Management Actions a. After review of the employee's timely response, if any, the University shall notify the employee of the action to be taken, and the effective date of the action.
Management Actions a. After review of the employee's timely response, if any, the University shall notify the employee of the action to be taken, and the effective date of the action. The action may not include discipline more severe than that described in the notice of intent; however, the University may reduce the discipline without the issuance of further notice of intent.
Management Actions. If an Adaptive Management Trigger occurs, decision-making shall follow the process described in Section 1.5. The potential Adaptive Management Actions for maximizing Sandhill cranes use of habitat are aimed at adjusting habitat available for Sandhill crane use. These actions are the following:
Management Actions. If an Adaptive Management Trigger occurs, decision-making shall follow the process described in Section 1.5. All potential Adaptive Management Actions for the Cosumnes River flow benefit are aimed at increasing groundwater elevation and decreasing water loss from the Cosumnes River. These actions are the following:
Management Actions. If an Adaptive Management Trigger occurs, decision-making shall follow the process described in Section 1.5. Potential adaptive management actions for passive wetland and riparian habitat involve water delivery for other facets of the Program that allow for the benefits of an elevated groundwater table to accrue. Adaptive management actions include:
Management Actions. If evaluation of modified CRAM score improvements reach an Adaptive Management Trigger, decision-making shall follow the process described in Section 1.5. Potential adaptive management actions for active wetland are aimed at increasing ecosystem functionality on enrolled actively managed acres, as measured via modified CRAM. Adaptive management actions include:
Management Actions. If an Adaptive Management Trigger occurs, decision-making shall follow the process described in Section 1.5. Adaptive Management actions for active riparian habitat are aimed at increasing ecosystem functionality on enrolled actively managed acres, as measured via modified CRAM. Adaptive management actions include:
Management Actions. Management actions are activities being conducted by the Cooperator on the enrolled property that have the potential to affect LCT populations or recovery. [Describe all of the covered activities that will be implemented for this CA within this section]
Management Actions. Choose from the following management actions that will be undertaken to accomplish the expected net conservation benefit to the RCW. Please choose one or more of the following options for each management action listed below. YES - I plan to implement the following management action or NO - I do not plan to implement the following management action Prescribed Fire YES, I agree NO, I do not agree to conduct prescribed fires on a regular or recurring basis within areas of the enrolled property that are occupied RCW habitat. These areas will be maintained or enhanced by prescribed fire. This will provide an immediate net conservation benefit. YES, I agree NO, I do not agree to conduct prescribed fires on a regular or recurring basis within areas of the enrolled property that are potentially suitable nesting or foraging habitat. The use of prescribed fire will restore or enhance the areas as RCW habitat. This will provide an immediate net conservation benefit. YES, I agree NO, I do not agree to conduct prescribed fires on a regular or recurring basis within areas of the enrolled property that are currently unsuitable habitat, but, in this situation, I also agree to conduct the prescribed fires for a period sufficient for the habitat to either become occupied by RCWs or to become potentially suitable nesting or foraging habitat. The net conservation benefit will not be achieved until the areas where prescribed fires were conducted either become occupied by RCWs or become potentially suitable nesting or foraging habitat. This also means I may have to implement other conservation measures, such as a forest management strategy that could benefit RCWs, in order for a net conservation benefit to be achieved.
Management Actions. Or: what do you want to do about it? There is no point measuring and reporting something that you cannot or do not want to do anything about. There are a variety of clauses that might go into an SLA: • Constraining the user of the service: o What can they do? o When can they do it? o How much of a resource can they use? o What happens if the client tries to use more than permitted? • Constraining the provider of the service: o What resources must they provide and when? o What quality of service must they provide? o What happens if the resource or quality is not delivered? • Concerning prices: o What is the tariff for the use of the service? Flat rate? Varying with usage? Paid up-front or in arrears? o Are there penalties payable by either party? Quality of service (QoS) guarantees/promises are often couched in terms of percentages, for instance the response time of a query might be guaranteed to be below 20ms 95% of the time and 20-25ms 5% of the time. For anything outside this range a penalty might be payable. The definition of QoS must be done carefully (or perhaps care must be taken by the consumer). A promise of 99.9% uptime for a service sounds good but could mean the service is unavailable for 86.4 seconds every day at noon which may be exactly when you are using it. What you can actually do obviously depends on your application service. For instance, a customer may require a guarantee about the latency of a connection. Often the network cannot adapt so the service provider must offer relatively low latency guarantees and pay a penalty if they do not meet the threshold. With specialised hardware the network can be controlled precisely so a latency guarantee can be met by issuing management instructions to the network hardware to improve a link. There is an open question about where a management action should be defined. It could be argued that the SLA service, upon detecting a constraint breach should be able to determine exactly what actions should be taken, including instructing an application service to control a resource in some way. This implies that the SLA service must know in detail what the application service is capable of and how different management actions will affect the resource usage. An alternative is to have the SLA service to merely tell an application service that action must be taken to adjust some metric and leave it for the application service to determine the best course of action. There is an issue with getting the appl...
