Notice2026-10685

Proposal Review Panel for Engineering Education and Centers; Committee Renewal

Primary source

Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.

Published
May 29, 2026
Effective
June 26, 2026

Issuing agencies

National Science Foundation

Abstract

The National Science Foundation (NSF) is renewing the committee for Graduate Education.

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 103 (Friday, May 29, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 103 (Friday, May 29, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32122-32123]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-10685]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Proposal Review Panel for Engineering Education and Centers; 
Committee Renewal

AGENCY: National Science Foundation.

ACTION: Committee Management Renewal.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The National Science Foundation (NSF) is renewing the 
committee for Graduate Education.

DATES: NSF approves the continuation of this committee on 4/20/2026. 
Effective date for renewal is June 26, 2026. For more information, 
please contact Crystal Robinson, NSF, at (703) 292-8687.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Crystal Robinson, Committee Management 
Officer, NSF, at (703) 292-8687, or by mail to National Science 
Foundation, Randolph Building, 401 Dulany Street, Alexandria, VA 22314.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NSF management officials having 
responsibility for the advisory committee listed below have determined 
that renewing this committee for another two years is necessary and in 
the public interest in connection with the performance of duties 
imposed upon the Director, National Science Foundation (NSF), by 42 
U.S.C. 1861 et seq. This determination follows consultation with the 
Committee Management Secretariat, General Services Administration.

Committee

Proposal Review Panel for Engineering Education and Centers, #173

    Pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 102-3.60(a), to establish, renew, 
reestablish, or merge a discretionary (agency discretion) advisory 
committee, an agency must first consult with the General Services 
Administration's Committee Management Secretariat (the Secretariat) 
and, as part of the consultation, provide a written public interest 
determination approved by the head of the agency to the Secretariat 
with a copy to the Office of Management and Budget. In addition, 
pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 102-3.35, an agency shall follow the same 
consultation process and document in writing the same determination of 
need before creating a subcommittee under a discretionary committee 
that is not made up entirely of members of a parent advisory committee. 
Information on the following factors for the committee is provided to 
the Secretariat to demonstrate that renewing the committee is in the 
public interest:
    1. Annual budget: $416,412.
    a. Federal personnel on a full-time equivalent (FTE) basis: 3.9 
FTE.
    b. Other Federal internal costs: $2,088.
    c. Proposed payments to members: $378,086.
    d. Proposed number of members: 603.
    e. Reimbursable costs: $36,238.
    2. If applicable, the total dollar value of grants expected to be 
recommended during the fiscal year: $65,228,747.
    3. Criteria for selecting members to ensure the committee has the 
necessary.
    Committee members are selected based on their scientific and 
technical expertise, professional experience, and ability to provide 
informed, objective advice on proposals within the scope of EEC 
activities. Membership is drawn from a broad range of disciplines to 
ensure representation of the scientific areas encompassed by the 
committee's review portfolio. Membership consists of approximately 603 
members considering all meetings. The subject matter and volume of 
proposals to be reviewed determine the number of members participating 
in any given meeting. Every effort is made to ensure balanced 
membership, including representation across scientific disciplines, 
institutions, and geographic regions. Members are selected to provide 
complementary perspectives and the depth of technical expertise 
necessary to conduct thorough and credible proposal reviews. The 
majority of committee members are anticipated to be comprised of 
Special Government Employees (SGEs) with a small percentage of Regular 
Government Employees (RGEs) when subject matter expertise requires.
    4. List of all other Federal advisory committees of the agency:

84684 Advisory Committee for Technology, Innovation and Partnerships
1172 Alan T. Waterman Award Committee
13883 Astronomy and Astrophysics Advisory Committee
1173 Committee on Equal Opportunities in Science and Engineering
1186 Proposal Review Panel for Astronomical Sciences
10751 Proposal Review Panel for Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences
10747 Proposal Review Panel for Behavioral and Cognitive Sciences

[[Page 32123]]

10743 Proposal Review Panel for Biological Infrastructure
1189 Proposal Review Panel for Chemical, Bioengineering, Environmental, 
and Transport Systems
1191 Proposal Review Panel for Chemistry
1194 Proposal Review Panel for Civil, Mechanical, and Manufacturing 
Innovation
1207 Proposal Review Panel for Computer and Network Systems
1192 Proposal Review Panel for Computing & Communication Foundations
1185 Proposal Review Panel for Cyberinfrastructure
1569 Proposal Review Panel for Earth Sciences
1196 Proposal Review Panel for Electrical, Communications, and Cyber 
Systems
44011 Proposal Review Panel for Emerging Frontiers in Biological 
Sciences
34558 Proposal Review Panel for Emerging Frontiers and 
Multidisciplinary Activities
10744 Proposal Review Panel for Environmental Biology
1756 Proposal Review Panel for Geosciences
57 Proposal Review Panel for Graduate Education
1200 Proposal Review Panel for Information and Intelligent Systems
84685 Proposal Review Panel for Innovation and Technology Ecosystems
2469 Proposal Review Panel for Integrative Activities
10745 Proposal Review Panel for Integrative Organismal Systems
10749 Proposal Review Panel for International Science and Engineering
1203 Proposal Review Panel for Materials Research
1204 Proposal Review Panel for Mathematical Sciences
10746 Proposal Review Panel for Molecular and Cellular Biosciences
10752 Proposal Review Panel for Ocean Sciences
1208 Proposal Review Panel for Physics
1209 Proposal Review Panel for Polar Programs
59 Proposal Review Panel for Research on Learning in Formal and 
Informal Settings
10748 Proposal Review Panel for Social and Economic Sciences
1766 Proposal Review Panel for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences
84683 Proposal Review Panel for Translational Impacts
1214 Proposal Review Panel for Undergraduate Education

    5. Justification that the information or advice provided by the 
Federal advisory committee or subcommittee is not available from 
another Federal advisory committee, another Federal Government source, 
or any other more cost-effective and less burdensome source.
    Proposal peer review is central to NSF processes. Specific advisory 
committees (i.e., review panels) are impaneled for individual programs 
to directly provide the technical expertise relevant to the proposals 
under review. This therefore requires distinct membership for 
committees responsible for review of distinct subject areas. Notably, 
the EEC Section supports multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary 
activities that encompass a wide range of engineering and scientific 
areas necessitating the recruitment of committee members with unique 
combinations of technical expertise.
    6. If the consultation is a committee renewal, a summary of the 
previous accomplishments of the committee and the reasons it needs to 
continue.
    In the fiscal year 2025, the committee reviewed 736 proposals in 85 
meetings, with 603 members participating from external institutions and 
federal organizations. The use of panelists to review proposals for the 
Agency is an invaluable asset. The committee has been instrumental in 
identifying cutting edge topics and projects that pursue bold, 
innovative research that addresses national needs, strengthens U.S. 
leadership and fosters advances in new areas of fundamental or applied 
research, catalyzes development of new industries or capabilities that 
increase the leadership position for the country, and/or makes 
significant progress towards addressing a national need or grand 
challenge, particularly in current priority areas including, but not 
limited to, artificial intelligence, bioengineering, quantum 
engineering, robotics, and nuclear engineering. The cost of obtaining 
the expertise, insight, and information received by the Division using 
alternative methods, such as hiring full or part-time employees, would 
be extremely high.
    7. Explanation of why the committee/subcommittee is essential to 
the conduct of agency business.
    The ENG FACA committees are essential to the conduct of agency 
business as they align with the agency's usage of the merit review 
process and criteria in keeping with 42 U.S. Code Sec.  1862s, which 
outlines that ``the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts 
criteria are appropriate for evaluating grant proposals'' and directs 
the Foundation to ``maintain the intellectual merit and broader impacts 
criteria, among other specific criteria as appropriate, as the basis 
for evaluating grant proposals in the merit review process.''
    NSF's mission, as described in the 1950 NSF act, is ``to promote 
the progress of science, advance national health, prosperity, and 
welfare, and secure the national defense. This is achieved by investing 
in research to expand knowledge in science, engineering, and education, 
and by increasing the capacity of the U.S. to conduct and benefit from 
such research. Merit review panels under these FACA committees serve as 
the basis for the gold standard merit review to support the most 
compelling research to advance the NSF mission.
    This public interest determination documents that renewing the 
committee is essential to the conduct of agency business and that the 
information to be obtained is not already available through another 
advisory committee or source within the Federal Government.

    Dated: May 26, 2026.
Crystal Robinson,
Committee Management Officer, National Science Foundation.
[FR Doc. 2026-10685 Filed 5-28-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-P


</pre></body>
</html>
Indexed from Federal Register on May 29, 2026.

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.