[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 224 (Tuesday, November 22, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71352-71356]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-25431]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

[Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2022-0107; FF09E42000-FXES111609BFEDR-223]


John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System; Michigan, 
Minnesota, Mississippi, North Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, Texas, 
and Wisconsin; Draft 5-Year Review Boundaries

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of availability; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coastal Barrier Resources Act 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, have conducted this review for CBRS units in 
Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, North Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, 
Texas, and Wisconsin. This notice announces the findings of our review 
and request for comments on the draft revised boundaries from Federal, 
State, and local officials.

DATES: To ensure consideration, we must receive your written comments 
by December 22, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may submit written comments by one of the following 
methods:
     Electronically: Go to the: https://www.regulations.gov. 
Search for FWS-HQ-ES-2022-0107, which is the docket number for this 
notice.
     By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: 
Public Comments Processing, Attn: Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2022-0107, 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, by email at [email protected]. 
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-of-contact in 
the United States.

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 John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources 
System (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 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) review included:

 All 46 units located in Michigan.
 One (the only) unit located in Minnesota.
 All 7 units located in Mississippi.
 All 17 units located in North Carolina.
 All 10 units located in Ohio.
 Ten of the 23 total units in South Carolina.
 All 35 units located in Texas.
 All 7 units located in Wisconsin

    Of the 133 total units reviewed, the Service revised 18 units that 
had experienced changes in their sizes or locations as a result of 
natural forces since they were last mapped. The North Carolina units 
will be reviewed again in 2023 due to ongoing geomorphic change in 
certain units and the need for additional data.

Background on the Coastal Barrier Resources System

    Coastal barrier ecosystems are located at the interface of land and 
sea and are subject to continual geomorphic change (e.g., erosion and 
accretion). Coastal barriers and their associated aquatic habitat 
(wetlands and open water) provide important habitat for fish and 
wildlife and serve as the mainland's first line of defense against the 
impacts of severe storms. With the passage of CBRA in 1982, Congress 
recognized that certain actions and programs of the Federal Government 
have historically subsidized and encouraged development on storm-prone 
and highly dynamic coastal barriers, and the result has been the loss 
of natural resources; threats to human life, health, and property; and 
the expenditure of billions of tax dollars.
    CBRA established the CBRS, which originally comprised 186 
geographic units encompassing approximately 453,000 acres of relatively 
undeveloped lands and associated aquatic habitat along the Atlantic and 
Gulf of Mexico coasts. The CBRS was expanded by the Coastal Barrier 
Improvement Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-591) to include additional areas 
along the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico coasts, as well as areas along 
the coasts of the Great Lakes, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Puerto 
Rico.
    The CBRS now comprises a total of 870 geographic units, 
encompassing approximately 3.5 million acres of land and associated 
aquatic habitat. These areas are depicted on a series of official maps. 
Most new Federal expenditures and financial assistance are prohibited 
within the CBRS. Development can still occur within the CBRS, provided 
that it is not subsidized by the Federal Government.
    The CBRS includes two types of units, System Units and Otherwise 
Protected Areas (OPAs). System Units contain

[[Page 71353]]

areas that were relatively undeveloped and predominantly privately 
owned at the time of designation, though they may also contain areas 
held for conservation and/or recreation. Most new Federal expenditures 
and financial assistance, including Federal flood insurance, are 
prohibited within System Units. OPAs are predominantly comprised of 
conservation and/or recreation areas such as national wildlife refuges, 
State and national parks, and local and private conservation areas, 
though they may also contain private areas not held for conservation 
and/or recreation. OPAs are denoted with a ``P'' at the end of the unit 
number. The only Federal spending prohibition within OPAs is on flood 
insurance.

5-Year Review Authority

    The Secretary, through the Service, is responsible for 
administering CBRA, which includes maintaining and updating the 
official maps of the CBRS, consulting with Federal agencies that 
propose to spend funds within the CBRS, and making recommendations to 
Congress regarding proposed changes to the CBRS. With three narrow 
exceptions, only Congress--through new legislation--can modify the maps 
of the CBRS to add or remove areas.
    The three exceptions authorize the Secretary to:
    1. Review the maps of the 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 CBRS unit as a result of natural forces (16 U.S.C. 
3503(c); this process is known as the ``5-year review'');
    2. Add a parcel of real property to the CBRS if:
    a. the owner of the parcel requests, in writing, that the Secretary 
add the parcel to the CBRS; and
    b. the parcel is an undeveloped coastal barrier (16 U.S.C. 
3503(d)); and
    3. Add excess Federal property to the CBRS following consultation 
with the Administrator of the U.S. General Services Administration and 
a determination that the property (or a portion of it) constitutes an 
undeveloped coastal barrier (16 U.S.C. 3503(e)).
    Changes that are outside the scope of these three authorities 
cannot be made by the Service administratively. Rather, such changes 
must be made through the comprehensive map modernization process, which 
is more time consuming and resource-intensive because it entails 
significant research, public review, and congressional enactment of the 
revised maps. Comprehensive map modernization not only transfers the 
CBRS boundaries to a new base map and makes any modifications necessary 
to account for natural changes, but also corrects errors that affect 
property owners and adds areas appropriate for inclusion to the CBRS 
(beyond those additions authorized under 16 U.S.C. 3503(c)-(e)). 
Additional information about this process can be found in a notice the 
Service published in the Federal Register on January 4, 2021 (86 FR 
118) and at: https://www.fws.gov/program/coastal-barrier-resources-act/what-we-do.

5-Year Review Schedule

    The Service last completed the 5-year review for 19 of the 23 
States and territories that currently contain CBRS units between 2014 
and 2016. Additional information about that 5-year review is available 
at https://www.fws.gov/project/digital-conversion-and-5-year-review. 
The remainder of the CBRS units that did not go through that 5-year 
review process (located in Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, 
and the Long Island region of New York) were comprehensively revised 
through the Hurricane Sandy Remapping Project, which incorporated 
changes due to natural forces in addition to other more significant 
changes that have been recommended to Congress. The maps produced 
through the Hurricane Sandy Remapping Project were transmitted to 
Congress for consideration in April 2022 and must be adopted through 
legislation to become effective.
    With this notice, the Service initiates a new 5-year review cycle, 
which is planned to include approximately 450 units in three batches 
between 2022 and 2025. The units included in each batch are prioritized 
by considering the following factors: (1) the age of the current 
effective maps, with the oldest maps generally being revised first; (2) 
the availability of recent high-resolution aerial imagery (based on the 
anticipated U.S. Department of Agriculture National Agriculture Imagery 
Program [NAIP] acquisition schedule); and (3) avoiding overlaps between 
5-year review and comprehensive map modernization projects, which can 
cause confusion and result in duplicated effort. The schedule and 
batching for the 5-year review are subject to change, based upon the 
availability of aerial imagery that meets the standards described in 
the 5-Year Review Methodology section below and changes to our 
comprehensive remapping schedule. Information regarding the 5-year 
review is available on the Service's website at: https://www.fws.gov/project/cbrs-5-year-review.

5-Year Review Methodology

    The methodology described below is the general process through 
which the Service conducts a review of the CBRS units to identify areas 
where natural change has occurred and to produce revised maps through 
the 5-year review. Through the 5-year review effort, the existing CBRS 
boundaries are reviewed against updated base maps (i.e., a recent 
aerial image) to identify any natural changes that have occurred since 
the maps were last updated.

Base Map Selection and Base Fitting

    Base map selection and base fitting are the first steps in the 5-
year review process. A base map is a map depicting background reference 
information--such as landforms, roads, landmarks, and political 
boundaries--onto which other thematic information is overlaid. The 
Service selects aerial imagery to serve as the CBRS base map that is 
recent (generally less than 3 years old), high resolution (1 meter per 
pixel resolution or better), orthorectified (i.e., adjusted to ensure 
the proper perspective of features relative to their true position on 
the Earth's surface), and available free of charge. The base map for 
this 5-year review will primarily be NAIP imagery.
    CBRS boundaries are generally intended to follow natural and 
development features on the ground, such as shorelines, stream 
channels, edges of marshes or wetlands, roads, structures, and jetties. 
These features may appear in slightly different locations when viewed 
on different base maps due to minor differences in their georeferencing 
(i.e., alignment to a known geographic coordinate system) and/or 
orthorectification. The CBRS boundaries must be fit to these same 
features on the new base map in cases where small but significant 
differences are noted. If the intent of a particular boundary segment 
was clearly to follow an identifiable natural or development feature, 
the digital boundary is adjusted to the appropriate feature on the new 
base map. However, the extent of such adjustments is limited to the 
width of the existing boundary line depicted on the official map (which 
translates to about 20 feet on the Earth's surface). These adjustments 
are also within the stated horizontal accuracy range of NAIP imagery, 
which is also about 20 feet.
    Base-fitting adjustments are not made through the 5-year review if 
the intent of a particular boundary segment cannot be determined; the 
underlying feature

[[Page 71354]]

has clearly undergone human-generated change; or the boundary line on 
the official map is more than 20 feet from the actual feature it was 
intended to follow on the ground (unless geomorphic change has 
occurred, as described in the section below). Some changes are beyond 
the scope of the 5-year review and may require further review through 
the comprehensive map modernization effort that is described earlier in 
this notice.

Boundary Modifications To Account for Natural Changes

    The Service assesses the current official CBRS maps, as well as 
historical and current aerial imagery, to determine where natural 
changes (e.g., eroded shorelines, accreted sand spits) have occurred 
since the maps were last updated. Where the intent of a boundary 
segment was clearly to follow a geomorphic feature on the ground, and 
that feature had undergone natural change, the boundary on the map is 
modified to follow the present location of the geomorphic feature and/
or the aquatic habitat associated with the feature. Associated aquatic 
habitat may include the adjacent wetlands, marshes, estuaries, inlets, 
and nearshore waters associated with the fastland component of the 
coastal barrier. The term ``fastland'' refers to the portion of a 
coastal barrier between the mean high tide line on the ocean side, and 
the upper limit of tidal vegetation (or, if such vegetation is not 
present, the mean high tide line) on the landward side of the coastal 
barrier.
    In some cases, portions of the landward boundary are modified to 
reflect natural changes to the wetland/fastland interface. The 
``wetland/fastland interface'' is a transitional area between wetlands 
and fastland, or land that is predominantly wet and land that is 
predominantly dry. This interface is identified for CBRS mapping 
purposes through aerial photo interpretation, supported in some cases 
by National Wetlands Inventory data (https://www.fws.gov/program/national-wetlands-inventory).
    In cases where no such boundary changes are necessary, the Service 
will generally reissue the maps with updated base map imagery. Updating 
the imagery (even when there are no boundary changes) is useful because 
geomorphic changes are likely to have occurred within the interior of 
many units, even if they do not affect the outer boundaries of the 
units. Updated imagery also improves the usability of the maps to 
reflect changes in road networks and other features that serve as 
reference points to map users. In limited cases, to avoid confusion, 
the Service may choose not to reissue a map if there are no geomorphic 
changes and there is another draft revised map for the area undergoing 
review by Congress.

Map Paneling

    Each official CBRS map covers a spatial extent roughly equivalent 
to one U.S. Geological Survey 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle; this 
spatial extent is referred to as a ``map panel.'' There are some places 
where the existing CBRS map panels overlap each other, and yet provide 
no indication that there is another CBRS unit in the same area that is 
shown on a different map panel. This omission is a source of confusion 
for users who assume that, if no CBRS unit is depicted on a specific 
CBRS map, then there is no CBRS unit in that area.
    Rather than making static draft maps for stakeholder review, the 
Service will use a web mapping application to display proposed 5-year 
review changes to the CBRS boundaries. Following the close of the 
stakeholder review period, the Service will address the issue of map 
panel overlaps where possible by repaneling the affected areas. The 
existing map panels will be shifted and/or combined to eliminate 
overlaps, and all CBRS units on a given map panel will be depicted. 
Changes to the configuration of the CBRS map panels do not affect the 
placement of the CBRS boundaries but will help reduce confusion and 
improve the usability of the official CBRS maps.

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 Michigan, 
Minnesota, Mississippi, Ohio, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas, 
and Wisconsin. (See the list at the beginning of this section.) The 
remaining 13 South Carolina units are not included in this review 
either because they were either comprehensively reviewed recently or 
they will be included in a more comprehensive review (beyond the scope 
of the 5-year review) at a later date, at which time the Service will 
also complete an assessment of changes necessary due to natural forces.
    The Service made modifications due to natural changes in the size 
or location of a total of 18 CBRS units (of the 133 units reviewed). 
Below is a summary of those changes and the results of our review.

Michigan

    The Service's review found that 3 of the 46 CBRS units in Michigan 
require changes due to natural forces. The imagery that was used on the 
current effective maps is dated 2012. The imagery that was used for 
this review, and will be used for the revised maps, is dated 2020. 
Additionally, one adjustment was needed to the northern lateral 
boundary of Sadony Bayou Unit MI-22 to maintain the relationship 
between the boundary and a structure that was on the ground prior to 
the designation of the CBRS unit in 1990. This structure appeared to be 
outside of the unit on the 2012 NAIP imagery used for the currently 
effective map but appears to be within the unit on the 2020 imagery due 
to an approximately 10-foot difference in location between the two 
images. The boundary has been adjusted to the south by about 10 feet to 
maintain the relationship between the boundary and the structure that 
is depicted on the currently effective CBRS map.
    In September 2022, the Board on Geographic Names voted to replace 
the names of nearly 650 geographic features that had previously 
featured a derogatory word for indigenous women. These name changes 
affect three Michigan units, which have been updated accordingly.
    MI-05: HURON CITY. The boundary of the unit has been modified to 
account for shoreline erosion along Lake Huron to the east of Willow 
Creek.
    MI-13: BIRDSONG BAY. The name of this unit has been changed from 
``Squaw Bay'' to ``Birdsong Bay'' to reflect the new name of the 
underlying feature.
    MI-21: ARCADIA LAKE. The boundary of the unit has been modified to 
account for natural changes along the shoreline of the peninsula 
located between Arcadia Lake and Lake Michigan.
    MI-25: MINO-KWE POINT. The name of this unit has been changed from 
``Squaw Point'' to ``Mino-kwe Point'' to reflect the new name of the 
underlying feature.
    MI-40: GREEN ISLAND. The boundary of the unit has been modified to 
account for shoreline erosion along Lake Michigan at Point la Barbe.
    MI-64: MINO-KWE JIIGIBIIK. The name of this unit has been changed 
from ``Squaw Beach'' to ``Mino-kwe jiigibiik'' to reflect the new name 
of the underlying feature.

Minnesota

    The Service's review found that the boundaries of Unit MN-01 (the 
only CBRS unit in Minnesota) do not need to

[[Page 71355]]

be modified due to changes from natural forces. The imagery that was 
used on the currently effective map is dated 2012. The imagery that was 
used for this review, and will be used for the revised map, is dated 
2021.

Mississippi

    The Service's review found that two of the seven CBRS units in 
Mississippi require changes due to natural forces. The imagery that was 
used on the currently effective maps is dated 2012. The imagery that 
was used for this review, and will be used for the revised maps, is 
dated 2021.
    R02: DEER ISLAND. The western boundary of the unit has been 
modified to account for accretion at the western end of Deer Island.
    R03: CAT ISLAND. The southern boundary of the eastern segment of 
the unit has been modified to account for accretion of the spit at the 
south end of Cat Island.

North Carolina

    The Service made no changes to the 17 CBRS units in North Carolina, 
and revised maps have not been produced for this State. The imagery 
that was used on the currently effective maps is dated 2010, 2012, or 
2014, depending on the unit. The imagery that was used for this review 
is dated 2020.
    While no changes have been made to the CBRS boundaries in North 
Carolina at this time, future changes are warranted for the boundaries 
of Unit NC-03P, which were updated by Congress in 1999 through Public 
Law 106-116 to align with the boundaries of Cape Hatteras National 
Seashore at that time. However, there has been significant shoreline 
erosion along the Atlantic coast of Hatteras Island, particularly in 
the villages of Rodanthe, Waves, Avon, and Buxton, and the CBRS 
boundary is now hundreds of feet offshore in some places. Erosion is 
occurring at a rate of 2-4 meters per year in some areas.
    In those places where the shoreline has eroded significantly, the 
boundary of Cape Hatteras National Seashore is the mean high-water 
line. Numerous structures may be located seaward of the mean high-water 
line due to erosion and may be on National Park Service owned property. 
Some of these structures have been deemed uninhabitable due to 
compromised septic systems and/or other issues. At the time of our 
review, the National Park Service was planning to conduct a boundary 
survey. As the survey was not completed before our 5-year review effort 
was completed, we have not made any boundary modifications at this 
time.
    We plan to revisit the North Carolina CBRS units again with the 
next batch of 5-year review maps anticipated in 2023, and we invite 
Federal, State, and local officials to submit any pertinent data 
regarding shoreline erosion along Hatteras Island at this time. We will 
reassess the boundary of Unit NC-03P against the survey of the national 
seashore, more recent aerial and satellite imagery that we expect to be 
available in 2023, and any additional data that we receive from 
Federal, State, and local officials. We will also continue to monitor 
geomorphic change occurring in other areas in North Carolina, including 
the northwestern boundary of Unit L03AP (where geomorphic change is 
occurring very near to the CBRS boundary along Shackleford Banks).

Ohio

    The Service's review found that 1 of the 10 CBRS units in Ohio 
requires changes due to natural forces. The imagery that was used on 
the currently effective maps is dated 2013 and 2014. The imagery that 
was used for this review, and will be used for the revised maps, is 
dated 2021.
    OH-06: BAY POINT. The southern boundary of the unit has been 
modified to account for the southward accretion of Bay Point.

South Carolina

    The Service's review found that 3 of the 10 CBRS units in South 
Carolina that are included in this review (Units M02, M03, M08, M09/
M09P, M10, M13, SC-01, SC-03, and SC-10P) require changes due to 
natural forces. The imagery that was used on the currently effective 
maps is dated 2011, 2013, or 2015, depending on the unit. The imagery 
that was used for this review, and will be used for the revised maps, 
is dated 2021.
    The remaining 13 South Carolina units are not included in this 
review, either because they were either comprehensively reviewed 
recently or they will be included in a more comprehensive review 
(beyond the scope of the 5-year review) at a later date, at which time 
the Service will also complete an assessment of changes necessary due 
to natural forces.
    M03: PAWLEYS INLET. The southwestern boundary of the unit has been 
modified to account for natural changes in the wetlands.
    M09: EDISTO COMPLEX. The coincident boundary between Units M09 and 
M09P has been modified to follow the current location of Jeremy Inlet. 
The landward boundary of the unit has been modified to reflect natural 
changes in the configuration of the wetlands along the Townsend River.
    M09P: EDISTO COMPLEX. The coincident boundary between Units M09 and 
M09P has been modified to follow the current location of Jeremy Inlet.

Texas

    The Service's review found that 6 of the 35 CBRS units in Texas 
require changes due to natural forces. The imagery that was used on the 
currently effective maps is dated 2010. The imagery that was used for 
this review, and will be used for the revised maps, is dated 2020.
    T03A: BOLIVAR PENINSULA. The boundary of the unit has been modified 
to reflect natural changes in the configuration of the wetlands on and 
around the Bolivar Peninsula.
    T04: FOLLETS ISLAND. The boundary of the unit (a portion of which 
is coincident with Unit T04P) has been modified to reflect erosion 
along the shorelines of Mud Island and Moody Island.
    T04P: FOLLETS ISLAND. The boundary of the unit (a portion of which 
is coincident with Unit T04) has been modified to reflect erosion along 
the shoreline of Moody Island.
    T07: MATAGORDA PENINSULA. The coincident boundary between Unit T07 
and T07P has been modified to account for natural changes at the mouth 
of Caney Creek.
    T07P: MATAGORDA PENINSULA. The coincident boundary between Unit T07 
and T07P has been modified to account for natural changes at the mouth 
of Caney Creek.
    T12: BOCA CHICA. The boundary of the unit has been modified to 
account for natural changes along the shoreline of the Rio Grande.

Wisconsin

    The Service's review found that three of the seven CBRS units in 
Wisconsin 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 2020.
    WI-03: PESHTIGO POINT. The southern boundary of the western segment 
of the unit has been modified to account for erosion and an increased 
lake level in Green Bay.
    WI-04: DYERS SLOUGH. The eastern boundary of the unit has been 
modified to account for erosion and an increased lake level in Green 
Bay.
    WI-07: FLAG RIVER. The western boundary of the unit has been 
modified to reflect natural changes in the

[[Page 71356]]

configuration of the wetlands at the mouth of the Flag River.

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 Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, 
North Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, Texas, and Wisconsin. 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; and (4) Federal officials 
with knowledge of the coastal geomorphology within the project area.
    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 (e.g., the removal of structures 
from a unit) will not be considered at this time. We must receive 
comments on or before the date listed above in DATES.
    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.

Availability of Draft Revised Coastal Barrier Resources System 
Boundaries and Related Information

    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.

Gary Frazer,
Assistant Director for Ecological Services.
[FR Doc. 2022-25431 Filed 11-21-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P