 Okay, a couple more things that need to be done in open session. This is the point, we've reached the point rather of the council initiated discussion and again for our ad hoc, this is the point in time where we stop and are willing to listen to you. So if there, if you came here with a burning issue or an idea, this is where things come up, where you feed back to us. This is where the idea came from to have Phil Bourne come and talk to the council. You might want to hear a report on if not one of the other research activities here, a workshop or something else that you think is appropriate to get information brought back to you. So at this point the floor is yours and we're all yours. I'd like to bring up a point, it's off of a comment I think Eric that you made in your report about interaction with the FDA. I am very, very concerned that the FDA inserting itself into the implementation research of using genetic information in doing clinical trials when you get, when you use that information in patients. So beyond just clear, we're talking about FDA. What I've seen happen in the, and a major concern in the newborn sequencing program is not so much, in fact, it's not at all that the FDA is really telling people what to do, but there is a danger and one of my colleagues brought this up of self-censoring, that people are changing their research projects, they're changing their research direction even though the FDA said they do not want that to happen, it's happening because of concern about the FDA insisting on an IED or other sorts of things. So I would just like to bring up that maybe at the next meeting we could have more of a discussion about the role of the FDA regulation in regulating genomics research. So if we can do that, would you like, and that you want this to be, you want to hear from NHGRI staff who are interacting a lot with the FDA, would we want to invite somebody from the FDA to come talk? I think, what's, what's, what's your imagining? Well, I've heard a bunch from Jonathan Giflin, he's been very helpful and terrific right there. I think it would be a good idea to have a two-way conversation, because at this point the conversation has been one-way from us to FDA. I would love to hear the FDA's point of view and see if we can actually have a dialogue. Okay. So Jonathan is going to give you a presentation tomorrow morning, and we certainly heard this, if you want to refine that discussion, if you want to define what you want to hear from us after Jonathan's presentation. Yeah, so we'll have a continuation of this after tomorrow. Bidi? It'd be helpful to have maybe some presentation on the future plans for technology development. So where are, where are we, Jeff Schloss, where are we on, we've had that on the possible agenda, I think multiple councils, are we aiming for February now? We're aiming for a concept clearance in May, because we, by that time we will have had a workshop where various, well, workshops in one format or another. So would we want, that's our plan at this point. So would it be silly to have a presentation in February if we were going to have a concept in May? I think so. Okay. But we'll be having some ongoing planning activities that will culminate in a concept in May. Yeah. But is this all sequencing technology, like sequencing technologies are more broad? No, no, sequencing technology will be included in the discussion, but we intend it to be broader. Okay, good. Yeah. Okay. Ursula? Yeah, I have a suggestion in terms of interaction with other agencies or organizations about bringing PCORnet to talk about their initiative and speak about the bio repository in particular. Okay. We could look into that. I think we've exhausted them. Okay. Very good. Thank you. Let me draw your attention to three items of interest. You can find them in the ECB or link to the council open session agenda and the council webpage. These are the quarterly reports from the American Society of Human Genetics, the Society of Genetic Counselors, and the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics, if you want to see about recent activities and updates from those societies. And finally, I am required to read the conflict of interest statement to you. This applies to the review of applications that will be performed in the closed session. You must leave the meeting room when applications submitted by your organization are being individually discussed. In the case of state higher education or other systems with multiple campuses geographically separated, own organization is intended to mean the entire system except where determination has been made that the components are separate organizations for the purpose of conflict of interest. You should avoid situations that could give rise to changes to charges of conflict of interest, whether real or apparent. For example, you should not participate in the deliberations and actions of any application from or involving your spouse, child, recent student, recent teacher, professional collaborator with whom you have worked closely, close personal friend or a scientist with whom you have had longstanding scientific or personal differences. NHGRI staff will determine the appropriate action based on recency, frequency, and strength of such associations or interests, either positive or negative, and will instruct you accordingly. In council actions in which you vote on a block of applications without discussing any individual one, the on block action, your vote will not apply to any applications from any institution fulfilling the criteria noted above. Please sign the conflict of interest form, which has been provided to you in your folders. We will collect them at the end of the meeting. So once Eric hits the gavel, the open session will be concluded. We ask you to stick around for five, ten minutes for them to disconnect the cameras. We'll come back to the second closed session. So we'll start at about six o'clock. I'll say six. OK, we'll talk about what we're going to do from there. All right, I will close the open session. Thank you very much.