Questions? Call 800-624-6242 About | Ordering | New Menu | Items in cart [0] SEARCH

Rights & Permissions Free Resources Display this book on your site! Related Titles Reopening Public Facilities After a Biological Attack: A Decision-Making Framework Biological Threats and Terrorism: Assessing the Science and Response Capabilities: Workshop Summary Other Related Titles Assuring the Safety of the Pentagon Mail: Letter Report (2003) Board on Radiation Effects Research (BRER) Citation Manager Export the bibliographic data for this book in your chosen format Web Search Builder Use this book's key terms to search within this book, across our collection, or across the Web. Skim This Chapter Skim this chapter and use this chapter's key terms to search within this book. Reference Finder Paste in your own text to find books that relate to your topic. Citation Manager . "Appendix C: Review Process and Reviewers." Assuring the Safety of the Pentagon Mail: Letter Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2003. Please select a format: Page 14   E-mail Share on facebook Facebook Share on delicious Delicious Share on stumbleupon Stumble Share on twitter Twitter More Sharing ServicesMore Page 14 Letter Report (1-8) Appendix A: Committee Biographic Sketches (9-12) Appendix B: Statement of Task (13-13) Appendix C: Review Process and Reviewers (14-14)

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 14
Appendix C Review Process REVIEWERS This report has been reviewed in draft borne by persons chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council's Report Review Committee. The purposes of this review are to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in notating the published report as sound as possible ant! to ensure that the report meets institutional standards of objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following for their participation in the review of this report: Duane Lindner PhD Chris Whipple PhD David Franz PhD Bert Coursey PhD Thomas Voss, PhD John H. MoxIey, Ill MD Although the reviewers listed above have provicled many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor clic! they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by John Ahearne. Appointed by the National Research Council, he was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the author committee and the National Research Council. 14

Representative terms from entire chapter:

coursey phd