Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: National Science Foundation Proposal/Award Information Guidance on Financial Assistance

The commenter opposes the NSF's proposed guidance, arguing that it aligns with a non-existent OMB regulation that threatens scientific integrity and academic freedom. They characterize the proposal as an overreach of the NSF's authority to control university speech.

The commenter, an individual, opposes the proposed changes to the National Science Foundation's proposal and award information guidance. They argue that the changes represent a political interference in scientific funding and a violation of free speech.

A university professor opposes the updated NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide, arguing that it allows political appointees to oversee grant funding and undermines the peer review process. The commenter contends that the rule compromises scientific rigor, restricts international collaboration, and infringes upon academic freedom.

The commenter opposes the proposed rule, arguing that it imposes excessive institutional requirements and economic impacts on grantees. They characterize the information collection as a regulatory overreach that threatens academic freedom and speech at independent universities.

The commenter opposes the proposed NSF guidance, arguing that it imposes gross burdens on grantees and institutions while threatening public health and freedom of thought. They call for the guidance to be reversed in favor of evidence-based decision-making by experts.