62726 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 27, 2004 / Notices 

financial assistance under the National 

Foundation on the Arts and the 

Humanities Act of 1965, as amended, 

including information given in 

confidence to the agency by grant 

applicants. In accordance with the 

determination of the Chairman of April 

14, 2004, these sessions will be closed 

to the public pursuant to subsection

(c)\(6) of 5 U.S.C. 552b. 

Any person may observe meetings, or 

portions thereof, of advisory panels that 

are open to the public, and if time 

allows, may be permitted to participate 

in the panel’s discussions at the 

discretion of the panel chairman. 

If you need special accommodations 

due to a disability, please contact the 

Office of AccessAbility, National 

Endowment for the Arts, 1100 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20506, 202/682–5532, 

TDY–TDD 202/682–5496, at least seven 

(7) days prior to the meeting. 

Further information with reference to 

these meetings can be obtained from Ms. 

Kathy Plowitz-Worden, Office of 

Guidelines & Panel Operations, National 

Endowment for the Arts, Washington, 

DC 20506, or call 202/682–5691.

Dated: October 22, 2004. 

Kathy Plowitz-Worden, 

Panel Coordinator, Panel Operations, 

National Endowment for the Arts.

[FR Doc. 04–24020 Filed 10–26–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7537–01–P

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Notice of Intent To Seek Approval To 

Extend a Current Information 

Collection

AGENCY: National Science Foundation.

ACTION: Notice and request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The National Science 

Foundation (NSF) is announcing plans 

to request approval of this collection. In 

accordance with the requirement of 

Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13), 

we are providing an opportunity for 

public comment on this action. After 

obtaining and considering public 

comment, NSF will prepare the 

submission requesting that OMB 

approve clearance of this collection for 

no longer than 3 years.

DATES: Written comments on this notice 

must be received by December 27, 2004 

to be assured of consideration. 

Comments received after that date will 

be considered to the extent practicable.

ADDRESSES: Written comments 

regarding the information collection and 

requests for copies of the proposed 

information collection request should be 

addressed to Suzanne Plimpton, Reports 

Clearance Officer, National Science 

Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Rm. 

295, Arlington, VA 22230, or by e-mail 

to splimpto@nsf.gov.

Comments: Written comments are 

invited on (a) whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the Agency, including 

whether the information shall have 

practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the 

Agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information; (c) 

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the inforamtion on 

respondents, including through the use 

of automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology; 

or (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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports Clearance 

Officer, National Science Foundation, 

4201 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 295, 

Arlington, Virginia 22230; telephone 

(703) 292–7556; or send e-mail to 

splimpto@nsf.gov. Individuals who use 

a telecommunications device for the 

deaf (TDD) may call the Federal 

Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–

800–877–8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 

p.m., Eastern time, Monday through 

Friday.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title of Collection: NSF Proposal 

Review Process. 

OMB Control No.: 3145–0060. 

Expiration Date of Approval: March 

31, 2005. 

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 onefourth 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 subfields. 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 questionnaire (NSF 428A) is 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 27, 2004 / Notices 62727

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, 

and ethnicity is used in meeting NSF 

needs for data to permit response to 

Congressional and other queries into 

equity issues. These data also are 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. A proposer 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 

gender. This information also is 

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 6.3 

reviews, with a minimum requirement 

of three reviews. The estimated burden 

for the Reviewer Background 

Information (NSF 428A) is estimated at 

5 minutes per respondent with up to 

10,000 potential new reviewers for a 

total of 83 hours. The aggregate 

estimated total is 600,083 for the 

reviewer process and the reviewer 

background information.

Dated: October 22, 2004. 

Suzanne H. Plimpton, 

Reports Clearance Officer, National Science 

Foundation.

[FR Doc. 04–24050 Filed 10–26–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7555–01–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 72–11] 

Sacramento Municipal Utility District, 

Rancho Seco Independent Spent Fuel 

Storage Installation; Notice of 

Docketing of Materials License SNM–

2510; Application for an Exemption 

and for a Conforming Amendment 

By letter dated July 19, 2004, 

Sacramento Municipal Utility District 

(SMUD or the licensee) submitted an 

application to the Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC or the Commission) 

requesting an exemption from the 

requirements of Title 10 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 72.44(d)(3) 

pursuant to 10 CFR 72.7 and also 

requesting a conforming amendment to 

the Rancho Seco Independent Spent 

Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) 

technical specifications pursuant to 10 

CFR 72.56. 

The licensee is requesting 

Commission approval to be relieved 

from submitting an annual report to the 

Commission specifying the quantity of 

principal radionuclides released to the 

environment in liquid and gaseous 

effluent during the previous 12 months 

of the Rancho Seco ISFSI operation. The 

licensee is currently storing spent fuel at 

the Rancho Seco ISFSI on the site of the 

Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station 

located in Sacramento County, 

California under license SNM–2510. If 

the exemption is granted, then as further 

requested by the licensee, upon 

approval of the Commission, the Rancho 

Seco ISFSI license, SNM–2510, would 

be amended to remove this requirement 

from the technical specifications. 

This application was docketed under 

10 CFR part 72; the ISFSI Docket No. is 

72–11 and will remain the same for this 

action. 

In accordance with the requirement of 

10 CFR 51.21, NRC will perform an 

environmental assessment of the 

potential environmental impacts of this 

exemption request. The exemption (in 

conjunction with the conforming license 

amendment) is subject to the 

Commission’s approval. 

If the Commission grants the 

requested exemption, the Commission 

may issue either a notice of hearing or 

a notice of proposed action and 

opportunity for hearing in accordance 

with 10 CFR 72.46(b)(1) regarding the 

proposed amendment or, if a 

determination is made that the proposed 

amendment does not present a genuine 

issue as to whether public health and 

safety will be significantly affected, take 

immediate action on the proposed 

amendment in accordance with 10 CFR 

72.46(b)(2) and provide notice of the 

action taken and an opportunity for 

interested persons to request a hearing 

on whether the action (conforming 

amendment) should be rescinded or 

modified. 

For further details with respect to this 

amendment, see the application dated 

July 19, 2004, which is publicly 

available in the records component of 

NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access 

and Management System (ADAMS). The 

NRC maintains ADAMS, which 

provides text and image files of NRC’s 

public documents. These documents 

may be accessed through the NRC’s 

Public Electronic Reading Room on the 

Internet at http://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/adams.html. If you do not have 

access to ADAMS or if there are 

problems in accessing the documents 

located in ADAMS, contact the NRC 

Public Document Room (PDR) Reference 

staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737 

or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 15th day 

of October 2004.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Amy M. Snyder, 

Project Manager, Spent Fuel Project Office, 

Office of Nuclear Material Safety and 

Safeguards.

[FR Doc. 04–24018 Filed 10–26–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 72–11] 

Sacramento Municipal Utility District, 

Rancho Seco Independent Spent Fuel 

Storage Installation; Notice of 

Docketing of Materials License SNM–

2510; Amendment Application 

By letter dated July 29, 2004, 

Sacramento Municipal Utility District 

(SMUD or licensee) submitted an 

application to the U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission (NRC or the 

Commission), in accordance with Title 

10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 

(10 CFR) 72.56, requesting the 

amendment of the Rancho Seco 

Independent Spent Fuel Storage 

Installation (ISFSI) license. SMUD is 

requesting Commission approval to 

allow for the storage of Greater than 

Class C (GTCC) waste at the Rancho 

Seco ISFSI located on the site of the 

Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station 

located in Sacramento County, 

California. 

This application was docketed under 

10 CFR part 72; the ISFSI Docket No. is 

72–11 and will remain the same for this 

action. Upon approval of the