National Disaster Safety Board (NDSB)
Written and Edited by Harry Edelman (Harry Edelman), Brad Milliken (Brad Milliken), and Irene Conforti Green (Irene Conforti Green)
What’s happening?
Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI) and Senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA) have announced their intent to introduce bipartisan legislation to create a National Disaster Safety Board (NDSB). This legislation will be accompanied by companion bipartisan legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives by Representatives Katie Porter (D-CA) and Garret Graves (R-LA). The bipartisan group has made the text of their bill (along with a one-page summary) available to the public for review.
What does this mean?
Schatz and Cassidy’s bill, titled “The Disaster Learning and Life Saving Act of 2020,” seeks to establish and fund the NDSB as a “permanent and independent board to study the underlying causes of disaster-related fatalities and property damage nationwide.” The NDSB is modeled after the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) — an independent organization of approximately 400 people which investigates plane crashes, major highway incidents, and railroad accidents. Similarly, the NDSB would independently review federally declared disasters with more than ten disaster-related fatalities in order to make recommendations that provide policymakers a path forward.
Why does this matter?
Per a press release from Senator Schatz, “policymakers rely on a patchwork of studies, after-action reports, audits, and media reports to understand the impacts of natural disasters, which are inconsistent and vulnerable to political pressure.” While federal, state, local governments, and academic institutions conduct various types of after-action reports, analysis, and isolated recommendations, there are no consistent standards, requirements, or expectations that link them together. Looking through data from various compilations of after-action reports, Barnett et al. concluded a lack of standardization for after-action reports leads to shortcomings for analysis and implementation of recommendations. Per the introduced language included in the Disaster Learning and Life Saving Act of 2020, the NDSB would be granted the authority and resources to develop and enact a methodology of measuring impacts of hazards, assessing response capacity and capabilities in a manner that maintains consistency and allows for the analysis of trends over time.
How would the National Disaster Safety Board work?
Per language in the current form of the Disaster Learning and Life Saving Act of 2020, the NDSB may begin the review of an incident if the Board determines that a natural hazard or public health incident has the potential to cause ten or more fatalities. It may also initiate a review for any hazard or public health incident if requested by an affected State, Tribal or local government, or if the Board determines that information may be gained by a review or may benefit a socially, medically, or economically vulnerable population. Using NDSB’s to-be-developed methodology, reviews and recommendations would be submitted to Congress, any department or agency of the Federal Government, all State and Tribal governments, and the general public.
Who would be on the board?
The NDSB would have “seven members, all chosen for their experience in emergency management, public health, engineering, social and behavioral sciences, and experience working at the state and local level with vulnerable communities,” per the press release from Sen. Schatz’s office. In the language of the proposed legislation, the President appoints the seven members based on a list of fourteen developed by the majority and minority leaders from the Senate and U.S. House of Representatives. Additionally, as a nod to the notion that all disasters are inevitably local and require localized approaches, “At least two of the Board’s seven members would come from state and local contexts.” While the NDSB could be technically independent, its members will be the product of the political processes. Just as bodies like the FCC are, by statute, independent organizations, it is not hard to imagine a situation where the NDSB may not be immune to political pressure. As an independent agency, there is a higher bar set for removing the head officer. In regular executive branch agencies, the President can remove departmental or agency leadership at will. For independent agencies, the President would need to demonstrate malfeasance prior to removal, a measure against potential partisanship.
What are the future implications of the NDSB?
In press releases and in the discussion surrounding the NDSB, it is often compared to the National Transportation Safety Board, however, the relevance of Board members’ political orientation is likely the largest difference. The outcomes of NTSB reviews rarely contain political ramifications, while the potential outcomes of NDSB reviews could have tremendous political implications, especially for communities impacted by a disaster. Language in the proposed legislation seeks to prioritize efforts that focus on lifesaving and injury prevention, especially in disproportionately impacted communities. Partisanship already affects the way that disaster resources are allocated. NDSB could, by the nature of its work, become involved in topics such as systemic racism, social vulnerability, and emergency declarations. These have increasingly become partisan issues, more so than say, train accidents. It is worth remembering that an independent bipartisan organization is not, by virtue, apolitical.
Where do we go from here?
The bill has not yet been introduced and referenced press releases acknowledge the intent to file the proposed legislation. However, as a part of that process, the legislation must first be considered by a committee; which one is not entirely clear. The legislation will need to be scheduled, debated, potentially marked up, and finally voted on by whichever committee it is introduced. Once approved, the legislation will go to the Senate floor and again scheduled, debated, and voted on. It is possible that the proposed legislation makes it through this process without any changes. It is also possible that the proposed language changes considerably does not receive enough votes to advance, or is not signed into law by the President. At present, this proposed legislation represents a bipartisan effort to take a giant step forward for our country’s emergency and disaster management communities, but such a step is not taken without risk.
In the best case scenario, this legislation would lay the policy and appropriation foundation for establishing an analytical, impartial, non-regulatory body of multi-field experts capable of shining a light on major gaps in the Federal, State, Tribal, and Local Governments’ ability to reduce the loss of life, injury, and economic hardship caused by emergencies and disasters. In the worst-case scenario, this could create another “bipartisan” body managed by a partisan majority which could selectively assign facts to predetermined agenda-specific recommendations, an arguably worse outcome than having no NDSB at all. As with most pieces of legislation at this stage in the process, the range of expectations for the final product is quite large. Moving forward, expect the emergency and disaster management community writ large to track this issue closely.
Sources:
1. Office of US Senator Brian Schatz. (2020, October 9). Schatz, Cassidy To Introduce Bipartisan Legislation To Create New Independent Board To Investigate Major Natural Disasters, Make Policy Recommendations, Help Save Lives [Press release]. Retrieved October 18, 2020, from https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/browse?text=The Disaster Learning and Life Saving Act of 2020.#sponsor=412507&cosponsors=412269&sort=relevance
2. A BILL To provide for a National Disaster Safety Board., S., 116th Cong., Https://www.schatz.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/National Disaster Safety Board Bill Text ALB20C83[1].pdf (2020 (Pending)).
3. Senator Schatz, B., & Cassidy, B. (2020, October 9). Retrieved October 18, 2020, from https://www.schatz.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/National Disaster Safety Board One Pager.pdf
4. Barnett DJ, Strauss-Riggs K, Klimczak VL, Rosenblum AJ, Kirsch TD. An Analysis of After Action Reports From Texas Hurricanes in 2005 and 2017. J Public Health Manag Pract. 2020 Jan 30. doi: 10.1097/PHH.0000000000001120. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 32011592.
5. National Transportation Safety Board. (n.d.). History of The National Transportation Safety Board. Retrieved October 18, 2020, from https://www.ntsb.gov/about/history/pages/default.aspx
