(http://micro.ifas.ufl.edu/fac/facilities.html).
The NSF guidelines concerning competition issues are described in Exhibit
V-1 (end of chapter V) of the NSF Grants and Policies manual.
http://www.nsf.gov/cgi-bin/getpub?gpm
If you look at both the services provided by vendors and by the
guidelines, you will see that the NSF policies recognize the broad
complexity of this issue as it relates to academic and commercial
enterprises and the national research infrastructure. Clearly, academic
labs should not use spectrometers for roles that can be adequately met by
services, irrespective of rates. However, a careful look at both the
guidelines and the capabilities of the vendors will show that academic and
non-profit institutions are allowed and strongly encouraged to interact in
an appropriate fashion with their industrial colleagues. We do indeed have
the right to interact with industry and do not give up this right simply
because we received partial support from the government for instrumentation.
I will also point out that fees are not the defining issue. It is not
necessary for academic institutions to charge commercial rates for work
with industry, provided that our work is collaborative AND/OR cannot be
performed through commercial vendors. This judgement isn't solely a
matter of hardware--academics can still have and offer technical expertise
that is unavailable in commerce.
I presume lawyers will ultimately decide if an academic institition is
competing if they have "customers" willing to pay twice the commercial rate
for service work.
Dr. Ronald A. Nieman, Director NMR Facility http://asnmr4.la.asu.edu/nmr
Department of Chemistry & Biochemistry
Box 871604, Arizona State University http://www.asu.edu/clas/chemistry
Tempe, AZ 85287-1604 (602) 965-3613 Fax (602) 965-2747
nieman@asu.edu http://www.public.asu.edu/~nieman