[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 11 (Wednesday, January 16, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2249-2250]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-1025]


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

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: 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 703-292-7556.
    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.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: National Science Foundation Proposal Evaluation Process.
    OMB Control Number: 3145-0060.

Proposed Project Proposal Evaluation Process

    The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent Federal 
agency created by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as 
amended (42 U.S.C. 1861-75). The Act states the purpose of the NSF is 
``to promote the progress of science; (and) to advance the national 
health, prosperity, and welfare'' by supporting research and education 
in all fields of science and engineering.''
    From those first days, NSF has had a unique place in the Federal 
Government: It is responsible for the overall health of science and 
engineering across all disciplines. In contrast, other Federal agencies 
support research focused on specific missions such as health or 
defense. The Foundation also is committed to ensuring the nation's 
supply of scientists, engineers, and science and engineering educators.
    The Foundation fulfills this responsibility by initiating and 
supporting merit-selected research and education projects in all the 
scientific and engineering disciplines. It does this through grants and 
cooperative agreements to more than 2,000 colleges, universities, K-12 
school systems, businesses, informal science organizations and other 
research institutions throughout the U.S. The Foundation accounts for 
about one-fourth of Federal support to academic institutions for basic 
research.
    The Foundation relies heavily on the advice and assistance of 
external advisory committees, ad-hoc proposal reviewers, and to other 
experts to ensure that the Foundation is able to reach fair and 
knowledgeable judgments. These scientists and educators come from 
colleges and universities, nonprofit 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.
    Review of proposals may involve large panel sessions, small groups, 
or use of a mail-review system. Proposals are reviewed carefully by 
scientists or engineers who are expert in the particular field 
represented by the proposal. About 50% are reviewed exclusively by 
panels of reviewers who gather, usually in Arlington, VA, to discuss 
their advice as well as to deliver it. About 35% are reviewed first by 
mail reviewers expert in the particular field, then by panels, usually 
of persons with more diverse expertise, who help the NSF decide among 
proposals from multiple fields or sub-fields. Finally, about 15% are 
reviewed exclusively by mail.

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) What is 
the intellectual merit of the proposed activity? (2) What are the 
broader impacts of the proposed activity?
    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 also used in the 
design, implementation, and monitoring of NSF efforts to increase the 
participation of various groups in science, engineering, and education.

Confidentiality

    When a decision has been made (whether an award or a declination), 
verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the names of the reviewers, and 
summaries of review panel deliberations, if any, are provided to the 
PI. Proposers also may request and obtain any other releasable material 
in NSF's file on their proposal. Everything in the file except 
information that directly identifies either reviewers or other pending 
or declined proposals is usually releasable to the proposer.
    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, ethnicity, 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 information regarding race, ethnicity, 
disability, and

[[Page 2250]]

gender. This information is also protected by the Privacy Act.

Burden on the Public

    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 8.5 reviews.

    Dated: January 10, 2002.
Suzanne H. Plimpton,
Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Foundation.
[FR Doc. 02-1025 Filed 1-15-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M