Request for Information: Public Access to Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Publications Resulting From Federally Funded Research, 68518-68520 [2011-28623]
Download as PDF
68518
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 214 / Friday, November 4, 2011 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
requirements and follow best practices
for protecting confidentiality, personal
privacy, proprietary interests,
intellectual property rights, author
attribution, and for ensuring that
homeland and national security
interests are not compromised.
The Working Group is now seeking
additional insight from ‘‘non-Federal
stakeholders, including the public,
universities, nonprofit and for-profit
publishers, libraries, federally funded
and non-federally funded research
scientists, and other organizations and
institutions with an interest in longterm stewardship and improved public
access to the results of federally funded
research,’’ as described in Section
103(b)(6) of ACRA. Specifically the
Working Group seeks further public
comment on the questions listed below:
Preservation, Discoverability, and
Access
(1) What specific Federal policies
would encourage public access to and
the preservation of broadly valuable
digital data resulting from federally
funded scientific research, to grow the
U.S. economy and improve the
productivity of the American scientific
enterprise?
(2) What specific steps can be taken
to protect the intellectual property
interests of publishers, scientists,
Federal agencies, and other
stakeholders, with respect to any
existing or proposed policies for
encouraging public access to and
preservation of digital data resulting
from federally funded scientific
research?
(3) How could Federal agencies take
into account inherent differences
between scientific disciplines and
different types of digital data when
developing policies on the management
of data?
(4) How could agency policies
consider differences in the relative costs
and benefits of long-term stewardship
and dissemination of different types of
data resulting from federally funded
research?
(5) How can stakeholders (e.g.,
research communities, universities,
research institutions, libraries, scientific
publishers) best contribute to the
implementation of data management
plans?
(6) How could funding mechanisms
be improved to better address the real
costs of preserving and making digital
data accessible?
(7) What approaches could agencies
take to measure, verify, and improve
compliance with Federal data
stewardship and access policies for
scientific research? How can the burden
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:06 Nov 03, 2011
Jkt 226001
of compliance and verification be
minimized?
(8) What additional steps could
agencies take to stimulate innovative
use of publicly accessible research data
in new and existing markets and
industries to create jobs and grow the
economy?
(9) What mechanisms could be
developed to assure that those who
produced the data are given appropriate
attribution and credit when secondary
results are reported?
Standards for Interoperability, Re-Use
and Re-Purposing
(10) What digital data standards
would enable interoperability, reuse,
and repurposing of digital scientific
data? For example, MIAME (minimum
information about a microarray
experiment; see Brazma et al., 2001,
Nature Genetics 29, 371) is an example
of a community-driven data standards
effort.
(11) What are other examples of
standards development processes that
were successful in producing effective
standards and what characteristics of
the process made these efforts
successful?
(12) How could Federal agencies
promote effective coordination on
digital data standards with other nations
and international communities?
(13) What policies, practices, and
standards are needed to support linking
between publications and associated
data?
Response to this RFI is voluntary.
Responders are free to address any or all
the above items, as well as provide
additional information that they think is
relevant to developing policies
consistent with increased preservation
and dissemination of broadly useful
digital data resulting from federally
funded research. Please note that the
Government will not pay for response
preparation or for the use of any
information contained in the response.
How To Submit a Response
All comments must be submitted
electronically to: digitaldata@ostp.gov.
Responses to this RFI will be accepted
through January 12, 2012. You will
receive an electronic confirmation
acknowledging receipt of your response,
but will not receive individualized
feedback on any suggestions. No basis
for claims against the U.S. Government
shall arise as a result of a response to
this request for information or from the
Government’s use of such information.
PO 00000
Frm 00124
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Inquiries
Specific questions about this RFI
should be directed to the following
email address: digitaldata@ostp.gov.
Form should include:
[Assigned ID #]
[Assigned Entry date]
Name/Email
Affiliation/Organization
City, State
Comment 1
Comment 2
Comment 3
Comment 4,
Comment 5
Comment 6
Comment 7
Comment 8
Comment 9
Comment 10
Comment 11
In addition, please identify any other
items the Working Group might
consider for Federal policies related to
public access to peer-reviewed scholarly
publications resulting from federally
supported research.
Please attach any documents that
support your comments to the
questions.
Ted Wackler,
Deputy Chief of Staff.
[FR Doc. 2011–28621 Filed 11–3–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY POLICY
Request for Information: Public
Access to Peer-Reviewed Scholarly
Publications Resulting From Federally
Funded Research
Notice of Request for
Information (RFI).
ACTION:
In accordance with Section
103(b)(6) of the America COMPETES
Reauthorization Act of 2010 (ACRA;
Pub. L. 111–358), this Request for
Information (RFI) offers the opportunity
for interested individuals and
organizations to provide
recommendations on approaches for
ensuring long-term stewardship and
broad public access to the peerreviewed scholarly publications that
result from federally funded scientific
research. The public input provided
through this Notice will inform
deliberations of the National Science
and Technology Council’s Task Force
on Public Access to Scholarly
Publications.
Release Date: November 3, 2011.
Response Date: January 2, 2012.
ADDRESSES: publicaccess@ostp.gov.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\04NON1.SGM
04NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 214 / Friday, November 4, 2011 / Notices
Issued By
Office of Science and Technology
Policy (OSTP) on behalf of the National
Science and Technology Council
(NSTC).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Purpose
In accordance with Section 103(b)(6)
of the America COMPETES
Reauthorization Act of 2010 (ACRA;
Pub. L. 111–358), this Request for
Information (RFI) offers the opportunity
for interested individuals and
organizations to provide
recommendations on approaches for
ensuring long-term stewardship and
broad public access to the peerreviewed scholarly publications that
result from federally funded scientific
research. The public input provided
through this Notice will inform
deliberations of the National Science
and Technology Council’s Task Force
on Public Access to Scholarly
Publications.
Background
The multi-agency Task Force on
Public Access to Scholarly Publications
(Task Force), established under the
National Science and Technology
Council (NSTC) Committee on Science
(CoS), has been tasked with developing
options for implementing the scholarly
publications requirements of Section
103 of ACRA. OSTP will issue a report
to Congress, in accordance with Section
103(e) of ACRA, describing priorities for
the development of agency policies for
ensuring broad public access to the
results of federally funded unclassified
research, the status of agency policies
for public access to publications
resulting from federally funded
research, and a summary of public input
collected from this RFI and other
mechanisms.
In 2009 and 2010, OSTP conducted a
public consultation about policy options
for expanding public access to federally
funded peer-reviewed scholarly articles.
The Task Force has reviewed the
information submitted through OSTP’s
public consultation (the full set of
comments can be viewed on the OSTP
Web site [https://www.whitehouse.gov/
blog/2010/03/08/public-access-policyupdate]), experience with the various
policies currently in use at a variety of
Federal agencies, and a report from the
congressionally convened Scholarly
Publishing Roundtable (https://
www.aau.edu/WorkArea/
showcontent.aspx?id=10044). The Task
Force is now seeking additional insight
from ‘‘non-Federal stakeholders,
including the public, universities,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:06 Nov 03, 2011
Jkt 226001
nonprofit and for-profit publishers,
libraries, federally funded and nonfederally funded research scientists, and
other organizations and institutions
with a stake in long-term preservation
and access to the results of federally
funded research,’’ as described in
Section 103(b)(6) of the ACRA.
Specifically, OSTP seeks further public
comment on the questions listed below,
on behalf of the Task Force:
(1) Are there steps that agencies could
take to grow existing and new markets
related to the access and analysis of
peer-reviewed publications that result
from federally funded scientific
research? How can policies for archiving
publications and making them
publically accessible be used to grow
the economy and improve the
productivity of the scientific enterprise?
What are the relative costs and benefits
of such policies? What type of access to
these publications is required to
maximize U.S. economic growth and
improve the productivity of the
American scientific enterprise?
(2) What specific steps can be taken
to protect the intellectual property
interests of publishers, scientists,
Federal agencies, and other stakeholders
involved with the publication and
dissemination of peer-reviewed
scholarly publications resulting from
federally funded scientific research?
Conversely, are there policies that
should not be adopted with respect to
public access to peer-reviewed scholarly
publications so as not to undermine any
intellectual property rights of
publishers, scientists, Federal agencies,
and other stakeholders?
(3) What are the pros and cons of
centralized and decentralized
approaches to managing public access to
peer-reviewed scholarly publications
that result from federally funded
research in terms of interoperability,
search, development of analytic tools,
and other scientific and commercial
opportunities? Are there reasons why a
Federal agency (or agencies) should
maintain custody of all published
content, and are there ways that the
government can ensure long-term
stewardship if content is distributed
across multiple private sources?
(4) Are there models or new ideas for
public-private partnerships that take
advantage of existing publisher archives
and encourage innovation in
accessibility and interoperability, while
ensuring long-term stewardship of the
results of federally funded research?
(5) What steps can be taken by Federal
agencies, publishers, and/or scholarly
and professional societies to encourage
interoperable search, discovery, and
analysis capacity across disciplines and
PO 00000
Frm 00125
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
68519
archives? What are the minimum core
metadata for scholarly publications that
must be made available to the public to
allow such capabilities? How should
Federal agencies make certain that such
minimum core metadata associated with
peer-reviewed publications resulting
from federally funded scientific research
are publicly available to ensure that
these publications can be easily found
and linked to Federal science funding?
(6) How can Federal agencies that
fund science maximize the benefit of
public access policies to U.S. taxpayers,
and their investment in the peerreviewed literature, while minimizing
burden and costs for stakeholders,
including awardee institutions,
scientists, publishers, Federal agencies,
and libraries?
(7) Besides scholarly journal articles,
should other types of peer-reviewed
publications resulting from federally
funded research, such as book chapters
and conference proceedings, be covered
by these public access policies?
(8) What is the appropriate embargo
period after publication before the
public is granted free access to the full
content of peer-reviewed scholarly
publications resulting from federally
funded research? Please describe the
empirical basis for the recommended
embargo period. Analyses that weigh
public and private benefits and account
for external market factors, such as
competition, price changes, library
budgets, and other factors, will be
particularly useful. Are there evidencebased arguments that can be made that
the delay period should be different for
specific disciplines or types of
publications?
Please identify any other items the
Task Force might consider for Federal
policies related to public access to peerreviewed scholarly publications
resulting from federally supported
research.
Response to this RFI is voluntary.
Responders are free to address any or all
the above items, as well as provide
additional information that they think is
relevant to developing policies
consistent with increased public access
to peer-reviewed scholarly publications
resulting from federally funded
research. Please note that the U.S.
Government will not pay for response
preparation or for the use of any
information contained in the response.
How To Submit a Response
All comments must be submitted
electronically to: publicaccess@ostp.gov.
Responses to this RFI will be accepted
through January 2, 2012. You will
receive an electronic confirmation
acknowledging receipt of your response,
E:\FR\FM\04NON1.SGM
04NON1
68520
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 214 / Friday, November 4, 2011 / Notices
but will not receive individualized
feedback on any suggestions. No basis
for claims against the U.S. Government
shall arise as a result of a response to
this request for information or from the
Government’s use of such information.
Inquiries
Specific questions about this RFI
should be directed to the following
email address: publicaccess@ostp.gov.
Form should include:
[Assigned ID #]
[Assigned Entry date]
Name/Email
Affiliation/Organization
City, State
Comment 1
Comment 2
Comment 3
Comment 4
Comment 5
Comment 6
Comment 7
Comment 8
Please identify any other items the Task
Force might consider for Federal
policies related to public access to peerreviewed scholarly publications
resulting from federally supported
research.
{Attachment is: Please attach any
documents that support your comments
to the questions.}
Ted Wackler,
Deputy Chief of Staff.
[FR Doc. 2011–28623 Filed 11–3–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. IC–29853]
Notice of Applications for
Deregistration Under Section 8(f) of the
Investment Company Act of 1940
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
October 28, 2011.
The following is a notice of
applications for deregistration under
section 8(f) of the Investment Company
Act of 1940 for the month of October,
2011. A copy of each application may be
obtained via the Commission’s Web site
by searching for the file number, or an
applicant using the Company name box,
at https://www.sec.gov/search/
search.htm or by calling (202) 551–
8090. An order granting each
application will be issued unless the
SEC orders a hearing. Interested persons
may request a hearing on any
application by writing to the SEC’s
Secretary at the address below and
serving the relevant applicant with a
copy of the request, personally or by
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:06 Nov 03, 2011
Jkt 226001
mail. Hearing requests should be
received by the SEC by 5:30 p.m. on
November 25, 2011, and should be
accompanied by proof of service on the
applicant, in the form of an affidavit or,
for lawyers, a certificate of service.
Hearing requests should state the nature
of the writer’s interest, the reason for the
request, and the issues contested.
Persons who wish to be notified of a
hearing may request notification by
writing to the Secretary, U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street
NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090.
For Further Information Contact:
Diane L. Titus at (202) 551–6810, SEC,
Division of Investment Management,
Office of Investment Company
Regulation, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549–8010.
Keystone America Capital Preservation
and Income Fund [File No. 811–6237]
Summary: Applicant seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an
investment company. On or about
December 30, 1994, applicant
transferred its assets to Keystone Capital
Preservation and Income Fund, based
on net asset value. Records listing the
expenses incurred in connection with
the reorganization are no longer
available.
Filing Date: The application was filed
on October 5, 2011.
Applicant’s Address: 200 Berkeley St.,
Boston, MA 02116.
Keystone Australia Funds Inc. [File No.
811–5832]
Summary: Applicant seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an
investment company. On or about
December 30, 1994, applicant
transferred its assets to Keystone World
Bond Fund, then known as Keystone
America World Bond Fund, based on
net asset value. Records listing the
expenses incurred in connection with
the reorganization are no longer
available.
Filing Date: The application was filed
on September 27, 2011.
Applicant’s Address: 200 Berkeley St.,
Boston, MA 02116.
Global Real Estate Investments Fund
[File No. 811–22322]
Summary: Applicant seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an
investment company. On July 29, 2011,
applicant transferred its assets to James
Alpha Global Real Estate Investments
Portfolios, a series of Saratoga
Advantage Trust, based on net asset
value. Expenses of $80,330 incurred in
connection with the reorganization were
paid by Ascent Investment Advisors,
LLC, applicant’s investment adviser.
PO 00000
Frm 00126
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Filing Date: The application was filed
on September 27, 2011.
Applicant’s Address: Ascent
Investment Advisors, LLC, 5251 DTC
Parkway #935, Greenwood Village, CO
80111.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Investment Management, pursuant to
delegated authority.
Kevin M. O’Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011–28585 Filed 11–3–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–65660; File Nos. SR–
EDGA–2011–29; SR–EDGX–2011–28]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGA
Exchange, Inc.; EDGX Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Designation of Longer Period
for Commission Action on Proposed
Rule Changes Relating to
Amendments to EDGA and EDGX
Rules Regarding the Registration and
Obligations of Market Makers
October 31, 2011.
On August 30, 2011, EDGA Exchange,
Inc. and EDGX Exchange, Inc. (‘‘EDGA’’
and ‘‘EDGX,’’ or ‘‘Exchanges’’) filed
with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant
to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’),1 and
Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 proposed rule
changes relating to amendments to
EDGA and EDGX rules regarding the
registration and obligations of market
makers. The proposed rule changes
were published for comment in the
Federal Register on September 16,
2011.3
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act 4 provides
that, within forty-five days of the
publication of notice of the filing of a
proposed rule change, or within such
longer period as the Commission may
designate up to ninety days of such date
if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons
for so finding, the Commission shall
either approve or disapprove the
proposed rule change or institute
proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule change should be
disapproved. The 45th day for these
filings is October 31, 2011.
1 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 65315
(September 12, 2011), 76 FR 57772 (September 16,
2011) (SR–EDGX–2011–28); Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 65316 (September 12, 2011), 76 FR
57787 (SR–EDGA–2011–29).
4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
2 17
E:\FR\FM\04NON1.SGM
04NON1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 214 (Friday, November 4, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68518-68520]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-28623]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
Request for Information: Public Access to Peer-Reviewed Scholarly
Publications Resulting From Federally Funded Research
ACTION: Notice of Request for Information (RFI).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with Section 103(b)(6) of the America COMPETES
Reauthorization Act of 2010 (ACRA; Pub. L. 111-358), this Request for
Information (RFI) offers the opportunity for interested individuals and
organizations to provide recommendations on approaches for ensuring
long-term stewardship and broad public access to the peer-reviewed
scholarly publications that result from federally funded scientific
research. The public input provided through this Notice will inform
deliberations of the National Science and Technology Council's Task
Force on Public Access to Scholarly Publications.
Release Date: November 3, 2011.
Response Date: January 2, 2012.
ADDRESSES: publicaccess@ostp.gov.
[[Page 68519]]
Issued By
Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) on behalf of the
National Science and Technology Council (NSTC).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose
In accordance with Section 103(b)(6) of the America COMPETES
Reauthorization Act of 2010 (ACRA; Pub. L. 111-358), this Request for
Information (RFI) offers the opportunity for interested individuals and
organizations to provide recommendations on approaches for ensuring
long-term stewardship and broad public access to the peer-reviewed
scholarly publications that result from federally funded scientific
research. The public input provided through this Notice will inform
deliberations of the National Science and Technology Council's Task
Force on Public Access to Scholarly Publications.
Background
The multi-agency Task Force on Public Access to Scholarly
Publications (Task Force), established under the National Science and
Technology Council (NSTC) Committee on Science (CoS), has been tasked
with developing options for implementing the scholarly publications
requirements of Section 103 of ACRA. OSTP will issue a report to
Congress, in accordance with Section 103(e) of ACRA, describing
priorities for the development of agency policies for ensuring broad
public access to the results of federally funded unclassified research,
the status of agency policies for public access to publications
resulting from federally funded research, and a summary of public input
collected from this RFI and other mechanisms.
In 2009 and 2010, OSTP conducted a public consultation about policy
options for expanding public access to federally funded peer-reviewed
scholarly articles. The Task Force has reviewed the information
submitted through OSTP's public consultation (the full set of comments
can be viewed on the OSTP Web site [https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/03/08/public-access-policy-update]), experience with the various
policies currently in use at a variety of Federal agencies, and a
report from the congressionally convened Scholarly Publishing
Roundtable (https://www.aau.edu/WorkArea/showcontent.aspx?id=10044). The
Task Force is now seeking additional insight from ``non-Federal
stakeholders, including the public, universities, nonprofit and for-
profit publishers, libraries, federally funded and non-federally funded
research scientists, and other organizations and institutions with a
stake in long-term preservation and access to the results of federally
funded research,'' as described in Section 103(b)(6) of the ACRA.
Specifically, OSTP seeks further public comment on the questions listed
below, on behalf of the Task Force:
(1) Are there steps that agencies could take to grow existing and
new markets related to the access and analysis of peer-reviewed
publications that result from federally funded scientific research? How
can policies for archiving publications and making them publically
accessible be used to grow the economy and improve the productivity of
the scientific enterprise? What are the relative costs and benefits of
such policies? What type of access to these publications is required to
maximize U.S. economic growth and improve the productivity of the
American scientific enterprise?
(2) What specific steps can be taken to protect the intellectual
property interests of publishers, scientists, Federal agencies, and
other stakeholders involved with the publication and dissemination of
peer-reviewed scholarly publications resulting from federally funded
scientific research? Conversely, are there policies that should not be
adopted with respect to public access to peer-reviewed scholarly
publications so as not to undermine any intellectual property rights of
publishers, scientists, Federal agencies, and other stakeholders?
(3) What are the pros and cons of centralized and decentralized
approaches to managing public access to peer-reviewed scholarly
publications that result from federally funded research in terms of
interoperability, search, development of analytic tools, and other
scientific and commercial opportunities? Are there reasons why a
Federal agency (or agencies) should maintain custody of all published
content, and are there ways that the government can ensure long-term
stewardship if content is distributed across multiple private sources?
(4) Are there models or new ideas for public-private partnerships
that take advantage of existing publisher archives and encourage
innovation in accessibility and interoperability, while ensuring long-
term stewardship of the results of federally funded research?
(5) What steps can be taken by Federal agencies, publishers, and/or
scholarly and professional societies to encourage interoperable search,
discovery, and analysis capacity across disciplines and archives? What
are the minimum core metadata for scholarly publications that must be
made available to the public to allow such capabilities? How should
Federal agencies make certain that such minimum core metadata
associated with peer-reviewed publications resulting from federally
funded scientific research are publicly available to ensure that these
publications can be easily found and linked to Federal science funding?
(6) How can Federal agencies that fund science maximize the benefit
of public access policies to U.S. taxpayers, and their investment in
the peer-reviewed literature, while minimizing burden and costs for
stakeholders, including awardee institutions, scientists, publishers,
Federal agencies, and libraries?
(7) Besides scholarly journal articles, should other types of peer-
reviewed publications resulting from federally funded research, such as
book chapters and conference proceedings, be covered by these public
access policies?
(8) What is the appropriate embargo period after publication before
the public is granted free access to the full content of peer-reviewed
scholarly publications resulting from federally funded research? Please
describe the empirical basis for the recommended embargo period.
Analyses that weigh public and private benefits and account for
external market factors, such as competition, price changes, library
budgets, and other factors, will be particularly useful. Are there
evidence-based arguments that can be made that the delay period should
be different for specific disciplines or types of publications?
Please identify any other items the Task Force might consider for
Federal policies related to public access to peer-reviewed scholarly
publications resulting from federally supported research.
Response to this RFI is voluntary. Responders are free to address
any or all the above items, as well as provide additional information
that they think is relevant to developing policies consistent with
increased public access to peer-reviewed scholarly publications
resulting from federally funded research. Please note that the U.S.
Government will not pay for response preparation or for the use of any
information contained in the response.
How To Submit a Response
All comments must be submitted electronically to:
publicaccess@ostp.gov.
Responses to this RFI will be accepted through January 2, 2012. You
will receive an electronic confirmation acknowledging receipt of your
response,
[[Page 68520]]
but will not receive individualized feedback on any suggestions. No
basis for claims against the U.S. Government shall arise as a result of
a response to this request for information or from the Government's use
of such information.
Inquiries
Specific questions about this RFI should be directed to the
following email address: publicaccess@ostp.gov.
Form should include:
[Assigned ID ]
[Assigned Entry date]
Name/Email
Affiliation/Organization
City, State
Comment 1
Comment 2
Comment 3
Comment 4
Comment 5
Comment 6
Comment 7
Comment 8
Please identify any other items the Task Force might consider for
Federal policies related to public access to peer-reviewed scholarly
publications resulting from federally supported research.
{Attachment is: Please attach any documents that support your comments
to the questions.{time}
Ted Wackler,
Deputy Chief of Staff.
[FR Doc. 2011-28623 Filed 11-3-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P