FR 2021-01443

Overview

Title

National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences; Notice of Closed Meetings

Agencies

ELI5 AI

The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences is having a secret meeting online to talk about some important ideas, like when someone is trying to invent something new. Dr. Laura A. Thomas is the person to ask if you need more details about it.

Summary AI

The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences announced upcoming closed meetings as per section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. These meetings will not be open to the public to protect confidential information and personal privacy. The meeting will take place virtually on February 19, 2021, and will involve a review of grant applications. Dr. Laura A. Thomas is the contact person for further information regarding the meeting.

Type: Notice
Citation: 86 FR 6893
Document #: 2021-01443
Date:
Volume: 86
Pages: 6893-6893

AnalysisAI

The document is a notice regarding upcoming closed meetings by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), as articulated in the Federal Register. It is in compliance with section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The meetings, scheduled for February 19, 2021, will be held virtually and involve reviewing grant applications. These sessions are not open to the public to protect the confidentiality of certain information, such as trade secrets, patentable materials, or personal data associated with the grant applications. Dr. Laura A. Thomas is mentioned as the scientific review officer who can be contacted for further information.

Summary of the Document

The notice serves as an official announcement of closed meetings arranged by the NIEHS. Although it outlines the logistics of the meeting, such as the date, time, and contact details, the intended purpose is to review and evaluate grant applications related to time-sensitive research opportunities in environmental health sciences. The closed status of the meetings is justified by the need to protect sensitive information.

Significant Issues and Concerns

Several issues arise from the notice. First, the absence of an abstract leaves readers without a concise summary, potentially complicating comprehension for those unfamiliar with such documents. The stated rationale for closing the meetings is vague, citing potential disclosures of trade secrets or personal information. More detail on what specific trade secrets or types of personal information influenced the meeting closure could enhance transparency.

Moreover, the mention of "patentable material" is ambiguous. Clarifying what kind of patentable material or confidential information is expected to be discussed would offer better insight into the meetings' privacy need. Additionally, the notice does not specify the evaluation criteria for the grant applications, leaving the review process somewhat opaque. This lack of detail may lead to concerns regarding fairness or favoritism.

Public Impact

For the general public, the closed nature of these meetings may lead to concerns about accessibility and transparency in government processes, particularly those involving public research funding. There could be a perception that such closed-door meetings limit the public's understanding of and participation in environmental health sciences decisions affecting community welfare and environmental policy.

Impact on Stakeholders

For stakeholders, particularly applicants of the grant process and affiliated researchers, the notice indicates a structured yet confidential review procedure that might assure them of an unbiased and meticulous evaluation of their proposals. However, without a detailed account of the criteria used for evaluation, stakeholders could harbor doubts about the process's transparency and fairness. Conversely, maintaining the confidentiality of sensitive information and intellectual property rights may positively impact stakeholders, ensuring that proprietary ideas and personal data remain secure.

In summary, while the notice addresses procedural requirements for holding closed meetings, it raises several issues related to transparency and specificity that could influence public perception and stakeholder trust in the NIEHS's operations. Enhancing the document's clarity and detail could ameliorate these concerns and safeguard the interests of all parties involved.

Issues

  • • The document's abstract is missing, which could provide a summary and context for understanding the notice.

  • • The publication does not elaborate on why the meeting is closed, beyond a general mention of potentially disclosing trade secrets or personal information. Additional specific reasons for the closure could improve transparency.

  • • The phrase 'such as patentable material' is vague and could benefit from clarification about what types of information are expected to be discussed.

  • • The qualifications or criteria used to evaluate the grant applications are not specified, leading to potential ambiguity regarding the evaluation process.

  • • The document does not specify the parties involved in the meeting, aside from the listed contact person, which could lead to perceptions of favoritism or lack of transparency.

  • • No details are provided about what constitutes 'Time-Sensitive Research Opportunities in Environmental Health Sciences,' which could lead to confusion about the scope of the research under review.

Statistics

Size

Pages: 1
Words: 366
Sentences: 14
Entities: 45

Language

Nouns: 156
Verbs: 14
Adjectives: 10
Adverbs: 2
Numbers: 30

Complexity

Average Token Length:
5.49
Average Sentence Length:
26.14
Token Entropy:
4.79
Readability (ARI):
20.71

Reading Time

about a minute or two