Laserfiche WebLink
<br />III. A~/fERNATrYE EVALUATION CRITERIA AND MATRIX <br /> <br />In ortIer I, <br />be develo' <br />Inc., agre <br /> <br />],sess the feasibility of the nine management alternatives, evaluation criter: 1d to <br />J, As a first step in this process, the Feasibility Committee, workin~ ,h'-'; \\ <br />that a management alternative should: <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />ac -'l'rr,date rrent operations and optimize future operational flexibil <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />at!, ''''ainty regarding ESA compliance to provide stable 2':umF:Y "jr <br />tim.t.1I~ f\1~""""I~. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />mIL' <br /> <br />0>>' <br /> <br />,f jeopardy and/or adverse effect findings by the Sl <br />;j~cls and/or operations, and <br /> <br />p, <br /> <br />. 1m! ,ent a cost-effective program. <br /> <br />The criteria <br />degree of <- <br />coordinate, <br />in Chapter <br /> <br />_ ,eloped from these goals address the issues of preul. Jilit\ ost; <br />- :'le process; operational flexibility; and the presence of a compreLensive, <br />- crvatiun strategy, The specific criteria are listed below and explained in detail <br />ul' the Feasibility Assessment. <br /> <br />· Degree of long-term planning certainty provided, <br /> <br />· Ability to develop the alternative, <br /> <br />· Ability to achieve prelisting agreements, <br /> <br />. Effectiveness in avoiding or resolving findings of adverse modification of critical habitat <br />and/or jeopardy opinions, <br /> <br />. Ability to obtain incidental take authoriz<.tion, <br /> <br />. Ability to coordinate actions or reduce the need for actions by other parties that are <br />detrimental to Participant projects, <br /> <br />FINAL REPORT <br /> <br />December 20. 1994 <br />Page xi <br />