Overview
Title
To provide for a National Disaster Safety Board, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
H.R. 6450 is a plan to start a special team called the National Disaster Safety Board. This team's job is to look at big weather problems, like storms and earthquakes, to learn how to keep people safe in the future.
Summary AI
H.R. 6450 proposes the creation of a National Disaster Safety Board to examine natural disasters and learn from them to prevent future loss of life and property damage. The board would operate independently within the government, focusing on understanding the causes of disasters, making safety recommendations, and ensuring coordination with various governmental levels. It aims to prioritize lifesaving and injury prevention efforts, especially in communities that are disproportionately affected. The bill outlines the process for appointing board members, conducting reviews, and making findings and recommendations publicly available.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The bill titled "National Disaster Safety Board Act of 2023" proposes the establishment of a National Disaster Safety Board (NDSB). This independent body aims to study natural disasters to understand and address systemic causes of these events without assigning blame. The Board seeks to apply its findings nationwide, focusing particularly on preventing loss of life and economic harm, especially among communities that are disproportionately affected. Additionally, it is responsible for generating recommendations based on its findings and ensuring these recommendations are communicated to relevant entities through training and collaboration.
Summary of Significant Issues
Ambiguities and Accountability
One significant issue with the bill is the potential ambiguity of certain terms and definitions. For example, the term "economic injury" relies on a definition from another piece of legislation, which might lead to inconsistent interpretation. Moreover, the bill affords the NDSB considerable discretion in deciding which incidents to study, potentially leading to subjective interpretations and inconsistencies.
Furthermore, exemptions from federal acts like the Administrative Procedure Act may reduce transparency and accountability, raising ethical concerns about the Board's proceedings and decision-making processes. The 90-day timeline for federal agencies to respond to recommendations may also be insufficient for a thorough evaluation, potentially leading to rushed and poorly considered responses.
Budgetary Concerns
The bill proposes substantial financial appropriations over several years without clearly specifying how these funds will be utilized, which could lead to ineffective or wasteful spending. Similarly, training protocols for the Board and associated entities lack clear guidelines on fee structures, raising concerns about financial management and fairness.
Complex Selection Process
The selection process for Board members is intricate and could cause delays in its establishment. This complexity, coupled with requirements for broad consultations, introduces risks of favoritism or excessive influence from external organizations, which may undermine the Board’s impartiality.
Impacts on the Public and Specific Stakeholders
Broad Public Impact
For the general public, the establishment of the NDSB could potentially lead to better-preparedness for natural disasters, ultimately reducing loss of life and economic damage. By focusing on understanding trends and systemic issues, the Board's work could result in more effective response strategies and enhanced resilience against future incidents. However, if cost overruns or inefficiencies arise due to unclear fund utilization, taxpayers could bear unnecessary financial burdens.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Federal, State, and Local Governments: These entities could benefit from enhanced collaboration and coordination in disaster response efforts but may face challenges navigating the complex structure of the Board's operations. Additional responsibilities concerning data sharing and implementing recommendations may also strain resources if not properly managed.
Disproportionately Impacted Communities: These communities stand to gain the most from the Board's targeted focus on reducing vulnerability and enhancing resilience. However, ensuring this aspect remains a priority amidst broader operational challenges will be crucial for delivering meaningful aid.
Private Sector and Educational Institutions: Partnerships with the private sector and educational institutions could lead to innovations in disaster preparedness and response. However, ambiguities in appointing members and potential favoritism or influence from consultations could skew priorities, affecting the breadth and effectiveness of initiatives.
Overall, while the National Disaster Safety Board Act of 2023 aims to enhance disaster resilience and reduce harm, its success will depend heavily on clear guidelines, transparent processes, and effective resource management.
Financial Assessment
The proposed legislative bill, H.R. 6450, outlines significant financial appropriations to support the establishment and operation of a National Disaster Safety Board. The monetary aspects and potential implications are discussed herein.
Financial Appropriations
The bill authorizes substantial allocations of funds to establish and maintain the National Disaster Safety Board. The appropriations are structured as follows: $25 million for fiscal year 2024, $40 million for fiscal year 2025, $50 million for fiscal year 2026, and $60 million for fiscal year 2027. These funds are intended to be available until expended, suggesting a commitment to long-term financial support for the board's operations.
Relationship to Identified Issues
Ambiguity in Fund Utilization
A critical issue identified is the lack of specificity in how the appropriations will be utilized. The bill authorizes large sums for the board but does not delineate the exact uses for these funds. This lack of detailed allocation could lead to potential inefficiencies and wasteful spending. It raises concerns about financial transparency and accountability, as the bill does not explicitly outline mechanisms to monitor or evaluate the effectiveness of financial use.
Potential for Wasteful Spending
The allocation of funds without clear, predefined purposes poses a financial risk. Large appropriations without associated guidelines increase the chance of resources being mismanaged or expended on non-essential activities. This issue aligns with the concern that Section 4's exemptions from certain procedural acts might lessen oversight, further amplifying the risk of financial misuse.
Excessive Formation of Liaison Committees
The bill allows the Chairperson of the board to determine the number of liaison committees necessary, without specific guidelines. This might lead to the formation of numerous committees, which could unnecessarily inflate operating costs and lead to inefficient use of allocated funds. Such excessive expansions can strain financial resources and prompt ethical concerns regarding resource allocation.
Unclear Fee Guidelines for Training Services
Section 11 mentions the authorization to charge reasonable fees for training services. However, it lacks clear guidelines on what constitutes a reasonable fee, which could lead to financial mismanagement or inequitable practices. Without standardized fee structures, there is potential for inconsistency in how charges are applied, which may lead to disparities in access to training services provided by or through the board.
Conclusion
The financial components of H.R. 6450, while laying a foundation for a robust budget to support the board's operations, exhibit some areas of concern. The bill could benefit from additional specificity in fund utilization, more stringent oversight, and clearer guidelines for fees and committee formations. Addressing these issues would enhance the financial accountability and effectiveness of the National Disaster Safety Board, thereby increasing public trust in its operations.
Issues
The definition of 'economic injury' in Section 2, which relies on the term 'substantial economic injury' from the Small Business Act, could be ambiguous without further details, potentially leading to inconsistent application.
The exemption from the Administrative Procedure Act, Paperwork Reduction Act, and Federal Advisory Committee Act in Section 4 might lack transparency and reduce accountability, which could raise legal and ethical concerns.
In Section 5, the timeline for federal departments and agencies to reply to the Board's recommendations (90 days) may be insufficient for thorough evaluation, potentially leading to hasty decisions affecting policy implementation.
Section 12 authorizes large appropriations without specifying fund utilization, potentially increasing the risk of wasteful spending, which poses financial concerns.
In Section 7, the complex and multi-layered selection process for appointing Board members could lead to delays and inefficiencies, raising political concerns about the Board's timely establishment and function.
Section 4's criteria for determining incident review could lead to subjective interpretation, creating inconsistencies that may impact public trust and affect policy outcomes.
The provision in Section 9 allowing the Chairperson to determine the number of liaison committees without specific guidelines may lead to excessive formations, raising financial and ethical concerns about resource allocation and favoritism.
Section 11 lacks clear guidelines on what constitutes a 'reasonable fee' for training services and details on reimbursement rates, potentially leading to inequity and financial mismanagement.
The language in Section 6 categorizing recommendations as 'open', 'closed', or 'outdated' might lead to potential ambiguities, leaving room for subjective interpretation, which can impact the perceived effectiveness of recommendations.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title; table of contents Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines the short title of a proposed law, named the "National Disaster Safety Board Act of 2023," and provides a list of sections included in the act, which range from definitions and purpose, to administrative details and information disclosure.
2. Definitions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
This section defines key terms used in the bill, detailing what constitutes an act of violence, the role of the National Disaster Safety Board and its Chairperson, economic injury, and what qualifies as a natural or technological disaster. It also explains the terms related to higher education and research institutions, states, terrorism, and tribal governments.
3. Establishment and purpose Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The National Disaster Safety Board is established to independently study natural disasters with the aim of preventing future loss of life and economic harm by focusing on understanding and addressing systemic causes without assigning blame. It seeks to apply its findings nationally and emphasizes lifesaving and injury prevention efforts, especially in communities that are disproportionately affected.
4. General authority Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The Board is authorized to review incidents of natural hazards causing significant loss of life, injury, or economic damage to help prevent similar incidents in the future. They work with various government levels and entities, can choose or decline to review specific incidents, and coordinate with other investigations. They aim to understand trends and issue safety recommendations, often focusing on vulnerable communities, and share findings to assist in reducing future risks.
5. Recommendations and responses Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines the responsibilities of the Board when making recommendations following an incident. It requires explaining the link between recommendations and findings, identifying entities that must make changes, publishing responses, and evaluating if responses reduce future risks. Federal agencies must reply to recommendations within 90 days, detailing their plan and timeline, while the Board must eventually make these publicly available. Additionally, the Board ensures recommendations are shared through training, professional associations, and collaborations with relevant organizations and institutions.
6. Reports and studies Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The Board is required to submit annual reports to Congress and other entities containing studies on reducing harm from natural hazards, evaluate protective measures, and suggest effective policies. Additionally, every two years, the Board must provide a detailed report on reviews conducted, assess governmental responses, and list incidents not reviewed. The Board must also share this information through training and collaboration with relevant organizations.
7. Appointment and organization Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill establishes a Board composed of seven members appointed by the President, with advice from the Senate, to oversee emergency management and related fields. It outlines the rules for appointments, including political diversity and technical qualifications, sets terms of office, and details the powers of the Chairperson, organization, and responsibilities of different offices, while also ensuring open meetings and transparency in decision-making.
8. Methodology Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The Board is required to follow professional best practices when conducting reviews and creating reports. It must regularly examine and update its methods, use relevant information from various entities, and ensure transparency by explaining its reasoning in reports. The section also specifies that nothing should delay the presentation of urgent findings, and the methodology must be published within 30 days of a review's publication.
9. Administrative Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines the powers and responsibilities of the Board, including conducting hearings, issuing subpoenas, and enforcing compliance through civil actions. It also details the Board's authority to hire experts, make agreements, and interact with government bodies, as well as procedures for budget submissions and managing overtime pay for employees. Additionally, it specifies how the Board can collect funds, regulate entry and inspection during incidents, and maintain effective communication with other governmental and non-governmental organizations.
10. Disclosure, availability, and use of information Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines how the Board should handle and disclose information. It permits public disclosure of most records, but withholds trade secrets and confidential information unless certain conditions are met. It ensures privacy protection and sets specific rules for sharing recordings, transcripts, and information from foreign incident reviews.
11. Training Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section allows the Board to use federal government training facilities and resources for their employees and other relevant personnel, charging reasonable fees to cover costs. The Board can also provide training for its employees and authorize others to participate, with possible reimbursement for non-Board personnel.
12. Authorization of appropriations Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section authorizes funding for the Act with specified amounts for each fiscal year from 2024 to 2027, totaling up to $175 million. It also allows the Board to collect fees, refunds, and reimbursements for services, with the collected amounts being used only for related activities and remaining available until used, and permits refunding any fees paid by mistake.
Money References
- (a) In general.—There are authorized to be appropriated, to remain available until expended, for the purposes of this Act— (1) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2024; (2) $40,000,000 for fiscal year 2025; (3) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2026; and (4) $60,000,000 for fiscal year 2027.
13. Authority of the Inspector General Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security is given the authority to review the Board’s financial, property, and business operations to ensure they follow federal laws and regulations. They must inform the Board and Congress of any issues, recommend solutions, and report on progress. They are provided funds for these activities, and if funds are lacking, they must have an agreement with the Board to cover expenses.
14. Evaluation and audit of National Disaster Safety Board Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section requires the Comptroller General of the United States to evaluate and audit the National Disaster Safety Board's programs and spending at least once every two years. This is to ensure the Board's operations are efficient and effective, including areas such as information security, resource management, workforce development, and procurement practices.