Opinion ID: 2763492
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Legal Requirements for an RPA

Text: Action.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 18 SAN LUIS V. LOCKE
NMFS To Explain How Each RPA Action Is Essential To Avoid Jeopardy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
NMFS To Articulate Compliance with the Non-Jeopardy Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 2. Challenged RPA Actions. . . . . . . . . . . 64 a. Action IV.2.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 b. Action IV.2.3 and Action IV.3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 c. Action IV.4.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 d. Action III.1.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 e. Action III.1.3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 f. Action III.2.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 VI. CROSS-APPEAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 A. NMFS Need Not Distinguish Discretionary and Non-Discretionary Actions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 B. The Biological Opinion’s Indirect Mortality Factors Are Direct Effects Under the ESA. . . 75 SAN LUIS V. LOCKE 19 C. Reclamation Is Not Independently Liable Under the ESA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 VII. CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 GLOSSARY OF TERMS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 20 SAN LUIS V. LOCKE