text:
This document has been archived and replaced by NSF 13-527.
Antarctic Research
Program Solicitation
National Science Foundation
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
May 31, 2012
Important Reminders
A revised version of the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG), NSF 11-1, was issued on October 1, 2010 and is effective for proposals submitted, or due, on or after January 18, 2011. Please be advised that the guidelines contained in NSF 11-1 apply to proposals submitted in response to this funding opportunity. Proposers who opt to submit prior to January 18, 2011, must also follow the guidelines contained in NSF 11-1.
Cost Sharing: The PAPPG has been revised to implement the National Science Board's recommendations regarding cost sharing. Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited. In order to assess the scope of the project, all organizational resources necessary for the project must be described in the Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources section of the proposal. The description should be narrative in nature and must not include any quantifiable financial information. Mandatory cost sharing will only be required when explicitly authorized by the NSF Director. See the PAPP Guide Part I: Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) Chapter II.C.2.g(xi) for further information about the implementation of these recommendations.
Data Management Plan: The PAPPG contains a clarification of NSF's long standing data policy. All proposals must describe plans for data management and sharing of the products of research, or assert the absence of the need for such plans. FastLane will not permit submission of a proposal that is missing a Data Management Plan. The Data Management Plan will be reviewed as part of the intellectual merit or broader impacts of the proposal, or both, as appropriate. Links to data management requirements and plans relevant to specific Directorates, Offices, Divisions, Programs, or other NSF units are available on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/dmp.jsp. See Chapter II.C.2.j of the GPG for further information about the implementation of this requirement.
Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan: As a reminder, each proposal that requests funding to support postdoctoral researchers must include, as a supplementary document, a description of the mentoring activities that will be provided for such individuals. Please be advised that if required, FastLane will not permit submission of a proposal that is missing a Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan. See Chapter II.C.2.j of the GPG for further information about the implementation of this requirement.
Program Title:
Antarctic Research
Astrophysics & Geospace Sciences (AAGS), Earth Sciences (AES), Glaciology (AG), Integrated System Science (AISS), Ocean & Atmospheric Sciences (AOAS), Organisms & Ecosystems (AOE)
Synopsis of Program:
Scientific research and operational support of that research are the principal activities supported by the United States Government in Antarctica. The goals are to expand fundamental knowledge of the region, to foster research on global and regional problems of current scientific importance, and to use Antarctica as a platform from which to support research. The U.S. Antarctic Program provides support for fieldwork only when a compelling justification exists for doing the work in Antarctica (i.e., the work can only be done or is best done, in Antarctica). The program also supports Antarctic-related analytical research performed at home organizations.
Cognizant Program Officer(s):
Please note that the following information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.
Sonia Esperança, Program Director, Antarctic Integrated System Science, telephone: (703) 292-4735, email: email@example.com
Alexandra Isern, Program Director, Antarctic Earth Sciences, telephone: (703) 292-7581, fax: (703) 292-9079, email: email@example.com
Peter Milne, Program Director, Antarctic Ocean & Atmospheric Sciences, telephone: (703) 292-4714, fax: (703) 292-9079, email: email@example.com
Diana Nemergut, Program Director, Antarctic Organisms & Ecosystems, telephone: (703) 292-7448, email: email@example.com
Julie Palais, Program Director, Antarctic Glaciology, telephone: (703) 292-8033, fax: (703) 292-9079, email: firstname.lastname@example.com
Vladimir Papitashvili, Program Director, Antarctic Astrophysics & Geospace Sciences, telephone: (703) 292-7425, fax: (703) 292-9079, email: email@example.com
James Swift, Program Manager, Antarctic Research and Logistics Integration, telephone: (703) 292-7450, fax: (703) 292-9079, email: firstname.lastname@example.com
Jessie L. Crain, Research Support Manager, OPP/AIL, telephone: (703) 292-7457, fax: (703)292-9080, email: firstname.lastname@example.com
Timothy M. McGovern, Oceans Projects Manager, OPP/AIL, 755S, telephone: (703) 292-4248, fax: (703)292-9080, email: firstname.lastname@example.com
Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s):
Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant or Continuing Grant
Estimated Number of Awards: 50 approximately
Anticipated Funding Amount: $50,000,000 In FY 2013, the Division of Antarctic Sciences anticipates committing approximately $50M over the duration of the awards made in response to this solicitation, contingent on the availability of funds. Anticipated amounts available by program are: AOE, $10M; AAGS, $11M; AES, $9M; AG, $7M; AISS, $6M; and AOAS, $7M. (See section III)
The categories of proposers eligible to submit proposals to the National Science Foundation are identified in the Grant Proposal Guide, Chapter I, Section E.
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI:
None Specified
A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
B. Budgetary Information
C. Due Dates
May 31, 2012
Merit Review Criteria: National Science Board approved criteria. Additional merit review considerations apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
Award Conditions: Additional award conditions apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
Reporting Requirements: Standard NSF reporting requirements apply.
Scientific research and its operational support are the principal activities supported by the United States Government in Antarctica. The goals are to expand fundamental knowledge of the region, to foster research on global and regional problems of current scientific importance, and to use Antarctica as a platform from which to conduct research. The U.S. Antarctic Program provides support for fieldwork only when a compelling justification exists for doing the work in Antarctica (i.e., the work can only be done, or is best done, in Antarctica). The program also supports analytical research, as well as modeling and synthesis activities, performed at home organizations.
The Division of Antarctic Sciences strongly encourages proposals from persons under-represented in science and from investigators new to Antarctic research with the goal of broadening participation with respect to both individuals and institutions. The program also strongly encourages international collaborations and research-related education and outreach.
The National Science Foundation funds and manages the U.S. Antarctic Program, which supports research in the areas described in Section II.
Astrophysics and Geospace Science
The Polar Regions are often called Earth's windows to outer space. This term originally applied to study of the aurora and other phenomena related to the interaction of the solar wind with the Earth's magnetosphere in the domain that we now call Geospace. Today, the concept of Earth's polar atmosphere as a window to outer space extends to research in other fields, such astronomy and astrophysics. For example, favorable atmospheric conditions over the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station located on the high Antarctic Plateau enable scientists to use this window for better understanding the internal structure of the Sun, to study our Milky Way and other galaxies, and to probe the early Universe with unprecedented precision. Antarctica's deep, clear ice sheet is used also as a "window" providing an extraordinarily transparent medium to detect neutrinos — elusive particles that fill the Universe but rarely interact with ordinary matter — only when they collide directly with a proton or neutron in an atomic nucleus. The cubic-kilometer IceCube Neutrino Observatory, built deep in the ice sheet at the South Pole Station, is now operational, taking advantage of this highly transparent medium.
The Antarctic Astrophysics and Geospace Sciences (AAGS) Program focuses on studies of the polar middle and upper atmosphere, near-Earth space (Geospace), and beyond to the Sun, galaxies, and the Universe.
Antarctic middle and upper atmosphere (mesosphere and thermosphere) research focuses on aeronomy of the middle and upper atmosphere where processes of dissociation and ionization are important. Proposals are welcome that deal with atmospheric temperature changes and dynamics of neutral winds at altitudes from 30 to a few hundred kilometers, particularly in the context of planetary atmospheric tides and climate change dynamics. Proposals dealing with interactions of the middle and upper atmosphere with either the stratosphere or the Antarctic ozone layer are especially encouraged.
Antarctic geospace research on solar wind interaction with the Earth's magnetosphere and ionosphere focuses on deriving characteristics and physical mechanisms from the interplay of energetic charged particles with (and within) the geomagnetic field. Proposals are welcome that deal with the global interaction of the solar wind with the magnetosphere and its manifestation through precipitation of charged particles over both the northern and southern polar regions (aka Aurora Borealis and Australis, respectively) and electrical currents and fields that propagate from the magnetosphere to the ionosphere. Proposals that deal with dissipation of solar wind energy and momentum through the magnetosphere and into the ionosphere are especially encouraged.
Antarctic astronomy and astrophysical studies of the Universe, including cosmic ray and solar physics, focus on fundamental physics issues and history of the Universe. Proposals for study of the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation and high-energy neutrino physics, as well as topics in galactic astronomy, solar and cosmic ray physics are welcome. This research activity is primarily conducted at the South Pole Station and on NASA's long-duration balloon flights launched from McMurdo; research proposals to exploit unique capabilities of these ground- and balloon-based platforms are encouraged. Proposals in astronomy and astrophysics for studies at another nation's Antarctic facility also are welcome, but they must be collaborative with scientists from other nation, who lead the project at their nation's Antarctic facility.
Major goal of the AAGS program is to sponsor "cutting-edge" and new emerging research areas that require or benefit from the unique atmospheric or other conditions of the southern polar region. Proposals are welcome that either use Antarctica as an observing platform or contribute to the understanding of the role the Antarctic continent and surrounding Southern Ocean play in the changing global environmental processes. Interdisciplinary studies that might help improving our understanding of potential solar activity forcing on the polar neutral atmosphere are especially encouraged.
Organisms and Ecosystems
The Antarctic Organisms and Ecosystems (AOE) Program supports research at all levels of biological organization, from molecular, cellular, and organismal to communities and ecosystems over regional and global scales. Accordingly, the program welcomes integrative and interdisciplinary approaches toward fundamental questions in biological and environmental science related to polar regions. Investigators also are encouraged to develop and apply theory and innovative technologies to understand how organisms adapt to and live in high-latitude environments and how populations and ecosystems respond to global change.
Particular emphases include:
Earth Sciences
Antarctica is a dynamic and diverse continent with mountains, volcanoes, deserts, fossils, and some of the Earth's most ancient crust. The continental shelves and ocean basins surrounding Antarctica record ice-sheet histories as well as unique geodynamic processes and other geologic phenomena. Much of this geology is hidden beneath thick ice sheets or beneath the sea, therefore, innovative approaches are needed to decipher its history. Projects supported by the Antarctic Earth Sciences (AES) Program provide insights into Antarctica's rich history and lead to increased understanding of the processes that shape it today.
AES encourages and supports field, laboratory, and theoretical work in both terrestrial and marine settings in the fields of geology, geophysics, and other areas of earth sciences. The program also supports research at the intersection between earth sciences and biology, glaciology, and oceanography and considers proposals jointly with AISS as appropriate. Proposals could address such diverse topics as:
Work on previously collected samples and data is encouraged. Proposers should investigate availability of existing samples through individual researchers and repositories such as:
Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences
The Antarctic atmosphere and surrounding oceans play a major role in global transport of heat, momentum, and biogeochemical cycles. They are key components of the global ocean circulation and planetary climate dynamics. As a coupled system they serve both as indicators and determinants of climate and ecosystem variability and change. The Antarctic Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences (AOAS) Program is intended to foster advances in understanding of the physics and chemistry of both oceanic and lower atmospheric processes and environments at high southern latitudes and their links at local, regional and global scales across the Antarctic continent and Southern Ocean. Innovative approaches involving surface and/or satellite-based field observations and/or modeling studies are particularly encouraged.
Major program elements include but are not limited to:
The Antarctic ice sheet covers about 98% of the continent, extending over almost 14 million square km. The largest mass of ice on Earth, it contains the equivalent of 60 m of sea-level rise if all of its ice were to melt. The Antarctic Glaciology (AG) Program is an interdisciplinary program concerned with the history and dynamics of the Antarctic ice sheet. The program encompasses the study of the continental East Antarctic Ice Sheet as well as the marine-based West Antarctic Ice Sheet and supports research on the floating ice shelves fringing the continent (including the icebergs that break off of those ice shelves), as well as the glaciers draining the interior of the continent. Another key area of interest is determining the Cenozoic history of the ice sheet, including the uplift of the Transantarctic Mountains and its interaction with global climate (e.g., response to the Pliocene warming). Much of the glacial geological research in the Transantarctic Mountains relates to understanding the history of the ice sheet during the Cenozoic Era, especially during the Quaternary Period.
Recent program emphases include
An ongoing initiative supported by the program is the multidisciplinary West Antarctic Ice Sheet program (WAIS). This program, which is supported by the AG, AES, AOAS, and AISS programs, is designed to advance understanding of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet. Scientists participating in the WAIS program want to know what triggers marine ice sheet collapse and to evaluate the possibility that this could happen in West Antarctica. Predicting the ice sheet's future behavior requires an understanding of its history, current state (including the nature of the bed), internal dynamics, and coupling to the current global climate system.
A related activity involving studies of the Antarctic ice sheet is the Center for Remote Sensing of Ice Sheets (CReSIS). CReSIS, a Science and Technology Center established by the National Science Foundation (NSF) in 2005, develops new technologies and computer models to measure and predict the response of sea-level change to the mass balance of ice sheets in both Antarctica and Greenland. CReSIS provides students and faculty with opportunities to pursue research in a variety of disciplines; to collaborate with world-class scientists and engineers in the United States and abroad; and to make meaningful contributions to the study of climate change impacts on world sea level. As such, CReSIS scientists also collaborate extensively with others funded by the Antarctic Glaciology program.
Ice cores from Antarctica and Greenland are important for understanding rapid climate changes and the degree to which these changes are global in extent. The ice cores being drilled as part of the WAISCORES program will complement those already under study from Byrd Station and Siple Dome in West Antarctica and Taylor Dome and Vostok Station in East Antarctica. Ice cores are unique in that they contain continuous, or nearly continuous, records of annual precipitation, atmospheric temperature, and components of the atmosphere, including gases as well as soluble and insoluble aerosol particles from a variety of sources (biogenic, terrestrial, solar, marine, volcanic, and anthropogenic). The WAIS Divide ice core will provide a Southern Hemisphere equivalent to the Greenland ice cores and will allow detailed comparison of environmental conditions between the Northern and Southern Hemispheres. Proposals to compare these records are welcome.
The Glaciology Program relies on ice-core curation and ice coring and drilling services for polar research. The following organizations provide this support.
A detailed description of NICL, IDPO, and IDDO services and requirements for obtaining their support is available on the "Information for Proposers" page (http://www.usap.gov/proposalInformation/) on the USAP.gov web portal.
Integrated System Science
Disciplinary science discoveries increasingly highlight the need for integrative approaches. It is also increasingly apparent that, to discern the importance of human involvement in a naturally varying world, the co-dependence of physical, chemical, geological, biological, glaciological, oceanic, and atmospheric systems must be considered.
The Antarctic Integrated System Science (AISS) program invites projects that cross disciplinary boundaries. Successful AISS projects will lead to a deeper understanding of complex interactions that govern the Antarctic environment and its past, present, and future roles in the Earth system. Investigations supported by AISS must cross disciplinary boundaries and contribute significantly to research addressing fundamental questions about our planet. Investigators are encouraged to propose innovative collaborative projects that address fundamental research questions regarding global change and other basic research discovery challenges as delineated in recent community reports.
Proposals could address such diverse questions as:
The AISS program was established to complement and advance science being pursued by NSF's disciplinary programs. AISS will not support projects that recast disciplinary questions into a form requiring minimal expertise from other disciplines when progress is possible within a discipline, or those projects that simply combine separate disciplinary questions without attention to the integration of results. In addition, projects that are overly broad in scope and for which tractable research strategies are impractical, are discouraged.
Workshop reports relevant to community thinking in this area include Setting a Course for Antarctic Integrated System Science and A Research Program for Projecting Sea‐Level Rise from Land‐ice Loss. Those considering submission to AISS are strongly encouraged to contact the program director in advance.
Related NSF Opportunities
The Division of Antarctic Sciences encourages the use of other proposal mechanisms that could help advance knowledge and understanding of the Antarctic. For instance, Major Research Instrumentation, EAGER, Research Coordination Networks, Research Opportunity Awards, Research Experiences for Undergraduates, Rapid Response Awards and Exploratory Research Awards. We draw specific attention to the following:
Research Coordination Network Proposals: The Antarctic Sciences Division encourages proposals to establish Research Coordination Networks (RCN, see NSF 11-531). RCNs are expected to advance a field or combination of fields through exchange of information or resources, integration of research activities, and/or creation of new collaborative networks
Ocean Acidification: The effects of ocean acidification could significantly affect strategies for developing practices towards the sustainability of ocean resources. Basic research concerning the nature, extent and impact of ocean acidification on oceanic environments in the past, present and future is required. https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2012/nsf12500/nsf12500.htm
Decadal and Regional Climate Prediction using Earth System Models (EaSM): EASM is focused on the prediction of future climates and their consequences for human systems on time scales of several decades and shorter and global to regional and finer spatial scales. A time span of several decades is chosen because within this timeframe modeled climate change responses appear to be insensitive to CO2 forcing scenarios. https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2012/nsf12522/nsf12522.htm
Partnerships for International Research and Education (PIRE): The primary goal of PIRE is to support high quality projects in which advances in research and education could not occur without international collaboration. PIRE seeks to catalyze a higher level of international engagement in the U.S. science and engineering community. https://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=12819
Facilities for research in Antarctica include three year-round research stations with scientific equipment and laboratories, helicopters, ski-equipped airplanes, surface vehicles, a wide array of additional research facilities and temporary camps, a research icebreaker, and an ice-strengthened research ship. These facilities are operated by NSF's Division of Antarctic Infrastructure and Logistics (AIL) (703-292-8032) through support contracts and through agreements with other Federal agencies.
The U.S. Antarctic Program includes many organizations that provide logistical and operational support to meet the needs of the field research program. NSF's prime Antarctic logistics contractor, Lockheed-Martin Antarctic Support Contractor (LMASC) based in Centennial, Colorado, coordinates research support and field operations in Antarctica and has a planning group that can assist investigators with questions about field or logistical support. Investigators are strongly encouraged to contact the LMASC Science Planning Group with questions during the proposal preparation phase. For additional information, contact Jessie Crain (703/292-7457, email: firstname.lastname@example.com), or Tim McGovern (703/292-4248, email: firstname.lastname@example.com), OPP/AIL.
Other organizations offer technical support for research, and your proposal must include a summary document or letter of support from that organization in the supplemental documents section. A list of these organizations and more detailed descriptions of the research support provided by each is available at https://www.nsf.gov/od/opp/ant/solicitation_resources/prop_prep_info.jsp.
The U.S. Antarctic Program maintains a web portal (http://www.usap.gov/) that links to research, logistics, and operational information about U.S. activities in the Antarctic. Besides information concerning USAP stations, ships, and related field support, the site provides more detailed descriptions of the research support provided by other organizations. Investigators should use the web portal to access information for proposal preparation purposes. The "Information for Proposers" page (http://www.usap.gov/proposalInformation/) provides links to resources that will be useful as you prepare your proposals.
Non-U.S. facilities; international cooperation
The U.S. Antarctic Program welcomes proposals from U.S. scientists that involve collaboration and cooperation with scientists from other nations. Such proposals are usually the result of scientist-to-scientist discussions of potential collaborations. When discussing such projects with foreign colleagues, remember that individuals cannot commit U.S. Antarctic Program resources. U.S. scientists wishing to do research with other nations' Antarctic programs are asked to contact an Office of Polar Programs program director before submitting a formal proposal. Your acceptance of a generous offer from another nation's Antarctic program could be construed as commitment of U.S. resources for some later project.
Automated data collection
The U.S. Antarctic Program supports various automated data collection programs. These include automated geophysical data observatories, automatic weather stations, data from seismic and GPS stations, and other data streams. More detailed information about these programs is available on the "Information for Proposers" page (http://www.usap.gov/proposalInformation/) on the USAP.gov web portal.
Investigators who require time on an ice-capable research vessel should consult the vessel operating schedules at http://usap.gov/calendarsAndSchedules/ or the relevant program director in Antarctic Sciences to determine availability of ship time. All investigators that request ship time must fill out a UNOLS ship request form (https://strs.unols.org/Public/diu_login.aspx) and submit the form as a supplemental document with their proposals.
The U.S. Antarctic Program operates two research ships - the 230-foot Laurence M. Gould and the 308-foot Nathaniel B. Palmer. The capabilities of research ships and instruments available for not-to-interfere underway measurements on behalf of investigators who do not join a cruise can be found on Marine Operations home page on the U.S. Antarctic Program web site, USAP.gov.
Other vessels. University-National Oceanographic Laboratory Systems (UNOLS) vessels operate in the Southern Ocean in some years (http://www.unols.org/). In addition, ships that provide operational support near McMurdo may be able to provide underway research support in the Southern Ocean and the Ross Sea. Contact Tim McGovern, (703)292-4248, ax: (703)292-9080, email: email@example.com, the cognizant program director in NSF's Office of Polar Programs to discuss potential use of operational support vessels. Research ships of other Antarctic Treaty nations operate in Antarctic waters; see "Non-U.S. facilities; international cooperation".
Samples for Research. Specimens collected in the Antarctic are available to qualified investigators for study. For information, including the policies and procedures for obtaining samples, contact the facilities listed on the "Information for Proposers" page (http://www.usap.gov/proposalInformation/contentHandler.cfm?id=1751) on USAP.gov.
Data for Research and Data Curation. Detailed descriptions of the facilities that curate data for research are available on the "Information for Proposers" page (http://www.usap.gov/proposalInformation/contentHandler.cfm?id=1751) on USAP.gov.
Protection of the environment has high priority for nations that operate in the Antarctic. The Antarctic Treaty System, with its Agreed Measures for the Conservation of Fauna and Flora (1964) and its Protocol on Environmental Protection (1991), prescribes comprehensive protection measures. The U.S. Government is pledged to uphold these principles and NSF operates the U.S. Antarctic Program in accordance with U.S. and international requirements regarding protection of the environment.
The U.S. implements these environmental protection agreements through the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-541), as amended by the Antarctic Science, Tourism, and Conservation Act of 1996 (PL 104-227). The regulations issued under the Act govern the taking of fauna and flora; entry into protected areas; introduction of non-native species; material management and waste disposal; and use of designated pollutants. A permit system enables investigators to apply to collect specimens and enter protected areas for compelling scientific purposes. The system provides for public comment on each application.
If your research involves any of the activities listed above, an Antarctic Conservation Act permit may be required for the proposed activities. If there is any question as to whether a permit is required, contact an Office of Polar Programs science program director, the permit officer (Nadene Kennedy, firstname.lastname@example.com), or the environmental policy specialist (Adrian Dahood, firstname.lastname@example.com). Additional permits may be required for certain activities such as research involving marine mammals or importation of bird or mammal tissue, plants or soils. Please contact the environmental officer for additional information.
All activities within the U.S. Antarctic Program, including scientific research, science support, construction, operations, logistics, and facilities maintenance, are subjected to environmental impact assessment specific to the proposed action or governed by a program-wide environmental impact statement. NSF carefully reviews each research proposal and does not give approval unless the project (sometimes modified for this purpose) complies with Antarctic environmental standards.
Sample Permits
Your Antarctic research may require the collection of Antarctic specimens. As mentioned in the U.S. Antarctic Program Environmental Stewardship section, the Antarctic Conservation Act (ACA) governs the taking of Antarctic fauna and flora. A permit system enables investigators to apply to collect Antarctic specimens. Transshipment and importation of Antarctic samples is governed by regulations of the countries involved (e.g., New Zealand, Chile, and the United States), to obtain permits required for collection, transshipment, and importation. Consult "Information for Proposers" on USAP.gov web site for more details on permits required for transshipment and importation (http://www.usap.gov/USAPgov/proposalInformation/documents/Permit%20Guide.pdf).
In the U.S. Antarctic Program, NSF expects each year to fund approximately 50 new standard or continuing research grants with durations of 1 to 5 years.
In FY 2013, the Division anticipates committing approximately $50M over the duration of the awards in all programmatic areas in response to this solicitation, subject to the availability of funds.
In addition, and separate from these awards to organizations, field and laboratory support will be available in Antarctica for those projects for which fieldwork has been proposed and approved.
The categories of proposers eligible to submit proposals to the National Science Foundation are identified in the Grant Proposal Guide, Chapter I, Section E.
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI:
None Specified
Full Proposal Preparation Instructions: Proposers may opt to submit proposals in response to this Program Solicitation via Grants.gov or via the NSF FastLane system.
In determining which method to utilize in the electronic preparation and submission of the proposal, please note the following:
Collaborative Proposals. All collaborative proposals submitted as separate submissions from multiple organizations must be submitted via the NSF FastLane system. Chapter II, Section D.4 of the Grant Proposal Guide provides additional information on collaborative proposals.
Antarctic research proposal preparation:
Supplemental instructions
The following instructions supplement the NSF GPG and the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide guidelines. Proposals not following these instructions are subject to return without review
OPP expects investigators to share these things (data, samples, etc., as above) with other researchers at no more than incremental cost and within a reasonable time. Unless otherwise justified, samples and data should be made publicly available no more than one year after collection. Investigators should use national and international standards to the greatest extent possible for collecting, processing, and communicating OPP-sponsored data sets. Also, the program strongly encourages the use of national data centers, sample repositories, museums and other registration and curation systems.
The data management plan proposed and approved through the NSF award process must define which data sets are to be considered real time data and thus made available immediately. After an award is made, data management will be monitored primarily through the Annual and Final Report process and through evaluation of subsequent proposals. In subsequent proposals, data management must be reported by the PI and Co-PIs under "Results of prior NSF support."
For all OPP-supported projects collecting routine, real-time data, using general USAP instruments:
For physical and chemical oceanographic data, principal investigators are encouraged to consider compliance with the CLIVAR data policy (http://www.clivar.org/resources/data/clivar-data-policy) and submit their data to the appropriate Data Assembly Centers (http://www.clivar.org/resources/data/clivar-data-assembly-centres-dacs).
In addition, all awardees must submit a metadata listing to the Antarctic Master Directory (http://www.usap-data.org/) as soon as possible after collection but no later than 6 months prior to expiration of the award. Some examples of these resources are listed on the USAP web portal.
Completing the ORW is time consuming and must be done before the proposal is submitted. OPP recommends proposers start this process at least two weeks before final proposal submission. Proposals lacking these Operational Requirements Worksheets are subject to return without review.
Some aspects of fieldwork that should be considered when preparing your proposal follow below. A detailed description of this information is available at https://www.nsf.gov/od/opp/ant/solicitation_resources/prop_prep_info.jsp under the heading "Section III".
If you have questions, contact Patrick Smith (firstname.lastname@example.com) in OPP's Antarctic Infrastructure and Logistics Division.
Information Security Management
United States law and Executive Office of the President guidance regarding information security requirements for Federal information systems apply to the information technology (IT) infrastructure of the USAP.
All grantee scientific research instrumentation, personal computing devices (e.g., laptop computers), and remote interactions from home institution computing/networks to systems within the USAP general network infrastructure (i.e., within the usap.gov domain) must comply with NSF/USAP information security requirements.
USAP information security policy, guidance instructions, advisories, and other related information can be found on the USAP web portal on the USAP Information Security Program homepage (http://www.usap.gov/technology/contentHandler.cfm?id=1562).
Environmental protection and waste management
You must convince the Foundation that your project, if approved, can be performed in compliance with Antarctic environmental regulations. The ORW will help you define field plans. Failure to document environmental stewardship practices and waste generation estimates in your proposal could change the Foundation's decision from award to declination.
Please refer to the section U.S. Antarctic Program Environmental Stewardship in this solicitation for additional information about permitting and environmental impact assessments.
If you have questions, contact Adrian Dahood (email: email@example.com), OPP Environmental Policy Specialist.
Details about health and safety issues are available at https://www.nsf.gov/od/opp/ant/solicitation_resources/prop_prep_info4.jsp#sah.
Cost Sharing: Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited
Budget Preparation Instructions:
Budget provisions for field services in Antarctica
In Antarctica, many support services are provided and paid for by the NSF-funded U.S. Antarctic Program. Many common-use items are bought and shipped to Antarctica in bulk for allocation to field parties. This practice, while affecting the way an investigator plans for fieldwork, lowers the cost of acquiring, maintaining, and shipping items to Antarctica. However, as with other research programs at NSF, requests for field support must be outlined in sufficient detail in the proposal so that reviewers and NSF program officers can assess whether this support is appropriate for the research program proposed.
Investigators should use their proposals and Operational Requirements Worksheets (ORWs) to specify services and items of equipment that are required for their research. To plan and budget for acquisition of these items, NSF must know well in advance what they are and approximately how much they cost.
Costs for the following items must be included in your funding request (questions related to this list should be directed to your cognizant program officer or Research Support Managers in the Division of Antarctic Infrastructure and Logistics):
Note: The USAP issues at no charge to the award limited amounts of basic polar clothing including insulated underwear, mukluks, thermal boots, parkas, insulated overalls, gloves, and other extreme-cold-weather gear.
Commercial air travel
Do not budget in your proposal for commercial air travel between your home organization and the departure point for Antarctica (normally Christchurch, New Zealand, or Punta Arenas, Chile). The Foundation's Antarctic support contractor will issue tickets at no cost to your grant. Under most circumstances the tickets issued will not include travel from a point outside the United States. If you contemplate such foreign travel, please discuss this with your program director.
If a foreign scientist is part of your field Program, NSF generally expects that person to be cleared medically through their nation's Antarctic program (if relevant) and to provide their airfare and travel expenses to and from the southern hemisphere point of departure. Exceptions must be discussed with your cognizant program officer.
Do budget in the proposal for accompanied excess baggage needed for your research as well as for per diem during this travel and for any travel not involving deployment to Antarctica.
Do not budget for life or disability insurance. NSF does not provide insurance for grantee personnel in Antarctica, and it does not fund acquisition of this insurance in its research grants.
Persons traveling to Antarctica are expected to have insurance appropriate to their normal life situations so that any needed health care, compensation for property loss, worker's compensation, or survivor benefit will be provided for.
Emergency medical care for U.S. Antarctic Program participants in Antarctica is provided in clinics at the year-round stations. Persons who need hospital care will be transported to health care facilities in New Zealand, South America, or the United States, at which point they or their sponsors will be responsible for medical costs.
Check your health and life insurance policies to be sure that flights aboard scheduled military aircraft are covered.
All research staff (paid or volunteer) should be affiliated in some manner with your organization(s), so that any worker's compensation issues arising from injuries sustained while deployed can be addressed by your organization.
May 31, 2012
For Proposals Submitted Via FastLane:
Detailed technical instructions regarding the technical aspects of preparation and submission via FastLane are available at: https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/a1/newstan.htm. For FastLane user support, call the FastLane Help Desk at 1-800-673-6188 or e-mail email@example.com. The FastLane Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of the FastLane system. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this funding opportunity.
Submission of Electronically Signed Cover Sheets. The Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must electronically sign the proposal Cover Sheet to submit the required proposal certifications (see Chapter II, Section C of the Grant Proposal Guide for a listing of the certifications). The AOR must provide the required electronic certifications within five working days following the electronic submission of the proposal. Further instructions regarding this process are available on the FastLane Website at: https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/fastlane.jsp.
Before using Grants.gov for the first time, each organization must register to create an institutional profile. Once registered, the applicant's organization can then apply for any federal grant on the Grants.gov website. Comprehensive information about using Grants.gov is available on the Grants.gov Applicant Resources webpage: http://www07.grants.gov/applicants/app_help_reso.jsp. In addition, the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide provides additional technical guidance regarding preparation of proposals via Grants.gov. For Grants.gov user support, contact the Grants.gov Contact Center at 1-800-518-4726 or by email: firstname.lastname@example.com. The Grants.gov Contact Center answers general technical questions related to the use of Grants.gov. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this solicitation.
Submitting the Proposal: Once all documents have been completed, the Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must submit the application to Grants.gov and verify the desired funding opportunity and agency to which the application is submitted. The AOR must then sign and submit the application to Grants.gov. The completed application will be transferred to the NSF FastLane system for further processing.
Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program where they will be reviewed if they meet NSF proposal preparation requirements. All proposals are carefully reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and usually by three to ten other persons outside NSF who are experts in the particular fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with the oversight of the review process. Proposers are invited to suggest names of persons they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal and/or persons they would prefer not review the proposal. These suggestions may serve as one source in the reviewer selection process at the Program Officer's discretion. Submission of such names, however, is optional. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts of interest with the proposal.
All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science Board (NSB)-approved merit review criteria: intellectual merit and the broader impacts of the proposed effort. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities.
The two NSB-approved merit review criteria are listed below. The criteria include considerations that help define them. These considerations are suggestions and not all will apply to any given proposal. While proposers must address both merit review criteria, reviewers will be asked to address only those considerations that are relevant to the proposal being considered and for which the reviewer is qualified to make judgements.
What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity?
How important is the proposed activity to advancing knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields? How well qualified is the proposer (individual or team) to conduct the project? (If appropriate, the reviewer will comment on the quality of the prior work.) To what extent does the proposed activity suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts? How well conceived and organized is the proposed activity? Is there sufficient access to resources?
What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity?
How well does the activity advance discovery and understanding while promoting teaching, training, and learning? How well does the proposed activity broaden the participation of underrepresented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.)? To what extent will it enhance the infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks, and partnerships? Will the results be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological understanding? What may be the benefits of the proposed activity to society?
Examples illustrating activities likely to demonstrate broader impacts are available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/gpg/broaderimpacts.pdf.
Mentoring activities provided to postdoctoral researchers supported on the project, as described in a one-page supplementary document, will be evaluated under the Broader Impacts criterion.
Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria
Rationale for access to Antarctica
NSF supports fieldwork in Antarctica for research that can only be done or is best done in Antarctica. Proposals must make a compelling case that the fieldwork is needed to accomplish the goals of the proposed investigation. External reviewers will be asked to comment on the importance of fieldwork, and program officers will consider this issue in their recommendation.
Operational feasibility
Proposals involving fieldwork will also be evaluated for operational feasibility, which includes resource availability, environmental protection and waste management provisions, safety and health measures, and safeguards of radioactive materials. Proposers must recognize that proposals may be declined for operational reasons. For proposals involving fieldwork in the Antarctic, this operational evaluation is based largely on the Operational Requirements Worksheets that the proposer must complete as instructed in Section V.A. (Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions). While the full ORW will not be given to reviewers, a summary ORW, produced from information provided by the proposer as part of completing the full ORW, must be included in the proposal as a "Supplementary Document" and will be provided to reviewers.
All Antarctic field participants must also meet specified U.S. Antarctic Program health and dental requirements. See Section V.B. (Budget Preparation).
Candidates for wintering at the year-round stations are screened for psychological fitness.
AISS Additional Review Criteria
External reviewers and panel will be asked to comment on the synergism among the various disciplinary components proposed and the likelihood that the project will contribute to progress on a fundamental research question that can be answered with knowledge obtained from Antarctica and/or the Southern Ocean.
Joint support from international partners and other federal agencies
International collaborative proposals, especially when joint fieldwork is involved, as well as proposals that involve other US federal agencies require special efforts for coordination between the sponsoring organizations. NSF will engage potential partner organizations as required to determine project feasibility prior to making awards.
NSF's BROADER-IMPACTS REVIEW CRITERION
Antarctica presents exceptional opportunities for projects in all of the program areas described in the "Research Areas" section of this solicitation to respond to NSF's broader-impacts proposal evaluation criterion — "What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity" — that asks how well the proposed activity will advance understanding while promoting teaching and learning; how well it will broaden the participation of underrepresented groups; to what extent it will enhance the research and education infrastructure (facilities, instruments, networks, partnerships, etc.); how well the results will be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological understanding; and what may be the benefits to society of the proposed activity.
The Foundation's Advisory Committee for Polar Research, Working Group on Implementation of the Broader Impacts Criterion (then called "criterion 2"), has produced a document, Criterion 2 Background and List of Representative Activities, that proposers may want to consider when addressing the broader-impacts review criterion. The NSF Office of Budget, Finance, and Award Management has also prepared a document, Merit Review Broader Impacts Criterion: Representative Activities, describing activities that demonstrate broader impacts. [Note: The term "Criterion 2" used to be synonymous with the term "Broader Impacts Criterion." The latter term alone is currently used. The OPP Advisory Committee completed their work on the issue prior to this change in the criterion name.]
Proposers are encouraged to develop "Broader Impacts" activities that are specific to their research. Awareness of or collaboration with other Foundation programs also may be helpful in achieving broader impact.
A program of potential interest is PolarTREC. This program, funded by the Foundation and managed by the Arctic Research Consortium of the U.S., enables K-12 teachers to participate in polar research by working closely with scientists as a pathway to improving science education. The program's website (http://www.polartrec.com/) provides information about how researchers can participate. This activity offers a way for polar scientists to integrate education outreach into their research and help to meet the broader impacts criterion.
NSF staff also will give careful consideration to the following in making funding decisions:
Integration of Research and Education
One of the principal strategies in support of NSF's goals is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects, and activities it supports at academic and research institutions. These institutions provide abundant opportunities where individuals may concurrently assume responsibilities as researchers, educators, and students and where all can engage in joint efforts that infuse education with the excitement of discovery and enrich research through the diversity of learning perspectives.
Integrating Diversity into NSF Programs, Projects, and Activities
Broadening opportunities and enabling the participation of all citizens -- women and men, underrepresented minorities, and persons with disabilities -- is essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports.
Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by Ad hoc Review and/or Panel Review.
Reviewers will be asked to formulate a recommendation to either support or decline each proposal. The Program Officer assigned to manage the proposal's review will consider the advice of reviewers and will formulate a recommendation.
After scientific, technical and programmatic review and consideration of appropriate factors, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether the proposal should be declined or recommended for award. NSF is striving to be able to tell applicants whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. The time interval begins on the deadline or target date, or receipt date, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director accepts the Program Officer's recommendation.
A summary rating and accompanying narrative will be completed and submitted by each reviewer. In all cases, reviews are treated as confidential documents. Verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the names of the reviewers, are sent to the Principal Investigator/Project Director by the Program Officer. In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of the decision to award or decline funding.
In all cases, after programmatic approval has been obtained, the proposals recommended for funding will be forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements for review of business, financial, and policy implications and the processing and issuance of a grant or other agreement. Proposers are cautioned that only a Grants and Agreements Officer may make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of funds. No commitment on the part of NSF should be inferred from technical or budgetary discussions with a NSF Program Officer. A Principal Investigator or organization that makes financial or personnel commitments in the absence of a grant or cooperative agreement signed by the NSF Grants and Agreements Officer does so at their own risk.
Notification of the award is made to the submitting organization by a Grants Officer in the Division of Grants and Agreements. Organizations whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible by the cognizant NSF Program administering the program. Verbatim copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be provided automatically to the Principal Investigator. (See Section VI.B. for additional information on the review process.)
An NSF award consists of: (1) the award letter, which includes any special provisions applicable to the award and any numbered amendments thereto; (2) the budget, which indicates the amounts, by categories of expense, on which NSF has based its support (or otherwise communicates any specific approvals or disapprovals of proposed expenditures); (3) the proposal referenced in the award letter; (4) the applicable award conditions, such as Grant General Conditions (GC-1); * or Research Terms and Conditions * and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance that may be incorporated by reference in the award letter. Cooperative agreements also are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement Financial and Administrative Terms and Conditions (CA-FATC) and the applicable Programmatic Terms and Conditions. NSF awards are electronically signed by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer and transmitted electronically to the organization via e-mail.
*These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at https://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF. Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from firstname.lastname@example.com.
More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Award & Administration Guide (AAG) Chapter II, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag.
Special Award Conditions:
Metadata. Principal Investigators of OPP-awards are required to submit metadata files for all data sets and derived data products in the form of a Directory Interchange Format (DIF) entry, to the Antarctic Master Directory, via the USAP Data Coordination Center (http://www.usap-data.org/), which OPP funds for this purpose. Further information on DIF generation can be found at the Global Change Master Directory (http://gcmd.gsfc.nasa.gov/). This specific metadata (DIF) requirement is necessary for USAP obligations under the Antarctic Treaty. OPP policy also requires that the full data sets and sets of derived data products be transferred to a nationally recognized or program officer-approved data repository. Investigators also are expected to submit their metadata (DIF) at the time that they submit their final reports to NSF.
Antarctic Bibliography. Investigators funded through ANT are requested to send the Bibliography one copy or a URL to the online version of every publication developed under the award, labeled with the award number, to assure its citation in this valuable reference tool. Doing so will waive the General Grant Condition that requires submission of copies of every publication, developed under an NSF award, to the cognizant NSF program officer.
For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants), the Principal Investigator must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program Officer at least 90 days before the end of the current budget period. (Some programs or awards require more frequent project reports). Within 90 days after expiration of a grant, the PI also is required to submit a final project report, and a project outcomes report for the general public.
Failure to provide the required annual or final project reports, or the project outcomes report will delay NSF review and processing of any future funding increments as well as any pending proposals for that PI. PIs should examine the formats of the required reports in advance to assure availability of required data.
PIs are required to use NSF's electronic project-reporting system, available through FastLane, for preparation and submission of annual and final project reports. Such reports provide information on activities and findings, project participants (individual and organizational), publications, and other specific products and contributions. PIs will not be required to re-enter information previously provided, either with a proposal or in earlier updates using the electronic system. Submission of the report via FastLane constitutes certification by the PI that the contents of the report are accurate and complete. The project outcomes report must be prepared and submitted using Research.gov. This report serves as a brief summary, prepared specifically for the public, of the nature and outcomes of the project. This report will be posted on the NSF website exactly as it is submitted by the PI.
Please note that the program contact information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.
General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:
Sonia Esperança, Program Director, Antarctic Integrated System Science, telephone: (703) 292-4735, email: firstname.lastname@example.com
Alexandra Isern, Program Director, Antarctic Earth Sciences, telephone: (703) 292-7581, fax: (703) 292-9079, email: email@example.com
Peter Milne, Program Director, Antarctic Ocean & Atmospheric Sciences, telephone: (703) 292-4714, fax: (703) 292-9079, email: email@example.com
Diana Nemergut, Program Director, Antarctic Organisms & Ecosystems, telephone: (703) 292-7448, email: email@example.com
Julie Palais, Program Director, Antarctic Glaciology, telephone: (703) 292-8033, fax: (703) 292-9079, email: firstname.lastname@example.com
Vladimir Papitashvili, Program Director, Antarctic Astrophysics & Geospace Sciences, telephone: (703) 292-7425, fax: (703) 292-9079, email: email@example.com
James Swift, Program Manager, Antarctic Research and Logistics Integration, telephone: (703) 292-7450, fax: (703) 292-9079, email: firstname.lastname@example.com
Jessie L. Crain, Research Support Manager, OPP/AIL, telephone: (703) 292-7457, fax: (703)292-9080, email: email@example.com
Timothy M. McGovern, Oceans Projects Manager, OPP/AIL, 755S, telephone: (703) 292-4248, fax: (703)292-9080, email: firstname.lastname@example.com
For questions related to the use of FastLane, contact:
For questions relating to Grants.gov contact:
The NSF Website provides the most comprehensive source of information on NSF Directorates (including contact information), programs and funding opportunities. Use of this Website by potential proposers is strongly encouraged. In addition, National Science Foundation Update is a free e-mail subscription service designed to keep potential proposers and other interested parties apprised of new NSF funding opportunities and publications, important changes in proposal and award policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Regional Grants Conferences. Subscribers are informed through e-mail when new publications are issued that match their identified interests. Users can subscribe to this service by clicking the "Get NSF Updates by Email" link on the NSF web site.
Grants.gov provides an additional electronic capability to search for Federal government-wide grant opportunities. NSF funding opportunities may be accessed via this new mechanism. Further information on Grants.gov may be obtained at http://www.grants.gov.
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent Federal agency created by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 USC 1861-75). The Act states the purpose of the NSF is "to promote the progress of science; [and] to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare by supporting research and education in all fields of science and engineering."
NSF funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering. It does this through grants and cooperative agreements to more than 2,000 colleges, universities, K-12 school systems, businesses, informal science organizations and other research organizations throughout the US. The Foundation accounts for about one-fourth of Federal support to academic institutions for basic research.
NSF receives approximately 40,000 proposals each year for research, education and training projects, of which approximately 11,000 are funded. In addition, the Foundation receives several thousand applications for graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. The agency operates no laboratories itself but does support National Research Centers, user facilities, certain oceanographic vessels and Arctic and Antarctic research stations. The Foundation also supports cooperative research between universities and industry, US participation in international scientific and engineering efforts, and educational activities at every academic level.
Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects. See Grant Proposal Guide Chapter II, Section D.2 for instructions regarding preparation of these types of proposals.
The National Science Foundation has Telephonic Device for the Deaf (TDD) and Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) capabilities that enable individuals with hearing impairments to communicate with the Foundation about NSF programs, employment or general information. TDD may be accessed at (703) 292-5090 and (800) 281-8749, FIRS at (800) 877-8339.
The National Science Foundation Information Center may be reached at (703) 292-5111.
The National Science Foundation promotes and advances scientific progress in the United States by competitively awarding grants and cooperative agreements for research and education in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering.
To get the latest information about program deadlines, to download copies of NSF publications, and to access abstracts of awards, visit the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov
The information requested on proposal forms and project reports is solicited under the authority of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended. The information on proposal forms will be used in connection with the selection of qualified proposals; and project reports submitted by awardees will be used for program evaluation and reporting within the Executive Branch and to Congress. The information requested may be disclosed to qualified reviewers and staff assistants as part of the proposal review process; to proposer institutions/grantees to provide or obtain data regarding the proposal review process, award decisions, or the administration of awards; to government contractors, experts, volunteers and researchers and educators as necessary to complete assigned work; to other government agencies or other entities needing information regarding applicants or nominees as part of a joint application review process, or in order to coordinate programs or policy; and to another Federal agency, court, or party in a court or Federal administrative proceeding if the government is a party. Information about Principal Investigators may be added to the Reviewer file and used to select potential candidates to serve as peer reviewers or advisory committee members. See Systems of Records, NSF-50, "Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Associated Records," 69 Federal Register 26410 (May 12, 2004), and NSF-51, "Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records," 69 Federal Register 26410 (May 12, 2004). Submission of the information is voluntary. Failure to provide full and complete information, however, may reduce the possibility of receiving an award.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The OMB control number for this collection is 3145-0058. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 120 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions. Send comments regarding the burden estimate and any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to:
Suzanne H. Plimpton
Reports Clearance Officer
Division of Administrative Services
National Science Foundation
Arlington, VA 22230
The National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230, USA


text:
Correcto | RUG267 | Released: 12/11/07
Correcto are Danny Saunders on vocals, Patrick from The Royal We on bass, Richard Wright on guitar and Franz Ferdinand's own Paul Thomson on drums. Inspired by fact, fiction, surrealism and the mundane; and with sounds reminiscent of the Buzzcocks, Kinks, Fall, Ramones, 'all the good stuff' as Danny puts it, Correcto is the best art school punk band that we've come across for some time.
Written by Danny before dashing out the door, his brain fizzing with Substitute by the Who, guilt and TV show I'm Celebrity Get Me Out Of here ('I would eat a fish eye, to have you by my side'), Joni is an instant classic - a direct, unhampered and infectious tune which will have you singing along in no time.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Koreans prep cylindrical media-playing HDD case
Bin there, done that
It looks a bit like a dustbin - or maybe one of R2-D2's ancestors - but South Korean manufacturer DVICO's TVix M-5000U is a full media player equipped with 64MB of RAM, a 3.5in hard drive and the ability to pump out pictures at up to 1920 x 1080i HD resolution.
The 18.5cm tall unit - it's 13.1cm in diameter - has its own 7 x 5-character display to allow users to select from the video, music and photo content stored on the box's hard drive. DIVCO is pitching the TVix as an HDD enclosure, so it's up to you to obtain a drive and install it, but at least you get to select the capacity and you can upgrade in the future.
The machine supports video encoded in MPEG 1, 2 and 4; DivX; XviD and WMV 9. On the music side, it will play MP3, Ogg, WMA, AAC, PCM and AC3 formats, but it doesn't appear to handle DRM-protected files. BMP and JPEG round out the list of supported formats, these two for pictures.
The TVix has a trio of USB 2.0 ports, two of which can operate as a host, allowing the machine to grab content from other devices, such as digital cameras and external hard drives. It's got analog audio jacks plus digital co-axial and optical outputs. One the video side, it's got DVI, s-video, composite and component ports.
The machine is due to ship in Japan mid-March. It's expected to retail for around ¥40,000 ($340/£195). ®
Sponsored: Minds Mastering Machines - Call for papers now open


text:
Welcome to Ultimate Subaru Message Board, my lurker friend!
|Welcome to Ultimate Subaru Message Board, an unparalleled Subaru community full of the greatest Subaru gurus and modders on the planet! We offer technical information and discussion about all things Subaru, the best and most popular all wheel drive vehicles ever created.
We offer all this information for free to everyone, even lurkers like you! All we ask in return is that you sign up and give back some of what you get out - without our awesome registered users none of this would be possible! Plus, you get way more great stuff as a member! Lurk to lose, participate to WIN*!
* The joy of participation and being generally awesome constitutes winning
** Not an actual guarantee, but seriously, you probably won't regret it!
Serving the Subaru Community since May 18th, 1998!
Changing Instrument Panel bulb colors
Posted 02 January 2004 - 09:11 PM
I'm thinking of changin the color of the bulbs in the instrument panel.. Has anyone done this before???
If so, how in the hell do I get the instrument panel out of the dash? and what about disconnecting the Tach and speedo cables from the back of it? I have enough room to get my fingers behind the panel but thats it..
Please help..
Posted 02 January 2004 - 09:34 PM
On my old Sentra, I replaced the bulbs with blue ones, and then red. The blue ones were CRAP and faded after only a few weeks.
However, it seems as though the Subaru gauges, at least in my EA82, might have a green backing on them, which would limit your color choices. Red would shine through nicely, I think, and maybe amber, I suppose.
If you can remove the backing easily, like some VWs, you could change the color a lot more easily.
I've been itching to change mine to red for some time now.
Posted 02 January 2004 - 10:03 PM
with a small flat blade screwdriver, gently pry up the defrost, and off buttons on the right side (heater controls), underneath you will find phillips screws - same procedure on the left side. You will also need to gently pry off the fan control knob on the right, and on mine (89) the emergency flasher button on the left (not sure if the earlier versions had the same button or not).
Lower your steering wheel all the way down and carfully wiggle the panel loose, at this time you will need to get your hand in behind the panel to disconnect the speedo cable - tach is electric on mine so nothing to disconnect, not sure on older models tho...
speedo cable is threaded on, kinda like a coax cable for cb antenna. Once you get that loose you will be able to move the panel out some more and disconnect misc wires that run to other lights and such, simple plug connectors....You will probably need to do a little wiggleing with the steering wheel and panel, but it will come out. The back side of the instrument cluster is a circuit board....have fun!
As I said, my stock dash lights dont work at all (bad dimmer switch), so I wired in some large green LED's mounted at the lower edge of the guage cluster inside the dust cover so they dont glare, works great! they are wired into the light system so go on and off with my headlights. They are also availlable in red or amber from radio shack - wish they had blue, but no go there.
Posted 02 January 2004 - 10:22 PM
sitting in drivers seat you have several screws to deal with.....
lower the steering wheel to maximum place. for use of space with screwdrivers. I recomend the short stubby type for several of these screws especially the top two for the dash upper lip.
there are two short screws into the top lip (dash's sun visor).
The A/C control for DEF and OFF if you use a small flat blade screwdriver to pop off those buttons then the screws on that side will become obvious to remove.
Same position and technique for removing the left side section except one twist. The lower left is still there but the upper right corner is true diaganol as the temp. slider isn't in the way.
There are a few screws under the vents, and rear view mirror control.
then the housing pop's off.
The actual dash is still screwed in by 4 goldish(in color) on the tabs they are very visible to see, the long screw driver would be best here only.
once done, then you can unplug the clips on the backside and the speedo cable connector.
...on the back side of this unit you can then slowly unscrew the the clear cover and then the translucent flat piece too.... the little lightbulbs are under these two plates.
try that on for size. Some assembly required, your results may vary, some settling due to shipment,batteries not included.
Posted 02 January 2004 - 10:46 PM
two top screws
two bottom screws
temp control cable by gas pedal
you can use color "caps" try wal*mart or truckstop
Posted 03 January 2004 - 04:02 AM
Posted 03 January 2004 - 03:47 PM
they are easier to look at and are a hella lot cooler.
Thats whats inspired me to do that..
I tired painting the bulbs blue with fingernail polish and all that did was burn off and get me high off the fumes as I drove....
can I get a hell yea? lol
Posted 03 January 2004 - 10:18 PM
as for what to do? Get the little bulbs out of other dashboards and slide the little green rubbers off the bulbs for your lights okay?
Posted 08 November 2005 - 02:18 PM
How little can I get away with taking apart here?
Posted 08 November 2005 - 02:51 PM
Can someone narrow this down for me, for the heater/air conditioning pushbuttons? 1988 GL, not the digital type dash, the back-lighting for the pushbuttons on the right side that control heat/AC/fan have gone dark.
How little can I get away with taking apart here?
I believe you will only need to remove the dash cover; (screws behind the 'def' and 'off' covers, same on the other side, then two screws right above the instrument cluster, and a couple on the edge below the rear wiper switch.)
Once that snaps out, unplug everything and get it out of your way. That should give you enough room to work with the heater module and associated lights.
Posted 08 November 2005 - 03:33 PM
As I said, my stock dash lights dont work at all (bad dimmer switch), so I wired in some large green LED's mounted at the lower edge of the guage cluster inside the dust cover so they dont glare, works great! they are wired into the light system so go on and off with my headlights. They are also availlable in red or amber from radio shack - wish they had blue, but no go there.
More choices of LED's than you know what to do with
I put a super bright green one in the center of each of the stars on the subaru logo on the grill. Till I got pulled over for impersonating an emergency vehicle. Ooops. Should have used white I guess.
Posted 09 November 2005 - 01:27 AM
our overlay is tinted a bit, your yellow one will be more responsive to colored LED's behind it, the green one, probably not so much.
The green dash will swap right in....so you can go that route too, by the time I junked my '85, the only things left with the yellow were the fan controls, and rear defroster button, and headlight switch, everything else I replaced with working parts (all happened to be green too)
Posted 17 April 2009 - 08:01 AM
Posted 17 April 2009 - 01:53 PM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


text:
I've been thinking about this for a while now, since I see my company venturing into foreign markets, and also because I often read about other companies entering international markets. I think it's exciting, I love this stuff! For companies, it's the next thing to do.
I was triggered to write this post from a discussion forum at Forrester Reasearch that I'm part of. Jim Deitzel from Newell Rubbermaid was interested in knowing our opinions on how to go about setting up a website in different languages. This was a great discussion, and these are my thoughts on it… (I added a few thoughts from my old post)
Besides the critical language and currency support that website must have in order to go international, for an ecommerce retailer, going international should not just mean 'translating' (although I argue 'adapting' is better) a website into multiples languages, so 'we speak the same language they do'. It should mean going a step further and creating a website and an experience that is consistent with what the target market perceives as relevant, meaningful and persuasive.
'Think global and act local' applies here too. No one market has the same drivers, and no brand has the same image and 'feel' in every market. But when it happens, that markets and brands are similar enough to each other, a same strategy is likely to work for both. So it seems to be the case with Oral-B, which has similar websites in the US and United Kingdom with minor adjustments: www.oralb.com/en-US and www.oralb.com/en-UK.
When countries and brands differ drastically, then it's appropriate to also create unique websites and experiences that closely match the expectation and mindset of that particular new market. Such is the case with Pepsi in the US and France: www.pepsiworld.fr and www.pepsiusa.com; Coca-Cola in the US: www.coca-cola.com/index.jsp; Brazil: www.cocacola.com.br/pt-br/index.jsp; Danmark: www.coca-cola.dk; and China: www.icoke.cn; and Clairol in the US: www.clairol.com/index.jsp; Canada: www.clairol.ca/en_ca/default.jsp?hf=true; Australia: www.clairol.com.au; and Ireland: www.clairol.ie.
It seems there isn't just one way of going international. Ultimately, market conditions, brand variables and brand's strategic objectives in that market determine whether a brand pursues a distinctive effort or a standardized one across markets. 'Best practices' exist, and while I don't presume to know all, I agree with one in particular. When going international, think in that language, emerge in that culture, and don't translate! In transcultural marketing, I learned that 'adaptation' is a better term to use than 'translation'.
Why adaptation and not translation? Because the experience must be comparable from one context and language to the other, and translation – which is taking words from one language and finding comparable words in another language – misses that completely. In other words, when you translate from one language to the other, the underlying "conceptual anchor" (meaning) is lost. In addition, translation imposes the concepts of one language on the other arbitrarily, whereas adaptation looks at each language conceptually independent from another, on their own merits, the only truly valid alternative for decision purposes.
Technically, the researcher must assess (functional equivalence) whether a given concept or behavior serves the same function from country to country (or market to market); he/she must also determine (conceptual equivalence) whether these same concepts or behavior occur in different countries (or markets) and whether they are expressed is similar ways; and finally, he/she must examine whether the same classification scheme of objects can be used across countries (category equivalence). Without being too technical, the easiest example I always use to explain this is with the word 'rice'. It performs the same function in any culture, as food, and it's also categorized as food item. But it has slightly different concepts, and many times eaten in different ways, depending on the culture.
To Americans 'rice' is a small cup of pre-cooked, boiled Uncle Ben's white rice served as an accompaniment to a narrow range of foods. To some South Americans, 'rice' is a dinner plate full of saffron-colored, scratch-made fried rice served as an accompaniment to a broad range of foods. To the Japanese, 'rice' is a medium-sized cup of scratch-made steamed rice that serves as a blotter to the flavors of the foods with which it's eaten. It misses the point for a marketer to say that rice is rice is rice when, in fact, in each of these cultures 'rice' is a totally different and highly personal social experience.
Adaptation requires intimate knowledge of the culture and its idiosyncrasies, something that translation lacks in principle.


text:
Holiday show coming to Performing Arts Center
Local residents can join Charles Dickens in his study as history, humor and holiday come to life as he tells the story of "A Christmas Carol."
Scrooge and all the characters of Charles Dickens' holiday story will take the stage for the final show of the season at Wapakoneta Performing Arts Center at 7:30 p.m. Saturday, Dec. 17, in "The Night Before Christmas Carol," a special take on the classic Christmas story written by Dickens in 1843.
The historically accurate and humorous holiday production by renowned Dickens scholar, Elliot Engel, is set in 1843, on the night that the author dreamt up his idea for the ghostly Christmas tale that became world famous.
The performance not only tells the story with which everyone is familiar but shares with them Dickens' writing process.
As he composes the winter morality tale, the audience glimpses into the life of Dickens and his inspirations.
During the acclaimed 90-minute performance, actor David zum Brunnen cleverly portrays Dickens and 17 familiar characters of the story.
Suitable for every holiday audience, the play gives personal, social and historical context to the ghostly classic, according to crititcs, who also described zum Brunnen's portrayals as lively, physical and energetic.
Cedric Charles Dickens, the late great grandson of the author Charles Dickens, described zum Brunnen as "absolutely becoming his great-grandfather on stage."
"We are really excited about doing this show," Wapakoneta Performing Arts Center coordinator Pam Egbert said. "Short segments I have seen of the play, it will be something people will leave talking about."
Tickets are on sale for $20 for reserved seating at the Wapakoneta High School office, 1 Redskin Trail, in Wapakoneta.
"The Night Before Christmas Carol" is the third of four programs the Wapak-oneta Performing Arts Center has presented this year. Others included shows featuring Kent Boyd in February and Thaddeus Rex in September.
"'Night Before Christmas Carol' will be the season favorite," Egbert said. "It'll be a great way to finish out the Christmas season at the Performing Arts Center.
"What a better way than to see a great play, something that has never been performed at the Wapakoneta Performing Arts Center," she said.
She said it's been a great year for the center, setting the standard there with the huge Kent Boyd show.
"We learned a lot," Egbert said of putting on that show. "Since then, we don't want to do anything but the best we can."
Village Green Floral and Garden Center has added to the atmosphere inside the Wapakoneta Performing Arts Center by decorating it for Christmas programs this year.


text:
President was the big loser in the first debate
In 2009 the darling of the media and the hero of Hope and Change told his worshippers, "If I don't get this economy turned around in three years, mine will be a one-term presidency."
On Wednesday last our complainer-in chief did his best to fulfill this prophesy. Actually it wasn't the pathetic showing in the debate but his complete lack of success in both domestic and foreign affairs that came to light long before the presidential debate.
Using Clinton's words, the failures of this administration are so gigantic that even I (Clinton) could not have put a good spin on this dismal record.
It is my understanding the local Democrats had a big debate watch party. Wouldn't you just love to have been a mouse in the corner to hear their comments after watching a complete wipe out of Obama? No doubt the outward comments ranged all the way from complete denial to this fight wasn't fair. The referee, moderator Jim Lehr, should have stepped in not allowing Romney to score all these points or at least stopped this massacre after the first 60 minutes.
It was so bad that some of you, including me, might tend to feel sorry for the "Hope and Change" guy. Most of us so inclined snapped out of these feelings of sympathy when you realize the tremendous damage Obama has inflicted on this country.
After all, it's difficult to be successful in a debate when the results of the past four years have been so dismal. For the first year or two blaming everything on Bush might have garnered some traction, but now that mantra is growing stale even for his most ardent supporters.
So what are the excuses that are so prominently displayed? One of the best is that Obama arrived in Denver only 4 or 5 hours before the debate and the higher altitude left him woozy. This insightful thought comes from the climate change wizard, Al Gore.
Robert Reich, of academic fame, complained that it was a mismatch because Romney is a pugilist while Obama is an educator. Still others have said that the debate was about even as Romney won on style while Obama won on substance. If Obama's performance was high on substance, then Arkansas' football team has good basics in defense - it's just they aren't very flashy.
Still others felt Romney's tactics were disrespectable to the president especially since the media has treated Obama with kid gloves. Thus he was not prepared for anyone to actually challenge his miserable presidential performance.
Last Wednesday night you saw the differences between a man with a long list of business and political successes and a community organizer that has spent his life attempting to even out all economic elements of life. Romney has an outstanding record of dealing successfully with Democrats when he was governor of Massachusetts. Obama has spent four years ignoring any input from congressional Republicans and creating greater animosity between conservatives and liberals.
Just ask yourself why Obama has used the term "tax breaks for the rich" hundreds of times when these tax breaks are miniscule in amount and do virtually nothing toward reducing the deficit or national debt. The only purpose is to attempt to divide this country and create a class war.
So what are the discouraging aspects of this historical debate? Here's one – voters polled by CBS after the debate showed a dramatic increase in the number who thought Romney cared about them. Before the debate only 30 percent said they thought Romney "cares about your needs and problems". After the debate the number rose to 63 percent. First of all how completely uninformed are our voters that information obtained in one debate could change their minds?
Secondly and most important, the implication by including this as an important question is that this should be an important criteria in voting. I want a president who works with and solves important economic, social and world wide problems. I don't give a rat's behind if our president ranks the highest in feeling our pain. Does it accomplish anything if our country's leader exhibits the utmost in empathy, while allowing our country to crumble financially and to tear down our military defenses?
One other discouraging element in this debate comes from a national media survey. They interviewed 12 students from the University of Wisconsin in Madison. The question was, "Do you think it was fair that the election commission denied President Obama to use his teleprompter?" Of course it was a loaded question but 11 of those 12 students thought it was indeed unfair to deny teleprompter use. The lone dissenter was an older male student who was probably in his thirties. Hooray for the education our college students are receiving.
Several columnists have stated that while Romney definitely won, there were no one-liners that will go down in history. Here is my favorite. After Obama used one of his trite phrases for the second time saying, "We have got to stop giving tax breaks to corporations who move jobs overseas." Romney gave this response, "I have been in business 25 years and I have no idea what you are talking about." The response from Obama – complete silence.


text:
The past decade or so, agriculture has witnessed a host of ups and downs. And according to Joe Gednalske, director of product development for WinField Solutions, LLC, Shoreview, MN, the next few years for agriculture will see more of the same.
"I think that the next five years will be the most fun in agriculture that we've ever seen," says Gednalske. "But with the spread of herbicide-resistant weeds, this will also spur the development of new crop protection products and control methods, which will lead to more complex timing on application work to correct misses and mistakes. So the effort to limit spray drift will become even more important."
For this reason, WinField has built a special Spray Analysis System at its research facility in River Falls, WI. "Our investment in this state-of-art system reinforces our commitment to help ag retailers and growers to get the best performance from their spray applications," said Eric Spandl, Ph.D., technical marketing manager. "With new EPA spray drift regulations in the wings, WinField is ready to help agricultural professionals minimize spray drift and protect crop input investments."
Changing times, changing requirementsAccording to Spandl, much of the spray drift analysis conducted in the past has focused on the use of water in conjunction with crop protection products."When users are picking products based upon their spray quality, a lot of the numbers and data are based on water mixes," he says. "But water alone doesn't really represent all the tank mixtures being used today. There are a lot of other things that can influence drift such as adjuvant choice or the addition of crop nutrients."
Newer and returning crop protection products can also make a difference in the spray drift analysis, he adds. For example, many of today's most popular herbicides such as glyphosate only require a 75-foot buffer zone according to their product labels. However, products such as 2,4-D require a 250-foot buffer zone when applied.Furthermore, according to Lillian Magidow, Agrisolutions technical lead, some of the industry's newer and larger self-propelled sprayers are also playing a part in the spray drift equation. "When people think about drift, they usually think about wind, and it's true that if the wind speed doubles, this doubles your drift potential," says Magidow. "But you need to consider the equipment, too. Tests show that if an applicator doubles the height of their boom, they end up tripling their drift potential."
Need for Spray Analysis SystemWhen considering all these variables, WinField thought it made perfect sense to develop a comprehensive spray analysis system that could test for all of them. Developed by the company's research and product development staff, the Spray Analysis System consists of a fully-enclosed low-speed wind tunnel and a laser designed to illuminate droplet particles within its recirculating closed chamber. This way, the system can test a wide range of products including adjuvants, active ingredients and tank mixtures. It can also determine the effectiveness of various nozzles in preventing spray drift.
"These test results are recorded in a database system for comparison, and results are validated in the field, at university test sites and at the nearly 200 Answer Plot Program locations across the country," says Spandl. "Since we began operating the system early in 2012, more than 14,500 samples and 700 nozzle types have been tested to build an extensive testing database."
In the end, he says, WinField's Spray Analysis System can hopefully aid in the development not only of new techniques to reduce the risk of spray drift, but new product introductions that could help in this effort. "One of the big issues of concern everyone in agriculture talks about today is spray drift," says Spandl. "And the stakes are simple-if you are not getting product on target in the field, whether you are an ag retailer or a grower, you are wasting money at a minimum or facing serious liability issues at a maximum."


text:
Pepsi's Mid-Calorie Soda Aims To Win Back Drinkers
NEW YORK (AP) — Pepsi hopes to win back drinkers with a compromise.
Some people don't like the calories in regular soda, but loathe the taste of diet. So, PepsiCo Inc. is rolling out "Pepsi Next," a mid-calorie drink that's half the calories of regular Pepsi at 60 calories per can.
The cola, which is slated to hit store shelves nationally by the end of March, is Pepsi's biggest product launch in years. It's likely to revive the cola wars that had become flat in recent years as Coke, Pepsi and others failed to innovate. The drink is the latest attempt to stem declining soda sales as people increasingly move away from sugary drinks to water and other lower-calorie beverages because of health concerns.


text:
Reporting in Science, two teams of scientists say they were unable to replicate the results of a 2010 study claiming to have found 'alien life' on Earth--a bacterium that could build its DNA using arsenic. Science journalist Carl Zimmer talks about how the controversy played out online, and how science corrects itself.
What Happens When Scientists Get It Wrong?
By editor • Jul 13, 2012