[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 2 (Tuesday, January 5, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 531-532]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-24]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment Request

AGENCY: National Science Foundation.

ACTION: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The National Science Foundation (NSF) has submitted the 
following information collection requirement to OMB for review and 
clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104-13. 
Comments regarding (a) whether the collection of information is 
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, 
including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the 
accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of 
the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, 
utility and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to 
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are 
to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, 
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or 
other forms of information technology should be addressed to: Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB, Attention:

[[Page 532]]

Desk Officer for National Science Foundation, 725--17th Street, NW., 
Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503, and to Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports 
Clearance Officer, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, 
Suite 295, Arlington, Virginia 22230 or send email to [email protected]. 
Comments regarding these information collections are best assured of 
having their full effect if received within 30 days of this 
notification. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling 
703-306-1125 X 2017.
    NSF may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless 
the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control 
number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to 
the collection of information that such persons are not required to 
respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently 
valid OMB control number.
    Title: National Science Foundation Proposal Evaluation Process.
    OMB Control Number: 3145-0060.
    Summary of Collection: The missions of NSF are to: increase the 
Nation's base of scientific and engineering knowledge and strengthen 
its ability to support research in all areas of science and 
engineering; promote innovative science and engineering education 
programs that can better prepare the Nation to meet the challenges of 
the future; and promote international cooperation in science and 
engineering. The Foundation is also committed to ensuring the Nation's 
supply of scientists, engineers, and science educators. In its role as 
leading Federal supporter of science and engineering, NSF also has an 
important role in national policy planning.
    The Foundation fulfills this responsibility by initiating and 
supporting merit-selected research and education projects in all the 
scientific and engineering disciplines. This support is made primarily 
through grants, contracts, and other agreements awarded to over 2000 
universities, colleges, academic consortia, non-profit institutions, 
and small business.
    The Foundation relies heavily on the advice and assistance of 
external advisory committees, ad-hoc proposal reviewers, and other 
experts to ensure that the Foundation is able to reach fair and 
knowledgeable judgments. These scientists and educators come from 
colleges and universities, non-profit research and education 
organizations, industry, and other Government agencies.
    In making its decisions on proposals, the counsel of these merit 
reviewers has proven invaluable to the Foundation both in the 
identification of meritorious projects and in providing sound basis for 
project restructuring.
    Merit review is successful because of the thousands of experts from 
all fields of research who volunteer their time to evaluate and 
determine which proposals deserve consideration for funding. NSF 
program officers rely on the advice of expert reviewers to help make 
often-difficult decisions on how to best allocate limited resources and 
to target those proposals that promise to produce the most significant 
contributions. Review of proposals may involve large panel sessions, 
small groups, or use of a mail-review system. Proposals are reviewed 
carefully by scientists and engineers who are expert in the particular 
field represented by the proposal.
    Need and Use of the Information: The information collected is used 
to support grant programs of the Foundation. The information collected 
on the proposal evaluation forms is used by the Foundation to determine 
the following criteria when awarding or declining proposals submitted 
to the agency: (1) Research performance competence; (2) Intrinsic merit 
of the research; (3) Utility or relevance of the search; and (4) Effect 
of the research on the infrastructure of science and engineering.
    The information collected on reviewer background questionnaires is 
used by managers to maintain an automated database of reviewers for the 
many disciplines represented by the proposals submitted to the 
Foundation. Information collected on gender, race, ethnicity is used in 
meeting NSF needs for data to permit response to congressional and 
other queries into equity issues. These data are aslo used in the 
design, implementation, and monitoring of NSF efforts to increase the 
participation on various groups in science, engineering, and education.
    Confidentiality. Verbatim but anonymous copies of reviews are sent 
to the principal investigators/project directors. Subject to this NSF 
policy and applicable laws, including the Freedom of Information Act, 
reviewers' comments will be given maximum protection from disclosure. 
While listings of panelists' names are released, the names of 
individual reviewers, associated with individual proposals, are not 
released to anyone.
    Because the Foundation is committed to monitoring and identifying 
any real or apparent inequities based on gender, race, ethinicity, or 
disability of the proposed principal investigator(s)/project 
director(s) or the co-principal investigator(s)/co-project director(s), 
the Foundation also collects race, ethnicity, disabilty, and gender. 
This information also is protected by the Privacy Act.
    Description of Respondents: Nonprofit institutions; state, local or 
tribal governments; and business or other for-profit.
    Number of Respondents: 30,000.
    Frequency of Responses: On occasion.
    Total Burden Hours: The Foundation estimates that anywhere from one 
hour to twenty hours may be required to review a proposal. It is 
estimated that approximately five hours are required to review an 
average proposal. Each proposal receives an average of three reviews, 
resulting in approximately 450,000 burden hours each year.

    Dated: December 29, 1998.
Suzanne H. Plimpton,
Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Foundation.
[FR Doc. 99-24 Filed 1-4-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M