← All actions
Record closed July 23, 2026
Affects public lands

Stop seafloor mining off Virginia's coast

Commercial Leasing for Outer Continental Shelf Minerals Offshore the Commonwealth of Virginia-Request for Information and Interest

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management· Outer Continental Shelf offshore Commonwealth of VirginiaFederal Register 2026-12600 ↗

The groups on this fight

4 groups work Virginia

By footprint, from the same match the STAND matchmaker runs; none is linked to this decision in our record yet. Give straight to them; nothing routes through us.

Every group above is on STAND for Public Lands, with its court record, its filings and who backs it.

The federal government is taking the first step toward leasing the ocean floor off Virginia for hard mineral mining.

What’s at risk

Marine ecosystems, fisheries, and coastal communities off Virginia's coast could be harmed by commercial hard mineral extraction on the seafloor. This process, if it advances, could open federal waters to industrial seafloor mining operations.

If this goes through

If this leasing process moves forward, it could result in permanent industrial mining on the ocean floor off Virginia, with lasting damage to marine habitat and fisheries that communities and wildlife depend on.

Our plain-English read of the official notice ↗. Check it against the agency’s own words below.

6 holes in the agency’s own analysis

What the public could have raised, from the agency’s own document

  • I oppose this action as proposed, and I ask the agency to weigh the specific harms below.
  • BOEM states it will focus environmental review on preliminary activities only, but then acknowledges that subsequent operations will require additional environmental review later. This contradicts the statement that this RFI and environmental process will support the lease sale decision, since major operational impacts—exploration, development, and production—are explicitly deferred for later review. Section 2 should clarify whether the current NEPA review is adequate for the lease issuance decision or whether BOEM is improperly segmenting environmental review.
  • BOEM requests comments on potential royalty rates, rental rates, minimum bids, and lease term duration, suggesting these financial terms are not yet determined. However, BOEM has already decided unilaterally that royalties will be applied to 'all marketable mineral production.' BOEM should clarify what discretion remains over royalty policy and justify why this key term was predetermined rather than left open for public input.
  • BOEM requests information on whether 'adjustment or suspension of rental payments' should be allowed under certain conditions, but the RFI provides no baseline rental rate for commenters to evaluate or negotiate. Without a proposed rental rate in writing, public comments will be uninformed and BOEM's evaluation of responses will lack a rational framework. BOEM should publish a preliminary rental rate proposal.
  • BOEM invites comments specifically on 'barriers to leasing and production' and asks commenters to identify regulatory obstacles they believe BOEM 'should be aware of,' which invites responses seeking agency deregulation. This framing presupposes that regulatory barriers are obstacles to remove rather than environmental or safety protections to maintain. BOEM should neutrally request input on applicable legal requirements without suggesting that barriers warrant elimination.
Show all 8 points from the document
  • The unsolicited lease request from Odyssey Marine Exploration triggered this entire RFI process, yet the document never discloses what specific geological survey data, environmental baseline information, or commercial viability studies OME provided to justify BOEM's decision to initiate leasing steps. BOEM should release the OME request and supporting materials to ensure public input is based on the same information BOEM used to decide to proceed.
  • BOEM states that 'this RFI is one of the initial steps in the process to ensure that all interests and concerns are considered for future leasing decisions,' but simultaneously the document confirms BOEM has already conducted 'an evaluation of the request, including the area proposed for leasing, the OCS minerals of primary interest (i.e., heavy minerals sands and phosphorites).' This shows BOEM has already designated specific minerals of interest before receiving any public comment, narrowing the scope prematurely.
  • Say something only you can say. The law requires the agency to consider and respond to substantive comments, and specifics are what make a comment substantive.
Every point is checked against the agency’s own decision document ↗. 6 findings verified against the text, word for word.

In the agency’s own words

On November 13, 2025, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) received an unsolicited request to lease hard minerals (herein "minerals") in an area on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) offshore the Commonwealth of Virginia. After reviewing the request, BOEM decided to initiate the first step that could potentially lead to a lease sale by publishing this request for information and interest (RFI). This RFI is not a final decision to lease the minerals and does not prejudge any future Secretarial decisions concerning leasing offshore the Commonwealth of Virginia. This RFI requests information and comments on,…

Federal Register 2026-12600 ↗

The reporting behind this

From More Than Just Parks

More actions that need you

Go deeper, free

A wrong fact, a dead link, a form that wouldn’t take your letter: one tap and it comes to the people who build PLAN, with this fight attached.

Know an open comment period we are missing, or spotted a wrong deadline? .