Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 212 / Friday, November 3, 2023 / Notices 75621 

• Form 3–2321, ‘‘Federal Subsistence 

Regional Advisory Council Membership 

Application/Nomination.’’ 

• Form 3–2322, ‘‘Regional Advisory 

Council Candidate Interview.’’ 

• Form 3–2323, ‘‘Regional Advisory 

Council Reference/Key Contact 

Interview.’’ 

The member selection process begins 

with the information that we collect on 

the application. Ten interagency review 

panels interview all applicants and 

nominees, their references, and regional 

key contacts. These contacts are based 

on the information that the applicant 

provides on the application form. The 

information that we collect through the 

application form and subsequent 

interviews is the basis of the Federal 

Subsistence Board’s recommendations 

to the Secretaries of the Interior and 

Agriculture for appointment and 

reappointment of council members. 

We use the following forms to collect 

information from qualified rural 

residents for subsistence harvest: 

• Form 3–2326, ‘‘Federal Subsistence 

Hunt Application, Permit, and Report.’’ 

• Form 3–2327, ‘‘Designated Hunter 

Permit Application, Permit, and 

Report.’’ 

• Form 3–2328, ‘‘Federal Subsistence 

Fishing Application, Permit, and 

Report.’’ 

• Form 3–2378, ‘‘Designated Fishing 

Permit Application, Permit, and 

Report.’’ 

• Form 3–2379, ‘‘Federal Subsistence 

Customary Trade Recordkeeping Form.’’ 

We use the information collected to 

evaluate: 

• Eligibility of applicant. 

• Subsistence harvest success. 

• Effectiveness of season lengths, 

harvest quotas, and harvest restrictions. 

• Hunting patterns and practices. 

• Hunter use. 

The Federal Subsistence Board uses 

the harvest data, along with other 

information, to set future season dates 

and harvest limits for Federal 

subsistence resource users. These 

seasons and harvest limits are set to 

meet the needs of subsistence users 

without adverse impact to the health of 

existing animal populations. 

In addition to the above forms, 

regulations at 50 CFR part 100 and 36 

CFR part 242 contain requirements for 

the collection of information. We collect 

nonform information on: 

• Repeal of Federal subsistence rules 

and regulations (50 CFR 100.14 and 36 

CFR 242.14). 

• Proposed changes to Federal 

subsistence regulations (50 CFR 100.18 

and 36 CFR 242.18). 

• Special action requests (50 CFR 

100.19 and 36 CFR 242.19). 

• Requests for reconsideration (50 

CFR 100.20 and 36 CFR 242.20). 

• Requests for permits and reports, 

such as traditional religious/cultural/ 

educational permits, fishwheel permits, 

fyke net permits, and under-ice permits 

(50 CFR 100.25–27 and 36 CFR 242.25– 

27). 

Title of Collection: Federal 

Subsistence Regulations and Associated 

Forms, 50 CFR 100 and 36 CFR 242. 

OMB Control Number: 1018–0075. 

Form Numbers: FWS Forms 3–2300, 

3–2321 through 3–2323, 3–2326 through 

3–2328, and 3–2378 through 3–2379. 

Type of Review: Extension of the 

currently approved collection. 

Respondents/Affected Public: 

Individuals; private sector; and State, 

local, and Tribal governments. Most 

respondents are individuals who are 

federally defined rural residents in 

Alaska. 

Total Estimated Number of Annual 

Respondents: 15,242. 

Total Estimated Number of Annual 

Responses: 15,242. 

Estimated Completion Time per 

Response: Varies from 15 minutes to 4 

hours, depending on activity. 

Total Estimated Number of Annual 

Burden Hours: 6,769. 

Respondent’s Obligation: Required to 

obtain or retain a benefit. 

Frequency of Collection: On occasion. 

Total Estimated Annual Nonhour 

Burden Cost: None. 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor and a person is not required to 

respond to a collection of information 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number. 

The authority for this action is the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

Madonna Baucum, 

Information Collection Clearance Officer, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service. 

[FR Doc. 2023–24376 Filed 11–2–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[Docket No. FWS–HQ–ES–2023–0148; 

FF09E42000–FXES111609BFEDR–234] 

John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier 

Resources System; Florida, Georgia, 

Louisiana, Maine, and New York; Draft 

5-Year Review Boundaries 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability; request 

for comments. 

SUMMARY: The Coastal Barrier Resources 

Act (CBRA) requires the Secretary of the 

Interior to review the maps of the John 

H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources 

System (CBRS) at least once every 5 

years and make any minor and technical 

modifications to the boundaries of the 

CBRS as are necessary to reflect changes 

that have occurred in the size or 

location of any unit as a result of natural 

forces. We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (Service), have conducted this 

review for CBRS units in Florida, 

Georgia, Louisiana, Maine, and the 

Great Lakes region of New York. With 

this notice, we announce the findings of 

our review and invite comments on the 

draft revised boundaries from Federal, 

State, and local officials. 

DATES: To ensure consideration, we 

must receive your written comments by 

December 4, 2023. 

ADDRESSES: 

Accessing Files: The draft revised 

boundaries may be viewed in a web 

mapping application accessed from the 

Service’s website at https://

www.fws.gov/project/cbrs-5-year-review. 

For more information, see Request for 

Comments under SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION. 

Submitting Comments: You may 

submit written comments by one of the 

following methods: 

• Internet: Go to: https://

www.regulations.gov. Search for and 

submit comments on Docket No. FWS– 

HQ–ES–2023–0148. 

• U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public 

Comments Processing, Attn: Docket No. 

FWS–HQ–ES–2023–0148, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, 5275 Leesburg Pike, 

MS: PRB/3W, Falls Church, VA 22041– 

3808. 

We request that you send comments 

by only one of the methods described 

above. We will post all information 

received on https://

www.regulations.gov. If you provide 

personal identifying information in your 

comment, you may request at the top of 

your document that we withhold this 

information from public review. 

However, we cannot guarantee that we 

will be able to do so. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Katie Niemi, Coastal Barriers 

Coordinator, via telephone at 703–358– 

2071 or email at CBRA@fws.gov. 

Individuals in the United States who are 

deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have 

a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, 

TDD, or TeleBraille) to access 

telecommunications relay services. 

Individuals outside the United States 

should use the relay services offered 

within their country to make 

international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
75622 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 212 / Friday, November 3, 2023 / Notices 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA; 16 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) requires the 

Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to 

review the maps of the CBRS at least 

once every 5 years and make, in 

consultation with the appropriate 

Federal, State, and local officials, such 

minor and technical modifications to 

the boundaries of the CBRS as are 

necessary solely to reflect changes that 

have occurred in the size or location of 

any unit as a result of natural forces (16 

U.S.C. 3503(c)). 

The Service’s review included: 

• Six of the 137 total units located in 

Florida 

• All 13 units located in Georgia 

• Fifteen of the 21 total units located in 

Louisiana 

• All 34 units located in Maine 

• All 21 units located in the Great Lakes 

region of New York 

The remaining Louisiana and New 

York (Long Island) units were not 

included in this review because they are 

part of separate comprehensive mapping 

projects (the related maps are awaiting 

adoption by Congress through 

legislation). The remaining Florida units 

were not included in this review but are 

planned for review in the future. 

Of the 89 total units reviewed, the 

Service revised 13 units that changed in 

size or location as a result of natural 

forces since they were last mapped. The 

Service’s review of these areas also 

found two CBRS units that require 

modifications to correct administrative 

errors made in the past on maps for Lee 

County, Florida. 

Background and Methodology 

Background information on the 5-year 

review effort and the methodology used 

to produce the revised boundaries can 

be found in a notice the Service 

published in the Federal Register on 

November 22, 2022 (87 FR 71352). 

Prior to the Service’s ‘‘digital 

conversion’’ effort for the CBRS maps 

(carried out during the period 2013– 

2016), the official CBRS maps had 

significant limitations due to their age, 

scale, and the now antiquated 

techniques used to create them. On 

August 29, 2013 (78 FR 53467), the 

Service published a notice in the 

Federal Register describing the 

limitations of those original maps, along 

with the methodology that was used to 

transcribe the boundaries from those 

maps to new base map imagery for the 

purposes of the 5-year review. In that 

notice, the Service also described 

limited circumstances under which 

CBRS boundaries may be modified to 

correct administrative errors made in 

the past, either in (a) the transcription 

of the boundaries from maps that were 

reviewed and approved by Congress to 

the official CBRS maps on file with the 

Service or (b) the inclusion of 

unqualifying areas to the CBRS through 

a map modification to account for 

natural changes under 16 U.S.C. 

3503(c). We found two administrative 

errors in Units P19 and P19P that were 

introduced through the digital 

conversion and 5-year review effort in 

Florida in 2016. Minor corrections to 

these two units are described below. 

Proposed Modifications to the CBRS 

In accordance with CBRA’s 

requirement to update the CBRS maps at 

least once every 5 years to account for 

natural changes, the Service has 

conducted a review of certain unit 

boundaries in Florida, Georgia, 

Louisiana, Maine, and the Great Lakes 

region of New York. 

The Service made modifications due 

to natural changes in the size or location 

of a total of 13 CBRS units (of the 89 

units reviewed). In addition, two units 

in Florida were modified to correct 

administrative errors made in the past 

on maps for Lee County, Florida. Below 

is a summary of those changes and the 

results of our review. 

Florida 

The Service’s review found that five 

of the six CBRS units in Florida that are 

included in this review (Units FL–70, 

FL–70P, P19, P19P, P20, and P20P) 

require changes due to natural forces. In 

addition, two units in Florida, P19 and 

P19P, were modified to correct 

administrative errors. The imagery that 

was used on the currently effective 

maps is dated 2013. The imagery that 

was used for this review, and will be 

used for the revised maps, is dated 

2022. Other CBRS units in Florida were 

not assessed as part of this review. 

For Unit P19, the administrative 

errors affect three privately owned 

structures that were inadvertently added 

to the unit when the Service modified 

the boundary in a prior 5-year review. 

Additionally, one adjustment was 

needed to correct an error in the 

transcription of a portion of the 

boundary of Unit P19P along the 

excluded area at the northern end of 

North Captiva Island affecting one 

structure. These errors are corrected as 

described below under these two units. 

Otherwise Protected Area (OPA) Unit 

P19P is made up of 15 discrete segments 

on North Captiva Island that are 

interspersed with System Unit P19. We 

are only modifying the northernmost 

segment of Unit P19P to reflect changes 

from natural forces. Although erosion 

has been occurring along the other 14 

segments, we found that modifications 

beyond the scope of this project and our 

5-year review authority are needed to 

first address significant misalignments 

in the locations of the OPA boundaries 

and the Cayo Costa State Park parcels 

they were intended to follow. These 

alignment errors were already present 

on the map adopted by Congress in 2000 

via Public Law 106–360 and can be 

attributed to imprecise information 

regarding the location of the parcel 

boundaries at the time the CBRS map 

was produced. However, because these 

other errors are not of the administrative 

nature described in the Background and 

Methodology section above, they cannot 

be corrected administratively by the 

Service. Rather, such changes must be 

made through the comprehensive 

remapping process, which is described 

in more detail in a notice the Service 

published in the Federal Register on 

January 4, 2021 (86 FR 118). 

FL–70P: GASPARILLA ISLAND. Unit 

FL–70P has two discrete segments, but 

modifications to account for natural 

changes were only necessary in the 

western segment. The western boundary 

of the excluded area of this segment has 

been modified to account for natural 

changes in the shoreline between the 

Boca Grande Rear Range Lighthouse and 

Sea Grape Beach. 

P19: NORTH CAPTIVA ISLAND. The 

boundary along the western side of 

North Captiva Island that is coincident 

with the northernmost segment of Unit 

P19P has been modified to account for 

natural changes in the shoreline along 

the Gulf of Mexico. The excluded area 

boundary at the northern tip of North 

Captiva Island has been modified to 

account for natural changes in the 

shoreline along the Gulf of Mexico and 

Captiva Pass. 

In addition, two segments of the 

boundary along the excluded area have 

been modified to correct an 

administrative error made during the 

previous 5-year review for this unit that 

affected three existing structures. That 

boundary was modified in 2016 to 

account for natural changes in the 

shoreline. However, that boundary 

modification was not included in the 

description of the 5-year review changes 

included in the Federal Register notices 

associated with this unit dated 

November 17, 2015 (80 FR 71826) and 

March 14, 2016 (81 FR 13407). The 2016 

boundary change inadvertently resulted 

in adding to the unit three existing 

structures along the beach in the North 

Captiva Dunes subdivision. The 

boundary has been modified so that the 

structures will no longer be located 

within the unit. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 212 / Friday, November 3, 2023 / Notices 75623 

P19P: NORTH CAPTIVA ISLAND. 

Unit P19P has 15 discrete segments that 

are all coincident with Unit P19. In the 

northernmost segment of Unit P19P, the 

western boundary coincident with Unit 

P19 has been modified to account for 

natural changes in the shoreline along 

the Gulf of Mexico. 

Additionally, an adjustment has been 

made to correct an administrative error 

in the transcription of the boundary 

from the CBRS map dated October 27, 

2000, to the official map dated January 

11, 2016, for this unit. We found that 

when we digitized the southern 

boundary of the excluded area on North 

Captiva Island for the purposes of the 5- 

year review in 2015–2016, we did not 

properly follow the boundary 

transcription methodology described in 

the notice published in the Federal 

Register (August 29, 2013; 78 FR 

53467). 

This transcription error resulted in 

small portions of six privately owned 

parcels, including one existing 

structure, being incorrectly depicted as 

within the unit in 2016. The southern 

boundary of the excluded area (part of 

the northern boundary of Unit P19P) is 

adjusted to correct this error and 

maintain the relationship between the 

OPA boundary, and the boundary of 

Cayo Costa State Park as established by 

Congress via Public Law 106–360 in 

2000 and clearly indicated by legislative 

history and our background records on 

Unit P19P. 

P20: CAYO COSTA. The coincident 

boundary between Units P20 and P20P 

at the northern tip of Cayo Costa has 

been modified to account for natural 

changes in the shoreline along Boca 

Grande Pass. 

P20P: CAYO COSTA. Unit P20P has 

13 discrete segments, but modifications 

to account for natural changes were only 

necessary in the northernmost segment. 

The coincident boundary between Units 

P20 and P20P at the northern tip of 

Cayo Costa has been modified to 

account for natural changes in the 

shoreline along Boca Grande Pass. 

Georgia 

The Service’s review found that 4 of 

the 13 CBRS units in Georgia require 

changes due to natural forces. The 

imagery that was used on the currently 

effective map is dated 2013. The 

imagery that was used for this review, 

and will be used for the revised map, is 

dated 2021. 

GA–05P: ALTAMAHA/WOLF 

ISLANDS: The coincident boundary 

between Units GA–05P and N03 has 

been modified to account for accretion 

at the northern tip of Little St. Simons 

Island. 

N03: LITTLE ST. SIMONS ISLAND: 

The coincident boundary between Units 

GA–05P and N03 has been modified to 

account for accretion at the northern tip 

of Little St. Simons Island. 

N06: CUMBERLAND ISLAND: Unit 

N06 has five discrete segments, but 

modifications to account for natural 

changes were only necessary in the 

southernmost segment. The coincident 

boundary between Units N06 and N06P 

along Beach Creek near its confluence 

with Cumberland Sound has been 

modified to account for natural changes 

in the shoreline. 

N06P: CUMBERLAND ISLAND: Unit 

N06P has six discrete segments, but 

modifications to account for natural 

changes were only necessary in the 

southernmost segment. The coincident 

boundary between Units N06 and N06P 

along Beach Creek near its confluence 

with Cumberland Sound has been 

modified to account for natural changes 

in the shoreline. 

Louisiana 

The Service’s review found that 3 of 

the 15 CBRS units in Louisiana that are 

included in this review (Units LA–03P, 

LA–04P, LA–05P, LA–07, LA–08P, LA– 

09, LA–10, S01, S01A, S02, S03, S08, 

S09, S10, and S11) require changes due 

to natural forces. The imagery that was 

used on the currently effective maps is 

dated 2013. The imagery that was used 

for this review, and will be used for the 

revised maps, is dated 2021. 

The remaining six Louisiana units 

were not assessed as part of this review 

because they are part of a separate 

comprehensive mapping project (the 

related maps are awaiting adoption by 

Congress through legislation). 

LA–05P: MARSH ISLAND/RAINEY. 

The boundary of the unit has been 

modified to account for wetland erosion 

along Vermilion Bay and West Cote 

Blanche Bay. Due to the significant rate 

of erosion in this area, some of the 

boundary has been generalized (i.e., 

simplified so that the map is clear, and 

the boundary is not overly detailed). 

LA–10: CALCASIEU PASS. A portion 

of the northern boundary of the unit has 

been modified to account for wetland 

erosion along West Cove. Due to the 

significant rate of erosion in this area, 

some of the boundary has been 

generalized (i.e., simplified so that the 

map is clear, and the boundary is not 

overly detailed). 

S10: MERMENTAU RIVER. The 

southern boundary of the excluded area 

at the western end of the unit has been 

modified to account for shoreline 

erosion along the Gulf of Mexico. 

Maine 

The Service’s review found that the 

34 CBRS units in Maine do not need to 

be modified due to changes from natural 

forces. The imagery that was used on 

the currently effective maps is dated 

2011 and/or 2012, with the exception of 

one map that also utilizes imagery dated 

2003–2005. The imagery that was used 

for this review, and will be used for the 

revised maps, is dated 2021. 

New York (Great Lakes) 

The Service’s review found that 1 of 

the 21 CBRS units in the Great Lakes 

region of New York (the only CBRS 

units in New York that were part of this 

review) requires changes due to natural 

forces. The imagery that was used on 

the currently effective maps is dated 

2013. The imagery that was used for this 

review, and will be used for the revised 

maps, is dated 2022. 

The remaining CBRS units in the 

Long Island region of New York were 

not assessed as part of this review 

because they are part of a separate 

comprehensive mapping project related 

to Hurricane Sandy (the related maps 

are awaiting adoption by Congress 

through legislation). 

NY–62: GRENADIER ISLAND. The 

eastern lateral boundary of the unit has 

been modified to account for the 

accretion of a sand spit that has 

migrated outside the unit. 

Request for Comments 

CBRA requires consultation with the 

appropriate Federal, State, and local 

officials on the proposed CBRS 

boundary modifications to reflect 

changes that have occurred in the size 

or location of any unit as a result of 

natural forces (16 U.S.C. 3503(c)). We 

therefore invite interested Federal, 

State, and local officials to review and 

comment on the draft revised 

boundaries for Florida, Georgia, 

Louisiana, Maine, and the Great Lakes 

region of New York. The Service is 

specifically notifying the following 

stakeholders concerning the availability 

of the draft revised boundaries: (1) the 

Chair and Ranking Member of the House 

of Representatives Committee on 

Natural Resources, the Chair and 

Ranking Member of the Senate 

Committee on Environment and Public 

Works, and the members of the Senate 

and House of Representatives for the 

affected areas; (2) the governors of the 

affected areas; (3) State and local 

officials with floodplain management 

and/or land use responsibilities for the 

affected areas; and (4) Federal officials 

with knowledge of the coastal 

geomorphology within the affected 

areas. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
75624 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 212 / Friday, November 3, 2023 / Notices 

Federal, State, and local officials may 

submit written comments and 

accompanying data as described in 

ADDRESSES, above. Comments regarding 

specific CBRS unit(s) should reference 

the appropriate unit number(s) and unit 

name(s). Please note that boundary 

modifications through the 5-year review 

process can only be made to reflect 

changes that have occurred in the size 

or location of any CBRS unit as a result 

of natural forces. Other requests for 

changes to the CBRS outside of the 

Service’s administrative authorities (16 

U.S.C. 3503(c)–(d)) will not be 

considered at this time. We must receive 

comments on or before the date listed 

above in DATES. 

The draft revised boundaries may be 

viewed in a web mapping application 

accessed from the Service’s website at 

https://www.fws.gov/project/cbrs-5- 

year-review. A shapefile of the draft 

revised CBRS boundaries, which can be 

used with GIS software, is also available 

for download. The shapefile is best 

viewed using the base imagery to which 

the boundaries were drawn; the base 

imagery sources and dates are included 

in the metadata for the shapefile. The 

Service is not responsible for any 

misuse or misinterpretation of the 

shapefile. 

Interested parties who are unable to 

access the draft revised boundaries or 

other information online may contact 

the individual identified in FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT, above, and 

reasonable accommodations will be 

made. 

Next Steps 

Following the close of the comment 

period, the Service will review all 

comments received on the draft revised 

boundaries; adjust the boundaries, as 

appropriate; prepare final revised maps; 

and publish a notice in the Federal 

Register to announce the availability of 

the final revised maps. The revised 

maps will take effect upon the date of 

publication of that notice in the Federal 

Register. 

Authority 

Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA; 

16 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

Gary Frazer, 

Assistant Director for Ecological Services. 

[FR Doc. 2023–23864 Filed 11–2–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management 

[Docket No. BOEM–2023–0047] 

Notice of Availability of a Joint Record 

of Decision for the Proposed Coastal 

Virginia Offshore Wind Commercial 

Project 

AGENCY: Bureau of Ocean Energy 

Management (BOEM), Interior; National 

Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA), Commerce. 

ACTION: Record of decision (ROD); 

notice of availability. 

SUMMARY: BOEM announces the 

availability of the joint ROD on the 

Final Environmental Impact Statement 

(EIS) for the construction and operations 

plan (COP) submitted by Virginia 

Electric and Power Company (dba 

Dominion Energy) for its proposed 

Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind 

Commercial Project (Project), offshore 

Virginia Beach, Virginia. The joint ROD 

includes the Department of the Interior’s 

(DOI) decision regarding the COP and 

NMFS’ plans for decision, pending 

completion of all statutory processes, 

regarding Dominion Energy’s requested 

Incidental Take Regulations (ITR) and 

an associated Letter of Authorization 

(LOA) under the Marine Mammal 

Protection Act (MMPA). NMFS has 

adopted the final EIS to support its 

decision of whether or not to issue the 

requested ITR under the MMPA. The 

joint ROD concludes the National 

Environmental Policy Act process for 

each agency. 

ADDRESSES: The joint ROD and 

associated information are available on 

BOEM’s website at https://

www.boem.gov/renewable-energy/stateactivities/CVOW-C. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information related to BOEM’s action, 

contact Jessica Stromberg, BOEM Office 

of Renewable Energy Programs, 45600 

Woodland Road, VAM–OREP, Sterling, 

Virginia 20166, (703) 787–1730, or 

jessica.stromberg@boem.gov; For 

information related to NMFS’ action, 

contact Katherine Renshaw, NOAA 

Office of General Counsel, (302) 515– 

0324. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Dominion 

Energy seeks approval to construct, 

operate, and maintain the Project: a 

wind energy facility and the associated 

export cables on the Outer Continental 

Shelf (OCS) offshore Virginia. The 

Project would be developed within the 

range of design parameters outlined in 

the COP, subject to applicable 

mitigation measures. 

The Project as proposed in the COP 

would include up to 202 wind turbine 

generators (WTGs); 3 offshore, high 

voltage, alternating current substations; 

inter-array cables linking the individual 

turbines to the offshore substations; 

substation interconnector cables linking 

the substations to each other; offshore 

export cables; an onshore export cable 

system; an onshore switching station 

north of Harpers Road (Harpers 

Switching Station) or north of Princess 

Anne Road (Chicory Switching Station) 

in Virginia Beach, Virginia; and an 

overhead power line connection to the 

existing electrical grid at the Fentress 

Substation in Chesapeake, Virginia. 

The WTGs, offshore substations, interarray cables, and substation 

interconnector cables would be located 

on the OCS approximately 24 nautical 

miles (27 statute miles) east of Virginia 

Beach, Virginia, within the area defined 

by Renewable Energy Lease OCS–A– 

0483. The offshore export cables would 

be buried below the seabed surface on 

the OCS and Commonwealth of 

Virginia-owned submerged lands. The 

onshore export cables, substations, and 

grid connections would be located in 

Princess Anne County, Virginia. 

After carefully considering public 

comments on the draft EIS and the 

alternatives described and analyzed in 

the final EIS, DOI selected Alternative 

B, ‘‘Revised Layout to Accommodate the 

Fish Haven and Navigation,’’ in 

combination with Alternative D–1, 

‘‘Onshore Habitat Impact Minimization 

Alternative.’’ This combination of 

alternatives B and D–1 is the preferred 

alternative identified in the final EIS. 

The anticipated mitigation, monitoring, 

and reporting requirements, which will 

be included in BOEM’s COP approval as 

terms and conditions, are included in 

the ROD, which is available at: https:// 

www.boem.gov/renewable-energy/stateactivities/CVOW-C. 

NMFS has adopted BOEM’s final EIS 

to support its decision of whether or not 

to promulgate the requested ITR and 

issue the associated LOA to Dominion 

Energy. NMFS’ final decision of 

whether or not to promulgate the 

requested ITR and issue the LOA will be 

documented in a separate Decision 

Memorandum prepared in accordance 

with internal NMFS policy and 

procedures. The final ITR and a notice 

of issuance of the LOA, if issued, will 

be published in the Federal Register. 

The LOA would authorize Dominion 

Energy to take small numbers of marine 

mammals incidental to Project 

construction and would set forth 

permissible methods of incidental 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1