 Okay, next up is the conflict of interest statement, which we are required to read in the open session. This applies to the applications that will be reviewed tomorrow in closed session. You must leave the meeting room when applications submitted by your own organization are being individually discussed. In the case of state higher education or other systems with multiple campuses that are geographically separated, your own organization is intended to mean the entire system except where a determination has been made that the components are separate organizations for the purposes of determining conflict of interest. You should avoid situations that could give rise to charges of conflict of interest, whether real or apparent. For example, you should not participate in the deliberations and actions on any application from or involving your spouse, partner or child, a recent student, a recent teacher, a professional collaborator with whom you have worked closely, a close friend or a scientist with whom you've had longstanding scientific or personal differences. The NHGRI will determine the appropriate action based on recency, frequency, and strength of such associations or interests, either positive or negative, and you will be instructed accordingly. In council actions in which you vote on a block of applications without discussing any individual one, for example, the on block action, your vote will not apply to any application from an institution fulfilling the criteria listed above or noted above. Please sign the conflict of interest and disposal of confidential materials form that Comfort Ground has sent to you and return it to Comfort with your signature by email. So that's all that's listed on the open session agenda, but we do have one other activity to get through. It shouldn't take too long. And that is that we have some council members who have completed their tour of duty. Community management considers them to be completely rehabilitated and are free to be released to the wild again. So our departing members are, I'm gonna begin with Mark Craven. Now, I had not worked with Mark before he joined council. At the first council meeting, we had a special planning session that took place on Sunday night, all council meetings are on Monday and Tuesday. And so Sunday night, we met with a subgroup of council members in a hotel over on Rockville Pike somewhere. And I had not met Mark before. The hotel put us in a room in a basement in a far-flung corner to me, to say it was out of the way is an understatement. So we got to the starting time and I've decided to go back to the lobby to look for wayward council members and direct them back to the room. Well, as I said, I had not worked with Mark before. So I had my cell phone in hand with his photograph on my phone. And I'm looking at the phone and at people that I encounter. And suddenly I spot Mark and he's coming towards me and he's got his cell phone in his hand with my picture on it. So we could have called one another, but that this system seemed to work well. Should have swiped left or swiped right or something. Mark, thank you for your service on council, for your advice. Thank you also for serving on the data science working group. And we look forward to interacting with you in the future, in other venues. Next is Steve Rich. I'm working on a plan that will bring Steve Rich back as an ad hoc member for every future council member, meeting rather, to start off council-initiated discussion. And you witness today, Steve always launches council-initiated discussion. So what are we gonna do without Steve? The other thing that I have noticed in my interactions with council members is that when I send an email to all the members, it's a race between Mark and Steve, which one will reply first? And usually it's within about 20 seconds. And it's right now about 50-50. And you will notice that Mark was the first person to log into the council meeting today. So my concern now is that no one is gonna respond to my email messages. That was the tiebreaker. Now that we've, what's the tiebreaker? I don't know. Maybe the next person to volunteer for a workshop will be our tiebreaker. Steve, I also wanna thank you looking back 15 years for participating in a lot of peer review meetings, chairing a couple of them for me, and serving on multiple workshops for NHGRI. And the last person is Hal Dietz. Hal is the third member that's departing us this year. First, I wanna acknowledge that all three of these people agreed to extend their council service by six months. They did that because of the problem that we've had onboarding council members, and we appreciate that extra service. Hal also served on the Board of Scientific Counselors, which guides and advises the Intramural Research Program. Including chairing that group. He even chaired that group. He chaired it, yeah. What this means is that Hal was subjected to two rounds of the vetting process in order to serve on the BSC and council, and that's something I wouldn't wish on anyone. Not to mention 10 years with me or something like that. Yeah, okay. I will say to the community at large, if you're forming an advisory committee and you need someone to keep you honest, I can recommend Hal for that without question. So to all three of you, thank you again for being important members of the council and serving NHGRI so well. And as I always tell departing members, we welcome you back into the arms of the peer review process. We look forward to putting you on a committee soon. Thank you all very much. And with that, you can gavel us to closure. Let me announce that we will meet again tomorrow at 11 a.m. Eastern time to resume with the second closed session. So we'll see council back in closed session, 11 o'clock tomorrow. It's been a long day. Thank you everybody for your perseverance, and but most importantly, your input. And I will gavel us to a close. Thank you. Good night.