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 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. The proposed action involves the issuance of an EOS by the Service for the covered activities in the permit area, under section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA. The EOS would cover “take” of the covered species associated with implementation of a conservation strategy for freshwater mussels and the operation and maintenance of BRA’s water supply and distribution system within the permit area. An application for an EOS must include a CCAA that describes the conservation measures the applicant has agreed to undertake to minimize and mitigate for the impacts of the proposed taking of covered species to the maximum extent practicable. The applicant will fully implement the CCAA if approved by the Service. Next Steps We will evaluate the CCAA and comments we receive to determine whether the EOS application meets the requirements of section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA. We will also evaluate whether issuance of a section 10(a)(1)(A) permit would comply with section 7 of the ESA by conducting an intra-Service section 7 consultation. We will also evaluate the comments received to determine if the CCAA is eligible for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). We will use the results of the combination of the above findings, in our final analysis to determine whether to issue an EOS. If all necessary requirements are met, we may issue the EOS to the applicant. Public Availability of Comments Written comments we receive become part of the public record associated with this action. 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 request in your comment that we 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. 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 applicant has submitted a draft SHA for the TCB that covers approximately 1,105 acres of land (enrolled property) in Clallam County, Washington. The enrolled property is primarily operated as a commercial lavender and xxxxx farm (“u-pick farm”), and a private recreational area and homestead. There are also some non-agricultural areas of mowed grasslands, xxxxx, and forest. The applicant worked closely with the Service to establish the baseline and develop the SHA. Habitat surveys for the TCB have shown there are 40.5 acres of TCB baseline habitat within the enrolled property. The baseline habitat contains three habitat types: upland grass and forb occupied by the covered species (15.3 acres), and a buffer consisting of emergent xxxxx/wetland (18.7 acres) and beach upland (6.5 acres). For specific details about baseline conditions, see the draft SHA. Within the 40.5 acres, the applicant will perform habitat management activities for the benefit of the TCB. Within the area occupied by the TCB, the applicant will maintain and potentially enhance habitat. This will include annual hand removal of Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius) until it is considered eradicated. Additional non- desirable vegetation may also be removed if necessary. Plantings of certain vegetation to benefit the TCB may also occur. The applicant will maintain fencing and signage to impede illegal public trespass onto baseline habitat. The applicant will conduct annual surveys of the TCB during its flight period and also monitor the status of baseline habitat relative to the metrics described in the SHA. Additional monitoring will also include observations regarding public access, describing any research and data collection, and any emerging issues that could influence the success of the SHA. The applicant will monitor and report in years 1, 3, and 5 of the SHA, and every 3 years thereafter (except for adult TCB surveys, which will be conducted annually). These activities will require the applicant to enter habitat occupied by the TCB as needed over the course of the year, but mainly during the spring flight season for the TCB. Depending on the timing, these activities could result in take of TCB larva and possibly adult butterflies, mainly as a result of inadvertent trampling. Continued removal of Scotch broom and other invasive plant species and the planting of target host plants could result in temporary disturbance of TCB habitat and also result in take if TCB is present in the affected ...
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 provide technical and financial assistance, as available, to support the Grand Unified Trails System (GUTS) regional project. Coordination will be accomplished jointly through annual action plans established by the GUTS steering committee. The steering committee will be composed of government agencies, special interest groups, and businesses interested in the long-term development of trails and greenways in the Santa Fe region. Individuals and organizations must see some aspect of their goals being met through this partnership.
Proposed Action. Add two (2) new VAV boxes to the system to control the open cubicle area and the glassed in area outside offices 128-131. Scope: Provide material and labor to install new VAV boxes and associated duct work as required. Air balance and set up of new VAV boxes. Test air flow at all outlets. Check calibration of all space sensors, re-calibrate as required. Reconfigure/add controls to conform to the base intent of the existing modified systems as well as changes proposed here.
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). Provider: Any physician, hospital, facility, or other Health Care Professional who is licensed or otherwise authorized to provide Health Care services in the State or jurisdiction in which they are furnished. Provider Complaint: A written expression by a Provider which indicates dissatisfaction or dispute with the Contractor’s policies, procedures, or any aspect of a Contractor’s administrative functions, including a Proposed Action.
Proposed Action. Under the Proposed Action Alternative, timber harvest operations in commercial forests and in Forests & Fish Buffers are expected to be similar to under the other alternatives, including the No Action Alternative. Under the Proposed Action Alternative, 453 acres of old-growth forest (210+ year old Western Hemlock) will be set aside as no-harvest Presumed Habitat, potentially resulting in an additional 453 acres of trees in the Enrolled Lands. In addition, timber harvest that could otherwise occur in Occupied Sites pursuant to a Class IV-Special Forest Practices Application will not be undertaken over the duration of the Permit, resulting in potentially more trees on the landscape where those sites are present (2,068 acres). With respect to Forests & Fish Buffers, Applicant will grow, protect, and restore mature forests within the Forests & Fish Buffers totaling 60,802 acres through compliance with the Forest Practices Program.
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.