Proposed Action. The proposal of an action for the denial or limited authorization of a requested service, including the type or level of service; the reduction, suspension, or termination of a previously authorized service; the denial, in whole or part of payment for a service; the failure to provide services in a timely manner; or the failure of the CMO to act within the time frames provided in 42 CFR 438.408(b).
Proposed Action. 4.14.3.1 All Proposed Actions shall be made by a physician, or other peer review consultant, who has appropriate clinical expertise in treating the Member’s Condition or disease.
Proposed Action. The proposed action is the Service’s issuance of a permit for covered activities in the permit area for up to 50 years, pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA. The permit would cover ‘‘take’’ of the yellow-billed cuckoo associated with covered activities occurring within the permit area. The Draft SHA Amendment commits the City of Tempe to implement conservation measures to improve habitat for the covered species on Rio Salado lands uses while allowing for covered activities within the project area to continue. To meet section 10(a)(1)(A) permit requirements, the applicant developed and proposes to implement the SHA and SHA Amendment, which describe the actions the City of Tempe has agreed to undertake to improve habitat within the Rio Salado Project, Tempe Reach, area. Expected benefits include, but may not be limited to: Improvement of riparian habitat which can be used by both covered species and other native fauna, limiting the amount of new disturbance to riparian habitat, and improving environmental exposure to the public. We will evaluate the permit application, associated documents, and comments we receive to determine whether the permit application meets the requirements of the ESA, NEPA, and implementing regulations. If we determine that all requirements are met, we will approve the SHA Amendment. We will fully consider all comments we receive during the public comment period, and we will not make our final decision until after the comment period ends. 44298 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 169 / Thursday, August 30, 2018 / Notices Public Availability of Comments All comments we receive become part of the public record associated with this action. Requests for copies of comments will be handled in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act, NEPA, and Service and Department of the Interior policies and procedures. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. All submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, will be made available for public disclosure in their entirety.
Proposed Action. The parties committed to this partnership are united by a mutual goal of improving the lives of Santa Fe residents and visitors through the development and improvement of trails and greenways. The parties recognize that Santa Fe's future quality of life and economic prosperity is partially dependent on providing trails and outdoor recreation opportunities and preserving our nationally and internationally significant cultural heritage. We, the undersigned, concur that quality of life issues and economic development opportunities can be addressed through trails and greenways. Therefore, we will work in partnership with other community members to support the Grand Unified Santa Fe Trails Organization (GUSTO) regional project. Signature of Representative Name of Supporting Group or Agency
Proposed Action. Under the Proposed Action Alternative, 453 acres of old growth forest (210+ years old Hemlock) would be set aside as Presumed Habitat and become a no harvest area for the life of the proposed SHA. These set-asides could have reasonably foreseeable positive impacts on species that prefer mature and old growth forests. The old-growth forest being set aside for conservation purposes could be associated with reduced levels of habitat fragmentation, and/or edge effects. While timber harvest activities have the potential to negatively affect wildlife both directly and indirectly, these effects are not expected to be significantly different under any of the alternatives under consideration. In addition, there may be reasonably foreseeable (although likely small) positive impacts to endangered and threatened wildlife associated with making Occupied Sites no-harvest zones for the life of the proposed SHA. Other threatened and endangered species which utilize these areas may benefit from this conservation measure.
Proposed Action. The IOP component of the proposed action includes adoption of a policy that would identify and define inadvertent overruns of approved diversions of Colorado River water by lower Basin Colorado River contractors, establish procedures that account for inadvertent overruns, and define subsequent mandatory payback requirements to allow repayment to system storage for any inadvertent overruns. It is not anticipated that it would be necessary to materially modify the IOP for a 30-year period absent extraordinary circumstances such as significant Colorado River infrastructure failures. The IOP would be applicable to all lower Basin States users with quantified entitlements. The adoption of the IOP does not affect nor is it applicable to the United States’ obligations under the 1944 Treaty with the Republic of Mexico. Under the provisions of the IOP, an inadvertent overrun is defined as Colorado River water that is diverted, pumped, or received by an entitlement holder in excess of the water user’s entitlement for that year. Under the IOP, payback would be required to begin in the calendar year that immediately follows the release date of the final Decree Accounting Record 10 that reports inadvertent overruns for a Colorado River water user. Prior to the beginning of the calendar year, the user’s water order, along with the payback plan, and the user’s existing Reclamation-approved conservation plan, would be submitted to Reclamation for review and approval within the annual 43 CFR Pt. 417 process regarding annual water order approvals.
Proposed Action. Under the proposed IA, the Secretary would commit to certain actions required to facilitate implementation of the QSA.8 Chief among these is the change in location of the delivery point of Colorado River water to the QSA parties. The IA would result in a change in the amount of water the Secretary would deliver to MWD’s diversion point at Lake Havasu (above Xxxxxx Dam), and CVWD’s and IID’s diversion point at Imperial Dam. In a ‘‘normal’’ year under Art. II(B)(1) of the Decree, in aggregate, deliveries to Imperial Dam would be reduced by as little as approximately 200 to as much as approximately 400 thousand acre-feet (KAF), and this water would instead be delivered to the MWD facility at Lake Havasu. Therefore, there would be a reduction in flow in the Colorado River of this same amount of Colorado River water from Xxxxxx Dam to Imperial Dam. As part of the QSA, IID would implement agricultural water conservation measures (including land fallowing) to conserve as much as 300 XXXX, and an equal amount of Colorado River water would be transferred to SDCWA, CVWD, and/or MWD.
Proposed Action. The Service proposes to approve the CCAA and to issue an EOS permit, both with a term of 20 years, to the applicants for incidental take of the Oregon spotted frog caused by covered activities, if permit issuance criteria are met. The area to be addressed under this proposed CCAA (i.e., the covered lands) includes 170 acres of land, including 6,909 linear feet along both banks of the Deschutes River, upstream and downstream of the Colorado Street Bridge, Bend, Deschutes County, Oregon. Portions of the covered lands currently provide habitat that is occupied by Oregon spotted frogs. These specific areas include the Casting Pond, the Xxx Xxxxxx Amphitheater Xxxxx, and the riparian habitat on the banks of Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 139 / Monday, July 21, 2014 / Notices 42349 the Deschutes River above the ordinary high water mark. The proposed CCAA is intended to result in benefits to Oregon spotted frogs by reducing or eliminating threats to the species on the covered lands, and creating or maintaining habitat conditions that are suitable for all life- history stages of the species through the implementation of conservation measures. Conservation measures include: Monitoring and maintaining sufficient water levels for the Oregon spotted frog in the Casting Pond through the use of water control devices; periodically removing invasive plants from the Casting Pond to maintain approximately 30 percent aquatic vegetative cover and 70 percent open water; removal of nonnative predators in the Casting Pond should they be discovered during annual surveys; maintaining vegetation along the banks of the Casting Pond to control erosion and potential sedimentation; and protection of the riparian zone along the banks of the Deschutes River within the covered lands through the use of signs and temporary fencing, to address public use that may threaten the integrity of shoreline vegetation that serves as cover for Oregon spotted frogs. Some incidental take of spotted frogs is anticipated with maintenance of the Casting Pond, and with the expansion and construction of stormwater ponds and bioswales that may become temporary habitats. Consistent with our CCAA Policy (64 FR 32726), the conservation goal of the proposed CCAA is to encourage enhancement and protection of suitable Oregon spotted frog habitat on the covered lands by either maintaining or modifying existing land management so that they are consistent with the conservation needs of the Oregon spotted frog. We can...
Proposed Action. This component of the proposed action involves implementation of biological conservation measures from two Service BOs. The first, dated January 2001 (Biological Opinion for Interim Surplus Criteria, Secretarial Implementation Agreements, and Conservation Measures on the Lower Colorado River, Lake Xxxx to the Southerly International Boundary Arizona, California, and Nevada), addresses potential impacts from the proposed change in point of diversion that could occur to federally- listed fish and wildlife species or their associated critical habitats within the historic floodplain of the Colorado River between Xxxxxx Dam and Imperial Dam. The conservation measures related to the water transfers include stocking of listed Razorback suckers in the lower Colorado River, restoration or creation of 44 acres of backwaters along the Colorado River between Xxxxxx Dam and Imperial Dam, provision of funding for capture and rearing efforts for listed Bonytail chubs from Lake Mohave, and a two-tiered conservation plan to minimize potential effects to occupied habitat of the listed Southwestern willow flycatcher on the Colorado River between Xxxxxx and Imperial Dams. Based on the concern that IID would not be able to complete work necessary to obtain ‘‘take’’ authorization for effects of its proposed QSA-related water conservation actions through a Section 10 Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) process by December 31, 2002, Reclamation, in July 2002, voluntarily submitted a Biological Assessment (BA) to the Service on a proposed voluntary species conservation program (Biological Assessment of Reclamation’s Proposed Section 7(a)(1) Conservation Measures for Listed Species in the Imperial Irrigation District/Salton Sea Areas). This voluntary species conservation program serves as an alternative means for obtaining the necessary ‘‘take’’ authorization for the relevant California agencies under the ESA for IID’s water conservation actions. The BA, prepared on a voluntary basis by Reclamation, included voluntary species conservation measures to address listed species in the IID/Salton Sea area that could be affected by water conservation actions taken by IID pursuant to the QSA. The conservation measures included beneficial noted above, the IA has been renamed and replaced by the Water Delivery Agreement. measures for the Desert pupfish, Yuma 9 See, e.g., the Colorado River Compact of 1922, the Boulder Canyon Project Act of 1928, Arizona v. California 1964 Supreme Court Decree [D...
Proposed Action. Under the Proposed Action Alternative, 453 acres of old-growth forest (210+ years old Hemlock) would be set aside as Presumed Habitat for the term of the permit. These set-asides could have reasonably foreseeable positive impacts on Special Status Plant Species that prefer old-growth forests and have the potential to occur on Enrolled Lands, like Coptis asplenifolia or Oxalis suksdorfii. Most of the Special Status Plant Species that have the potential to occur on Applicant’s lands are plants that are associated with wetlands or non-forest habitats. Federally-listed plant species, such as Howellia aquatilis, or Sidalcea nelsoniana, are both species that are associated with uncommon habitats (remnant lowland prairies and/or wetlands), and would not be affected in any way by the issuance of the proposed SHA from what would occur under the No Action Alternative. The alternatives do not differ in their impacts to federally-listed or Special Status Plant Species. In addition, 2,068 acres of Occupied Sites would become no harvest zones whereas, under the No Action Alternative, they potentially could be harvested under a Class IV-Special Forest Practice application (and possibly a federal HCP). These Sites are broadly distributed across the Enrolled Lands and so could result in reasonably foreseeable impacts to plant species that have the potential to occur within those lands. A beneficial impact, due to no disturbance, would occur for any plants present in these protected areas when compared to the No Action Alternative. Likely impact to rare and threatened plant species in Forests & Fish Buffers and commercial forests will be the same under all alternatives, including the No Action Alternative, as discussed above.
