This week, Illinois Congressman Eric Sorensen, reported to be the only meteorologist member of Congress, introduced the National Weather Safety Board Act. (note that as of this time, there is no published text of the bill to reference, only press releases from the Congressman’s office).
Per the press release, the bill apparently “establishes an independent review board to investigate major weather-related disasters to determine what went wrong, what worked, and how the nation can better protect lives and property in the future.” “The Board would examine preparedness, forecasting, warnings, and emergency response across federal agencies. After that process, the board would issue public recommendations to prevent future tragedies.” “Under the legislation, the NWSB would be composed of experts in meteorology, hydrology, emergency management, communications, social science, and academia. Following qualifying major disasters, the Board would vote on whether to launch an investigation, subpoena records if necessary, and issue both preliminary and final reports with actionable recommendations to agencies, including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Weather Service, FEMA, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the FCC.”
NBC’s article on the bill indicated that it “outlines specific kinds of events that would qualify as weather disasters subject to the board’s scrutiny. The list includes any event that the president designates as a major disaster under the Stafford Act. Other severe weather events that involve at least 10 fatalities or 100 injuries would also qualify, as would events the board considers ‘rapid-onset’ mass casualty events.”
While I think this is a great idea, it is also very limiting. It is not as comprehensive as the National Disaster Safety Board, which has been introduced several times and for some reason never gained enough traction to go to vote. While weather events certainly account for the majority of disasters in the US (and elsewhere across the globe), they aren’t the only cause of disasters. Nor are they the only disasters declared under the authority of the Stafford Act. Further, the press releases also seem to indicate a very federal focus. The National Disaster Safety Board bills all indicated inclusion and coordination with all levels of government.
There are some other differences between what has been proposed for the National Weather Safety Board and the National Disaster Safety Board related to research and data collection, though fortunately that gap (at least in terms of weather) seems to be filled by the Weather Research and Forecasting Innovation Reauthorization Act of 2026.
Not that I wouldn’t welcome the development of a National Weather Safety Board, but I think the concept can be improved and I question why we are limiting ourselves to weather events when there are other hazards that can and should be included in such a concept.
© 2026 Tim Riecker, CEDP
The Contrarian Emergency Manager 