None of our regulatory committees charge for review.  It has been discussed,
especially among the members of the Animal Care and Use Committee, but was
pretty soundly rejected.  If my memory serves me correctly, the logic went
something like::
 --regulatory review is considered an element of our administrative
component of the indirect cost formula;  charging both IC and for the review
would be double-dipping?.
 --it introduces an element of coercion -- is the charge for the review
or for the approval?  What happens if the committee declined to approve a
procedure?
 --it possibly places special burden on the committee to review more
promptly, or differently, in order to meet the contractor's requirements,
which is inequitable for the rest of the campus
 --estimating and documenting the actual costs of a review would be
difficult, and perhaps more expensive than it is worth.
 --it could open the door to becoming a "regulatory committee for hire"
which is undesirable for several reasons.

Celia Walker   [xxxxxx@vines.colostate.edu]
Director, Regulatory Compliance
Colorado State University
970/491-1563     FAX:  970/491-1958