### 8349 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 30 / Monday, February 14, 2011 / Notices

2 Study of the impacts of global climate change is an evolving field, and additional research is needed to understand the phenomenon’s likely effects on estuarine habitats and processes with specificity. At this time, the Independent Scientific Advisory Board of the Northwest Power and Conservation Council expects that the regional effects of global climate change in the next century will include more precipitation falling as rainrather than snow, reduced snow pack, and late-summer/early-fall stream flows, and associated rises in stream temperature (Independent Scientific Advisory Board 2007). The climate-related management actions in Table 1 reflect these expected impacts. Although the management actions clearly would not change the threat of global climate change itself, they have the potential to lessen its impact on salmonids in the estuary. Even if climate cycles and global climate change have effects different from those assumed in this document, the management actions that Table 1 associates with climate would provide benefits to salmonids by addressing other threats, such as water withdrawal, urban and industrial practices, and reservoir heating. All three of the management actions associated with climate in Table 1 are associated with other threats listed in Table 1.

3 Unless otherwise noted, the term best management practices is used in the Estuary Module to indicate general methods or techniques found to be most effective in achieving an objective. NMFS envisions that in implementation, specific best management practices would be developed or recommended.

**Note:** Italics indicate an action’s second occurrence in the table, in connection with a different threat.

Identifying management actions that
could reduce threats to salmon and steelhead as they rear in or migrate through the estuary is an important step toward improving conditions for salmonids during a critical stage in their life cycles. However, actual implementation of management actions is constrained by a variety of factors, such as technical, economic, and private property considerations. In some cases, it will be impossible to realize an action’s full potential because its implementation is constrained by past societal decisions that are functionally irreversible. An important assumption of the Estuary Module is that the implementation of each of the 23 management actions is constrained in

some manner.

The Estuary Module makes another important assumption about implementation: although implementation of actions is constrained, even constrained implementation can make important
contributions to the survival of salmonids in the estuary and plume.

Within the context of these two fundamental assumptions, the Estuary
Module evaluates the costs and potential benefits of recovery actions.

Potential Survival Benefits

To help characterize potential survival improvements, the Estuary Module uses a planning exercise that involves distributing a plausible survival improvement target of 20 percent across the actions to hypothesize the portion of that total survival improvement target that might result from each action. The primary purpose of the survival improvement target is to help compare the relative potential benefits of different management actions. The survival improvement target does not account for variation at the ESU, population, and subpopulation scales, and is not intended for use in life cycle modeling, except as a starting point in the absence of more rigorous data. Time and Cost Estimates

Each action in the Estuary Module is broken down into a number of specific projects or units, and per-unit costs for each project are identified. The costs reflect assumptions about the constraints to implementation and the degree to which it is possible to reduce
those constraints.

Given those constraints, the Estuary
Module estimates that the cost of implementing all 23 actions and associated research and monitoring over a 25-year time period is $592.15 million. Costs of tributary actions and the total estimated time and cost of recovery for
each affected ESU or DPS will be provided in ESU- and DPS-level recovery plans.

Monitoring and Adaptive Management

Research, monitoring, and evaluation (RME) within an adaptive management
framework is a critical element of recovery planning for ESA-listed species. Monitoring for the Estuary Module will build on ongoing efforts. In particular, the Federal Columbia River Estuary Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation Program (Johnson et al.

, 2008) is an appropriate monitoring plan on which to base RME for the Estuary Module, particularly because it links Estuary Module RME to RME for the
2008 Federal Columbia River Power System Biological Opinion and its 2010 Supplement (NMFS, 2008 and 2010). The Estuary Module also identifies other applicable monitoring plans and guidance documents as well as additional monitoring needs, particularly in the area of action effectiveness monitoring.

Conclusion

The Estuary Module contributes to all
the Columbia Basin salmon and steelhead recovery plans by analyzing limiting factors and threats related to
survival of listed salmon and steelhead in the Columbia River estuary, identifying site-specific management actions related to those limiting factors and threats, and estimating the cost and time to implement those actions. NMFS will incorporate the Estuary Module by
reference into all Columbia Basin salmon and steelhead recovery plans. We conclude that the Estuary Module provides information that helps to meet the requirements for recovery plans under ESA section 4(f), and adopt it as a component of Columbia Basin ESA recovery plans.

References

A complete list of all references cited herein is available upon request ( see **FOR**

**FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT** section).

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.
Dated: February 9, 2011.

Therese Conant, Acting Chief, Endangered Species Division, Office of Protected Resources, National
Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 2011–3243 Filed 2–11–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 3510–22–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE**

**Office of the Secretary**

**[Docket ID DoD–2011–OS–0016]**

**Proposed Collection; Comment Request** 

**AGENCY :**  Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs,

DoD.

**ACTION :**  Notice.

**SUMMARY :**  In compliance with Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs announces a proposed new public information collection and seeks public comment on the provisions thereof. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and


### 8350 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 30 / Monday, February 14, 2011 / Notices

(d) ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

**DATES :**  Consideration will be given to all comments received by April 15, 2011.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

• Mail: Federal Docket Management System Office, 1160 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301–1160.

Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, docket
number and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy
for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact
information.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  To request more information on this proposed information collection or to obtain a copy of the proposal and associated collection instruments, please write to Defense Health Information Management System (DHIMS), Attn: COL DaCosta Barrow, 5109 Leesburg Pike, Skyline 6, Suite 100, Falls Church, VA 22041, or call

DHIMS at 703–998–6900.

Title; Associated Form; and OMB
Number: Enterprise Blood Management System (EBMS); OMB Control Number

0720–TBD.

Needs and Uses: EBMS is a commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) automated information system (AIS) software application that provides the Military Health System (MHS) with a comprehensive enterprise wide Blood Donor Management System (DBMS) and Blood Transfusion Management System (BTMS) with capabilities to manage blood donors (both in-house and at mobile collection sites), including Theater and VA; manage blood products both fresh and frozen throughout the collection, processing, testing, storing, and shipping procedures; interface with testing instrumentation for enterprise (Global) results management; shipping blood with in-transit visibility and shipping data transmit and receive; automate, enterprise-wide ‘‘lookback’’ for donors, patients, and products; automated, blood order issue, and transfusion records; manage enterprise inventory (Global). It has built-in safeguards to limit access and visibility of personal or sensitive information in accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974. The application will account for everyone that donates blood and
receives blood transfusions in the MHS—Active Duty, Reserves, National Guard, government civilian, contractors and volunteers assigned or borrowed— this also includes non-appropriated fund employees and foreign nationals.

Affected Public: Contractors, civilians, and foreign nationals donating to the Military Health Systems.

Annual Burden Hours: 766. Number of Respondents: 4,600. Responses per Respondent: 1. Average Burden per Response: 10
minutes.

Frequency: On occasion.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 
Summary of Information Collection

In order to attain standardization, ensure a safe blood product, and comply with Federal law, all Military blood facilities are licensed and/or registered by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and must operate according to Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 211, Current Good Manufacturing Practices for Finished Pharmaceuticals, Part 610 series, Biologics, and Part 820 series, Medical Devices.

EBMS is a commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) FDA 510K cleared Medical Device automated information system (AIS) software application that provides the Military Health System (MHS) with a comprehensive enterprise wide Blood Donor Management System (DBMS) and Blood Transfusion Management System (BTMS) with capabilities to manage blood donors (both in-house and at mobile collection sites), including Theater and VA; manage blood products both fresh and frozen throughout the collection, processing, testing, storing, and shipping procedures; interface with testing instrumentation for enterprise (Global) results management; shipping blood with in-transit visibility and shipping data transmit and receive; automate, enterprise-wide ‘‘ lookback’’ for donors, patients, and products; automated, blood order issue, and transfusion records; manage enterprise inventory (Global). It has built-in safeguards to limit access and visibility of personal or sensitive information in accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974. The application will account for everyone that donates blood and
receives blood transfusions in the MHS—Active Duty, Reserves, National Guard, government civilian, contractors and volunteers assigned or borrowed— this also includes non-appropriated fund employees and foreign nationals. EBMS is a n-tier enterprise solution. The solution will use COTS products,
installed at a Central Server location.
EBMS which is delineated in several DoD issuances, including DoD Directive 6000.12, DoD Instruction 6480.4, and AR10–64, has applicability at the headquarters level allowing Armed Services Blood Program (ASBP) and Service Blood Program Office (SBPO) touse this product to conduct its own dayto-day blood inventory management. This comprehensive tool provides the capability to manage inventory, monitor adverse trends, review lookback case, manage donor deferrals and develop standard operation procedure. Deciding to implement EBMS within MHS, provides an enterprise solution for transfusion and donor processing that can be applied to enterprise-wide blood inventory, and traceability through out patient and donor life.

The information in EBMS is personalor sensitive; therefore, it contains builtin safeguards to limit access and visibility of this information. EBMS uses role-based security so a user sees only the information for which permissionhas been granted. It uses state-of-themarket 128-bit encryption security for
our transactions. It is DITSCAP certified having been subjected to and passed thorough security testing and evaluation by independent parties. It meets safeguards specified by the Privacy Act of 1974 in that it maintains a published DoD Privacy Impact Assessment and System of Record covering Active Duty Military, Reserve, National Guard, and government civilian employees, to include non-appropriated fund employees and foreign nationals, DoD contractors, and volunteers. EBMS is hosted in a secure facility managed by the Defense Information Systems Agency.

Morgan F. Park, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 2011–3208 Filed 2–11–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 5001–06–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE**

**Office of the Secretary**

**Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting** 

**AGENCY :**  Department of Defense.

**ACTION :**  Notice.

**SUMMARY :**  Under the provision of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C., appendix as amended),
the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b as amended), and