evaluation or building forensics expertise in their respective field;
It further requires that a minimum of 2 members must have experience working at the State or municipal level in one of the above fields, and that a minimum of two members must have demonstrated professional experience working with historically vulnerable populations.
The term of office for NDSB members would be 5 years. One of the members would be appointed as the Chairperson, and another as Vice Chairperson.
Each board member would appoint and supervise full-time staff members. The legislation also provides guidance on the detailing of federal employees from reelvant agencies (FEMA, DOD, HUD, etc.) and from state, local and Tribal governments, higher education, and non-profit research organizations.
Budget - the bill directs the Secretary of Transportation to fund the NDSB at amounts starting at $25 million for fiscal year 2024 and increasing to $60 million by fiscal year 2027.
Final Thoughts
The idea of a NDSB is certainly exciting for a disaster researcher like myself. Anyone who has spent time in this business knows the data challenges we face and the general frustration with the lack of research capacity within our federal agencies who manage disaster programs. The research community is vibrant and growing, but ultimately we have a major shortage of multi-disciplinary, comparable and actionable research.
I certainly have lots of questions. Who will line up in support of the bills, and who will oppose them? What will the relative balance of expertises look like on the NDSB? How will the NDSB consider policy issues where there are no immediate federal ‘triggers’ like land-use planning?
I’ll be tracking the bill in 2024 and will write more as things develop.
Get Smarter on the Natural Disaster Safety Board:
‘Why We Need a National Disaster Safety Board,’ featuring Doug Parson (America Adapts), Anna Weber (Natural Resources Defense Council), and Scott Knowles (Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology)
‘For the COVID-19 Era, a United States Disaster Investigation Board,’ by Glenn Corbett (John Jay College) and Scott Knowles (KAIST)
‘President Joe Biden Hasn’t Launched a Maui Fire Investigation. Here’s Why,’ by Jennifer Scholtes and Alex Daugherty
‘What if American Had a Detective Agency for Disasters?’ by Adam Rogers (Wired)
‘Forensic Disaster Investigations In-Depth, a New Case Study Model,’ by Ian Burton (University of Toronto)
Sources: The National Transportation Safety Board Aviation Accident Statistics and the Bureau of Transportation Statistics.
While proponents of these bills often cite the NTSB, the Chemical Safety Board is another such agency that a National Disaster Safety Board takes inspiration from.
Then Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) proposed two pieces of legislation to establish an independent investigative commission to study Katrina, but both efforts lacked sufficient Republican support. The Senate Committee appointed a ‘Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina,’ which released its findings in February of 2006. The Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs published their own report later that year.
'Concept For Implementation of a Lessons Learned Capability For Presidentially Declared Disasters,’ by Charles R. Jennings (RaCERS, John Jay University).