Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should ensure that the Program Manager of the Vessel Response Plan Program establishes a process to analyze incidents where VRPs have been activated to determine whether or how the Coast Guard should improve its VRP review processes—including its approach to verifying plan information, contracts, and the quality of data used in review processes-- to assure VRP effectiveness. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the Coast Guard should ensure that the Vessel Response Plan Program, in developing the charter and plan of action for the Maritime Oil Spill Response Plan Advisory Group, adopts key practices of program management. These practices include—outlining the (1) systems and methods to be used by the group to carry out its work and monitor progress on achieving desired outcomes, (2) roles and responsibilities of stakeholders involved, (3) mechanisms by which potential improvements identified by the group will be incorporated by the Vessel Response Plan Program into its processes and how such progress will be measured, (4) time frames and milestones for carrying out actions under the plan, and (5) mechanisms by which the group will obtain and incorporate feedback from the maritime industry. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The U.S. Commissioner of the IBWC should work with the Mexican Commissioner to formalize a binational rapid response team to address sewage infrastructure failures along the U.S.-Mexico border, including the Nogales and South Bay wastewater treatment plants. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: International Boundary and Water Commission, United States and Mexico
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2020, USIBWC stated that two teams have been established with members, one in the Nogales, Arizona and Nogales, Sonora region and one in the San Diego and Tijuana region. IBWC continues to take actions to formalize the binational rapid response teams. We will review the final documents for each team when they are completed and available.

Recommendation: The U.S. Commissioner of the IBWC should direct USIBWC staff to conduct long-term capital planning for the Santa Cruz River Basin and Tijuana River Valley watersheds, following the principles in OMB Circular A-11. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: International Boundary and Water Commission, United States and Mexico
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2020, the U.S. Commissioner of the IBWC stated that it had conducted long-term capital planning for the facilities for which it is responsible. They noted the 5-year plan that USIBWC had developed for the South Bay plant and the 10-year plan that it had developed for the Nogales plant. We noted these plans in our original report and stated that they needed to be broadened to identify needs in the Santa Cruz River Basin and Tijuana River Valley watersheds. The agency only partially concurred with our recommendation in the report and noted that to the extent our report envisions USIBWC undertaking long-term capital planning for (1) nonfederal infrastructure; (2) infrastructure that does not yet exist; and/or (3) infrastructure that the USIBWC is not yet authorized to construct or maintain, it does not concur. The agency is a key player in managing water quality on the border and has the infrastructure and organization that will be part of the solution. Without the information that USIBWC would generate by comprehensively assessing its long-term needs, such as through long-term capital planning efforts, Congress cannot authorize specific work that needs to be done. We recommended that the agency conduct long-term planning, including for infrastructure that does not exist and for infrastructure that is not yet authorized specifically to address this problem. We continue to believe that USIBWC should recognize its role along the border and start planning for it, including by undertaking long-term capital planning for existing and potential future infrastructure and identifying alternatives to address the long-standing water quality problems.

Recommendation: The NOAA Administrator, in coordination with interagency committee member agencies, should establish a time frame for documenting the committee's membership process. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2020, NOAA stated that its Administrator, in consultation with interagency committee member agencies, will determine criteria and other factors for evaluating federal agency interest and will formalize and document the interagency committee's membership process. NOAA anticipates documenting the process in the committee's charter by August 31, 2020.

Recommendation: The NOAA Administrator, in coordination with interagency committee member agencies, should clarify what is meant by "senior official" in the Marine Debris Act, such as through revisions to its charter. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2020, NOAA stated that the agency, in coordination with interagency committee member agencies, will define the term "senior official" so that it can be consistently applied across all member agencies. NOAA stated it will consider seniority requirements of similar advisory committees and the ability to make decisions on behalf of an agency, among other factors, when developing the definition. NOAA plans to include the definition in the committee's charter by August 31, 2020.

Recommendation: The chair of the interagency committee, in coordination with member agencies, should develop and implement a process to analyze the effectiveness of the interagency committee's recommendations and strategies, and include the results in its biennial reports. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Interagency Marine Debris Coordinating Committee
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2020, NOAA stated the agency will work with interagency committee member agencies to review and update the committee's recommendations. As part of this process, the committee will develop metrics to analyze the effectiveness of the committee's recommendations and strategies. NOAA stated that the recommendations and assessment of effectiveness will be included in the committee's 2018-2019 biennial report, which NOAA expects to publish by December 31, 2020.

Recommendation: The chair of the interagency committee, in coordination with member agencies, should develop a process to identify recommendations for priority funding needs to address marine debris, and include such recommendations in its biennial reports. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Interagency Marine Debris Coordinating Committee
Status: Open

Comments: In February 2020, NOAA stated that it will, in coordination with interagency committee member agencies, develop a process to identify priority funding needs which can be reflected in each agency's respective budgeting process and shared in the committee's biennial reports. NOAA expects to publish the committee's 2018-2019 biennial report by December 31, 2020.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard should direct the chair of the Interagency Coordinating Committee on Oil Pollution Research, in coordination with member agencies, to systematically review its membership to determine whether any additional agencies should be involved in coordinating oil spill research and that the most appropriate offices within member agencies are represented. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2020, the U.S. Coast Guard informed GAO that the Interagency Coordinating Committee on Oil Pollution Research (ICCOPR) review of non-member agencies was complete and that the formal process to invite the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for membership has been initiated. To formalize membership, a majority of current ICCOPR members must approve USGS by vote, which is expected. This will be followed by a letter of invitation from the Coast Guard Commandant to USGS making the membership official.

Recommendation: The Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard should direct the chair of the Interagency Coordinating Committee on Oil Pollution Research, in coordination with member agencies, to coordinate with the relevant Natural Resource Damage Assessment trustee councils to help ensure that the interagency committee's research informs and supports the councils' damage assessment and restoration efforts. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
Status: Open

Comments: In October 2020, the Coast Guard informed GAO that the ICCOPR FY 2022-2027 Research and Technology Plan will include a process to engage Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) trustees. Once updated and finalized, ICCOPR will execute this plan to coordinate with the NRDA trustee councils.

Recommendation: The EPA Region 10 Administrator should work with the management conference on future updates to the CCMP to help prioritize among the indicators that currently lack measurable targets and ensure that such targets are developed for the highest priority indicators where possible. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Status: Open

Comments: EPA agreed with this recommendation, and in June 2019 EPA provided GAO with a written update on the status of actions being taken in response to the recommendation. EPA stated that the leader of the management conference, the Puget Sound Partnership, has initiated an effort to review and revise the Puget Sound recovery vital signs, including updating their associated indicators and targets. EPA estimated that this effort will be completed in fiscal year 2021 for use in the 2022 comprehensive conservation and management plan (CCMP) update. In December 2019, EPA stated that work is ongoing. We will continue to monitor the status of this effort and will assess the extent to which it addresses our recommendation.