FACACLASSIC

Note: An Annual Comprehensive Review, as required by §7 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, is conducted each year on committee data entered for the previous fiscal year (referred to as the reporting year). The data for the reporting year is not considered verified until this review is complete and the data is moved to history for an agency/department. See the Data From Previous Years section at the bottom of this page for the committee’s historical, verified data.

Details on agency responses to committee recommendations can be found under the Performance Measures section for each committee in the fields “Agency Feedback” and “Agency Feedback Comment.”

NSF - 1190 - Proposal Review Panel for Chemical and Transport Systems - Agency Authority

GENERAL INFORMATION

Committee Name	Proposal Review Panel for Chemical and Transport Systems	Agency Name	National Science Foundation
Fiscal Year	2007	Committee Number	1190
Original Establishment Date	11/17/1988	Committee Status	Terminated
Actual Termination Date	5/23/2007	Committee URL
Actual Merged Date		Presidential Appointments*	No
New Committee This FY	No	Max Number of Members*	Unlimited
Terminated This FY	Yes	Designated Fed Officer Position Title*	Deputy Division Director, CTS
Merged This FY		Designated Federal Officer Prefix	Dr.
Current Charter Date	6/30/2006	Designated Federal Officer First Name*	Robert
Date Of Renewal Charter	6/30/2008	Designated Federal Officer Middle Name	M.
Projected Termination Date	6/30/2008	Designated Federal Officer Last Name*	Wellek
Exempt From Renewal*	No	Designated Federal Officer Suffix
Specific Termination Authority		Designated Federal Officer Phone*	703/ 292-8370
Establishment Authority*	Agency Authority	Designated Federal Officer Fax*	703/292-9054
Specific Establishment Authority*	ADM IV-100	Designated Federal Officer Email*	rwellek@nsf.gov
Effective Date Of Authority*	8/30/1990
Exempt From EO 13875 Discretionary Cmte
Committee Type*	Continuing
Presidential*	No
Committee Function*	Grant Review Committee

RECOMMENDATION/JUSTIFICATIONS

Agency Recommendation*	Continue
Legislation to Terminate Required	No
Legislation Status
How does cmte accomplish its purpose?*	The Division of Chemical and Transport Systems (CTS)utilized over 60 Proposal Review meetings during this fiscal year to review proposals within the division's eight programs. The panels reviewed proposals for such areas as Faculty Early Career Development Program (CAREER); Nanoscale Interdisciplinary Research Teams (NIRT); Nanoscale Exploratory Research (NER); Program Unsoliciated Panels; Polmer Panels; STC; Committee of Visitors; Sandia/NSF Panels and Materials Research Instrumentation (MRI). The discussion among SEP panelist provide advice and recommendations concerning proposals submitted to NSF/CTS to help the Program Directors select the best proposals for financial support. The fair, equitable and efficient review of these special proposals is best accomplished by having the panelist jointly discuss the technical aspects involved. The rankings of the panels have tremendous weight in the matter of selecting awards for research.
How is membership balanced?*	Panel membership must broadly cover the technical content of the proposals. Having established a competent pool, members are invited with the concern to have representation from large and small universities and industry. Diversity is also a major concern when forming the panel.
How frequent & relevant are cmte mtgs?*	Panel meetings occur as soon as practical after the closing date for each program initiative. Each panel group normally considers approximately 20 proposals. These SEP panels are vital for the review process for these special program iniatives handled by the Division of Chemical and Transport Systems located in the Directorate for Engineering.
Why advice can't be obtained elsewhere?*	Panel reviews have the advantage of allowing open discussion among the members. Teams, such as these, usually arrive at superior decisions when compared to individuals.
Why close or partially close meetings?	The proposals being reviewed include information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including technical information; financial data, such as salaries and personal information concerning individuals associated with the proposals.
Recommendation Remarks

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

Outcome Improvement To Health Or Safety*	No	Action Reorganize Priorities*	No
Outcome Trust In Government	No	Action Reallocate Resources	No
Outcome Major Policy Changes	No	Action Issued New Regulations	No
Outcome Advance In Scientific Research	Yes	Action Proposed Legislation	No
Outcome Effective Grant Making	Yes	Action Approved Grants Or Other Payments	Yes
Outcome Improved Service Delivery	No	Action Other	No
Outcome Increased Customer Satisfaction	No	Action Comment	NA
Outcome Implement Laws/Reg Requirements	No	Grants Review*	Yes
Outcome Other	No	Number Of Grants Reviewed	1,211
Outcome Comment	NA	Number Of Grants Recommended	154
Cost Savings*	Unable to Determine	Dollar Value Of Grants Recommended	$38,861,954.00
Cost Savings Comment	The use of panelists to review proposals for the Agency is an invaluable asset. The cost of obtaining the expertise, insight, and information received by the Division using alternative methods, such as hiring the expertise as full or part-time employees, would be extremely high.	Grants Review Comment	The panelists/advisory committee members provided information on the merit of the proposal, which includes an overall rating.The number of proposals above includes pre-proposals submitted to NSF for review. The pre-proposals are not included in the number of grants recommended or dollar value of grants recommended for approval.
Number Of Recommendations*	1,211	Access Contact Designated Fed. Officer*	Yes
Number Of Recommendations Comment	NA	Access Agency Website	No
% of Recs Fully Implemented*	100.00%	Access Committee Website	No
% of Recs Fully Implemented Comment	The word implement is not applicable to grant review panels. All recommendations are considered by the agency.	Access GSA FACA Website	No
% of Recs Partially Implemented*	0.00%	Access Publications	No
% of Recs Partially Implemented Comment	No applicable. Please see answer directly above.	Access Other	No
Agency Feedback*	Yes	Access Comment	N/A
Agency Feedback Comment*	Although panelists may not receive direct feedback, each committee member may use the NSF FastLane, a public web-based program, which provides information on awards made the agency to determine the outcome of proposals reviewed by the panel.	Narrative Description*	The NSF mission is set out in the NSF Act of 1950 authorizes and directs the Agency to initiate and support: basic scientific research and research fundamental to the engineering process; and science and engineering education programs at all levels and in all fields of science and engineering. The involvement of knowledgeable peers from outside the Foundation in the review of proposals is the keystone of NSF’s proposal review system. Their judgments of the extent to which proposals address the merit review criteria are vital for informing NSF staff and influencing funding recommendations.

COSTS

1. Payments to Non-Federal Members*	$499,960.00	1. Est Paymnts to Non-Fed Membrs Nxt FY*	$0.00
2. Payments to Federal Members*	$0.00	2. Est. Payments to Fed Members Next FY*	$0.00
3. Payments to Federal Staff*	$450,770.00	3. Estimated Payments to Federal Staff*	$0.00
4. Payments to Consultants*	$0.00	4. Est. Payments to Consultants Next FY*	$0.00
5. Travel Reimb. For Non-Federal Membrs*	$249,897.00	5. Est Travel Reimb Non-Fed Membr nxtFY*	$0.00
6. Travel Reimb. For Federal Members*	$862.00	6. Est Travel Reimb For Fed Members*	$0.00
7. Travel Reimb. For Federal Staff*	$0.00	7. Est. Travel Reimb to Fed Staf Nxt FY*	$0.00
8. Travel Reimb. For Consultants*	$0.00	8. Est Travel Reimb to Consltnts Nxt FY*	$0.00
10. Other Costs	$0.00	10. Est. Other Costs Next FY*	$0.00
11. Total Costs	$1,201,489.00	11. Est. Total Next FY*	$0.00
Date Cost Last Modified		Est. Fed Staff Support Next FY*	0.00
Federal Staff Support (FTE)*	3.31	Est Cost Remarks
Cost Remarks

Interest Areas

No interest areas selected for this committee.

Custom Links

Committee Level Reports