Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment Request, 37158-37160 [2011-15785]
Download as PDF
37158
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2011 / Notices
APPENDIX
[11 TAA petitions instituted between 6/6/11 and 6/10/11]
Subject firm
(petitioners)
Location
Intelicoat Technologies, LLC (Workers) ...............................
Unimin Corporation (Union) ..................................................
Beacon Medical Services (Workers) ....................................
Pelican Importing and Exporting (State/One-Stop) ..............
International Netherlands Group, ING (State/One-Stop) .....
Saint-Gobain Abrasives (Union) ...........................................
RockTenn (Company) ..........................................................
Grays Harbor Paper L.L.C. (Union) .....................................
Finisar Corporation (Workers) ..............................................
Camco Cedar (State/One-Stop) ...........................................
Bos Automotive Products, Inc (Company) ...........................
Portland, OR .........................
Hamilton, WA ........................
Aurora, CO ............................
Houston, TX ..........................
Windsor, CT ..........................
Watervliet, NY .......................
Milwaukee, WI .......................
Hoquiam, WA ........................
Horsham, PA .........................
Tacoma, WA .........................
Morristown, TN ......................
TA–W
80217
80218
80219
80220
80221
80222
80223
80224
80225
80226
80227
................
................
................
................
................
................
................
................
................
................
................
[FR Doc. 2011–15845 Filed 6–23–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Comment Request
National Science Foundation.
Submission for OMB Review;
Comment Request.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104–
13 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), and as part
of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent burden, the
National Science Foundation (NSF) is
inviting the general public and other
Federal agencies to comment on this
proposed continuing information
collection. This is the second notice for
public comment; the first was published
in the Federal Register at 76 FR 21073
and no substantial comments were
received. NSF is forwarding the
proposed submission to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for
clearance simultaneously with the
publication of this second notice. The
full submission may be found at:
https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/
PRAMain.
SUMMARY:
Comments regarding these
information collections are best assured
of having their full effect if received by
OMB within 30 days of publication in
the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Written comments
regarding (a) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of NSF,
including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of
NSF’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; or (d) ways
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
DATES:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:06 Jun 23, 2011
Jkt 223001
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 e-mail to splimpto@nsf.gov. Copies
of the submission may be obtained by
calling (703) 292–7556.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Suzanne H. Plimpton, NSF Reports
Clearance Officer at (703) 292–7556 or
send e-mail to splimpto@nsf.gov.
An agency 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 of Collection: National Science
Foundation Science Honorary Awards.
OMB Control No.: 3145–0035.
Abstract: The National Science
Foundation (NSF) administers several
honorary awards, among them the
President’s National Medal of Science,
the Alan T. Waterman Award, the
National Science Board (NSB) Vannevar
Bush Award, the NSB Public Service
Award, and the Presidential Awards for
Excellence in Science, Mathematics and
Engineering Mentoring (PAESMEM)
program.
PO 00000
Frm 00106
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Date of
institution
06/06/11
06/06/11
06/07/11
06/07/11
06/07/11
06/07/11
06/08/11
06/08/11
06/09/11
06/09/11
06/10/11
Date of
petition
06/03/11
06/03/11
05/16/11
06/06/11
06/06/11
06/06/11
05/27/11
06/07/11
06/08/11
06/07/11
06/09/11
In 2003, to comply with E-government
requirements, the nomination processes
were converted to electronic submission
through the National Science
Foundation’s (NSF) FastLane system.
Individuals can now prepare
nominations and references through
https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/
honawards/. First-time users must
register on the Fastlane Web site using
the link found in the upper right-hand
corner above the ‘‘Log In’’ box before
accessing any of the honorary award
categories.
Use of the Information: The
Foundation has the following honorary
award programs:
• President’s National Medal of
Science. Statutory authority for the
President’s National Medal of Science is
contained in 42 U.S.C. 1881 (Pub. L. 86–
209), which established the award and
stated that ‘‘(t)he President shall * * *
award the Medal on the
recommendations received from the
National Academy of Sciences or on the
basis of such other information and
evidence as * * * appropriate.’’
Subsequently, Executive Order 10961
specified procedures for the Award by
establishing a National Medal of Science
Committee which would ‘‘receive
recommendations made by any other
nationally representative scientific or
engineering organization.’’ On the basis
of these recommendations, the
Committee was directed to select its
candidates and to forward its
recommendations to the President.
In 1962, to comply with these
directives, the Committee initiated a
solicitation form letter to invite these
nominations. In 1979, the Committee
initiated a nomination form as an
attachment to the solicitation letter. A
slightly modified version of the
nomination form was used in 1980.
The Committee established the
following guidelines for selection of
candidates:
E:\FR\FM\24JNN1.SGM
24JNN1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2011 / Notices
1. Principal criterion: The total impact
of an individual’s work on the current
state of physical, biological,
mathematical, engineering or social and
behavioral sciences.
2. Achievements of an unusually
significant nature in relation to the
potential effects on the development of
scientific thought.
3. Unusually distinguished service in
the general advancement of science and
engineering, especially when
accompanied by substantial
contributions to the content of science.
Recognition by peers within the
scientific community.
4. Contributions to innovation and
industry.
5. Influence on education through
publications, teaching activities,
outreach, mentoring, etc.
6. Must be a U.S. citizen or permanent
resident who has applied for
citizenship.
In 2003, the Committee changed the
active period of eligibility to three years,
including the year of nomination. After
that time, candidates must be
renominated with a new nomination
package for them to be considered by
the Committee.
Narratives are now restricted to two
pages of text, as stipulated in the
guidelines at https://
www.fastlane.nsf.gov/honawards/nms.
• Alan T. Waterman Award. Congress
established the Alan T. Waterman
Award in August 1975 (42 U.S.C. 1881a
(Pub. L. 94–86) and authorized NSF to
‘‘establish the Alan T. Waterman Award
for research or advanced study in any of
the sciences or engineering’’ to mark the
25th anniversary of the National Science
Foundation and to honor its first
Director. The annual award recognizes
an outstanding young researcher in any
field of science or engineering
supported by NSF. In addition to a
medal, the awardee receives a grant of
$500,000 over a three-year period for
scientific research or advanced study in
the mathematical, physical, medical,
biological, engineering, social, or other
sciences at the institution of the
recipient’s choice.
The Alan T. Waterman Award
Committee was established by NSF to
comply with the directive contained in
Public Law 94–86. The Committee
solicits nominations from members of
the National Academy of Sciences,
National Academy of Engineering,
scientific and technical organizations,
and any other source, public or private,
as appropriate.
In 1976, the Committee initiated a
form letter to solicit these nominations.
In 1980, a nomination form was used
which standardized the nomination
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:06 Jun 23, 2011
Jkt 223001
procedures, allowed for more effective
Committee review, and permitted better
staff work in a short period of time. On
the basis of its review, the Committee
forwards its recommendation to the
Director, NSF, and the National Science
Board (NSB).
Candidates must be U.S. citizens or
permanent residents and must be 35
years of age or younger or not more than
seven years beyond receipt of the Ph.D.
degree by December 31 of the year in
which they are nominated. Candidates
should have demonstrated exceptional
individual achievements in scientific or
engineering research of sufficient
quality to place them at the forefront of
their peers. Criteria include originality,
innovation, and significant impact on
the field.
• Vannevar Bush Award. The NSB
established the Vannevar Bush Award
in 1980 to honor Dr. Bush’s unique
contributions to public service. The
award recognizes an individual who,
through public service activities in
science and technology, has made an
outstanding ‘‘contribution toward the
welfare of mankind and the Nation.’’
The NSB ad hoc Vannevar Bush
Award Committee annually solicits
nominations from selected scientific
engineering and educational societies.
Candidates must be a senior stateperson
who is an American citizen and meets
two or more of the following criteria:
1. Distinguished himself/herself
through public service activities in
science and technology.
2. Pioneered the exploration, charting,
and settlement of new frontiers in
science, technology, education, and
public service.
3. Demonstrated leadership and
creativity that have inspired others to
distinguished careers in science and
technology.
4. Contributed to the welfare of the
Nation and mankind through activities
in science and technology.
5. Demonstrated leadership and
creativity that have helped mold the
history of advancements in the Nation’s
science, technology, and education.
Nominations must include a narrative
description about the nominee, a
curriculum vitae (without publications),
and a brief citation summarizing the
nominee’s scientific or technological
contributions to our national welfare in
promotion of the progress of science.
Nominations must also include two
reference letters, submitted separate
from the nomination through https://
www.fastlane.nsf.gov/honawards/.
Nominations remain active for three
years, including the year of nomination.
After that time, candidates must be
renominated with a new nomination for
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
37159
them to be considered by the selection
committee.
• NSB Public Service Award. The
NSB Public Service Award Committee
was established in November 1996. This
annual award recognizes people and
organizations that have increased the
public understanding of science or
engineering. The award is given to an
individual and to a group (company,
corporation, or organization), but not to
members of the U.S. Government.
Eligibility includes any individual or
group (company, corporation, or
organization) that has increased the
public understanding of science or
engineering. Members of the U.S.
Government are not eligible for
consideration.
Candidates for the individual and
group (company, corporation, or
organization) award must have made
contributions to public service in areas
other than research, and should meet
one or more of the following criteria:
1. Increased the public’s
understanding of the processes of
science and engineering through
scientific discovery, innovation and its
communication to the public.
2. Encouraged others to help raise the
public understanding of science and
technology.
3. Promoted the engagement of
scientists and engineers in public
outreach and scientific literacy.
4. Contributed to the development of
broad science and engineering policy
and its support.
5. Influenced and encouraged the next
generation of scientist and engineers.
6. Achieved broad recognition outside
the nominee’s area of specialization.
7. Fostered awareness of science and
technology among broad segments of the
population.
Nominations must include a summary
of the candidate’s activities as they
relate to the selection criteria; the
nominator’s name, address and
telephone number; the name, address,
and telephone number of the nominee;
and the candidate’s vita, if appropriate
(no more than three pages).
The selection committee recommends
the most outstanding candidate(s) for
each category to the NSB, which
approves the awardees.
Nominations remain active for a
period of three years, including the year
of nomination. After that time,
candidates must be renominated with a
new nomination for them to be
considered by the selection committee.
• Presidential Awards for Excellence
in Science, Mathematics and
Engineering Mentoring (PAESMEM)
program.
E:\FR\FM\24JNN1.SGM
24JNN1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
37160
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2011 / Notices
In 1996, the White House, through the
National Science and Technology
Council (NSTC) and the Office of
Science and Technology Policy (OSTP),
established the Presidential Awards for
Excellence in Science, Mathematics and
Engineering Mentoring (PAESMEM)
program. The program, administered on
behalf of the White House by the
National Science Foundation, seeks to
identify outstanding mentoring efforts
or programs designed to enhance the
participation of groups (women,
minorities and persons with disabilities)
underrepresented in science,
mathematics and engineering. The
awardees will serve as exemplars to
their colleagues and will be leaders in
the national effort to more fully develop
the Nation’s human resources in
science, mathematics and engineering.
An honorarium in the amount of
$10,000 will accompany the award
along with a commemorative
Presidential certificate. The award will
be made to: (1) An individual who has
demonstrated outstanding and sustained
mentoring and effective guidance to a
significant number of students at the
K–12, undergraduate, or graduate
education level or (2) to an organization
that, through its programming, has
enabled a substantial number of
students underrepresented in science,
mathematics and engineering to
successfully pursue and complete the
relevant degree programs. It is
anticipated that each award will be used
to continue the recognized activity. The
nominees must have served in such a
mentoring role for at least five years.
Estimate of Burden: These are annual
award programs with application
deadlines varying according to the
program. Public burden also may vary
according to program; however, across
all the programs, it is estimated that
each submission will average 19 hours
per respondent. If the nominator is
thoroughly familiar with the scientific
background of the nominee, time spent
to complete the nomination may be
considerably reduced.
Respondents: Individuals, businesses
or other for-profit organizations,
universities, non-profit institutions, and
Federal and State governments.
Estimated Number of Responses per
Award: 207 responses, broken down as
follows: For the President’s National
Medal of Science, 55; for the Alan T.
Waterman Award, 60; for the Vannevar
Bush Award, 12; for the Public Service
Award, 20; and for the PAESMEM, 60.
Estimated Total Annual Burden on
Respondents: 3,980 hours, broken down
by 1,100 hours for the President’s
National Medal of Science (20 hours per
55 respondents); 1,200 hours for the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:06 Jun 23, 2011
Jkt 223001
Alan T. Waterman Award (20 hours per
60 respondents); 180 hours for the
Vannevar Bush Award (15 hours per 12
respondents); 300 hours for the Public
Service Award (15 hours per 20
respondents); and 1,200 hours for the
PAESMEM (20 hours per 60
respondents).
Frequency of Responses: Annually.
Comments: 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 information 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.
Dated: June 20, 2011.
Suzanne H. Plimpton,
Reports Clearance Officer, National Science
Foundation.
[FR Doc. 2011–15785 Filed 6–23–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2008–0391]
Notice of Availability of Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement for the Lost Creek In-Situ
Recovery (ISR) Project in Sweetwater
County, WY; Supplement to the
Generic Environmental Impact
Statement for In-Situ Leach Uranium
Milling Facilities
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is issuing a final
Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement (SEIS) to the Generic
Environmental Impact Statement for InSitu Leach Uranium Milling Facilities
(GEIS), (NUREG–1910, Supplement 3)
for the Lost Creek In-Situ Recovery
Project in Sweetwater County,
Wyoming. By letter dated October 30,
2007, Lost Creek ISR, LLC (LCI), a
wholly-owned subsidiary of UR-Energy
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
USA, Inc. submitted an application to
the NRC for a new source and byproduct
material license for the Lost Creek ISR
Project, which LCI proposed to be
located in the Great Divide Basin in
Sweetwater County, Wyoming. LCI is
proposing to recover uranium from the
Lost Creek ISR Project site using the insitu leach (also known as the in-situ
recovery [ISR]) process. In this final
SEIS, the NRC staff assessed the
environmental impacts from the
construction, operation, aquifer
restoration, and decommissioning of the
proposed Lost Creek ISR Project.
In addition to the proposed action, the
NRC staff assessed two alternatives in
the final SEIS: An alternative that would
result in dry yellowcake production at
the proposed Lost Creek ISR Project and
the No-Action Alternative. In addition,
the NRC staff evaluated alternative
wastewater disposal options to the
proposed action of disposing of liquid
effluent via Class I disposal wells.
Under the No-Action alternative, NRC
would deny LCI’s request to construct,
operate, conduct aquifer restoration, and
decommission an ISR facility at Lost
Creek. Alternatives that were
considered, but were eliminated from
detailed analysis, included conventional
mining and milling or heap leach
processing. However, given the
substantial environmental impact from
implementing these alternatives, they
were not further considered. The NRC
staff also evaluated alternate lixiviants.
For reasons discussed in the SEIS, this
alternative was also eliminated from
detailed analysis.
As discussed in Section 2.4 of the
final SEIS, unless safety issues mandate
otherwise, the NRC staff’s
recommendation to the Commission
related to the environmental aspects of
the proposed action is that the source
and byproduct material license be
issued as requested. This
recommendation is based upon: (1) The
license application, including the
environmental and technical report
submitted by LCI and the applicant’s
supplemental letters and responses to
the NRC staff’s requests for additional
information; (2) consultation with
Federal, State, Tribal, and local
agencies; (3) the NRC staff’s
independent review; (4) the NRC staff’s
consideration of comments received on
the draft SEIS; and (5) the assessments
summarized in this SEIS.
The final SEIS for the Lost Creek ISR
Project may be accessed on the Internet
at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections/nuregs/staff/sr1910/s3/.
Additionally, the NRC maintains an
Agencywide Documents and
Management System (ADAMS), which
E:\FR\FM\24JNN1.SGM
24JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 122 (Friday, June 24, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37158-37160]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-15785]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment Request
AGENCY: National Science Foundation.
ACTION: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), and as part of its continuing effort to
reduce paperwork and respondent burden, the National Science Foundation
(NSF) is inviting the general public and other Federal agencies to
comment on this proposed continuing information collection. This is the
second notice for public comment; the first was published in the
Federal Register at 76 FR 21073 and no substantial comments were
received. NSF is forwarding the proposed submission to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance simultaneously with the
publication of this second notice. The full submission may be found at:
https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.
DATES: Comments regarding these information collections are best
assured of having their full effect if received by OMB within 30 days
of publication in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Written comments regarding (a) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
NSF, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b)
the accuracy of NSF'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; 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 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 e-mail to splimpto@nsf.gov. Copies of
the submission may be obtained by calling (703) 292-7556.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Suzanne H. Plimpton, NSF Reports
Clearance Officer at (703) 292-7556 or send e-mail to splimpto@nsf.gov.
An agency 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 of Collection: National Science Foundation Science Honorary
Awards.
OMB Control No.: 3145-0035.
Abstract: The National Science Foundation (NSF) administers several
honorary awards, among them the President's National Medal of Science,
the Alan T. Waterman Award, the National Science Board (NSB) Vannevar
Bush Award, the NSB Public Service Award, and the Presidential Awards
for Excellence in Science, Mathematics and Engineering Mentoring
(PAESMEM) program.
In 2003, to comply with E-government requirements, the nomination
processes were converted to electronic submission through the National
Science Foundation's (NSF) FastLane system. Individuals can now prepare
nominations and references through https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/honawards/ honawards/. First-time users must register on the Fastlane Web site
using the link found in the upper right-hand corner above the ``Log
In'' box before accessing any of the honorary award categories.
Use of the Information: The Foundation has the following honorary
award programs:
President's National Medal of Science. Statutory authority
for the President's National Medal of Science is contained in 42 U.S.C.
1881 (Pub. L. 86-209), which established the award and stated that
``(t)he President shall * * * award the Medal on the recommendations
received from the National Academy of Sciences or on the basis of such
other information and evidence as * * * appropriate.''
Subsequently, Executive Order 10961 specified procedures for the
Award by establishing a National Medal of Science Committee which would
``receive recommendations made by any other nationally representative
scientific or engineering organization.'' On the basis of these
recommendations, the Committee was directed to select its candidates
and to forward its recommendations to the President.
In 1962, to comply with these directives, the Committee initiated a
solicitation form letter to invite these nominations. In 1979, the
Committee initiated a nomination form as an attachment to the
solicitation letter. A slightly modified version of the nomination form
was used in 1980.
The Committee established the following guidelines for selection of
candidates:
[[Page 37159]]
1. Principal criterion: The total impact of an individual's work on
the current state of physical, biological, mathematical, engineering or
social and behavioral sciences.
2. Achievements of an unusually significant nature in relation to
the potential effects on the development of scientific thought.
3. Unusually distinguished service in the general advancement of
science and engineering, especially when accompanied by substantial
contributions to the content of science. Recognition by peers within
the scientific community.
4. Contributions to innovation and industry.
5. Influence on education through publications, teaching
activities, outreach, mentoring, etc.
6. Must be a U.S. citizen or permanent resident who has applied for
citizenship.
In 2003, the Committee changed the active period of eligibility to
three years, including the year of nomination. After that time,
candidates must be renominated with a new nomination package for them
to be considered by the Committee.
Narratives are now restricted to two pages of text, as stipulated
in the guidelines at https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/honawards/nms.
Alan T. Waterman Award. Congress established the Alan T.
Waterman Award in August 1975 (42 U.S.C. 1881a (Pub. L. 94-86) and
authorized NSF to ``establish the Alan T. Waterman Award for research
or advanced study in any of the sciences or engineering'' to mark the
25th anniversary of the National Science Foundation and to honor its
first Director. The annual award recognizes an outstanding young
researcher in any field of science or engineering supported by NSF. In
addition to a medal, the awardee receives a grant of $500,000 over a
three-year period for scientific research or advanced study in the
mathematical, physical, medical, biological, engineering, social, or
other sciences at the institution of the recipient's choice.
The Alan T. Waterman Award Committee was established by NSF to
comply with the directive contained in Public Law 94-86. The Committee
solicits nominations from members of the National Academy of Sciences,
National Academy of Engineering, scientific and technical
organizations, and any other source, public or private, as appropriate.
In 1976, the Committee initiated a form letter to solicit these
nominations. In 1980, a nomination form was used which standardized the
nomination procedures, allowed for more effective Committee review, and
permitted better staff work in a short period of time. On the basis of
its review, the Committee forwards its recommendation to the Director,
NSF, and the National Science Board (NSB).
Candidates must be U.S. citizens or permanent residents and must be
35 years of age or younger or not more than seven years beyond receipt
of the Ph.D. degree by December 31 of the year in which they are
nominated. Candidates should have demonstrated exceptional individual
achievements in scientific or engineering research of sufficient
quality to place them at the forefront of their peers. Criteria include
originality, innovation, and significant impact on the field.
Vannevar Bush Award. The NSB established the Vannevar Bush
Award in 1980 to honor Dr. Bush's unique contributions to public
service. The award recognizes an individual who, through public service
activities in science and technology, has made an outstanding
``contribution toward the welfare of mankind and the Nation.''
The NSB ad hoc Vannevar Bush Award Committee annually solicits
nominations from selected scientific engineering and educational
societies. Candidates must be a senior stateperson who is an American
citizen and meets two or more of the following criteria:
1. Distinguished himself/herself through public service activities
in science and technology.
2. Pioneered the exploration, charting, and settlement of new
frontiers in science, technology, education, and public service.
3. Demonstrated leadership and creativity that have inspired others
to distinguished careers in science and technology.
4. Contributed to the welfare of the Nation and mankind through
activities in science and technology.
5. Demonstrated leadership and creativity that have helped mold the
history of advancements in the Nation's science, technology, and
education.
Nominations must include a narrative description about the nominee,
a curriculum vitae (without publications), and a brief citation
summarizing the nominee's scientific or technological contributions to
our national welfare in promotion of the progress of science.
Nominations must also include two reference letters, submitted separate
from the nomination through https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/honawards/.
Nominations remain active for three years, including the year of
nomination. After that time, candidates must be renominated with a new
nomination for them to be considered by the selection committee.
NSB Public Service Award. The NSB Public Service Award
Committee was established in November 1996. This annual award
recognizes people and organizations that have increased the public
understanding of science or engineering. The award is given to an
individual and to a group (company, corporation, or organization), but
not to members of the U.S. Government.
Eligibility includes any individual or group (company, corporation,
or organization) that has increased the public understanding of science
or engineering. Members of the U.S. Government are not eligible for
consideration.
Candidates for the individual and group (company, corporation, or
organization) award must have made contributions to public service in
areas other than research, and should meet one or more of the following
criteria:
1. Increased the public's understanding of the processes of science
and engineering through scientific discovery, innovation and its
communication to the public.
2. Encouraged others to help raise the public understanding of
science and technology.
3. Promoted the engagement of scientists and engineers in public
outreach and scientific literacy.
4. Contributed to the development of broad science and engineering
policy and its support.
5. Influenced and encouraged the next generation of scientist and
engineers.
6. Achieved broad recognition outside the nominee's area of
specialization.
7. Fostered awareness of science and technology among broad
segments of the population.
Nominations must include a summary of the candidate's activities as
they relate to the selection criteria; the nominator's name, address
and telephone number; the name, address, and telephone number of the
nominee; and the candidate's vita, if appropriate (no more than three
pages).
The selection committee recommends the most outstanding
candidate(s) for each category to the NSB, which approves the awardees.
Nominations remain active for a period of three years, including
the year of nomination. After that time, candidates must be renominated
with a new nomination for them to be considered by the selection
committee.
Presidential Awards for Excellence in Science, Mathematics
and Engineering Mentoring (PAESMEM) program.
[[Page 37160]]
In 1996, the White House, through the National Science and
Technology Council (NSTC) and the Office of Science and Technology
Policy (OSTP), established the Presidential Awards for Excellence in
Science, Mathematics and Engineering Mentoring (PAESMEM) program. The
program, administered on behalf of the White House by the National
Science Foundation, seeks to identify outstanding mentoring efforts or
programs designed to enhance the participation of groups (women,
minorities and persons with disabilities) underrepresented in science,
mathematics and engineering. The awardees will serve as exemplars to
their colleagues and will be leaders in the national effort to more
fully develop the Nation's human resources in science, mathematics and
engineering.
An honorarium in the amount of $10,000 will accompany the award
along with a commemorative Presidential certificate. The award will be
made to: (1) An individual who has demonstrated outstanding and
sustained mentoring and effective guidance to a significant number of
students at the K-12, undergraduate, or graduate education level or (2)
to an organization that, through its programming, has enabled a
substantial number of students underrepresented in science, mathematics
and engineering to successfully pursue and complete the relevant degree
programs. It is anticipated that each award will be used to continue
the recognized activity. The nominees must have served in such a
mentoring role for at least five years.
Estimate of Burden: These are annual award programs with
application deadlines varying according to the program. Public burden
also may vary according to program; however, across all the programs,
it is estimated that each submission will average 19 hours per
respondent. If the nominator is thoroughly familiar with the scientific
background of the nominee, time spent to complete the nomination may be
considerably reduced.
Respondents: Individuals, businesses or other for-profit
organizations, universities, non-profit institutions, and Federal and
State governments.
Estimated Number of Responses per Award: 207 responses, broken down
as follows: For the President's National Medal of Science, 55; for the
Alan T. Waterman Award, 60; for the Vannevar Bush Award, 12; for the
Public Service Award, 20; and for the PAESMEM, 60.
Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 3,980 hours, broken
down by 1,100 hours for the President's National Medal of Science (20
hours per 55 respondents); 1,200 hours for the Alan T. Waterman Award
(20 hours per 60 respondents); 180 hours for the Vannevar Bush Award
(15 hours per 12 respondents); 300 hours for the Public Service Award
(15 hours per 20 respondents); and 1,200 hours for the PAESMEM (20
hours per 60 respondents).
Frequency of Responses: Annually.
Comments: 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 information 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.
Dated: June 20, 2011.
Suzanne H. Plimpton,
Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Foundation.
[FR Doc. 2011-15785 Filed 6-23-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-P