Nomination Package Requirements

A complete nomination package consists of the following:

Nomination Letter

Should include the nominator’s (and co-nominator, if applicable) name, title, institution, and contact information
Should be written using an appropriate font size (e.g., Times New Roman, size 12). If the selected font size is too small, the nomination may be returned to the nominator without review
Should be submitted as an unencrypted, watermark-free PDF

While not required, the Honors and Recognition Committee recommends listing relevant honors/accolades
Include/highlight relevant positions/experiences
Make sure the information listed aligns with what has been discussed in the nomination and supporting letters

Bibliography

Include papers that are relevant to the contributions being highlighted in the nomination and support letters
The Union Fellows Committee recommends defining the role of the nominee in cases where important papers have been co-authored (unless the coauthor is a student or post-doc of the nominee)
The Union Fellows Committee recommends highlighting/notating co-authors that were/are advisees (e.g., students or post-docs) of the nominee

(3) Letters of Support

Each letter of support should provide evidence for and expand upon the main contributions of the nominee as listed in the nomination letter. Successful nominations often demonstrate a high level of coordination between the nomination letter and all 3 letters of support (e.g., nomination letter highlights three significant scientific contributions of the nominee; each supporting letter focuses on one of the three contributions in greater detail)
Coordinate with the nominator; make reference to the primary criteria that the candidate has been nominated for
Avoid repetition between letters of support and nomination letter
Write for the non-specialist and avoid use of acronyms and jargon; members of the Section review committee(s) may fully understand the specifics of the nominee’s science/scientific contributions, but the final selection committee is comprised of members who may or may not have expertise in the nominee’s field
Focus on the broader significance of the nominee’s contributions and the impact of their work
If citation numbers are provided, provide context for them (i.e., how do the numbers compare to others in the subdiscipline at a similar career stage?)
If mentoring is listed as an important way in which the nominee reflects AGU values, it would be helpful to highlight the students/postdocs, and what they are doing now
Please be sure to correctly identify collaborations or connections (i.e., supervisor/supervisee) between the letter writers and nominee

AGU reserves the right to reject, without review, nominations that do not meet all requirements.

Conflict of Interest

Nominators must abide by AGU's conflict of interest policy.

Two-Page Limit

No nomination component may exceed the 2-page limit. AGU will remove any pages in excess of the limit prior to sharing with the review committee(s).

Posthumous Nominations

Posthumous nominations are not accepted.

Duplicate Nominations

If duplicate nominations for the same candidate are submitted, only the first submitted will be considered.

Co-Nominations

A maximum of two nominators may submit a nomination together.