Browse Arkansas Code titles and sections
42 U.S.C. § 1862s — Reaffirmation of merit-based peer review
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
**(a) Sense of Congress** It is the sense of Congress that—
(1) sustained, predictable Federal funding of basic research is essential to United States leadership in science and technology;
(2) the Foundation’s intellectual merit and broader impacts criteria are appropriate for evaluating grant proposals, as concluded by the 2011 National Science Board Task Force on Merit Review;
(3) evaluating proposals on the basis of the Foundation’s intellectual merit and broader impacts criteria should be used to assure that the Foundation’s activities are in the national interest as these reviews can affirm that—
(A) the proposals funded by the Foundation are of high quality and advance scientific knowledge; and
(B) the Foundation’s grants address societal needs through basic research findings or through related activities; and
(4) as evidenced by the Foundation’s contributions to scientific advancement, economic growth, human health, and national security, its peer review and merit review processes have identified and funded scientifically and societally relevant basic research and should be preserved.
**(b) Merit review criteria** The Foundation shall 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.
**(c) Updates** If after January 6, 2017, a change is made to the merit-review process, the Director shall submit a report to the appropriate committees of Congress not later than 30 days after the date of the change.
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 42 U.S.C. § 1862s
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. A text match is a research starting point; applicability is not established.
Original supplied file — preserved unchanged
Download original Markdown file
File SHA-256: 80f0aa9656e1b77964ca3ba5a9738d3146ebe5459df7dd21c46c91ccbbd8aa77. The original may include catalog metadata, neighboring provisions, or embedded records outside this collection's scope. Search shows only the selected federal record. Historical editions and unverified snapshots are not a statement of current law.
Authority boundary: historical or unconfirmed source not current law verified.
Open the recorded source website ↗
Record provenance
Stable record: federal_law:legal_authorities:record_usc_795dc58d33db61d02a8396c2
Source file: Laws/federal/codes/united-states-code/title-42/section-1862s-reaffirmation-of-merit-based-peer-review--3418e311c0.md
Pages: Not recorded – Not recorded
Passage SHA-256: a3b5d1f12da1679039e6037272bacf6c73aa1e5c4766fc7f72476a60c80dd21c
Source location: Title 42, Chapter 16, § 1862s; chapter-016-national-science-foundation.md
Stored source content
**(a) Sense of Congress** It is the sense of Congress that—
(1) sustained, predictable Federal funding of basic research is essential to United States leadership in science and technology;
(2) the Foundation’s intellectual merit and broader impacts criteria are appropriate for evaluating grant proposals, as concluded by the 2011 National Science Board Task Force on Merit Review;
(3) evaluating proposals on the basis of the Foundation’s intellectual merit and broader impacts criteria should be used to assure that the Foundation’s activities are in the national interest as these reviews can affirm that—
(A) the proposals funded by the Foundation are of high quality and advance scientific knowledge; and
(B) the Foundation’s grants address societal needs through basic research findings or through related activities; and
(4) as evidenced by the Foundation’s contributions to scientific advancement, economic growth, human health, and national security, its peer review and merit review processes have identified and funded scientifically and societally relevant basic research and should be preserved.
**(b) Merit review criteria** The Foundation shall 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.
**(c) Updates** If after January 6, 2017, a change is made to the merit-review process, the Director shall submit a report to the appropriate committees of Congress not later than 30 days after the date of the change.
Cross-references
Connections may be documented source relationships, shared citations or nearby passages. Each explains its basis; a connection alone does not establish applicability to your situation.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
**(a) Establishment** The Director shall establish a committee under the National Science and Technology Council, including the Office of Management and Budget, with the responsibility to coordinate Federal programs and activities in support of STEM education, including at the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Department of Education, and all other Federal agencies that have programs and activities in support of STEM education.
**(b) Responsibilities** The committee established under subsection (a) shall—
(1) coordinate the STEM education activities and programs of the Federal agencies;
(2) coordinate STEM education activities and programs with the Office of Management and Budget;
(3) encourage the teaching of innovation and entrepreneurship as part of STEM education activities;
(4) review STEM education activities and programs to ensure they are not duplicative of similar efforts within the Federal government;
(5) develop, implement through the participating agencies, and update once every 5 years a 5-year STEM education strategic plan, which shall—
(A) specify and prioritize annual and long-term objectives;
(B) specify the common metrics that will be used to assess progress toward achieving the objectives;
(C) describe the approaches that will be taken by each participating agency to assess the effectiveness of its STEM education programs and activities; and
(D) with respect to subparagraph (A), describe the role of each agency in supporting programs and activities designed to achieve the objectives;
(6) establish, periodically update, and maintain an inventory of federally sponsored STEM education programs and activities,
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 42 U.S.C. § 6621
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Explicit cross-reference supplied in source Markdown; currentness and applicability require review.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
**(a) Establishment** The Director shall establish a working group under the National Science and Technology Council with the responsibility to coordinate Federal science agency research and policies related to the dissemination and long-term stewardship of the results of unclassified research, including digital data and peer-reviewed scholarly publications, supported wholly, or in part, by funding from the Federal science agencies.
**(b) Responsibilities** The working group shall—
(1) identify the specific objectives and public interests that need to be addressed by any policies coordinated under (a);
(2) take into account inherent variability among Federal science agencies and scientific disciplines in the nature of research, types of data, and dissemination models;
(3) coordinate the development or designation of standards for research data, the structure of full text and metadata, navigation tools, and other applications to maximize interoperability across Federal science agencies, across science and engineering disciplines, and between research data and scholarly publications, taking into account existing consensus standards, including international standards;
(4) coordinate Federal science agency programs and activities that support research and education on tools and systems required to ensure preservation and stewardship of all forms of digital research data, including scholarly publications;
(5) work with international science and technology counterparts to maximize interoperability between United States based unclassified research databases and international databases and repositories;
(6) solicit input and recommendations from, and collaborate with, non-Federal stakeholders, including the public, universities, nonprofit and for-profit publishers, libra
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 42 U.S.C. § 6623
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Explicit cross-reference supplied in source Markdown; currentness and applicability require review.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
There is established in the executive branch of the Government an independent agency to be known as the National Science Foundation (hereinafter referred to as the “Foundation”). The Foundation shall consist of a National Science Board (hereinafter referred to as the “Board”) and a Director.
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 42 U.S.C. § 1861
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Explicit cross-reference supplied in source Markdown; currentness and applicability require review.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
**(a) In general** The Secretary of Commerce may carry out a grant program to identify the need for skilled science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (referred to in this section as “STEM”) workers and to expand STEM apprenticeship programs.
**(b) Eligible recipient defined** In this section, the term “eligible recipient” means—
(1) a State;
(2) an Indian tribe;
(3) a city or other political subdivision of a State;
(4) an entity that—
(A) is a nonprofit organization, an institution of higher education, a public-private partnership, a science or research park, a Federal laboratory, or an economic development organization or similar entity; and
(B) has an application that is supported by a State, a political subdivision of a State, or a native organization; or
(5) a consortium of any of the entities described in paragraphs (1) through (5).
**(c) Needs assessment grants** The Secretary of Commerce may provide a grant to an eligible recipient to conduct a needs assessment to identify—
(1) the unmet need of a region’s employer base for skilled STEM workers;
(2) the potential of STEM apprenticeships to address the unmet need described in paragraph (1); and
(3) any barriers to addressing the unmet need described in paragraph (1).
**(d) Apprenticeship expansion grants** The Secretary of Commerce may provide a grant to an eligible recipient that has conducted a needs assessment as described in subsection (c)(1) to develop infrastructure to expand STEM apprenticeship programs.
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 15 U.S.C. § 3723
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Incoming connection: Explicit cross-reference supplied in source Markdown; currentness and applicability require review.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
**(a) Short title** This section may be cited as the “Crowdsourcing and Citizen Science Act”.
**(b) Sense of Congress** It is the sense of Congress that—
(1) the authority granted to Federal agencies under the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 (Public Law 111–358; 124 Stat. 3982) to pursue the use of incentive prizes and challenges has yielded numerous benefits;
(2) crowdsourcing and citizen science projects have a number of additional unique benefits, including accelerating scientific research, increasing cost effectiveness to maximize the return on taxpayer dollars, addressing societal needs, providing hands-on learning in STEM, and connecting members of the public directly to Federal science agency missions and to each other; and
(3) granting Federal science agencies the direct, explicit authority to use crowdsourcing and citizen science will encourage its appropriate use to advance Federal science agency missions and stimulate and facilitate broader public participation in the innovation process, yielding numerous benefits to the Federal Government and citizens who participate in such projects.
**(c) Definitions** In this section:
(1) **Citizen science** — The term “citizen science” means a form of open collaboration in which individuals or organizations participate voluntarily in the scientific process in various ways, including—
(A) enabling the formulation of research questions;
(B) creating and refining project design;
(C) conducting scientific experiments;
(D) collecting and analyzing data;
(E) interpreting the results of data;
(F) developing technologies and applications;
(G) making discoveries; and
(H) solving problems.
(2) **Crowdsourcing** — The term “crowdsourcing” means a method to obtain needed services, ideas, o
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 15 U.S.C. § 3724
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Incoming connection: Explicit cross-reference supplied in source Markdown; currentness and applicability require review.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
**(a) Definition.—**
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection, for purposes of this section, the micro-purchase threshold is $10,000.
(2) For purposes of this section, the micro-purchase threshold for procurement activities administered under sections 6303 through 6305 of title 31 by institutions of higher education (as defined in section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 ([20 U.S.C. 1001(a)](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title20-section1001/a&num=0&edition=prelim)), or related or affiliated nonprofit entities, or by nonprofit research organizations or independent research institutes is—
(A) $10,000; or
(B) such higher threshold as determined appropriate by the head of the relevant executive agency and consistent with clean audit findings under chapter 75 of title 31, internal institutional risk assessment, or State law.
**(b) Compliance With Certain Requirements and Nonapplicability of Certain Authority.—**
(1) **Compliance with certain requirements.—** — The head of each executive agency shall ensure that procuring activities of that agency, when awarding a contract with a price exceeding the micro-purchase threshold, comply with the requirements of section 8(a) of the Small Business Act ([15 U.S.C. 637(a)](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title15-section637/a&num=0&edition=prelim)) and section 7102 of the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 (Public Law 103–355, [15 U.S.C. 644](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title15-section644&num=0&edition=prelim) note).
(2) **Nonapplicability of certain authority.—** — The authority under part 13.106(a)(1) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (48 C.F.R. 13.106(a)(1)), as in effect on November 18, 1
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 41 U.S.C. § 1902
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Incoming connection: Explicit cross-reference supplied in source Markdown; currentness and applicability require review.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
**(a) Initiation and support of studies and programs; scholarships; current register of scientific and engineering personnel** The Foundation is authorized and directed—
(1) to initiate and support basic scientific research and programs to strengthen scientific research potential and science education programs at all levels in the mathematical, physical, medical, biological, social, and other sciences, and to initiate and support research fundamental to the engineering process and programs to strengthen engineering research potential and engineering education programs at all levels in the various fields of engineering, by making contracts or other arrangements (including grants, loans, and other forms of assistance) to support such scientific, engineering, and educational activities and to appraise the impact of research upon industrial development and upon the general welfare;
(2) to award, as provided in [section 1869 of this title](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title42-section1869&num=0&edition=prelim), scholarships and graduate fellowships for study and research in the sciences or in engineering;
(3) to foster the interchange of scientific and engineering information among scientists and engineers in the United States and foreign countries;
(4) to foster and support the development and use of computer and other scientific and engineering methods and technologies, primarily for research and education in the sciences and engineering;
(5) to evaluate the status and needs of the various sciences and fields of engineering as evidenced by programs, projects, and studies undertaken by agencies of the Federal Government, by individuals, and by public and private research groups, employing by grant or contract such consulting services as i
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 42 U.S.C. § 1862
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Incoming connection: Explicit cross-reference supplied in source Markdown; currentness and applicability require review.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
**(a) Findings**
(1) 11 So in original. Probably should be preceded by introductory text. building the understanding of and confidence in investments in basic research is essential to public support for sustained, predictable Federal funding;
(2) the Foundation has improved transparency and accountability of the outcomes made through the merit review process, but additional transparency into individual grants is valuable in communicating and assuring the public value of federally funded research; and
(3) the Foundation should commit to transparency and accountability and to clear, consistent public communication regarding the national interest for each Foundation-awarded grant and cooperative agreement.
**(b) Guidance**
(1) **In general** — The Director of the Foundation shall issue and periodically update, as appropriate, policy guidance for both Foundation staff and other Foundation merit review process participants on the importance of transparency and accountability to the outcomes made through the merit review process.
(2) **Requirements** — The guidance under paragraph (1) shall require that each public notice of a Foundation-funded research project justify the expenditure of Federal funds by—
(A) describing how the project—
(i) reflects the statutory mission of the Foundation, as established in the National Science Foundation Act of 1950 ([42 U.S.C. 1861](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title42-section1861&num=0&edition=prelim) et seq.); and
(ii) addresses the Foundation’s intellectual merit and broader impacts criteria; and
(B) clearly identifying the research goals of the project in a manner that can be easily understood by both technical and non-technical audiences.
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 42 U.S.C. § 1862s–1
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Incoming connection: Explicit cross-reference supplied in source Markdown; currentness and applicability require review.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
**(a) Facilities oversight**
(1) **In general** — The Director of the Foundation shall strengthen oversight and accountability over the full life-cycle of each major multi-user research facility project, including planning, development, procurement, construction, operations, and support, and shut-down of the facility, in order to maximize research investment.
(2) **Requirements** — In carrying out paragraph (1), the Director shall—
(A) prioritize the scientific outcomes of a major multi-user research facility project and the internal management and financial oversight of the major multi-user research facility project;
(B) clarify the roles and responsibilities of all organizations, including offices, panels, committees, and directorates, involved in supporting a major multi-user research facility project, including the role of the Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction Panel;
(C) establish policies and procedures for the planning, management, and oversight of a major multi-user research facility project at each phase of the life-cycle of the major multi-user research facility project;
(D) ensure that policies for estimating and managing costs and schedules are consistent with the best practices described in the Government Accountability Office Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide, the Government Accountability Office Schedule Assessment Guide, and the Office of Management and Budget Uniform Guidance (2 C.F.R. Part 200);
(E) establish the appropriate project management and financial management expertise required for Foundation staff to oversee each major multi-user research facility project effectively, including by improving project management training and certification;
(F) coordinate the sharing of the best management practices and le
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 42 U.S.C. § 1862s–2
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Incoming connection: Explicit cross-reference supplied in source Markdown; currentness and applicability require review.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
**(a) Conflicts of interest** The Director of the Foundation shall update the policy and procedure of the Foundation relating to conflicts of interest to improve documentation and management of any known conflict of interest of an individual on temporary assignment at the Foundation, including an individual on assignment under the Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1970 ([42 U.S.C. 4701](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title42-section4701&num=0&edition=prelim) et seq.).
**(b) Justifications** The Deputy Director of the Foundation shall submit annually to the appropriate committees of Congress written justification for each rotator employed under the Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1970 ([42 U.S.C. 4701](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title42-section4701&num=0&edition=prelim) et seq.), or other rotator employed, by the Foundation that year that is paid at a rate that exceeds the maximum rate of pay for the Senior Executive Service, including, if applicable, the level of adjustment for the certified Senior Executive Service Performance Appraisal System.
**(c) Report** Not later than 1 year after January 6, 2017, the Director of the Foundation shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report on the Foundation’s efforts to control costs associated with employing rotators, including the results of and participation in the Foundation’s cost-sharing pilot program and the Foundation’s progress in responding to the findings and implementing the recommendations of the Office of Inspector General of the Foundation related to the employment of rotators.
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 42 U.S.C. § 1862s–3
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Incoming connection: Explicit cross-reference supplied in source Markdown; currentness and applicability require review.