Midsize Facilities The Infrastructure for Materials Research (2006) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 89-111
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 89... ...
The DOD does not, in general, establish or specifically support midsize materials research facilities.1 In this chapter, the committee comments on the programs of support for midsize materials research facilities. Selected specific programs are described in more detail in Appendix F
|
From page 90... ...
Based on the survey responses, the total capital investment (purchase price) in the 56 responding midsize facilities is $529 million (average = $10.2 million, median = $6.8 million)
|
From page 91... ...
Since there is no explicit midsize facilities program within DMR, the focus here is on support for instrumentation. In addition to the IMR program, DMR also, more recently, initiated the Instrumentation for Materials Research -- Midscale Instru mentation Program (IMR-MIP)
|
From page 92... ...
Thus, the NSF annual investment in instru mentation for materials research, including the required matching of 30 percent from nonfederal sources, can be estimated at nearly $40 million per year in 2003- up from about $30 million per year in 1999. As discussed above, the capital equip ment investment in the responding 56 midsize facilities is $529 million (purchase price)
|
From page 93... ...
(b) History of the level of support provided for capital equipment purchases through NSF's Division of Materials Research.
|
From page 94... ...
94 M I D S I Z EFA C I L I T I E S b 30,000 Equipment Budget 25,000 20,000 $M) 15,000 (FY94 Budget 10,000 5,000 0 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 Year c 12 10 DMR-MRI 8 $M)
|
From page 95... ...
DOE's BES also directly operates and fully supports a suite of smaller and midsize facilities -- including four existing electron-beam microcharacterization centers, as well as five nanoscale science research centers (transitioning from construction to operations in FY 2006) -- at which there are no user fees for non proprietary work.
|
From page 96... ...
revealed that it was a well-run and successful facility, serving 7Basic Energy Sciences Advisory Committee, Review of the Electron Beam Characterization Centers, Washington, D.C.: Department of Energy, 2000. Available online at http://www.sc.doe.gov/bes/ BESAC/e-beam report.pdf; last accessed June 1, 2005.
|
From page 97... ...
No discussion of the DOE's involvement in midsize facilities and instrumentation would be complete without reference to the Transmission Electron Aberration corrected Microscope (TEAM) project, undertaken by five electron microscopy centers with support from BES (see Appendix F for background information)
|
From page 98... ...
DISCUSSION The operations budgets of the 56 respondent midsize facilities totaled $66 million per year. On average, these expenses are covered by user fees (35 percent)
|
From page 99... ...
of NSF. Some of the needs of midsize facilities have already been recognized by the National Science Board (NSB)
|
From page 100... ...
The diversity of funding sources for midsize facilities is both a boon and a bane. It allows facilities to develop some autonomy by not being embedded within a single agency, but it also allows them to fall between the cracks of agency 10 Division of Materials Research program office, National Science Foundation.
|
From page 101... ...
In summary, the committee estimates that the midsize materials research facilities enterprise in the United States numbers more than 500 separate facilities and represents a domestic capital investment in excess of $1 billion, with an annual operating cost of more than $100 million. Not only does the scope of this enter prise represent a significant national investment, its management is something that exceeds the capability and resources of any one federal funding agency.
|
From page 102... ...
Many of the midsize facilities in France are supported by the Centre National de la Récherche Scientifique (CNRS)
|
From page 103... ...
These are targeted directly at the aero space and semiconductor industries in the region. GENERAL COMMENTS ON FEDERAL AGENCY POLICIES Midsize facilities for materials research do not have a programmatic or thematic home across the agencies or in any particular agency.
|
From page 104... ...
15DOE's BES supports two other midsize facilities based at universities -- the Notre Dame Radia tion Laboratory at the University of Notre Dame and the James R McDonald Laboratory for Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics at Kansas State University -- but they are not focused on materials research.
|
From page 105... ...
If the materials research community is to seriously exploit the full potential of midsize facilities, it will need to do its part to change the internal culture. In a similar vein, it was noted that instrument development is likely to be less well received than is instrument purchase in the peer review proposal system, although NSF explicitly supports some instrumentation development under the MRI program (these projects are in the minority in the list of approved awards)
|
From page 106... ...
The committee emphasizes that it is not advocating for or against user fees: this cost-recovery mechanism is simply a business tool that many midsize facilities use to generate operating revenue in order to meet the demands of a realistic budget. Some facilities, such as those embedded within the DOE national labora tories, are able to secure this support directly from the agency and therefore do not employ user fees.
|
From page 107... ...
. Midsize facilities in materials research are natural candidates for regionalization according to the following analysis:
|
From page 108... ...
The committee notes in passing that NSF supported a Regional Instrumenta tion Facility program in the 1970s and 1980s. These regional facilities were phased out because they failed to develop the important networking relationships with
|
From page 109... ...
In fact, midsize facilities are already regional facilities in cases where the region perhaps consists of several campuses (on average)
|
From page 110... ...
Similarly, federal agencies invested in a regional network might offer individual investigators research awards with appropriate incentives; for instance, support for user fees at networked facilities might be included as a separate line item. A key challenge of regional networking is that of identifying the stewards for managing the network and identifying the incentives for encouraging them to do so.
|
From page 111... ...
A final important -- and rather general -- consideration is the role that midsize facilities have in providing research and training opportunities to minorities and traditionally underserved populations -- especially those at smaller schools. Because of the large infrastructure burden placed on institutional hosts of midsize facilities, success stories tend to be well correlated with available (but creatively secured)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.