Audit Report

OIG-16-037

RESTORE ACT

Funded Priorities List Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process 

Met Requirements

April 21, 2016

Office of

Inspector General

Department of the Treasury

Contents

Funded Priorities List Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process Met Requirements Page i

(OIG-16-037)

Audit Report.................................................................................. 1

Background ................................................................................................ 2

 RESTORE Act .................................................................................... 2

Council-Selected Restoration Component .............................................. 3

Audit Results .............................................................................................. 4

Council’s Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process for the Funded Priorities 

List Met Requirements ........................................................................ 4

 Evaluation Criteria .......................................................................... 4

 Proposal Evaluation and Selection Process......................................... 6

 Proposal Selection.......................................................................... 7

Appendices

Appendix 1: Objective, Scope, and Methodology........................................ 10

Appendix 2: Management Response.... ..................................................... 12

Appendix 3: Major Contributors to This Report........................................... 13

Appendix 4: Report Distribution.................................................................14

Abbreviations

FPL Funded Priorities List

Clean Water Federal Water Pollution Control Act

Council Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council

RESTORE Act Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities,

and Revived Economies of the Gulf Coast States Act of 2012

Treasury Department of the Treasury

Trust Fund Gulf Coast Restoration Trust Fund
Funded Priorities List Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process Met Requirements Page ii

(OIG-16-037)

This Page Intentionally Left Blank.
OIG Audit

Report

The Department of the Treasury

Office of Inspector General

Funded Priorities List Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process Met Requirements Page 1

(OIG-16-037)

April 21, 2016

Justin R. Ehrenwerth

Executive Director, Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council

This report presents the results of our audit of the Gulf Coast

Ecosystem Restoration Council’s (Council) evaluation criteria and 

selection process for programs, projects, and activities to be 

funded under the Council-Selected Restoration Component of the

Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities,

and Revived Economies of the Gulf Coast States Act of 2012

(RESTORE Act).

1,2 We performed this audit as part of our ongoing 

oversight of RESTORE Act programs. Our audit objective was to 

assess the Council’s process for evaluating and selecting programs 

and projects under the Council-Selected Restoration Component. 

Specifically, we assessed whether the Council’s evaluation criteria, 

proposal evaluation, and selection process for the Funded Priorities 

List (FPL) complied with the RESTORE Act, the Department of the 

Treasury’s (Treasury) RESTORE Act regulations, the Council’s 

Initial Comprehensive Plan requirements, and the Council’s policies 

and procedures. Appendix 1 provides more detail of our audit 

objective, scope, and methodology.

In brief, we found that the Council’s evaluation criteria and 

selection process for programs, projects, and activities included in 

the FPL under the Council-Selected Restoration Component met 

applicable requirements. Accordingly, we make no 

recommendations in this report. In a written response, the Council 

 

1 Created by the RESTORE Act, the Council is an independent entity within the Federal government, 

comprised of the governors from the five affected Gulf Coast States (Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, 

Mississippi, and Texas); the Secretaries from the U.S. Departments of the Interior, Commerce, and 

Agriculture; the head of the department housing the Coast Guard (currently the Secretary of the 

Department of Homeland Security); the Secretary of the Army; and the Administrator of the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency.

2 Pub. L. 112-141, 126 Stat. 588-607 (July 6, 2012)
Funded Priorities List Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process Met Requirements Page 2

(OIG-16-037)

concurred with the conclusions of this audit. The management 

response in its entirety is included as appendix 2.

Background

RESTORE Act

The RESTORE Act established the Gulf Coast Restoration Trust 

Fund (Trust Fund) within Treasury to provide funds for 

environmental and economic restoration of the Gulf Coast region 

that was damaged by the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill. 

Deposits into the Trust Fund will be comprised of 80 percent of all 

civil and administrative penalties paid after July 6, 2012, under the 

Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act).

3 As of 

February 2015, the Trust Fund had received approximately 

$816 million as a result of the government’s settlement with the 

Transocean defendants.4In July 2015, BP Exploration & Production 

Inc. agreed to settle with the Federal government and the Gulf 

Coast States. A U.S. District Judge from the Eastern District of 

Louisiana approved the terms of the settlement on April 4, 2016, 

where BP Exploration & Production Inc. agreed to pay $20.8 billion. 

Of the $20.8 billion, $5.5 billion plus interest relates to civil and 

administrative penalties under the Clean Water Act; of that, 

$4.4 billion (80 percent) will be deposited into the Trust Fund over 

15 years. 

The RESTORE Act allocates money in the Trust Fund to the 

following 5 components: (1) 35 percent will be made available to 

the Gulf Coast States (Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, and 

Texas) in equal shares under the Direct Component; (2) 30 percent 

plus 50 percent of interest earned on the Trust Fund will be made 

available for grants and interagency agreements under the 

Council-Selected Restoration Component; (3) 30 percent will be 

made available for grants under the Spill Impact Component;

(4) 2.5 percent plus 25 percent of interest earned will be made 

 

3 Pub. L. 92-500 (as amended)

4 On February 19, 2013, the civil settlement between the Department of Justice and Transocean 

defendants (Transocean Deepwater Inc., Transocean Offshore Deepwater Drilling Inc., Transocean 

Holdings LLC, and Triton Asset Leasing GmbH) was approved. Among other things in the settlement, 

the Transocean defendants paid a $1 billion civil penalty plus interest. Of this amount, $800 million plus 

interest was deposited into the Trust Fund.
Funded Priorities List Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process Met Requirements Page 3

(OIG-16-037)

available to the Science Program Component; and (5) 2.5 percent 

plus 25 percent of interest earned on the Trust Fund will be made 

available to the Centers of Excellence Research Grants Program

Component. Treasury’s Office of the Fiscal Assistant Secretary is 

responsible for administering the Direct Component and the 

Centers of Excellence Research Grants Program Component. The

Council is responsible for administering the Council-Selected 

Restoration Component and the Spill Impact Component. The 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is responsible for 

administering the Science Program Component.

The Council-Selected Restoration Component

Section 1603 of the RESTORE Act required that the Council 

publish an Initial Comprehensive Plan no later than July 6, 2013, 

1 year after the RESTORE Act was signed into law. The Council’s 

Initial Comprehensive Plan serves as a framework that will guide 

the Council’s selection of programs, projects, and activities to be 

funded under the Council-Selected Restoration Component. The 

RESTORE Act requires that the Council’s Initial Comprehensive Plan 

include: (1) a list of projects or programs authorized prior to 

July 6, 2012, that have not yet commenced, the completion of 

which would further the purposes and goals of the act; (2) a 

description of the manner in which amounts from the Trust Fund 

projected to be made available to the Council for the succeeding 

10 years will be allocated; and (3) a prioritized list, subject to 

available funding, of specific projects and programs to be funded 

(referred to as the FPL) and carried out during the 3-year period 

immediately following the date of publication of the Initial 

Comprehensive Plan. The Council approved the Initial 

Comprehensive Plan on August 28, 2013, but at that time the plan 

did not contain an FPL as required by the RESTORE Act.5

 

5

In October 2013, we reported that the Council’s Initial Comprehensive Plan did not contain all of the 

elements required by the RESTORE Act, including an FPL (RESTORE Act: Gulf Coast Ecosystem 

Restoration Council Faces Challenges in Completing Initial Comprehensive Plan (OIG-14-003; issued 

Oct. 25, 2013)).
Funded Priorities List Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process Met Requirements Page 4

(OIG-16-037)

Audit Results

Council’s Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process for the 

Funded Priorities List Met Requirements

We found that the Council’s evaluation criteria, proposal 

evaluation, and selection process for programs, projects, and 

activities to be funded under the Council-Selected Restoration 

Component complied with the RESTORE Act, Treasury’s RESTORE 

Act regulations, Council’s Initial Comprehensive Plan requirements, 

and the Council’s policies and procedures.

After publishing the Initial Comprehensive Plan in August 2013, the

Council formed the Process Development Workgroup6to develop 

the evaluation criteria and selection process for the FPL. The 

Process Development Workgroup used requirements in the 

RESTORE Act and Treasury’s RESTORE Act regulations, as well as 

the Initial Comprehensive Plan to develop the evaluation criteria. 

Evaluation Criteria

Under the Council-Selected Restoration Component, the Council 

must give highest priority to programs, projects, and activities that 

are based on “best available science”

7

and address one or more of 

the following criteria: (1) projects that will make the greatest 

contribution to restoring and protecting the natural resources, 

ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wildlife habitats, beaches, and 

coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast region, without regard to 

geographic location within the Gulf Coast region; (2) large-scale 

projects and programs projected to substantially contribute to 

restoring and protecting the natural resources, ecosystems, 

fisheries, marine and wildlife habitats, beaches, and coastal 

wetlands of the Gulf Coast ecosystem; (3) projects contained in 

existing Gulf Coast State comprehensive plans for restoration and 

protection of natural resources; and (4) projects that restore

 

6 The Process Development Workgroup was comprised of representatives serving on behalf of each 

Council member, as well as Council staff.

7 The term “best available science” refers to science that (1) maximizes the quality, objectivity, and 

integrity of information, including statistical information; (2) uses peer-reviewed and publicly available 

data; and (3) clearly documents and communicates risks and uncertainties in the scientific basis for 

such projects.
Funded Priorities List Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process Met Requirements Page 5

(OIG-16-037)

long-term resiliency of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, 

marine and wildlife habitats, beaches, and coastal wetlands most 

impacted by the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

The RESTORE Act also requires that projects, programs, and 

activities funded under the Council-Selected Restoration 

Component be carried out in the Gulf Coast region. Treasury’s 

RESTORE Act regulations and the Council’s Initial Comprehensive 

Plan reiterate the requirements and priorities set forth in the 

RESTORE Act.

The Council’s Initial Comprehensive Plan further narrowed the 

evaluation criteria by identifying the Council’s goals and objectives 

to guide funding decisions. The Council’s goals, which provide the 

overarching framework for the Council’s approach for region-wide 

Gulf Coast restoration include: (1) restore and conserve habitat; 

(2) restore water quality; (3) replenish and protect living coastal 

and marine resources; (4) enhance community resilience; and 

(5) restore and revitalize the Gulf Coast economy. The Council’s 

objectives, which define the scope of projects and programs to be 

funded under the Council-Selected Restoration Component, include: 

(1) restore, enhance, and protect habitats; (2) restore, improve, 

and protect water resources; (3) restore and protect living coastal 

and marine resources; (4) restore and enhance natural processes 

and shorelines; and (5) promote community resilience. The Initial 

Comprehensive Plan affirmed that projects that are not within the 

scope of the Council’s objectives will not be funded under the 

Council-Selected Restoration Component.

Each of the evaluation criteria required by the RESTORE Act, 

Treasury’s RESTORE Act regulations, and the Initial Comprehensive 

Plan were captured in a series of “Context Reports” that were 

developed to evaluate each proposal received. The reports were 

titled as: (1) Eligibility, (2) Budget, (3) Science, (4) Priority and 

Commitment to Plan, and (5) Environmental Compliance. The 

“Context Reports” were to be completed by Council staff with the 
Funded Priorities List Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process Met Requirements Page 6

(OIG-16-037)

exception of the Science Context Report which was to be 

completed by three independent science reviewers.8

The Eligibility Context Report provides an evaluation of whether the 

proposed program, project, or activity would restore natural 

resources and benefit the Gulf Coast region. The Budget Context 

Report is an analysis of the adequacy of the proposed funding 

amount. The Science Context Report describes the verification 

work done to determine whether the proposed activities would be 

carried out using the “best available science.” The Priority and 

Commitment to Plan Context Report provides an evaluation of how

a proposal adheres to the priority criteria in the RESTORE Act, and

the goals and objectives contained in the Council’s Initial 

Comprehensive Plan. In the case of planning or technical assistance 

funding, the Environmental Compliance Context Report is intended 

to provide general information about the proposed activities that 

will be helpful to guide future environmental compliance. For 

proposals seeking implementation funding, the report also captures 

the status of environmental compliance.

Proposal Evaluation and Selection Process

In addition to developing the evaluation criteria, the Process 

Development Workgroup established the proposal evaluation and 

selection process and criteria for the FPL. The Initial 

Comprehensive Plan provided the detailed requirements with 

regards to the proposal evaluation and selection process. The plan

stipulated that proposals would be evaluated using the following

three-step process: (1) eligibility verification; (2) coordination 

review; and (3) evaluation. 

The eligibility verification step determined whether a proposal met

the minimum requirements under the RESTORE Act. The Process 

Development Workgroup designed the Eligibility and Priority and 

Commitment to Plan Context Reports to aid in this determination. 

The coordination review step determined whether the proposed 

program, project, or activity should be coordinated with Deepwater 

 

8 Council staff solicited expert volunteer reviewers from within the five Gulf Coast States and from 

across the country. Each proposal was reviewed by one volunteer from the Gulf Coast State most 

directly linked to the proposal, one from the Gulf Coast region but not the most directly linked State, 

and one from outside the Gulf Coast region.
Funded Priorities List Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process Met Requirements Page 7

(OIG-16-037)

Horizon oil spill restoration efforts funded by other organizations.

The evaluation step ensured that proposals conformed with

determinations included in the Budget, Science, and Environmental

Context Reports.

Using the three-step process outlined in the Initial Comprehensive 

Plan as a guideline, the Process Development Workgroup 

established a more detailed proposal evaluation and selection 

process. The Council Steering Committee9approved the process 

and related evaluation criteria in July 2014 and published the 

process on the Council’s website in August 2014.

Proposal Selection

In August 2014, at the same time the Council published the 

process on its website, it solicited proposals from Council member

entities. The solicitation of proposals was limited to Council 

member entities due to the RESTORE Act stipulation that projects 

and programs adopted through the Initial Comprehensive Plan be 

carried out through the Federal agencies and Gulf Coast States 

represented on the Council. The proposal submission guidelines 

allowed each Council member to submit up to five proposals. In 

addition, Council members could submit proposals on behalf of 

Federally-recognized Tribes.

10 The Council requested that the 

proposals focus on habitat and water quality for the Initial FPL. The 

proposal submission window closed on November 17, 2014, and 

the Council received 50 proposals, consisting of approximately 380 

distinct activities. 

Council staff and science volunteers reviewed each proposal using 

the established criteria. As a result, three separate Science Context 

Reports, one for each science reviewer, were developed for each 

proposal submitted, while one report per proposal was generated 

for each of the other four reviews (Eligibility, Budget, Priority and 

 

9 The Council’s Steering Committee is comprised of at least one representative serving on behalf of 

each Council member. The Steering Committee’s responsibilities include establishing committees or 

working groups to carry out the work of the Council, providing general program and policy advice to the 

Council, and providing oversight of program implementation and administration.

10 A Federally recognized tribe is an American Indian or Alaska Native tribal entity that is recognized as 

having a government-to-government relationship with the U.S., with the responsibilities, powers, 

limitations, and obligations attached to that designation, and is eligible for funding and services from the 

Bureau of Indian Affairs.
Funded Priorities List Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process Met Requirements Page 8

(OIG-16-037)

Commitment to Plan, and Environmental Compliance) for a total of 

350 ”Context Reports.” All of the reports were made available to 

the public on the Council’s website in March 2015.

Council staff also coordinated with other organizations funding 

Deepwater Horizon oil spill restoration efforts to leverage any 

available resources and avoid duplication and any potential 

conflicts. The Council conducted coordination efforts with the 

National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and the Natural Resource 

Damage Assessment Trustee Council, to name a few. 

After reviewing the ”Context Report” for each proposal, the 

Council’s Options Development Team comprised of Council staff, 

used geographic information system coordinates from the 

proposals to create maps showing the impacted areas. The Council 

staff evaluated the maps, looking for synergies and overlapping 

interests among the proposed projects. Based on the mapping 

information, the Options Development Team decided to focus on 

funding conservation and restoration activities in 10 key 

watersheds.

The Options Development Team also decided to separate the FPL 

into two categories to distinguish between those Draft FPL 

activities that the Council proposed to approve and fund (Category 

1 activities) and those Draft FPL activities that would be Council 

priorities for further review and potential future funding (Category 2 

activities). Going forward, the Council intends to review each 

proposed activity in Category 2 to determine whether to: (1) move 

the activity to Category 1 and approve it for funding, (2) remove it 

from Category 2 and any further consideration, or (3) continue to 

include it in Category 2. The Options Development Team presented 

the Draft FPL to the Council Steering Committee for review. On 

May 5, 2015, the Council Steering Committee endorsed the Draft 

FPL.

On August 13, 2015, the Council announced in the Federal 

Register that the Draft FPL was posted on the Council’s website 

for a 45 day comment period which closed on

September 28, 2015. The RESTORE Act and the Council’s 

Standard Operating Procedures stipulated that Council members 

must vote on approval of the Comprehensive Plan and future
Funded Priorities List Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process Met Requirements Page 9

(OIG-16-037)

revisions to the Comprehensive Plan. After considering comments 

received, the Council voted on and approved the Initial FPL on 

December 9, 2015. The Notice of Availability of the approved 

Initial FPL was published in the Federal Register on 

December 15, 2015. Subsequently, the Council published a notice 

in the Federal Register on December 31, 2015, requesting 

applications for FPL funding. 

* * * * * *

We appreciate the courtesies and cooperation extended by your 

staff as we inquired about these matters. Major contributors to this 

report are listed in appendix 3. A distribution list for this report is 

provided as appendix 4. If you have any questions, you may 

contact me at (202) 927-5762 or Eileen Kao, Audit Manager, at 

(202) 927-8759.

/s/

Deborah L. Harker

Director, Gulf Coast Restoration Audit
Appendix 1

Objective, Scope, and Methodology

Funded Priorities List Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process Met Requirements Page 10

(OIG-16-037)

As part of our oversight of programs, projects, and activities 

authorized by the Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist 

Opportunities, and Revived Economies of the Gulf Coast States Act 

of 2012 (RESTORE Act), we audited the Gulf Coast Ecosystem 

Restoration Council’s (Council) evaluation criteria and selection 

process to develop the Funded Priorities List (FPL) under the 

Council-Selected Restoration Component of the act. Our audit 

objective was to assess the Council’s process for evaluating and 

selecting programs and projects under the Council-Selected 

Restoration Component. Specifically, we assessed whether the

Council’s evaluation criteria, proposal evaluation, and selection 

process for the FPL complied with the RESTORE Act, the 

Department of the Treasury’s (Treasury) RESTORE Act regulations, 

Council’s Initial Comprehensive Plan requirements, and the 

Council’s policies and procedures.

To accomplish our audit objectives, we contracted with Booz Allen 

Hamilton Inc., a consulting firm with environmental service 

expertise, to assist us with this effort. We conducted our audit 

between November 2014 and December 2015, which included 

fieldwork at the Council’s offices in New Orleans, Louisiana. During 

the audit, we performed the following steps.

 We reviewed applicable Federal laws and regulations 

including:

 The RESTORE Act; 

 Treasury Interim Final Rule for RESTORE Act and 

Preamble, 31 CFR Part 34, October 14, 2014;

 Treasury Final Rule for RESTORE Act and Preamble, 

31 CFR Part 34, February 12, 2016;

 The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969

as amended;

 Council on Environmental Quality NEPA Regulations, 

40 CFR Part 1500-1508, November 28, 1978;

 Federal Records Act of 1950 as amended;

 Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 as amended; 

and

 Freedom of Information Act of 1967 as amended.
Appendix 1

Objective, Scope, and Methodology

Funded Priorities List Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process Met Requirements Page 11

(OIG-16-037)

 We reviewed the Council’s website and key documents, 

including:

 The Initial Comprehensive Plan, August 28, 2013;

 The Draft Initial FPL, August 13, 2015;

 Council Member Proposal Submissions;

 Proposal Context Reports;

 Council-Selected Restoration Component Proposal 

Submission and Evaluation Process Details;

 Council-Selected Restoration Component Proposal 

Submission and Evaluation Process Fact Sheet;

 Council Member Proposal Submission Guidelines For 

Comprehensive Plan Funded Priorities List of Projects 

and Programs Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration 

(RESTORE) Council 33 U.S.C. § 1321(t)(2);

 Gulf Coast Restoration Council Standard Operating 

Procedures;

 Initial FPL, December 9, 2015; and

 Federal Register Announcement – Notice of

Availability of the Initial Funded Priorities List, 

December 15, 2015.

 We interviewed key Council officials responsible for 

developing the FPL, including:

 Executive Director;

 General Counsel;

 Director of Environmental Compliance; and

 Acting Science Coordinator.

We conducted this performance audit in accordance with generally 

accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require 

that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate 

evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the 

evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives.
Appendix 2

Management Response

Funded Priorities List Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process Met Requirements Page 12

(OIG-16-037)
Appendix 3

Major Contributors to This Report 

Funded Priorities List Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process Met Requirements Page 13

(OIG-16-037)

Eileen J. Kao, Audit Manager

Marco T. Uribe, Auditor-in-Charge

Usman Abbasi, Auditor

Kajuana Britt, Referencer
Appendix 4

Report Distribution

Funded Priorities List Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process Met Requirements Page 14

(OIG-16-037)

Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council

Chairperson

Department of the Army Council Designee

Department of Commerce Council Designee

Environmental Protection Agency Council Designee

Department of Homeland Security Council Member

Department of the Interior Council Designee

State of Alabama Council Designee

State of Florida Council Designee

State of Louisiana Council Designee

State of Mississippi Council Designee

State of Texas Council Designee

Executive Director

Department of the Treasury

Deputy Secretary

Under Secretary for Domestic Finance

Fiscal Assistant Secretary

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Fiscal Operations and Policy

Office of Management and Budget

OIG Budget Examiner
Treasury OIG Website

Access Treasury OIG reports and other information online: 

http://www.treasury.gov/about/organizational-structure/ig/Pages/default.aspx

Report Waste, Fraud, and Abuse

OIG Hotline for Treasury Programs and Operations – Call toll free: 1-800-359-3898

Gulf Coast Restoration Hotline – Call toll free: 1-855-584.GULF (4853)

Email: Hotline@oig.treas.gov

Submit a complaint using our online form: 

https://www.treasury.gov/about/organizational-structure/ig/Pages/OigOnlineHotlineForm.aspx