Program Requirement Summary Program synopsis Eligibility Introduction Program Description
Modes of Support Proposal preparation Proposal Review Info Award Admin Info

SOCIETAL DIMENSIONS

OF ENGINEERING, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY:

ETHICS AND VALUES STUDIES
RESEARCH ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

 

Program Announcement

NSF 99-82

DIRECTORATE FOR SOCIAL, BEHAVIORAL AND ECONOMIC SCIENCES

  

YEARLY TARGET DATES:

FEBRUARY 1 AND AUGUST 1

  

 

  NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

 

 

 

The National Science Foundation promotes and advances scientific progress in the United States by competitively awarding grants for research and education in the sciences, mathematics and engineering.

To get the latest information about program deadlines, to download copies of NSF publications, and to access abstracts of awards, visit the NSF Web site at:

http://www.nsf.gov

 

 

Send an e-mail to: pubs@nsf.gov or telephone: 301.947.2722

 

SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS



GENERAL INFORMATION

Program Name: Societal Dimensions of Engineering, Science, and Technology Program - Ethics and Values Studies, Research on Science and Technology

Short Description/Synopsis of Program:

In SDEST, the Ethics and Values Studies (EVS) component focuses on improving knowledge of ethical and value dimensions in science, engineering, and technology. The Research on Science and Technology (RST) component focuses on improving approaches and information for decision making about science, engineering, and technology.

Cognizant Program Officer(s): Drs. Rachelle Hollander and John Perhonis, Program Officers, Room 995, Division of Social, Behavioral and Economic Research, telephone 703. 306.1743 or .1742, fax: 703.306.0485; e-mail: rholland@nsf.gov; jperhoni@nsf.gov.

Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) No.: 47.075 - Social, Behavioral, and Economic Research


ELIGIBILITY

AWARD INFORMATION

PROPOSAL PREPARATION & SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

PROPOSAL REVIEW INFORMATION

AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION

 

INTRODUCTION

The Societal Dimensions of Engineering, Science, and Technology (SDEST) program contains two former NSF programs, Ethics and Values Studies, and Research on Science and Technology. It is located in the Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences of the National Science Foundation.

In SDEST, the Ethics and Values Studies (EVS) component focuses on improving knowledge of ethical and value dimensions in science, engineering, and technology. The Research on Science and Technology (RST) component focuses on improving approaches and information for decision making about science, engineering, and technology.

Over the past few years, NSF has made approximately 30 new awards each year under this program, with an annual budget of about $2.5 million. Program goals include advancing scholarly and scientific work in these areas; and making research results of broad use in educational, policy and other settings.

 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Research on ethics, values, and the conduct and impacts of science and engineering often uses historical and philosophical modes of analysis. It may involve theories and methods from science and technology studies, applied ethics, and other areas of the social sciences and humanities. Research for decision making about science and technology addresses questions of interest to scholars and decisionmakers concerned with directions, management, and outcomes of U.S. investment in science, engineering, and technology. It takes an empirical approach to data collection and analysis. Information and analysis from the natural and physical sciences and engineering may also play a role in both of these research areas.

Proposals might address the following kinds of questions. These descriptions are suggestive, not exhaustive.

In Ethics and Values Studies (EVS), projects might address such issues as:

--scientific or professional ethics, including research ethics;

--the role of social or organizational values in scientific or engineering practice;

--equity issues in the development, use and effects of science or technology;

--controversy and the resolution of controversy involving science or technology;

--normative issues in decisions involving science or technology, and

--ethical and value issues for organizational policy and practice involving science or technology.

--Within these topics can fall a wide range of subjects,

SDEST also supports educational projects on ethical and value dimensions in science, engineering, and technology. The program works closely with programs in the Directorate for Education and Human Resources (EHR) at NSF in the consideration of these proposals. Educational projects use results from research on ethics and the conduct and impacts of science and engineering to develop programs or materials for formal or informal educational settings. Proposals for educational projects should satisfy the criteria in relevant EHR program announcements, and indicate how results will have impacts beyond improving a course or curriculum at a single institution. In addition, SDEST provides small supplemental awards for ethics activities in NSF-supported Research Experiences for Undergraduate sites projects.

In Research on Science and Technology (RST), projects could address such topics as:

--factors influencing the directions and impacts of scientific and engineering research and technological change, both domestic and international;

--issues of human resources in science and technology; and

--the relationships between individual, organizational and political adaptation or change and scientific and technological innovation or change.

--Under these headings can fall research on such questions as:

SDEST is also interested in considering proposals for research on the implications of different national strategies towards support for science and technology, on development of models and other approaches with which to gather and interpret information, and on improvement of data resources. Projects to summarize and assess the knowledge base about an important issue can also be considered. The section titled "Modes of Support" below has further information on eligible activities. The program welcomes inquiries from researchers who are uncertain about whether the topic or method they have in mind is appropriate for consideration.

In general, SDEST does not consider proposals from individual academic institutions to support lectureships or conference activities. It does consider proposals where conferences or workshops are part of a research or education project plan, and proposals for workshops to develop research agendas on topics important to program goals. It will consider proposals from national organizations such as professional societies, for small amounts of assistance for conference activities on ethical issues. Research focused primarily on ethical, value or policy issues for clinical research or practice or resource allocation in health care is not normally supported by the NSF or considered in SDEST.

 

MODES OF SUPPORT

Support for SDEST projects involving one or more investigators is available through grants for research or education. Some categories are noted below:

1) Standard Grants for research, infrastructure or education projects. These projects may involve one or several investigators, additional collaborators, advisors, postdoctoral researchers, or graduate or undergraduate student assistants. Infrastructure projects may involve a variety of activities to stimulate and provide resources for new research areas, including outreach efforts. They can include development and dissemination of appropriate data bases, text retrieval systems, and graphic resources for research, educational or public use. Electronic dissemination of results from infrastructure projects should be the norm in SDEST awards.

SDEST education projects on ethics, values and the conduct and impacts of science or engineering can include such activities as national summer workshops for graduate students or faculty, or projects by professional societies to develop concentrations in ethics and the social context of science and engineering for undergraduate or graduate level science and engineering students. Applicants should contact the program to discuss their ideas before preparing written submissions for education projects.

2) SDEST Scholars Awards, enabling individuals to undertake full time research during part or all of an academic year or summer. Awards allow up to $18,000 for partial support of full time summer research and/or related costs, and up to $60,000 for partial support of one or more semesters (or quarters) of full time academic year release time and related expenses. Summer support is limited to 2/9ths academic year salary. The maximum inclusive award in this category is $120,000; this is expected to extend over at least 24 months. Research assistance from postdoctoral, graduate and undergraduate students, if justified, may be included within these requests. Unaffiliated and affiliated scholars are eligible for these awards.

3) Postdoctoral and Professional Development Fellowships (PDF) for researchers who wish to improve and expand their skills in the areas of EVS (for physical and natural scientists and engineers); in areas of science or engineering (for researchers trained in ethics); and in both (for researchers trained in history, philosophy, or social science of science). Historians, philosophers or social scientists, for example, may have a research project in EVS that would benefit from training in a particular field of science or engineering along with education in applied ethics. Ethics scholars may undertake training in a scientific field. Alternatively, scientists or engineers may use this award to work with an ethics specialist to learn methods to improve an EVS research project. Applicants are encouraged to make arrangements with more than one host if needed. Awards may be made to the home or host institution, or as an individual fellowship.

Awards can extend over two years; they are expected to support a full-time academic year of research and study in a field outside the applicant's current area of expertise. PDFs must contain both a training and a research component. Letters from host scholars, describing their plans to work with the applicants, and from the host institutions, agreeing to provide appropriate space and facilities, must accompany these proposals, and can be appended to the project description. Reference letters may also be submitted.

EVS Professional Development Fellowships provide a stipend and travel allowance to the fellow and an activities support allowance to the host institution. The amount of the stipend depends on the fellow's prior earnings and work history; it can range from $35,000 to $60,000. The award also provides up to $4,000 for travel and $4,000 for the host institution allowance. The activities support allowance can be used to cover direct or indirect costs associated with the fellowship.

4) Doctoral Dissertation Research Improvement Grants. These grants provide funds for research expenses not normally available through the student's university. More information to apply is in Grants for Improving Doctoral Dissertation Research ( NSF92-114). The dissertation advisor is the principal investigator on these applications; the doctoral student should be listed as co-principal investigator; the award is made to the student's university. No indirect costs are allowed; and the usual limit on an award is $8,000 for research in North America and $12,000 for work abroad. The proposal must include a letter of recommendation from the faculty advisor evaluating the student's promise as a researcher and the value and status of the proposed research. If the doctoral student will use the award for travel expenses to work with a specialist, the proposal should provide a justification for this choice and a letter from the specialist agreeing to work with the student. The proposal should include a statement indicating whether the student has passed the preliminary qualifying exams and all course work required for the dissertation. These requirements must be met before an award will be made.

5) Small Grants for Training and Research. These awards are intended to provide sustained research opportunities for graduate students and post-doctoral fellows on important issues in SDEST. One or more senior investigators may propose a sustained course of study, research and training (for from one to three years) on a subject of significance. These training programs should have a specific research theme (e.g., ethics and computers in education, or analysis of federal and state science policy efforts), and the proposal should indicate how the training will be organized around the theme. The grants can provide a maximum of $100,000 support for one postdoctoral fellow and up to three graduate students to participate each year. For projects of more than one year, PIs may retain or change the postdoc and graduate students. In addition to providing a research theme and plan, applicants must also indicate how they will recruit members of underrepresented groups into the programs. They must specify how they will incorporate education of these students and postdocs about research ethics in the SGTR training activities. These awards are made to the university; the budget for student and post-doc support belongs in the participant support costs section of the budget form, and no indirect costs can be applied to these budget items.

 

PROPOSAL PREPARATION & SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

A. Proposal Preparation Instructions.

Proposals submitted in response to this program announcement should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the general guidelines contained in the Grant Proposal Guide (GPG), NSF 99-2. The complete text of the GPG (including electronic forms) is available electronically on the NSF Web site at: http://www.nsf.gov/. Paper copies of the GPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, PO Box 218, Jessup MD 20794-0218; telephone 301.947.2722 or by e-mail from pubs@nsf.gov .

Proposers are reminded to identify the program announcement number (NSF 99-82) in the program announcement/solicitation block on the NSF Form 1207, "Cover Sheet for Proposal to the National Science Foundation." Compliance with this requirement is critical to determining the relevant proposal processing guidelines. Failure to submit this information may delay processing.

All SDEST proposals contain a project description section of up to 15 pages. To assist in the evaluation of how proposed projects contribute to the SDEST program goal of making results of broad use to other researchers and, where relevant, in educational, policy and other settings, proposals can add up to two pages to the end of the project description section, titled "Dissemination Plan." Here, investigators should identify the individuals or groups with whom they intend to communicate, and specify how they will do so. They should specify the significance their findings will have for these audiences. In addition, if the projects will produce data and information of value to the broader research community, proposals can include up to two pages, titled "Data Management," describing the data and information products and the management and dissemination plans and costs for making them available to interested parties. Proposals involving interviews or surveys can include up to three pages at the end of the description, titled "Protocols."

B. Proposal Due Dates.

For paper submission of proposals, paper copies should be submitted at or around the twice-yearly target dates of February 1 and August 1. Copies of the proposal must be made and submitted to NSF according to the normal procedures for paper proposals identified in the GPG. For paper submission of proposals, the delivery address must clearly identify the NSF announcement or solicitation number under which the proposal is being submitted.

Similarly, for electronic submission of proposals, the proposal should be submitted at or around the twice-yearly target dates of February 1 and August 1. Copies of the signed proposal cover sheet must be submitted in accordance with the instructions identified below.

Submission of Signed Cover Sheets. For proposals submitted electronically via the NSF FastLane Project, the signed proposal Cover Sheet (NSF Form 1207) should be forwarded to the following address within five working days of submission of the proposal:

National Science Foundation
DIS-FastLane Cover Sheet
4201 Wilson Blvd.
Arlington, VA 22230

A proposal may not be processed until the complete proposal (including signed Cover Sheet) has been received by NSF.

C. FastLane Requirements.

The NSF FastLane system is available for electronic preparation and submission of a proposal through the Web at the FastLane Web site at http://www.fastlane.nsf.gov. The Sponsored Research Office (SRO or equivalent) must provide a FastLane Personal Identification Number (PIN) to each Principal Investigator (PI) to gain access to the FastLane "Proposal Preparation" application. PIs that have not submitted a proposal to NSF in the past must contact their SRO to be added to the NSF PI database. !!!This should be done as soon as the decision to prepare a proposal is made!!!

In order to use NSF FastLane to prepare and submit a proposal, the following are required:

Browser (must support multiple buttons and file upload)

PDF Reader (needed to view/print forms)

PDF Generator (needed to create project description)

A list of registered institutions and the FastLane registration form are located on the FastLane Web page. For questions or problems regarding a FastLane submission, send an e-mail message to Flprop@nsf.gov or call 703.306.1142. You can also send e-mail queries to the FastLane information line in the Division of Social and Economic Sciences that houses the SDEST program: sber-fast@nsf.gov.

PROPOSAL REVIEW INFORMATION

b. Merit Review Criteria.

Reviews of proposals submitted to NSF are solicited from peers with expertise in the substantive area of the proposed research or education project. These reviewers are selected by program officers charged with the oversight of the review process. NSF invites the proposer to suggest at the time of submission, the names of appropriate or inappropriate reviewers. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts with the proposer. Special efforts are made to recruit reviewers from non-academic institutions, minority serving institutions, adjacent disciplines to that principally addressed in the proposal, etc.

Proposals will be reviewed against the following general merit review criteria established by the National Science Board. Following each criterion are potential considerations that the reviewer may employ in the evaluation. These are suggestions and not all will apply to any given proposal. Each reviewer will be asked to address only those that are relevant to the proposal and for which he/she is qualified to make judgments.

What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity?

How important is the proposed activity to advancing knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields? How well qualified is the proposer (individual or team) to conduct the project? (If appropriate, the reviewer will comment on the quality of prior work.) To what extent does the proposed activity suggest and explore creative and original concepts? How well conceived and organized is the proposed activity? Is there sufficient access to resources?

What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity?

How well does the activity advance discovery and understanding while promoting teaching, training, and learning? How well does the proposed activity broaden the participation of underrepresented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.)? To what extent will it enhance the infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks, and partnerships? Will the results be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological understanding? What may be the benefits of the proposed activity to society?

Further delineation of these criteria for SDEST include:

  • fit of subject with theoretical and empirical issues of importance in the field;
  • grounding in theory and literature;
  • well-conceived methodologies, including, as applicable, reliable methods of empirical research;
  • relevance to policy, practice, or action;
  • academic outreach, including members of underrepresented groups, and
  • utility and dissemination to decision makers or an important spectrum of audiences.

 

Integration of Research and Education

One of the principal strategies in support of NSF's goals is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects and activities it supports at academic and research institutions. These institutions provide abundant opportunities where individuals may concurrently assume responsibilities as researchers, educators, and students and where all can engage in joint efforts that infuse education with the excitement of discovery and enrich research through the diversity of learner perspectives. PIs should address this issue in their proposal to provide reviewers with the information necessary to respond fully to both NSF merit review criteria. NSF staff will give it careful consideration in making funding decisions.

Integrating Diversity into NSF Program, Projects, and Activities

Broadening opportunities and enabling the participation of all citizens -- women and men, underrepresented minorities, and persons with disabilities -- is essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports. PIs should address this issue in their proposal to provide reviewers with the information necessary to respond fully to both NSF merit review criteria. NSF staff will give it careful consideration in making funding decisions.

B. Merit Review Process.

Most of the proposals submitted to NSF are reviewed by mail review, panel review, or some combination of mail and panel review. For the most part SDEST uses a combination of merit review from knowledgeable investigators followed by panel review by experts with broad knowledge of the field.

All proposals are carefully reviewed by at least three other persons outside NSF who are experts in the particular field represented by the proposal. Reviewers will be asked to formulate a recommendation to either support or decline each proposal. A program officer assigned to manage the proposal's review will consider the advice of reviewers and will formulate a recommendation. In most cases, the program officer will contact the proposer after his or her recommendation to award or decline funding has been approved by his or her supervisor, the division director. This informal notification is not a guarantee of an eventual award. NSF will be able to tell applicants whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months for 95 percent of proposals in this category. In those cases where a proposal is being considered for joint funding by separate divisions, directorates, or agencies, NSF will be able to inform applicants within nine months in 95 percent of proposals. The time interval begins on the proposal deadline or target date or from the date of receipt, if deadlines or target dates are not used by the program. The interval ends when the division director accepts the program officer's recommendation.

In all cases, after final programmatic approval has been obtained, award recommendations are then forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements for review of business, financial and policy implications and the processing and issuance of a grant or other agreement. Proposers are cautioned that only a Grants Officer may make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of funds. No commitment on the part of NSF should be inferred from technical or budgetary discussions with an NSF program officer. A principal investigator or organization that makes financial or personnel commitments in the absence of a grant or cooperative agreement signed by the NSF Grants Officer does so at its own risk.

Award Administration Information

A. Notification of the Award.

Notification of the award is made to the individual awardee or submitting organization by a Grants and Agreements Officer in the Division of Grants and Agreements (DGA). Organizations whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible by the cognizant NSF Program Division administering the program. Verbatim copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be provided automatically to the Principal Investigator.

B. Grant Award Conditions.

An NSF grant consists of: (1) the award letter, which includes any special provisions applicable to the grant and any numbered amendments thereto; (2) the budget, which indicates the amounts, by categories of expense, on which NSF has based its support (or otherwise communicates any specific approvals or disapprovals of proposed expenditures); (3) the proposal referenced in the award letter; (4) the applicable grant conditions, such as Grant General Conditions ( NSF GC-1)* or Federal Demonstration Partnership Phase III (FDP) Terms and Conditions* and (5) any NSF brochure, program guide, announcement or other NSF issuance that may be incorporated by reference in the award letter. Electronic mail notification is the preferred way to transmit NSF grants to organizations that have electronic mail capabilities and have requested such notification from the Division of Grants and Agreements.

* These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Web site at: http://www.nsf.gov/. Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone 301.947.2722 or by e-mail from pubs@nsf.gov.

C. Administration of Fixed Amount and Fellowships Awards.

SDEST Scholars Awards are fixed amount awards. They will be made on a fixed amount basis subject to the conditions of the grant instrument and this Announcement. A fixed amount award represents a predetermined amount for NSF support of the proposed research without regard to the subsequent costs of the project. Note to Institutional Research Administrators: grants awarded on a fixed amount basis are not subject to Federal cost principles as contained in OMB Circular A-21. As part of the final report required by the grant general conditions, the grantee must certify that the person months funded were actually expended. Individuals receiving fellowships or fixed amount awards to individuals must be U.S. citizens or U.S. nationals or have permanent U.S. resident status.

D. Reporting Requirements.

For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants), the PI must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program Officer at least 90 days before the end of the current budget period.

Within 90 days after expiration of a grant, the PI also is required to submit a final project report. Approximately 30 days before expiration, NSF will send a notice to remind the PI of the requirement to file the final project report. Failure to provide final technical reports delays NSF review and processing of pending proposals for that PI. PIs should examine the formats of the required reports in advance to assure availability of required data.

NSF has implemented a new electronic project reporting system, available through FastLane, which permits electronic submission and updating of project reports, including information on: project participants (individual and organizational); activities and findings; publications; and, other specific products and contributions. Reports will continue to be required annually and after the expiration of the grant, but PIs will not need to re-enter information previously provided, either with the proposal or in earlier updates using the electronic system.

Effective October 1, 1998, PIs are required to use the new reporting format for annual and final project reports. PIs are strongly encouraged to submit reports electronically via FastLane. For those PIs who cannot access FastLane, paper copies of the new report formats may be obtained from the NSF Clearinghouse as specified above. NSF expects to require electronic submission of all annual and final project reports via FastLane beginning in October, 1999.

D. New Awardee Information.

If the submitting organization has never received an NSF award, it is recommended that the organization's appropriate administrative officials become familiar with the policies and procedures in the NSF Grant Policy Manual which are applicable to most NSF awards. The "Prospective New Awardee Guide" (NSF 97-100) includes information on: Administration and Management Information; Accounting System Requirements and Auditing Information; and Payments to Organizations with Awards. This information will assist an organization in preparing documents that NSF requires to conduct administrative and financial reviews of an organization. The guide also serves as a means of highlighting the accountability requirements associated with Federal awards. This document is available electronically on NSF's Web site at: http://www.nsf.gov/cgi-bin/getpub?nsf97100.

Contacts for Additional Information

For further information, contact Program Directors Rachelle Hollander or John Perhonis, NSF, Room 995, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone: 703.306.1742 or .1743. Fax: .0485.

E-mail: rholland@nsf.gov or jperhoni@nsf.gov SDEST Web Address: www.nsf.gov/sbe/sber/sdest/

For questions related to use of FastLane, contact 703.306.1142, e-mail: flprop@nsf.gov , or sber-fast@nsf.gov.

Other Programs of Interest

The NSF Guide to Programs is a compilation of funding opportunities for research and education in science, mathematics, and engineering. General descriptions of NSF programs, research areas, and eligibility information for proposal submission are provided in each chapter. Beginning in fiscal year 1999, the NSF Guide to Programs only will be available electronically. Many NSF programs offer announcements concerning specific proposal requirements. To obtain additional information about these requirements, contact the appropriate NSF program offices listed in Appendix A of the GPG.

Any changes in NSF's fiscal year programs occurring after press time for the Guide to Programs will be announced in the NSF E-Bulletin, available electronically on the NSF Web site at: http://www.nsf.gov/. The direct URL for recent issues of the Bulletin is http://www.nsf.gov/cgi-bin/getpub?gp. Subscribers can also sign up for NSF's Custom News Service to find out what funding opportunities are available.

ABOUT THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

NSF funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering. Grantees are wholly responsible for conducting their project activities and preparing the results for publication. Thus, the Foundation does not assume responsibility for such findings or their interpretation.

NSF welcomes proposals on behalf of all qualified scientists, engineers and educators. The Foundation strongly encourages women, minorities and persons with disabilities to participate fully in its programs. In accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and NSF policies, no person on grounds of race, color, age, sex, national origin or disability shall be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving financial assistance from NSF (some programs may have special requirements that limit eligibility).

Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects. (For more information, see Section V.G.)

The National Science Foundation has Telephonic Device for the Deaf (TDD) and Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) capabilities that enable individuals with hearing impairments to communicate with the Foundation about NSF programs, employment or general information. TDD may be accessed at 703.306.0090, FIRS is found at 1.800.877.8339.

PRIVACY ACT AND PUBLIC BURDEN STATEMENTS

The information requested on proposal forms and project reports is solicited under the authority of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended. The information on proposal forms will be used in connection with the selection of qualified proposals; and project reports submitted by awardees will be used for program evaluation and reporting within the Executive Branch and to Congress. The information requested may be disclosed to qualified reviewers and staff assistants as part of the proposal review process; to proposer institutions/grantees to provide or obtain data regarding the proposal review process, award decisions, or the administration of awards; to government contractors, experts, volunteers and researchers and educators as necessary to complete assigned work; to other government agencies needing information as part of the review process or in order to coordinate programs; and to another Federal agency, court or party in a court or Federal administrative proceeding if the government is a party. Information about Principal Investigators may be added to the Reviewer file and used to select potential candidates to serve as peer reviewers or advisory committee members. See Systems of Records, NSF-50, "Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Associated Records," 63 Federal Register 267 (January 5, 1998), and NSF-51, "Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records," 63 Federal Register 268 (January 5, 1998). Submission of the information is voluntary. Failure to provide full and complete information, however, may reduce the possibility of receiving an award.

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 120 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions. Send comments regarding this burden estimate and any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to: Suzanne Plimpton,

Reports Clearance Officer, Information Dissemination Branch, Division of Administrative Services, National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA 22230

YEAR 2000 REMINDER

In accordance with Important Notice No. 120 dated June 27, 1997, Subject: Year 2000 Computer Problem, NSF awardees are reminded of their responsibility to take appropriate actions to ensure that the NSF activity being supported is not adversely affected by the Year 2000 problem. Potentially affected items include: computer systems, databases, and equipment. The National Science Foundation should be notified if an awardee concludes that the Year 2000 will have a significant impact on its ability to carry out an NSF funded activity. Information concerning Year 2000 activities can be found on the NSF web site at http://www.nsf.gov/oirm/y2k/start.htm.