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 Mathematical Sciences, #1204

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: $871,402.

a. Federal personnel on a full-time equivalent (FTE) basis: 10 FTE.

b. Other Federal internal costs: $14,696.

c. Proposed payments to members: $742,759.

c. Proposed payments to members: 1,050.

e. Reimbursable costs: $113,947.

2. If applicable, the total dollar value of grants expected to be recommended during the fiscal year: $331,424,737.

3. Criteria for selecting members to ensure the committee has the necessary. ( printed page 32117)

Membership is selected in response to specific proposals and applications to be reviewed. Members are selected for their demonstrated scientific and engineering expertise so as to represent a reasonable balance of capability in the various subfields of the proposals to be reviewed. Consideration was given to achieving geographic balance.

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

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

34558 Proposal Review Panel for Emerging Frontiers and Multidisciplinary Activities

44011 Proposal Review Panel for Emerging Frontiers in Biological Sciences

173 Proposal Review Panel for Engineering Education and Centers

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.

While ad hoc mail reviewers can be chosen to give a thorough technical review of a proposal, mail reviewer judgments are normally made about a single proposal viewed in isolation. Panel review, in combination with mail review, can, in addition, provide judgments about the comparative merits within a group of proposals or within a single complex, multidisciplinary proposal or a facility.

6. If the consultation is a committee renewal, a summary of the previous accomplishments of the committee and the reasons it needs to continue.

Past committees have played a critical role in identifying cutting edge topics and projects that pursue bold, innovative research that addresses national needs, strengthens U.S. leadership, and fosters progress in both fundamental or applied mathematical sciences. Their efforts have catalyzed the development of new science and technology, reinforced national leadership, and contributed to meaningful advances toward solving grand challenges, particularly in priority areas such as artificial intelligence, quantum computing, biotechnology, and advanced manufacturing. One notable example is the identification of foundational research in artificial intelligence in 2019, which led to a partnership between NSF and the Simons Foundation on the Mathematical and Scientific Foundations of Deep Learning which subsequently evolved into cross-cutting programs on Mathematical Foundations of Artificial Intelligence and Artificial Intelligence, Formal Methods, and Mathematical Reasoning.

7. Explanation of why the committee/subcommittee is essential to the conduct of agency business.

Panels are essential to the conduct of NSF business because they bring together diverse experts who collectively evaluate proposals, ensuring that funding recommendations reflect the best scientific judgement of the research community. The panel review process allows NSF to assess the intellectual merit and broader impacts of proposals fairly, transparently, and across a wide range of disciplines.

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.

91 FR 32116