National Academies Press: OpenBook
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×

Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons

A Supplemental Review

Committee on Review and Evaluation of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons

Board on Army Science and Technology

Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems

National Research Council

NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
Washington, DC

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×

NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance.

This is a report of work supported by Contract DAAM01-97-C-0015 between the U.S. Army and the National Academy of Sciences. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.

International Standard Book Number 0-309-06897-5

Limited copies are available from:

Board on Army Science and Technology

National Research Council

2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W.

Washington, DC 20418

(202) 334-3118

Additional copies of this report are available from:

National Academy Press
2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. , Lockbox 285 Washington, DC 20055 (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area) http://www.nap.edu

Copyright 2000 by the National Academy of Sciences . All rights reserved.

Printed in the United States of America.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

National Academy of Sciences

National Academy of Engineering

Institute of Medicine

National Research Council

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. William A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.

The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.

The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. William A. Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×

COMMITTEE ON REVIEW AND EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES FOR DEMILITARIZATION OF ASSEMBLED CHEMICAL WEAPONS

ROBERT A. BEAUDET, chair,

University of Southern California, Los Angeles

RICHARD J. AYEN,

Waste Management, Inc. (retired), Jamestown, Rhode Island

JOAN B. BERKOWITZ,

Farkas Berkowitz and Company, Washington, D.C.

NOSA O. EGIEBOR,

Tuskegee University, Tuskegee, Alabama

WILLARD C. GEKLER,

EQE International/PLG, Irvine, California

HANK C. JENKINS-SMITH,

University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

JOHN L. MARGRAVE,

Rice University, Houston, Texas

WALTER G. MAY,

University of Illinois (retired), Urbana

KIRK E. NEWMAN,

Naval Surface Warfare Center, Indian Head Division, Yorktown, Virginia

JIMMIE C. OXLEY,

University of Rhode Island, Kingston

WILLIAM R. RHYNE,

H&R Technical Associates, Inc., Oak Ridge, Tennessee

STANLEY I. SANDLER,

University of Delaware, Newark

WILLIAM R. SEEKER,

General Electric Energy and Environmental Research Corporation, Irvine, California

LEO WEITZMAN,

LVW Associates, Inc., West Lafayette, Indiana

Board on Army Science and Technology Liaison

WILLIAM H. FORSTER, chair,

Northrop Grumman Corporation, Baltimore, Maryland

Staff

BRUCE A. BRAUN, Study Director

HARRISON T. PANNELLA, Research Associate

JACQUELINE CAMPBELL-JOHNSON, Senior Project Assistant

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×

BOARD ON ARMY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

WILLIAM H. FORSTER, chair,

Northrop Grumman Corporation, Baltimore, Maryland

THOMAS L. MCNAUGHER, vice chair,

RAND Corporation, Washington, D.C.

ELIOT A. COHEN,

School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University, Washington, D.C.

RICHARD A. CONWAY,

Union Carbide Corporation (retired), Charleston, West Virginia

GILBERT F. DECKER,

Walt Disney Imagineering, Glendale, California

PATRICK F. FLYNN,

Cummins Engine Company, Inc., Columbus, Indiana

EDWARD J. HAUG,

NADS and Simulation Center, University of Iowa, Iowa City

ROBERT J. HEASTON,

Guidance and Control Information Analysis Center (retired), Naperville, Illinois

ELVIN R. HEIBERG,

Heiberg and Associates, Inc., Mason Neck, Virginia

GERALD J. IAFRATE,

University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana

DONALD R. KEITH,

Cypress International, Alexandria, Virginia

KATHRYN V. LOGAN,

Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta

JOHN E. MILLER,

Oracle Corporation, Reston, Virginia

JOHN H. MOXLEY,

Korn/Ferry International, Los Angeles, California

STEWART D. PERSONICK,

Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

MILLARD F. ROSE,

NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Alabama

GEORGE T. SINGLEY, III,

Hicks and Associates, Inc., McLean, Virginia

CLARENCE G. THORNTON,

Army Research Laboratories (retired), Colts Neck, New Jersey

JOHN D. VENABLES,

Venables and Associates, Towson, Maryland

JOSEPH J. VERVIER, ENSCO,

Inc., Melbourne, Florida

ALLEN C. WARD,

Ward Synthesis, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan

Staff

BRUCE A. BRAUN. Director

MICHAEL A. CLARKE, Associate Director

MARGO L. FRANCESCO, Staff Associate

CHRIS JONES, Financial Associate

DEANNA SPARGER, Senior Project Assistant

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×
This page in the original is blank.
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×

Preface

The United States has been in the process of destroying its chemical munitions for over a decade. The U.S. Army, with expertise from numerous bodies including the National Research Council (NRC), originally decided to use incineration as the method of destruction at all storage sites. However, citizens in states with storage sites have opposed incineration on the grounds that it is impossible to determine the exact nature of the effluents, in particular, effluents from the stacks. Nevertheless, the Army has continued to pursue incineration at most sites. In the last few years, influenced by growing public opposition to incineration and after numerous studies, including a 1996 study by the NRC entitled Review and Evaluation of Alternative Chemical Disposal Technologies, the Army is developing a chemical neutralization process to destroy chemical agents stored only in bulk ton containers at two sites: VX at Newport, Indiana, and mustard (HD) at Aberdeen Maryland.

Pursuaded by public opposition to incineration at the Lexington, Kentucky, and Pueblo, Colorado, sites, Congress in 1996 enacted Public Law 104-201 instructing the Department of Defense (DOD) to “conduct an assessment of the chemical demilitarization program for destruction of assembled chemical munitions and of the alternative demilitarization technologies and processes (other than incineration) that could be used for the destruction of the lethal chemical agents that are associated with these munitions.” The Army established a Program Manager for Assembled Chemical Munitions Assessment (PMACWA) to respond to this instruction. Unlike prior activities, the PMACWA involved the public in every aspect of the program including the procurement process. A nonprofit organization, the Keystone Center, was hired to facilitate public involvement.

After requesting and receiving proposals from industry for complete technology packages to destroy stored assembled chemical weapons, the Army initially selected seven industry teams, denoted as technology providers in this report. In later selections, these seven were reduced to six, and then three to proceed to the demonstration phase of the assessment program. When the NRC’s Committee on Review and Evaluation of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons (ACW Committee) first report was written, the committee did not have the benefit of evaluating the results of the demonstrations.

Subsequently, the PMACWA requested that the committee evaluate both the technology providers’ test reports and the Army’s evaluations to determine if the demonstrations changed the committee’s earlier findings or recommendations. This report is a supplemental review evaluating the impact of the three demonstration tests on the committee’s original findings and recommendations.

I wish to acknowledge with great gratitude the members of the ACW Committee who have continued to serve as volunteers throughout this extended study and who completed this supplemental study in the relatively short time allocated by the PMACWA. They provided the necessary expertise in chemical processing, permitting and regulations, energetic materials and public acceptance to continue this task. I remain, by far, the least capable of this group.

The committee recognizes and appreciates the assistance of the Army ACWA team, which provided support and the necessary reports. We also appreciate the openness and the cordiality of the technology providers.

A study such as this requires extensive support. We are all indebted to the NRC staff for their logistic support. I would particularly like to acknowledge the close working relationship between the committee and Bruce Braun, who undertook the task of acting study director along with his other duties as director of the NRC Board on Army Science and Technology. Mr. Braun also provided the resources and staff to complete this study in record time for an NRC report. The efforts of Harrison Pannella, who acted as assistant study director, were invaluable. He put in long hours on evenings and weekends to prepare, edit, and format this report. In addition, Rebecca Lucchese and Jacqueline Johnson

Page viii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×

provided logistic support to the committee, allowing us to concentrate on our task. Also, an acknowledgement is due for Carol Arenberg, who edited the final draft of the report. Everyone worked under a short deadline and great stress during a period that included a holiday season.

I gratefully acknowledge the support of my colleagues in the Chemistry Department at the University of Southern California, who willingly assumed my teaching duties while I traveled on behalf of this study.

Robert A. Beaudet, chair

Committee on Review and Evaluation of

Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization

of Assembled Chemical Weapons

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×

Acknowledgment

This report has been reviewed by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the authors and the NRC in making the published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The contents of the review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their participation in the review of this report:

Richard Magee, New Jersey Institute of Technology

Raymond McGuire, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

Royce Murray, University of North Carolina

Robert Olson, consultant

George Parshall, E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Company

Janice Phillips, Lehigh University

Martin Sherwin, ChemVen Group, Inc.

While the individuals listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, responsibility for the final content of this report rests solely with the authoring committee and the NRC.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×
Page xiii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×

List of Figures and Tables

FIGURES

 4-1

 

Demonstration test unit for treatment of HD/tetrytol hydrolysate,

 

19

 4-2

 

Demonstration test unit for treatment of GB/Comp B hydrolysate,

 

21

TABLE

 ES-1

 

Summary Evaluation of the Maturity of Demonstrated Unit Operations and Processes,

 

2

 5-1

 

Summary Evaluation of the Maturity of Demonstrated Unit Operations and Processes,

 

29

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×
This page in the original is blank.
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×

Acronyms

ACWA

Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment (program)

ARAR

appropriate, relevant, and applicable rule

BOD

biological oxygen demand

CAA

Clean Air Act

CAMDS

Chemical Agent Munitions Disposal System

CATOX

catalytic oxidation

CFM

cubic feet per minute

COD

chemical oxygen demand

CSTR

continuously stirred tank reactor

DAAMS

depot area air monitoring system

DMMP

dimethyl methyl phosphonate

DOD

U.S. Department of Defense

DPE

demilitarization protective ensemble (suit)

DRE

destruction and removal efficiency

DSHS

dunnage shredding/hydropulping system

EDC

energetics deactivation chamber

EMPA

ethyl methylphosphonic acid

EPA

Environmental Protection Agency

ERH

energetics rotary hydrolyzer

GB

type of nerve agent

GC

gas chromatography

GC/MS

gas chromatography/mass spectrometry

HD

distilled mustard agent

HEPA

high-efficiency particulate air

HRA

health risk assessment

ICB

immobilized cell biotreatment

IMPA

isopropyl methylphosphonic acid

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×

M

molar concentration

MPT

metal parts treater

NRC

National Research Council

PCG

plasma converted gas

PMACWA

Program Manager for Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment

ppmv

parts per million (volumetric)

PWC

plasma waste converter

RCRA

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

RDX

cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine

RFP

request for proposal

scf

standard cubic feet

SCWO

supercritical water oxidation

TCLP

toxicity characteristic leachate procedure

TNT

trinitrotoluene

TWA

time weighted average

UV

ultraviolet

VOC

volatile organic compound

VX

type of nerve agent

WHEAT

water hydrolysis of explosives and agent technology

3X

level of decontamination (suitable for transport for further processing)

5X

level of decontamination (suitable for commercial release)

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×
Page R1
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×
Page R2
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×
Page R3
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×
Page R4
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×
Page R5
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×
Page R6
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×
Page R7
Page viii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×
Page R8
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×
Page R9
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×
Page R10
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×
Page R11
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×
Page R12
Page xiii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×
Page R13
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×
Page R14
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×
Page R15
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2000. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9776.
×
Page R16
Next: Executive Summary »
Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons: A Supplemental Review Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $47.00 Buy Ebook | $37.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

In 1996, the U.S. Congress enacted two laws, Public Law 104-201 (authorization legislation) and Public Law 104-208 (appropriation legislation), mandating that the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) conduct an assessment of alternative technologies to the baseline incineration process for the demilitarization of assembled chemical munitions.

The PMACWA had previously requested that the National Research Council (NRC) perform and publish an independent evaluation of the seven technologies packages that had been selected during earlier phases of the Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment (ACWA) program and deliver a report by September 1, 1999. However, to meet that deadline, the NRC Committee on Review and Evaluation of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons (ACW Committee) had to terminate its data-gathering activities on March 15, 1999, prior to the completion of demonstration tests. In September 1999, the PMACWA requested that the ACW Committee examine the reports of the demonstration tests and determine if the results changed the committee's original findings, recommendations, and comments. Evaluation of Demonstration Test Results of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons documents the committee's reassessment of the findings and recommendations in the original report, Review and Evaluation of Alternative Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!