Fair enough. I would then conclude it is fair to say the lines between a TE and PR are blurred. i.e., in reality, to be a good TE, you need the skills of both a peer review and a technical editor. Why do I conclude this? Because I have done it, and have had it done for my work. If the TE can't do the tasks of a PR, they are of no use.....

>
I'd say that falls under the heading "peer reviewer." I'll ask a researcher friend of mine how her technical journals handle this, but I believe that the peer reviewer would review experiment results and design, which is what I think you are talking about.
<