Science and Technology in the National Interest: Ensuring the Best Presidential and Federal Advisory Committee Science and Technology Appointments

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

About | Ordering | New

LoginRegister

| Items in cart [0]

PAPERBACK
price:$49.00
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

Free Resources

Related Titles

Science and Technology in the National Interest: Ensuring the Best Presidential and Federal Advisory Committee Science and Technology Appointments (2005)
Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy (COSEPUP)

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 H Description of Procedures for Gathering Call for Comments." Science and Technology in the National Interest: Ensuring the Best Presidential and Federal Advisory Committee Science and Technology Appointments. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2005.

Please select a format:

Page
182


E-mail Share on facebook Facebook Share on delicious Delicious Share on stumbleupon Stumble Share on twitter Twitter More Sharing ServicesMore

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.

Science and Technology in the National Interest: Ensuring the Best Presidential and Federal Advisory Committee Science and Technology Appointments

Patient-advocacy groups.
Nongovernment organizations.
National Academies committee members for the last 4 years (on the assumption that many of them have served on federal advisory committees).

The committee received responses from 14 organizations-including professional societies, advocacy organizations, university organizations, nongovernment organizations, and patient-advocacy groups—and from over 200 individuals.

The responses are provided on the committee’s Web site (www.nationalacademies.org/cosepup). Not included on the Web site are those who requested that their comments to the committee be confidential.

Among the comments, the committee found many useful suggestions as to how the existing presidential and federal advisory committee process could be improved. The comments contributed to the committee’s findings and recommendations.