[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 207 (Wednesday, October 27, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62726-62727]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-24050]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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 <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#394a49555054494d5679574a5f175e564f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7102011d181c01051e311f02175f161e07">[email protected]</span></a>.
    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 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d7a4a7bbbebaa7a3b897b9a4b1f9b0b8a1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="4d3e3d2124203d39220d233e2b632a223b">[email protected]</span></a>. 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 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 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

[[Page 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


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>