Title: Forensic Sciences: Review of Status and Needs.
Series: Issues and Practices
Author(s): National Institute of Justice 
Published: National Institute of Justice, February 1999
Subject(s): Program evaluations, criminal justice system, technology in
law enforcement, evidence
70 pages
144,000 bytes

-------------------------------

Figures, charts, forms, and tables are not included in this ASCII plain-text
file. To view this document in its entirety, download the Adobe Acrobat
graphic file available from this Web site or order a print copy from NCJRS
at 800-851-3420 (877-712-9279 for TTY users).

-------------------------------

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
National Institute of Justice

Forensic Sciences: Review of Status and Needs

Coordination by
Office of Law Enforcement Standards
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8102

February 1999

NCJ 173412

National Institute of Justice
Jeremy Travis, Director

The technical effort to develop this report was conducted under
Interagency Agreement No. 94-IJ-R-004, Project No. 92-020IA.

This report was prepared with the assistance of the Office of Law
Enforcement Standards (OLES) of the National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST) under the direction of Alim A. Fatah, Program
Manager for Chemical Systems and Materials, and Kathleen M. Higgins,
Director of OLES. Editorial support was provided by Aspen Systems
Corporation.

This work was sponsored by the National Institute of Justice, David G.
Boyd, Director, Office of Science and Technology.

-------------------------------

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Foreword

Executive Summary

Training

Technology Transfer

Methods Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation

Analytical Services

Department of Energy Perspective

Participants

Glossary

-------------------------------

FOREWORD

Today, forensic science is facing many challenges that stretch its resources
to their limits. The American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors
(ASCLD) has a responsibility to identify means by which these challenges
can be met. It has been more than 20 years since the last status and needs
of the forensic sciences were studied. The need for a document that not
only addressed the current challenges facing the forensic science
profession, but offered possible solutions, became obvious.

At my request, Dr. Richard Rau at the National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
formed a committee to accomplish this task. This committee was led by
Kathleen Higgins, Director, Office of Law Enforcement Standards
(OLES). This project was titled "Forensic Summit: Roadmap to the Year
2000," and was funded by NIJ/OLES.

This document, Forensic Sciences: Review of Status and Needs, is the
work product from a 2-day meeting held March 5-6, 1997. This meeting
brought together 44 scientists and administrators with the common goal of
helping the forensic science professions. These 44 professionals
represented State, local, and Federal forensic science organizations and
several Department of Energy (DOE) laboratories.

The four topic areas were:

--Training.
--Technology Transfer.
--Methods Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.
--Analytical Services.

The participants were each assigned to one of the four areas. Each group
listed the current status and the needs in each of their areas.

I would like to formally thank all of the participants and sponsors for their
support in this summit. A special note of thanks goes to Aspen Systems
Corporation, who recorded the summit and assisted in the editing of this
document.

Kevin Lothridge
Past President
American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors

-------------------------------

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The work of forensic laboratories is varied and complex. Technical
analyses performed must be able to forestall or defeat any challenge. To
provide the best service possible to the criminal justice system, forensic
laboratories must stay abreast of and have access to the latest technology
and methods.

To assess the current state of forensic laboratories, the National Institute of
Justice (NIJ), the National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST)/Office of Law Enforcement Standards (OLES), and the American
Society of Crime Laboratory Directors (ASCLD), held a joint workshop,
Forensic Science Summit: Roadmap to the Year 2000, March 5-6, 1997, at
NIST in Gaithersburg, Maryland. The purpose of the workshop was to
determine the current status and needs of forensic laboratories on training;
technology transfer; methods research, development, testing, and
evaluation; and analytical services. The workshop also provided a forum
to explore the use of national and Federal laboratory resources [e.g.,
Department of Energy (DOE), Department of Defense (DOD)] and how
best to take advantage of this external support. Representatives from DOE
attended the workshop to observe and learn how DOE could further
contribute.

For technology transfer to be successful, there must be a true partnership
between local or State forensic laboratories and national laboratories.
Existing strengths that are fragmented and dispersed need to be
consolidated. Over the years, a large amount of development work has
been done at the national laboratories that some forensic laboratories may
be aware of because of their geographic location, but the work may not be
known to the entire forensic community. No formal process exists for
technology transfer to forensic laboratories. The key is to identify
technology currently in use or under development at national facilities that
can be quickly transferred for use in the forensic field. Areas of technology
at national laboratories that could be applied to the forensic community
include robotics, remote sensors, supercomputers for computational
power, and satellite communications. 

In forensic science, as in other disciplines, cost-effectiveness and
budgetary constraints are constant concerns. The technology must be
affordable, reliable, and in some cases portable. The forensic community
needs to be aggressive and creative in securing sources of funding to
ensure that quality work is performed.

It is important to examine not only the needs of the forensic community,
but also the consequences of not meeting those needs--how does it affect
the criminal justice system and the public that the forensic laboratories
serve. When police are not able to work cases efficiently, when court dates
are postponed, then taxpayer money is not well spent, efficiency is
reduced, and justice may not be served.

The training needs of the forensic community are immense. Training of
newcomers to the field, as well as providing continuing education for
seasoned professionals, are vital to ensuring that crime laboratories deliver
the best possible service to the criminal justice system. Forensic scientists
must stay up-to-date as new technology, equipment, methods, and
techniques are developed. While training programs exist in a variety of
forms, there is a need to broaden their scope and build on existing
resources. 

Casework--the support crime laboratories provide to those in the field--is
the essence of forensic laboratory work. Casework support includes
routine and traditional analyses common to all forensic laboratory settings,
methods development particular to the requirements of specific cases, and
the identification of analytical sources to perform work that is considered
nonroutine. 

Although many scientific and allied services apply to the forensic sciences
field, there are nine common disciplines provided by the majority of
municipal, county, and State forensic laboratories in the United States:
Latent Print Examinations, Questioned Document Examinations,
Firearms/Toolmarks and Other Impression Evidence Examinations, Crime
Scene Response and Related Examinations, Energetic Materials
(Explosives and Fire Debris Examinations), Postmortem Toxicology and
Human Performance Testing, Forensic Biology and Molecular
Biochemistry, Transfer (Trace) Evidence Evaluation, and Controlled
Substance Examinations.

Common needs prevalent throughout most of these disciplines include
standardization, validation, and the creation of information databases.
However, each discipline has specific aspects and concerns such as
sensitivity, efficiency, precision, portability, and effectiveness of sampling
methods. Therefore, blanket standards generally cannot and should not be
applied--they should be adapted and customized to each individual
discipline and technique.

The development of new technologies brings new concerns for the future.
If forensic scientists are to continue to provide valuable information and
evidence efficiently, it is crucial for their needs to be addressed and
resolved. This report can help further that agenda by serving as a guide on
research and training priorities and on policy regarding criminal justice
funding at the Federal, State, and local levels.

TRAINING

Training for the forensic community, as in other professions, is an ongoing
need. Training of novices and providing continuing education for seasoned
professionals are essential to ensure that crime laboratories deliver the best
possible service to the criminal justice system.

The training needs of the forensic community are immense. The major
impact of training is on the professional level. Forensic scientists must
stay up-to-date as new technology, equipment, methods, and techniques
are developed. While training programs exist in a variety of forms, there is
a need to broaden their scope and build on existing resources. Forensic
professionals need to take advantage of the explosion in information
technology and the ability to use it to exchange information and deliver
training. 

Training is essential but can be costly. The forensic community needs to
be aggressive and creative in obtaining funding for training programs to
ensure scientists keep abreast of the ever-changing trends and discoveries
in the forensic science field.

Detailed below are categories of training, the needs that fall under each
category, and the status of how those needs are currently being met.

Continuing Education for Operational Scientists 

Training Needs

Operational scientists at the bench level need to keep up-to-date on new
developments in the forensic field through continuing education, which
has two components: theoretical and practical. They also need to have
access to institutes of higher learning in order to continue their education
and have the opportunity of obtaining graduate degrees. Such education
not only helps develop their theoretical and practical skills but adds
considerably to their credentials.

--Theoretical. It is often less expensive and more straightforward to
provide theoretical training, for example, how a particular method or
instrument works.

--Practical. Practical skills can be learned through:

o Inservice (training that occurs as part of being on the job).
o Short courses.

Current Status 

Inservice Training. Currently, the extent and type of inservice training
varies widely, depending on the laboratory and the State.

Short Courses. A number of institutions currently offer short courses on
topics for forensic scientists. For example:

--Forensic Science Research and Training Center (FSRTC). FSRTC is part
of the FBI Laboratory at Quantico, Virginia. 

o Offers extensive program of short courses.
o More than 30 classes.
o 800 students per year.
o Free to participants.
o Training normally done onsite at FSRTC; limited traveling to other sites.
o Video teleconferencing (VTC) and satellite uplink capable.
o Affiliated with the University of Virginia.

--California Criminalistic Institute (CCI). CCI is a unit of the California
Department of Justice (CADOJ), under the Bureau of Forensic Services,
and provides specialized training to forensic science professionals.

o More than 50 classes.
o Classes include crime scene and casework review. 
o 600 students per year.
o In-State employees free; out-of-State participants pay $500/week
(tuition) and per diem.
o Classes normally onsite at CCI; some traveling to other sites within
California.
o Affiliated with the University of California at Davis.

--Illinois State Police (ISP). 

o 15 different courses per year.
o Courses 1 to 2 weeks long.
o Offers longer courses. Complete forensic discipline training (agency or
individual specific).
o $75 per day/student.
o Courses normally onsite at ISP; some traveling to other sites.
o Distance-learning capable.
o VTC and satellite uplink capable.
o Closely affiliated with University of Illinois at Chicago; also affiliated
with Southern Illinois University at Carbondale.

--National Forensic Science Technology Center (NFSTC). Located in
central Pinellas County, Florida, NFSTC provides methods research,
product development, and forensic education through onsite and
teleconference programs.

o Recently formed.
o 15 classes a year planned.
o 5 classes in 1996 with 147 students.
o Fee-based, $125/day.
o Onsite at NFSTC and traveling to other sites. Philosophy is to take the
course to the student.
o Distance-learning capable.
o VTC and satellite uplink capable.
o Affiliated with University of Central Florida (UCF), and the University
of South Florida (USF).

--Workshops also are offered through:

o Association of Firearms and Toolmarks Examiners (AFTE).
o International Association for Identification (IAI).
o Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
o American Academy of Forensic Science (AAFS).
o Regional forensic science associations.

--A variety of tertiary educational institutions offer undergraduate and
graduate degrees in forensic science and other subjects relevant to
contemporary forensic science.

Initial Training

Initial training applies to recent university graduates starting out in the
forensic field. Forensic laboratories need to recruit graduates with the
appropriate undergraduate scientific background and train them, which can
be a significant drain on resources within the laboratories.

Training Needs

Initial training, like continuing education, has theoretical and practical
components.

--Theoretical. Training can be done onsite at the scientist's laboratory or
through distance learning.

--Practical. 

o Normally done onsite. 
o Other possibilities include compressed distance-learning methods, under
which some training could be done at a participant's site. Participants
would then come together at another site to actually apply the method and
physically perform the analysis. Training could be done in compressed
modules. 

--Supervised Casework. Supervised casework is a major training need of
individuals who come into the laboratory. It is normally provided
inservice. It is a costly but important enterprise. Additional options for
providing supervised casework could include:

o Internships at an offsite laboratory.
o Visiting scientist programs.

Current Status

--Initial training currently is largely on-the-job training.
--Uniform/consensus entry-level academic background requirements do
not exist for all forensic disciplines. For example:

o Questioned documents/firearms/latent fingerprints--no degree required.
o With the exception of DNA, no uniform specific course work
requirements.

--Delivery almost exclusively onsite at the laboratory (except Illinois State
Police).
--There is need for visiting scientist/intern programs, but little or no
funding available.

Professional Orientation

Training Needs

There is a need for all individuals employed in a forensic science
laboratory to undergo professional orientation, which would include
training in:

--Criminal justice system.
--Legal system.
--Ethics.
--Professional organizations.
--Basic philosophy of forensic science.
--Overview of disciplines of forensic science.
--Safety.

Current Status

--Formal courses are available in some jurisdictions--FBI, ISP, CADOJ,
and Virginia State Division of Forensic Science. Average course length is
2 weeks.

First-Line Supervisors

Training Needs

--Quality Assurance.
--Case File Review.
--Basic Supervision Skills.

Current Status

--First-line supervision management training generally is not available,
with some exceptions.

o CADOJ provides nonmandatory, first-line supervisor training that
includes quality assurance, safety, case review, and crime scene training.
However, the department requires all supervisors to undergo a frontline
leadership course, which is a component course that is mandatory at the
State level.
o There is some voluntary ASCLD-supported and delivered training
sporadically carried out by regional associations.

Management

Although many crime laboratory managers have had adequate technical
training, they often have not had the opportunity to undergo formal
management training. Every crime laboratory manager should have the
opportunity to undergo such training.

Training Needs

--Fiscal Management.
--Quality Systems Management.
--Project Management.
--Human Resource Management.
--Customer Service.

Current Status

--Some nonmandatory courses are available.
--The FBI-sponsored annual symposium on crime laboratory development
includes management seminars.
--Management seminars offered by other organizations.

Quality Assurance

Every forensic scientist should undergo training in quality assurance, but
the number of formal classes is limited.

Training Needs

--General.
--Good Laboratory Practice (GLP).
--Quality Systems.
--Laboratory Audits.
--Method Development and Validation.

Current Status

--CADOJ offers a 1-week quality-assurance course at CCI.
--FBI offers one course a year for 1 week.
--NFSTC offers a 2-day auditor training course. Fee based.
--ASCLD/LAB (Laboratory Accreditation Board) offers laboratory
accreditation and laboratory inspectors training. Basic training (2-day
course) and training for team captains (1-day course).

Effective Expert Testimony

Forensic scientists must be able to provide effective expert testimony. 

Training Needs

--Public speaking.
--Presentation skills.

Current Status

--AAFS offers workshops.
--ISP offers basic and experienced classes lasting 3 days to 1 week.
--CADOJ offers a 3-day course.
--Occasional, sporadic attempts by other groups.

End-User Training

Forensic scientists need to educate their end users--those who use their
services and therefore need to understand those services and terminology.

Training Needs

--Police.
--Bar.
--Judiciary.
--General public.
--Policymakers.

Current Status

--Training sporadic at Federal, State, and local levels.
--Judiciary/policymakers. Training is rare. (Virginia, for example,
provides annual seminars for the judiciary.) ASCLD formerly provided
training to judges.

Training the Trainer

The trainer is the best person to evaluate the training effectiveness of a
program. 

Training Needs

--Evaluate training effectiveness.
--Spot employee training needs.
--Plan training programs.
--Prepare training material.

Current Status

--Courses are available in instructional methodology but nothing specific
for forensic science. However, the ISP provides an "in-house," 5-day
course for forensic science facilitators regarding a video teleconferencing
distance-learning training program.

Information

There is a need to make available to the forensic community as much
centralized information as possible and provide guidance on how to access
it.

Needs

--Database management.

--Reference collections. References are widespread with few centralized
resources.

o Databases.
o Physical material being tested.
o Results of the tests, analytical data.

--Literature.

o Published papers and articles.
o Abstracts of unpublished work.

--Casework interpretation information.

Current Status

--Reference collections.

o Status needs to be assessed.
o Databases (physical material).
o Reference databases are limited and local (e.g., CADOJ).
o National.
o No nationally accessible databases for physical materials exists.
o FBI rifling database. Characterizes general rifling characteristics of
weapons.

--Literature. Services and availability local and sporadic. For example:

o CADOJ: CCI "virtual library" with 10, 000 citations. Conducts literature
searches.
o FBI: Forensic Science Information Resource System (literature retrieval
system through which State and local laboratories and law enforcement
agencies can obtain literature through the FBI).
o ISP (Chicago): Librarian hired during first quarter of 1997 to set up a
forensic library that will enable online methods of literature retrieval.

Academic Credit for Short Courses 

Academic credit should be granted for short courses offered at other
institutions. While several institutions' programs are affiliated with
universities, granting of university credit for courses is problematic.
Currently, academic credit is not available for forensic-related short
courses except through the FBI (affiliated with the University of Virginia),
CCI (affiliated with the University of California at Davis in molecular
biology), and NFSTC (affiliated with the University of Central Florida,
University of South Florida).

Funding for Academic Institutions Providing Graduate-Level Forensic
Science Research 

Funding for accredited academic institutions providing graduate-level
forensic science research in the form of scholarships and grants is an
important training need. Currently, funding is nonexistent. Such funding
facilitates the development and implementation of appropriate new
technologies. 

Delivery Systems

Needs and Current Status

Training can be delivered through a variety of methods either onsite at the
laboratory (in-house) or offsite (external).

--In-house delivery methods.

o Onsite at the laboratory (currently commonly used).
o Video teleconferencing (current use limited--ISP uses this method).
o World Wide Web based (rarely used).
o Computer/interactive training (current use limited).

--External delivery methods. Currently available through:

o Commercial companies.
o Universities.
o State institutions.
o FBI/DEA/ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms).
o NFSTC.
o Professional organizations (workshops).

Recommendations Regarding Training

--The following recommendations are based on the training status and
needs identified above.

--The profession should accredit/certify forensic academic training
programs/institutions.

--The profession should set national consensus standards of education in
the forensic sciences.

--Independent, communitywide, consensus standard-setting bodies should
be established and funded (e.g., technical working groups), since training
is based upon such standards.

--NIJ should fund forensic academic research and development programs.

--ASCLD should intensify its effort to provide appropriate training for
managers and supervisors.

--All new employees should undergo professional orientation (including
managers new to the field).

--All forensic scientists should have formal quality-assurance training.

--All forensic scientists should have formal expert witness training.

--The profession should provide end-user training to the following:

o Police.
o Bar.
o Judiciary.
o General public.
o Policymakers.

--The profession should make a concerted effort to compile databases for
literature, reference materials, and analytical data.

--The profession should utilize existing and explore other delivery systems
for forensic science training.

o LABNET. LABNET is a recently added feature of the FBI laboratory
and is used to communicate information between laboratories.
o JUSTNET (Justice Technology Information Network). JUSTNET
(http://www.nlectc.org) serves as an information gateway, via the World
Wide Web, to information on new technologies, equipment, and products
of interest to the law enforcement and corrections communities.
o LETN (Law Enforcement Television Network). LETN provides quality
training, education, information, and news to the law enforcement
community via satellite and the computer-based STTAR (Specialized
Training, Testing, and Recordkeeping) workstation.
o DOE/other Federal sources.

--Computer-interactive training materials should be developed for forensic
science.

o CD-ROM.
o World Wide Web based.

--Distance-learning centers accessible to forensic laboratories should be
identified.

o Possible resources include the United States Distance Learning
Association, which has a home page on the Internet
(http://www.usdla.org). Also, in most States there are consortiums that are
generally university based with secondary and primary schools hooked up
into STTAR networks. 

--All training needs should be funded using a combination of the
following:

o Direct Federal funds.
o Fines and forfeitures.
o Foundation grants.

TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER

Introduction

The term "technology transfer" encompasses a broad range of activities
that a general definition is difficult to construct. Various groups and
institutions use a number of different definitions. The Federal Laboratory
Consortium defines technology transfer as "the process by which existing
knowledge, facilities, or capabilities developed under Federal research and
development funding are utilized to fulfill public and private needs."

The Office of Management and Budget's definition of technology transfer
is given in Circular No. A-11 (1994) as follows: 

Technology Transfer consists of efforts and activities intended to result in
the application or commercialization of Federal laboratory-developed
innovations by the private sector, State and local governments, and other
domestic users. These activities include, but are not limited to:

--Technical/cooperative interactions (direct technical assistance to private-
sector users and developers; personnel exchanges; resource sharing; and
cooperative research and development agreements).

--Commercialization activities (patenting and licensing of innovations and
identifying markets and users).

--Information exchange (dissemination to potential technology users of
technical information, papers, articles, reports, seminars, etc.).

Operational and analytical issues currently serve as the impetus for the
introduction of new technologies into forensic laboratories. Operational
concerns focus on increased efficiency, productivity, or "smarter" ways of
performing the job. This mechanism is driven predominately by the need
to process overwhelming caseloads with limited personnel and/or
equipment. Analytical concerns are based on techniques having increased
sensitivity or on new, nondestructive methods of analyzing evidence.

One of the characteristics associated with the technology transfer process
involving the national laboratories and the forensic community is the
considerable gap in understanding between what technology could do (its
potential) and what it actually does (the reality). Often, the perception of
forensic scientists is that the technology developed in national laboratories
is too complex or the technology is limited in scope of application (e.g., it
is case specific). Among the reasons for this misconception is the lack of
communication between the source of the technology (national
laboratories) and the user (forensic laboratories).

One reason why there is not more interest in the national laboratories and
industry in general is that the purely commercial aspects of developing
technology are not readily apparent. Although the researcher is driven by
dedication to solving the particular problem, increasingly, research
programs are being shaped by the attractiveness of reaping the potential
financial rewards of commercialization of a product or process.
Collaborative research agreements between the national laboratories and
universities or industrial partners in areas other than forensic science often
lead to inventions that are granted patents and technologies that can be
licensed.

Although there are well-established technology transfer mechanisms at
national laboratories (technology transfer offices), no formal transfer
process has been recognized by the forensic community, probably because
existing research efforts in forensic laboratories, if they exist, are
fragmented and dispersed. In certain instances, scientists at a particular
forensic laboratory may be aware of the technologies being developed at a
national laboratory within close geographic proximity to the forensic
laboratory; however the forensic community at large may be totally
unaware of the technology and its applications.

Technology transfer from national laboratories into the forensic
community has for the most part been limited to surveillance technologies
and other defense-related areas. Little in the way of advanced sampling,
laboratory robotics, or instrumentation has found its way into forensic
laboratories.

Types of Transfer

Technology can be transferred through:

--People. Postdoctoral students or researchers moving into industry or
other laboratories.

--Information. Publication in journals, books, reports, and lectures at
seminars and workshops.

--Hardware. Equipment, instruments, devices, and computers.

--Software. Development of algorithms to complement existing
technologies.

Technologies can be classified as:

--Dual-use. The reuse of technology from a Federal laboratory in a follow-
up application. A technology that may have been originally developed for
a defense-related or energy application but can be used in another are
without modification or further development.

--Pin-on. The movement of technology from a research and development
laboratory to a first-time application.

--Spin-off. A technology, typically a product or process that can be
adapted or "spun off" as a separate entity.

Existing Mechanism for Transfer

The transfer of technology from national laboratories into the forensic
community has traditionally occurred in the following manner:

--Individual(s) at either the national or forensic laboratory have expressed
interest in a technology and contacted one another (outreach). The inquiry
is often driven by an individual's interest in a particular technology.

--The researcher (source) informs the forensic scientist (user) of the
current applications of the technology and its attributes.

--The user determines whether the technology is applicable to forensics.

--Both parties perform a detailed assessment as to the feasibility of
transferring the technology to the forensic community.

--If the technology is found to be applicable, a source of funding is
identified (Federal, State, and local grants).

--A collaboration or "partnership" is established between the forensic
laboratory and the national laboratory possibly in conjunction with a
university.

--The technology is transferred to the forensic laboratory, a pilot study is
conducted and if necessary, additional research and development is
performed.

--Feedback is solicited from the user about the merits or disadvantages of
the technology.

Although this mechanism has been moderately successful in a very limited
number of situations, it is inadequate for meeting the current and future
needs of forensic laboratories.

Potential obstacles to technology transfer include:

--Insufficient knowledge of the market, including awareness of demand
and overly high expectations (profits vs. expenses).

--Inadequate communication on behalf of the laboratories, inertia and low
commercialization potential, and missing links between source,
intermediates (if applicable), and users.

--Formal or legal regulations, fiscal legal impediments, protection of
intellectual property (license and patent protection), secrecy, and
requirements on standardization of procedures.

--Fear of the unknown product or process.

--Factual circumstances such as time and space limitations.

The following sections represent a "roadmap" relating the current needs of
forensic laboratories to proposed mechanisms for technology transfer.
These are designed to provide insight into needs and problems associated
with the transfer of technology. The topics discussed are not intended to
provide a comprehensive summary of all aspects of technology transfer
from national laboratories to the forensic community, but only to highlight
key issues.

Immediate Needs

Existing technologies at the national laboratories that could be applied to
the immediate needs of the forensic community include:

--Databases. Compilations of large volumes of information (DNA,
firearms, fingerprints, trace evidence, etc.) that would be available for
dispersal.

--Hazardous waste disposal. Technology that would allow for the safe
handling, storage, and disposal of hazardous chemical, biological, or
nuclear evidence.

--Imaging. Techniques for the detection of fingerprints and other
physiological fluids that would replace and/or complement physical or
chemical methods.

--Microscopy. Advanced techniques (confocal, etc.) for examining
firearms/toolmarks and other trace evidence.

--MEMS (micro-electro-mechanical-systems)/nanotechnology.
Miniaturization of devices (sensors and instruments) that could be used for
remote sensing. Micromachines, for example a miniature bomb robot that
could fit into very small areas.

--Robotics. Robots with enhanced capabilities or "smart robots" could be
used in the field or in laboratory settings. Next-generation robots include
those using artificial intelligence and equipped with probes having the
dexterity of the human hand.

--Remote (field) sensors. These devices are based on microchip
technologies that could be used to detect contraband narcotics, explosives,
and other trace evidence.

--Satellite imagery. High-resolution photographs and digital images could
be used for the reconstruction and enhancement of exterior crime scenes.

--Software. Artificial intelligence/neural network-based algorithms that
could be used for computer-based training, data processing, and analysis.

--Supercomputers. These machines (parallel processors) are useful for
analyzing large amounts of data very quickly and could be used to analyze
highly complex crime scenes (blood splatter) or to search data banks
(fingerprint, DNA, firearms, etc.) rapidly.

The Technology Transfer Process

The goal of this section is to propose a process whereby the forensic
community can consistently identify, evaluate, develop, and put into use
new and/or improved products, processes, and services based on
technologies available or under development at the national laboratories.

Objectives

The following objectives must be met to provide a viable mechanism for
technology transfer:

1. Develop strategies to identify and share research and technical
information between forensic and national laboratories.

The transfer of knowledge is an important prerequisite for the application
of research findings. It is essential that accurate technical information be
available to all concerned. Managers and scientists at forensic laboratories
interested in learning about new technologies could use the following
resources to identify sources of research and solicit information about
what technologies are available.

Professional societies such as the AAFS, ASCLD, and the American
Chemical Society (ACS), among many others, represent a large and
diverse segment of the forensic, industrial, and academic community.
Most of these organizations disseminate information to their members and
the public through a variety of print and electronic media.

Sources of information on the needs and interests of forensic laboratories
include:

--Peer-reviewed publications (journals).
--Publications available from Federal Bureau of Investigation and Drug
Enforcement Administration laboratories (Crime Lab Digest and
Microgram).
--National and regional meetings of forensic societies.
--Workshops and symposia.
--Internet sites (ASCLD homepage).
--Internet chat rooms.
--Personal contacts.
--Site visits.

Sources of information on technologies available at the national
laboratories include:

--Peer-reviewed publications.
--Internal publications available to the public domain.
--Publications from cooperative research agreements.
--Patents and licenses.
--Internet listings (national laboratory homepage).
--Personal contacts.
--Site visits.

Mechanisms of information transfer. For the technology transfer to be
effective, it is essential that accurate technical information shapes both the
mechanism and the process that creates it.

--Build upon the existence of informal communication channels between
the national laboratories, forensic laboratories, universities, and companies
in the same geographical area.

--Establish personal contacts between technical staff and management of
forensic laboratories and the technology transfer liaison at the national
laboratories.

--Establish a mechanism to guide joint activities, perhaps through visiting
scientists who would spend time at both facilities.

2. Establish a project appraisal procedure for the selection of technologies
at the national laboratories.

The process must classify and prioritize available technologies. Having
selected a technology, an assessment of the technology must be performed
according to a mutually agreed upon set of criteria. The criteria for
selection should include the following:

--Accuracy and precision. The results must met certain minimum
specifications.

--Affordability. The technology has to be affordable. All laboratories have
some budgetary constraints regardless of the size of the organization.

--Applicability. The technology must be able to meet the needs of the
forensic science community.

--Methodology. The technology must be based on generally accepted
principles in forensic science.

--Sensitivity. Highly sensitive techniques are desirable for analyzing very
small quantities of evidence. However, if the technology is too sensitive,
low levels of contamination can create problems and become a limitation.

--Timeliness. In general, for the technology to have widespread utilitarian
value within the forensic community, it must be developed within a
reasonable period of time.

--Portability. This may be utilized as one of the criteria if the technology
in question could possibly be used at crime scenes.

3. Conduct a pilot study in the laboratory and, if applicable, in the field.

4. Obtain feedback from the user.

5. Evaluate the findings and generate a report.

6. Communicate the results back to the source.

7. Make recommendations.

8. Decide to either implement or abandon the technology.

Recommendations

The following recommendations, if implemented, are intended to lead to a
permanent mechanism to coordinate, guide, and evaluate the technologies
at the national laboratories.

--Prepare a directory of technologies available at the national laboratories.

Compile a directory of current projects at the national laboratories,
including a listing of key contact personnel. Classify the technologies as
being case specific or generic (i.e., applicable to routine analyses). A
directory should be published annually and the information made available
over the Internet.

--Prepare a directory of key contacts in the national laboratories and the
forensic community.

Individuals at the national laboratories must be kept informed of the
changing needs of the forensic community. There is a need to identify key
contacts at the national laboratories, forensic laboratories, private
corporations, the academic community, and law enforcement agencies. A
directory should be published annually and the information placed on the
Internet.

--Establish a steering committee and technical advisory focus group.

NIJ and ASCLD should cosponsor a forensic science steering committee.
The committee would determine the needs of the forensic community and
would form technical advisory focus groups. Each focus group would be
responsible for a particular technology. The members selected for the
focus groups would represent the laboratories and academic community.
The members of the focus groups would have the technical expertise to
identify which technologies are available and also possess the requisite
skills to determine the feasibility of commercial development. The
steering committee would have the responsibility for convening meetings
for the focus groups. At these meetings, advice and reactions would be
solicited from each participant regarding the scope and expectations of the
new technology, the manner in which the technology should be developed
and implemented, and the strengths and weaknesses associated with any
existing technology.

The focus groups shall have two purposes: (1) To gather information and
advice from Federal, State, and local forensic laboratories that would be
most affected by any technology transfer initiatives, and (2) to bring
together individuals with diverse backgrounds, perhaps for the first time,
to address technological issues of mutual interest. This interaction could
stimulate new ideas and areas for future development.

The information and recommendations from the focus groups would then
be evaluated by the steering committee and proposed in a framework that
would be acceptable to the national laboratories.

--Form strategic (working) partnerships.

Working partnerships represent the association of a diverse group of
individuals with a common interest. Partnerships bring a combination of
experience and expertise that promote activities that distribute the risks
and costs but most of all enhance the overall likelihood for success and the
sustainability of the project. All projects involve some degree of risk.
Risks can be technology itself, the development process, finance, and legal
issues. By choosing to establish strategic partnerships, the partners
contribute different but complimentary resources to the project and
thereby implicitly establish a process to minimize risk.

All parties must articulate a well-defined mission statement that is
practical and dedicated to deploying available resources strategically
among all partners. The mission must be accompanied by a rigorous but
flexible strategic plan for tracking and monitoring milestone achievement
of goals. Above all, the participants involved must understand the
objectives, resources, motives, and limitations of the partnership.

Identify a partnership organization to encourage, guide, coordinate, and
help finance the use of new and emerging technology in forensic
laboratories. NIJ could play an important role in promoting such
partnerships by identifying critical need areas, by providing seed money,
and by promoting relationships between public agencies (the DOE) and
forensic laboratories. While partnerships between universities, industry,
and government agencies (national laboratories) can be discussed and
agreed to, their true potential can be realized only to the extent that they
can be embodied in an organization that can act reliably over time.

Solicit information and advice from private-sector firms. These groups
include technology-intensive companies and manufacturers of analytical
instruments.

There is a need to address university research based at national
laboratories and to concentrate on those segments that would most likely
have major applications in forensic science.

Most importantly, partnerships will require that the individuals involved in
the forensic laboratories, national laboratories, universities, government,
and the private sector come to be better informed of the needs and
resources each has and understand their different views, yet appreciate
their common interests.

--Identify sources of funding.

Capital is essential at all stages. Government can play the role of catalyst
by providing seed capital through Federal or State grants, but leadership in
providing funding must increasingly come from the private sector.
Commercialization of a technology is ultimately a private-sector affair.
The basic principles of supply and demand must be part of the foundation
upon which the partnership is built. Industry must be proactive and must
be allowed to be proactive in moving commercially viable innovations
from research in the national laboratories into the forensic community.
Mechanisms should also be developed to encourage innovation and
support commercialization based on technologies in national laboratories
through the formation of industry/university consortia.

Ultimately, however, all parties should be prepared for the "if you build it
they may not come" scenario.

METHODS RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TESTING, AND
EVALUATION

Methods research, development, testing, and evaluation (RDT&E)
activities are vital to the provision of effective forensic science laboratory
services. Among other considerations, RDT&E activities assist in the:

--Validation of technologies prior to initial or enhanced forensic
applications.
--Determination of appropriate methodological standards.
--Improvement of analytical figures of merit (e.g., resolution, sensitivity)
for forensic techniques.
--Extension of current methods to new forensic applications.
--Identification of new analytes of forensic interest.
--Discrimination of potential sources of evidentiary materials.
--Elucidation of new characteristics and properties of materials having
forensic importance.
--Reduction of destructive steps included in the routine analysis of
evidence.
--Enhancement of productivity, portability, and interoperability of forensic
methods.
--Dissemination of appropriately validated databases.
--Optimization of technology for transfer to, and incorporation in, forensic
laboratories.
--Support of ongoing training efforts and the identification of new training
requirements.
--Creation of performance specifications for equipment and material used
in examinations.
--Assurance of safety and security during remote-deployment and
laboratory-based operations.

Although many scientific and allied services are applicable to the forensic
sciences field, there are nine common disciplines provided by the majority
of municipal, county, and State forensic laboratories in the United States,
as follows:

--Latent Print Examinations.
--Questioned Document Examinations.
--Firearms/Toolmarks and Other Impression Evidence Examinations.
--Crime Scene Response and Related Examinations.
--Energetic Materials (Explosives and Fire Debris Examinations).
--Postmortem Toxicology and Human Performance Testing.
--Forensic Biology and Molecular Biochemistry.
--Transfer (Trace) Evidence Evaluation.
--Controlled Substance Examinations.

Each of these disciplines has been divided into three categories for
discussion purposes: (1) the current status of the discipline, (2) systematic
methods used in the discipline, and (3) forensic scientists' needs. Once the
status and methods are discussed, specific areas are identified where new
or enhanced developments in forensic science are necessary.

Common needs of most of these disciplines include standardization,
validation, and creation of information databases. With regard to
standardization, it is important to realize that each discipline has specific
concerns regarding sensitivity, efficiency, precision, portability, and
effectiveness of sampling methods. Therefore, standards generally cannot
and should not be all-encompassing--they should be adapted and
customized to each individual discipline. In a phrase, "It is possible to
develop standards without achieving standardization."

The development of new equipment and technologies brings with it new
concerns for the future. If forensic scientists are to continue providing
valuable information and evidence in a timely and cost-effective manner,
it is crucial that their needs be addressed and resolved.

Latent Print Examinations

Current Status

For many years, courts have accepted the work performed in latent print
examinations because they understand that friction-ridge detail in
individual fingerprints is empirically unique. Nonetheless, two efforts are
now under way to increase the understanding of fingerprint features and
content. There is a modest effort to better comprehend the genetic basis
and relative importance of specific print features and a significant effort to
characterize and understand the chemical content of latent prints. The
latter effort will ultimately allow examiners to design more sensitive
visualization techniques. Latent print examiners currently use RDT&E
activities that include the visualization, recording, and recovery of latent
prints; comparison of prints; storage and retrieval systems; and automated
comparison systems.

Criteria used during print comparisons to determine individualizations
vary throughout the world. Although there are some jurisdictional
exceptions, in the United States examiners are not generally required to
find a specific number of comparison points to determine an identity
between two prints.

Systematic Methods

The attempts used in visualization are sequential and generally involve the
use of alternate light sources, physical (powder), and chemical treatments.
The exact sequence of the techniques depends on many case-specific
factors, and documentation is recommended after each visualization step
has been performed. Techniques used to recover visualized prints include
direct lifts, photography, and digital imaging, depending on the matrix and
the particular circumstances involved.

The quality and number of unique features observed through microscopic
comparisons between known and recovered (questioned) prints can help
examiners determine whether or not the prints form an identity.
Automated search and retrieval systems, such as the Automated
Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS), also assist examiners by
allowing them to select known prints to compare with recovered
(questioned) prints. AFIS has several competing systems, and
interoperability efforts among these systems are ongoing but have not yet
been completed.

Needs

Standardization of comparison criteria. There does not necessarily need to
be a known number of "points" of comparison that allow an examiner to
state an identity between a questioned and known print. However,
minimum criteria and reporting standardization based on empirical studies
and a consensus process among qualified examiners would significantly
enhance the reliability of findings. In addition, setting such minimum
guidelines would provide a more objective basis for competency testing
following initial training of examiners. It is recognized that it is not simply
the number of points of comparison available that lead to a reliable
identification. The quality of the comparison relies as much on spatial
relationships between, and the specific types of, minutiae (and the
frequency of occurrence of these minutiae in the "population" of prints) as
on sheer number of points.

Validation of the basis for print individualization. How can examiners
prove that each individual has unique fingerprints? There are certainly
statistical models that support this contention. Friction ridge print evidence
has historically been "understood" to hold individuality based on empirical
studies of millions of prints. However, the theoretical basis for this
individuality has had limited study and needs a great deal more work to
demonstrate that physiological/developmental coding occurs for friction
ridge detail, or that this detail is purely an accidental process of fetal
development. Studies to date suggest more than an accidental basis for the
development of print detail, but more work is needed.

Improved recovery and visualization methods. The value of a print relies
on the clarity and completeness of recovered detail. The chemical
composition of fingerprints is reasonably well understood, although more
work could be used to determine whether or not physiological states
(agonal processes or flight response, for instance) can alter the normal
composition of components in the secretions that comprise most latent
prints. In the best of cases, the methods used for visualizing and
recovering latent prints are systematically applied. Examiners consider the
need for contrast, preservation of underlying matrices, substrate dynamics,
contributions of one visualization step to subsequent steps, and the ease of
recording when determining the exact number and types of visualization
steps to pursue. More work is needed to fully understand the dynamics of
these variables, as well as to properly preserve and "recover" the
developed print. Specific efforts are needed to improve the recovery of
prints left on victims' bodies.

Determination of the relative importance of print features. There is
empirical evidence that suggests that certain print minutiae are more rare
than others [see generally the work of D.A. Stoney and J.I. Thornton,
Journal of Forensic Sciences 31(4), (October 1996): pp. 1187-1216 and
1217-1234; and Journal of Forensic Sciences 32(5), (September 1997): pp.
1182-1203]. More research is needed to demonstrate if this empirical
suggestion has a complete theoretical basis and/or statistical significance.
Specific testing of this hypothesis may allow examiners to quantify the
significance of a match between unknown and known prints in a more
definitive way. This knowledge may also lead to improved algorithms for
automated search and match programs, improved productivity for print
examiners, and also strengthen the forensic defensibility under the
conditions of increased court scrutiny expected in the future.

Detection of associative evidence in prints. Studying associative evidence
such as DNA, sex determinants, alcohol, drugs, stress markers, donor age
determinants, and print age determinants would help examiners detect
physical characteristics of the person(s) who left the prints, as well as
temporal characteristics that may have influenced the person's behavior or
activities at the time the prints were deposited. Such information of
enhanced identity (e.g., DNA) or temporal content may significantly
strengthen the connection between a suspect and the crime or crime scene,
especially in the absence of a fully definitive recovered print. Information
of this kind could provide specific information to better allow
investigators to narrow the focus of the investigation on particular
suspects, areas of search, and times. This may seem farfetched, but the
sensitivity of modern instrumental approaches continues to provide new
levels of information content when applied to classical evidence of other
kinds. There is no reason to believe that latent prints are immune from this
exciting potential.

Interoperability and improvement of search and retrieval systems.
Interoperability among the various AFIS systems would ensure that
examiners are getting the most complete, up-to-date information when
conducting searches of questioned prints against the local, statewide,
national, and international databases of prints. The algorithms on which
current methods are based must be enhanced and such enhancements will
rely on improved understanding of the basis for print individuality and
statistical significance of specific minutiae found. Simple interoperability
of current systems has not yet been achieved, which represents a
significant operational and investigative cost for the international forensic
community. There is arguably no more important immediate need than this
interoperability.

Shared databases for use in training and harmonization efforts. The "print
examiner" community has made efforts to harmonize information
available for training. Specific needs for improved tools include better
databases of "known nonmatches." Collecting nonmatches and widely
disseminating them using a standard format (similar to that used for
AFIS), will enhance training of new examiners and proficiency of senior
examiners. Unusual findings and other field curiosities and improved
systematic methods for visualization and recording of developed prints
may be similarly disseminated. The same means can facilitate the
development of digital photographic methods and enhancement methods
for prints on visually complex matrices.

Questioned Document Examinations

Current Status

Questioned document examination, which encompasses forgeries,
tracings, and disguised handwritings, is currently in a state of upheaval.
Courts in several jurisdictions recently questioned the scientific basis of
handwriting "identifications." In addition, criteria for using writing or
typing comparisons to determine individualizations are not standardized,
making validation of positive identifications very difficult. Computer
software programs for matching documents via handwriting analysis may
be able to provide an objective basis for this type of examination.
However, these pattern recognition programs are not necessarily available
to the entire forensic community. Another factor contributing to this
discipline's chaotic state is an ongoing change in the way that documents
are created and transmitted. Like the comparison of prints and
firearms/toolmark impressions, many components of questioned document
examination involve expertise that may only be garnered through
experience.

The development and expansion of electronic communications also have
created new areas of need within the discipline. As a result, examiners
may require RDT&E activities for cases involving comparison of
handwriting; comparison and measurement of document features such as
papers, inks, and toners; identification or elimination of source instruments
such as word processors, typewriters, copiers, or printers; computer
manipulation of images to assist in the review of documents; and recovery
of altered information such as shredded and burned documents.

Systematic Methods

Macroscopic and microscopic comparisons of recovered (questioned) and
known writings are used to determine any unique features present in both
writings. These comparisons incorporate authentic writing sources
(including requested and acquired standards) to allow for consideration of
inter and intraindividual variability during examination. The resultant
quality and number of unique features observed guide the examiner in
deciding whether or not the same individual may have written both
documents. The manner of forgery may be of interest when a questioned
writing is excluded from having been written by a particular individual.
Additionally, chromatographic and spectroscopic methods may be used on
inks, papers, and other features of a document to elicit additional
information about its age and source.

Machine-produced documents may be examined to determine
characteristic features of the letters, fonts, inks, toners, papers, and
artifacts of the printing process. Comparison of such features using
questioned and known-source documents can assist examiners in
determining whether or not a suspected machine may have printed a
questioned document. Embossing may also yield characteristic features
that allow for similar comparisons.

Needs

Validation of the scientific basis for handwriting examination. This
component is extremely important because work performed in this
discipline is ineffective if it cannot stand up in court. While other areas of
research also need to be addressed to improve the examination practices
for questioned documents, priority must be placed on demonstrating the
scientific basis for identifications claimed during handwriting
comparisons. Basic research on the psychomotor skills involved in
handwriting are needed. Demonstration of an adequate basis for
handwriting identifications could be obtained through the use of blind
studies. These studies must present a fair challenge to the community of
examiners but also must be structured to allow for the estimation of error
rates and statistical significance of observed features.

Harmonization of comparison criteria. Comparison criteria currently vary
throughout the world. Once studies on the fundamental underpinnings of
the discipline are completed, the resultant findings should be used to
develop a set of criteria that may be systematically applied as uniformly as
possible. This harmonization will enhance many aspects of the discipline
and provide a stronger scientific basis to handwriting identifications.

Improved nondestructive methods for determining characteristic features
of documents. Nondestructive methods must be improved for use in the
characterization of inks, toners, and papers. Multiple tests using current
methods may destroy critical areas of documents, and it is anticipated that
future scrutiny of evidence will require greater allowance for secondary
(reference) testing of intact evidence whenever possible. These methods
also will assist in meeting the challenges of image enhancement noted
below.

Image enhancement methods for writing or printing on visually complex
matrices. The matrices on which writing, typing, and printing occurs has
become more complex over the past few decades. Improved
manufacturing processes and the addition of postconsumer materials into
raw material feedstocks has added to the complexity of papers. In addition,
purposeful addition of visually complex features to currency and checks
adds to the difficulties facing the examiner. The development of digital
imaging equipment and application of computer enhancement methods
could provide important tools to the examiner in cases involving these
unusual matrices.

Image enhancement methods for linking documents to machines. The
technologies employed for creating documents has changed dramatically
over the past 20 years. Instruments such as typewriters, printers, copiers,
and facsimile machines no longer solely use offset processes--the staple of
document creation since the invention of machine-assisted writing.
Instead, a host of thermal, micromechanical, and chemical processes
generate the images produced on modern processed documents. To assist
examiners in discovering, recording, and cataloging unique features of
modern documents, it is important that more powerful imaging and image
enhancement instruments be developed. The products from the use of
these instruments--digital images of adequate clarity and detail--will allow
for rapid transmission of data among examiners as well as archival storage
and retrieval.

Shared databases of writing and machine-document exemplars for use in
training and harmonization efforts. These databases provide the basis for
development of systematic methods and more rigorous demonstration of
the scientific basis for writing and document comparisons. As with
firearms and toolmarks and latent prints, examiners of questioned
documents rely upon experience and judgment when determining the
importance of apparent writing nuances or document features. Databases
containing "known nonmatches" allow for challenges of examiners during
initial training and may be used to augment the ongoing proficiency of
more senior examiners as well. As the complexity of instruments that
create documents increases, these shared databases will also play a
significant role in reducing redundant research and development efforts.
Significant findings in one laboratory must be rapidly communicated to all
appropriate examiners, leading to more uniform and consistent results
among laboratories and greater forensic defensibility.

Firearms/Toolmarks and Other Impression Evidence Examinations

Current Status

Courts routinely accept identifications of firearms, tools, and other
implements through the comparison of microscopic impressions on
questioned and authenticated specimens. However, recent developments
suggest the need for additional studies to enhance understanding of the
scientific basis of such identifications.

Like the disciplines of fingerprint and document examinations, this
discipline also involves expertise achieved predominantly through
experience.

Systematic Methods

Microscopic comparisons of questioned and authenticated impressions are
used to determine the presence of any unique features. The quality and
number of unique features observed guide the examiner in determining if a
particular firearm, tool, or other implement may have produced the
questioned impressions. Many examiners rely on intralaboratory peer
review for assistance in cases involving difficult interpretations or when
comparisons lead to an identification. Documentation of unique features is
recommended when possible, although it may be difficult when features
on nonplanar surfaces are involved.

Two automated search and retrieval systems, IBIS (Integrated Ballistics
Identification System) and DRUGFIRE, are available to help examiners
select known firearms-related impressions for comparison with recovered
(questioned) impressions. These systems are now competitive, but efforts
are under way to increase their compatibility. There has been reasonable
success to date in using these systems with cases involving breech-face
markings and firing-pin impressions; however, newer technology now
allows examiners to capture and compare striae within land and groove
impressions on recovered bullets.

Needs

Validation of the basis for impression evidence identifications. An
excellent review of the "state-of-the-science" of firearm and toolmark
identification criteria was recently published [see R.G. Nichols, Journal of
Forensic Sciences, 42(3) (1997): pp. 466-474]. This review details the fact
that significant research exists that empirically supports the unique
identification of firearms and tools based on the alignment of microscopic
striae from a questioned mark with those made during test firing or
marking with suspect weapons and tools, respectively. However,
examiners do not routinely reference the available literature when
testifying to these identifications, and there are some "gaps" in the
knowledge set with respect to the relative frequency of--and therefore
importance to be assigned to--particular types of microscopic features
from various tools and weapons. Extension of the available knowledge is
necessary to provide more formal support for these identifications.

Development of portable nondestructive analytical approaches for
characterizing the elemental composition and other features of bullet
impact areas. Examination of bullet-impact areas often necessitates
examiners going to the location where the bullet or its impression is
discovered, such as a particular building, residence, or outdoor location. It
is not always possible for examiners to remove evidence for testing in a
laboratory (for example, a bullet impression in an interior or exterior wall),
especially if doing so will destroy or alter the evidence. Therefore, it is
vital for examiners to develop portable, nondestructive techniques that will
enable them to conduct comprehensive, onsite testing of bullet-impacted
surfaces so that evidence can be identified and presumptively evaluated at
the scene. A related need for portable "range-of-fire" determinations
exists, and may utilize similar approaches.

Incorporation of a "z-dimension" imaging component into pattern-
recognition systems. Current algorithms for characterizing microscopic
striae principally map the image in two dimensions (x- and y-). While
these algorithms may provide adequate information for some applications,
improvements are still needed. This is especially the case for impressions
made on nonplanar surfaces (such as bullets). The depth of the striation
provides an additional dimension that is currently ignored in the image-
capture systems, primarily because the imaging equipment is not designed
for such determinations. Incorporation of this third dimension for
characterizing striae would provide much greater discriminating power to
the algorithm. In addition, such an approach would increase productivity
when using automated search and retrieval systems (IBIS and
DRUGFIRE), because the number of matches recovered in the search
would be minimized.

Statistical analysis of performance of algorithms used in automated pattern
recognition (search/retrieval) software. The harmonization of IBIS and
DRUGFIRE will yield a common data set to allow for the facile
interchange of image data captured on either system. However, both
systems could be improved if the statistical basis for individualization of
firearms-related striae was better characterized. Just as with automated
fingerprints, the algorithms used in IBIS and DRUGFIRE return
candidates after searches demonstrate consistent features between
questioned and databased ("known") cartridges and bullets. However, the
performance of these two systems has not been fully characterized to
determine the relative importance of certain redundant or random
microscopic features to the search result.

Crime Scene Response and Related Examinations

Current Status

The forensic aspects of crime scene response have not received adequate
attention or funding. This needs to be remedied in a timely manner
because the quality of evidence recognition, documentation, collection,
and preservation are critical to the quality of results from resultant
analyses. In addition, crime scene personnel must be protected from
exposure to hazardous materials such as biological, chemical, and
etiologic agents, but this important concern has received very little
consideration.

Systematic Methods

The methods used in crime scene response and related endeavors are quite
diverse and should logically correspond to each individual case and the
specific types of evidence recovered.

Needs

Small, rugged, chemical analysis instruments for onsite preliminary or
confirmatory analysis in investigations involving drugs, explosives, and
hazardous materials. Current methods for presumptive testing of materials
at the scene do not allow for the preliminary detection of the full
complement of substances for which such testing is important. For drugs
and explosives, these portable methods significantly enhance the
productivity of the investigative/forensic science interface, because the
materials forwarded from field investigations are more routinely verified
in the laboratory than when no screening is available. The potentially wide
distribution of explosive residua in a postblast scene demands rapid
localization of the areas and particular items of evidence bearing such
traces, so that the investigation can be suitably focused to avoid the
deleterious effects of weather and human activity. With hazardous
materials, another important reason for onsite testing is to limit the
exposure of scene personnel to injury or illness caused by these materials.

Sample location, identification, capture and stabilization technology "in a
kit," suitable for recovery of trace particulate, liquid, chemical, and
biological evidence, with immediate partitioning of samples for secondary
testing. Following on the discussion of the onsite chemical analysis
instruments above, a further refinement of the collection approach is
needed. A "kit" should be developed that could not only be used in the
presumptive detection or identification of various types of evidence at a
crime scene, but that also allows for the retrieval and storage of evidence
to protect it from contamination so that it can be brought back to the
laboratory for further, more detailed examinations.

Portable and remote hazardous materials detectors for alerting/protecting
crime scene personnel. Portable and remote detectors can be very
beneficial, not only in gathering information but also in protecting crime
scene personnel. Portable detectors could show examiners the location and
types of hazardous materials present at a particular crime scene, while
remote detectors would allow personnel to obtain crime scene information
from a distance in cases where hazardous materials are present or
suspected. Both types of detectors would prevent field personnel from
being unnecessarily exposed to hazardous materials while still allowing
them to obtain vital information from a crime scene. Placement of similar
equipment in ongoing or permanent monitoring practice could be used to
alert personnel to dangerous changes or new, unsafe conditions.

Microrobotic platforms to support crime scene visualization, safety
assessments, and sampling. The development and use of microrobotic
equipment would further enable examiners to investigate potentially
dangerous crime scenes without putting themselves at risk. Robots could
perform sampling tests of questioned materials to determine any hazardous
components and further focus the investigation on areas of highest
contamination or interest. These same robots could be fitted with remote
sensing equipment for extending the use of equipment when barriers
(weather, line-of-sight for spectrometers, etc.) exist for conventional use.
The safety of field personnel and minimization of evidence destruction
from human intervention could be maintained through the use of
microrobotic equipment.

Computerized crime scene mapping supported by global positioning
systems (GPS) and multimedia capture technologies for three-dimensional
crime scene visualization, memorialization, and location of evidence.
Current attempts at constructing the "digital crime scene" have been
accompanied by relatively high cost and a lack of standardization. The
goal of research and development in this area is to provide a highly
accurate record of the position and the morphology (or other salient
features) of evidence discovered at the crime scene. This information must
be available in a three-dimensional map, to include objects discovered
underground or in multiple floors of buildings, and include digital
photographs that reliably and with adequate resolution provide for
memorialization with high integrity. These protocols also must be
developed to lower the overall cost (manpower and materials) of crime
scene processing. Systems must be developed that allow investigators to
demonstrate that images have not been inappropriately manipulated, and
to fully incorporate features needed in later review for information not
immediately obvious to scene investigators.

Energetic Materials (Explosives and Fire Debris Examinations)

Current Status

The identification of bulk explosives is relatively simple compared to the
recovery and detection of residues of explosives in postblast debris. Very
few laboratories routinely analyze postblast debris. Critical questions may
exist when attempting to interpret positive findings, due to the sensitivity
of approaches available. In addition, the possibility for inadvertent transfer
from contaminated surfaces to other surfaces or people can further
complicate or confound interpretations. Therefore, collaboration between
laboratory examiners and investigators is often critical in making proper
casework interpretations.

Fire Debris analysis is a subdiscipline of trace analysis that is in good
standing because there is sufficient published work on the analysis and
interpretation of the material involved. Standard guides for the
examination and interpretation of chemical residues in fire debris have
been published through the consensus process of ASTM Committee E-30
on Forensic Science. Research in recent years has been directed toward the
improved capture and detection of compounds that can be used as fire
accelerants. Significant work also has been devoted to the differentiation
of pyrolysis products from ignitable liquid residues. These standardization
documents are often quoted in the scientific literature, helping to meet the
requirements of the legal community.

Systematic Methods

Laboratory analysis of explosives involves characterization of energetic
materials in either bulk or postblast form. "Low explosives" (for example,
smokeless powder, flash powder, or match heads) are commonly used as
charge materials in improvised devices such as pipe bombs. Bulk low-
explosive materials are analyzed using microscopic, spectroscopic, and
chromatographic methods to characterize the content of admixtures (such
as flash powders and improvised mixtures) and single-component forms
(such as smokeless and black powders). Careful observation of the
physical morphology of recovered, commercial low explosives may allow
them to be linked to a particular manufacturing source. "High explosives"
include traditional military and commercial blasting materials. Bulk high-
explosive materials also are routinely identified using chromatographic
and spectroscopic methods.

Sufficient matrix materials may be present to allow for characterization of
possible sources of the material if analyses are focused on this need.
Courtroom acceptance of these results has been routine.

Analysis of postblast debris starts with macroscopic and microscopic
viewing and segregation of appropriate materials; then sieving and another
microscopic evaluation are conducted, if appropriate. Debris may need to
be extracted using aqueous or organic solvents, with concentration and
clean-up prior to chromatographic and spectroscopic examination.
Unfortunately, the analysis and interpretation of postblast debris is
difficult, because high concentrations of extraneous materials are often
present with the low-level traces of explosive residues.

Fire debris examination involves containment of debris in vapor-tight
containers. The common examination procedure at the laboratory involves
concentration of volatile traces on adsorbents, followed by elution of
adsorbed residua and chromatographic examination. For complex debris,
gas chromatography-mass spectrometry may be needed to adequately
discriminate between ignitable liquid residues and pyrolysis products from
matrix materials.

Needs

Improved methods for assessing the size, construction, and composition of
improvised explosive devices from macro-effects at postblast scenes. The
current tools available to investigators in assessing the size, construction,
and composition of improvised explosive devices (IEDs) from effects
observed at postblast scenes rely on very small data sets. For some types
of IEDs, there have been no systematic demonstrations of the macro-
effects of these devices. Many bombings involve IEDs every year, yet the
proper investigative focus cannot be assigned without more fundamental
knowledge of the effects to expect from different IEDs. Testing of various
designs, having a variety of sizes and in a variety of common applications
(such as in vehicles and buildings incorporating different construction
elements), is critical to improved postblast scene investigation outcomes.

Enhanced clean-up techniques for postblast debris. Because postblast
debris is usually comprised of a large amount of extraneous materials such
as building or vehicle remnants and a small amount of explosive device
remains, advanced technologies are needed to effectively separate out the
relevant materials so they can be properly identified and preserved. This is
particularly important when sifting through large areas of damage, because
examiners need to ensure that crucial evidence is not lost or destroyed
during the debris cleanup and removal processes.

Method development for recovery of explosive and ignitable liquid
residues from a variety of matrices. To complement more effective
cleanup processes in the laboratory, techniques need to be developed that
allow residues to be recovered from many different matrices such as 
building remnants, air, soil, and human remains. Since there may only be a
small amount of evidence that survives an explosion or fire, it is very
important for examiners to have the necessary technology to recover this
evidence regardless of the type of surface on which the residues are found.
This is especially important in aerospace and other more complex
environments, in which the degree of damage is often very high, and
fabrication materials are often unusual or esoteric and comprised of
advanced composites.

Enhanced field detection capabilities and mapping technologies for bomb
scene investigation assistance. Previous discussion on advances needed for
crime scene response is certainly applicable with postblast and fire scenes.
However, this need is magnified for these scenes because three-
dimensional mapping of the position of recovered traces of explosives or
ignitable liquid residues can be used to estimate the size and operation of
explosive and combustible devices or materials. Therefore, enhanced
capabilities not only provide greater accuracy in recording the position of
the evidence, but may actually materially contribute to the interpretation of
the size and composition of devices and explosive or ignitable liquids used
in the generation of observed effects.

Improved onsite materials science and metallurgical analytical capabilities
to assess, discriminate, and validate the effects of improvised explosive
devices versus alternative causes. Portable equipment for onsite
examination and analysis of postblast debris and structural components of
targets (such as buildings and vehicles) needs to be developed. Such
equipment will allow investigators to more accurately and quickly
determine whether an explosion was due to an improvised device or was
caused by other factors. The findings from these portable devices could
help investigators and examiners understand and more rapidly focus
investigations on the causes of explosions. In addition, they may provide
more rapid preliminary identifications of source materials.

Improved sensitivity in the detection of ignitable liquid residues in fire
debris. Minute traces may be all that remains of ignitable liquids used to
start an arson fire. Canine detection approaches and improved portable
detection devices may have better sensitivity to these traces than current
laboratory-based methods. Although the lowering of limits of detection
brings an attendant requirement for improved rules for the interpretation of
findings, these sensitivity enhancements are critical.

Desorption advances for enhanced automation. Most laboratories
providing fire-debris analysis services use a static or dynamic
adsorption/elution step to recover traces of ignitable liquids. The elution
("desorption") step in this process of sample preparation must be
automated to improve laboratory productivity. Automated methods for the
chemical and thermal desorption of explosive residues from debris would
significantly enhance the productivity of laboratory explosives analyses as
well. Such advances could also lead to improved portable devices for field
recovery of residues.

Algorithms for interpretation of complex fire and bomb debris analytical
data. Methods need to be developed that enable investigators to
systematically examine bomb debris and fire scene data to estimate the
size and content of components or amount of ignitable liquid involved. As
noted above for IEDs, controlled explosions and fires are needed to
provide the data for these algorithms. Examinations of scenes would be
more efficient if investigators had specific guidelines on which to rely, as
long as these guidelines are based on appropriate, accurate data.
Significant collaborative input should be used in the design of these
experiments, because controlled explosions and fires are extremely
expensive to conduct and may generate staggering amounts of data.

Continued validation of the current methods by intralaboratory studies.
Proficiency testing materials for use in fire debris and explosive-related
subdisciplines are notoriously difficult to manufacture and control. In
addition to difficulties posed for manufacturers of these materials, these
tests do not adequately test critical aspects of the examination such as the
proper selection of debris for testing, recovery of residues from complex
matrices, or interpretation of data in realistic scenarios. Intralaboratory
studies (as partially described above regarding algorithms for
interpretation of data) must be designed and implemented to address the
shortcomings of conventional proficiency testing approaches.

Postmortem Toxicology and Human Performance Testing

Current Status

Although courts routinely accept laboratory determinations in both
postmortem and human performance testing, interpretive controversies
still exist in several areas of toxicology. One important problem is that
normal, "impairing," and lethal concentration ranges for drugs and toxins
in human body fluids and tissues are not well known. The critical need is
for data from well-controlled studies of individuals taking normal doses of
drugs, or involved in normal occupations with attendant "normal"
exposures to nondrug toxins. Concentrations of these substances and their
metabolites in fluids or tissues from a deceased individual could then be
compared to postmortem expected values to determine the likelihood that
death was due to an overdose, or that the substance adversely contributed
to the death. Similarly, comparisons could be made for investigations of
impaired performance in cases involving living subjects.

Unlike many criminalistics subdisciplines, this discipline has national
certification standards both for personnel and for laboratories.
Toxicologists also generally have advanced academic degrees in analytical
sciences or pharmacology and several years of experience. 

Systematic Methods

The general approach to toxicological determinations include screening of
fluids and/or tissue homogenates from human subjects using highly
sensitive analytical methods that may have low specificities but high
sensitivity. Such methods may include immunoassays, microchemical
methods, and other low-cost approaches. The identities and quantities of
suspected toxins from these screens are confirmed using alternative
technologies that are more selective and employ different technologies
than those used in the screening process. Common confirmatory
techniques include gas and liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry.

Needs

Nondestructive analytical techniques with reduced interferences from
biological materials. One of the problems with analyses in this
subdiscipline is that testing tends to use destructive methods that result in
critical evidence being destroyed during the toxicological investigation.
Therefore, nondestructive techniques need to be developed so that multiple
tests can be performed on a small amount of biological fluid or tissue.
Examiners would also benefit by being able to test for alternative
substances after testing for the original target substance(s) was completed.
Nondestructive techniques would also enable retesting for an identified
substance if some controversy arose later about the original laboratory's
toxicological findings.

Well-controlled studies of the effects of drugs on the operation of motor
vehicles and complex equipment. Although many studies exist that
describe how alcohol impairs human behavior and performance, drug-
related studies tend to concentrate on how drugs affect human behavior
but not on how they affect the performance of complex tasks such as
driving motor vehicles or operating complex machinery. Studies need to
be conducted with subjects who perform realistic complex functions, such
as driving, before and after receiving a drug or placebo. In these studies,
appropriate biological fluids need to be collected throughout the study,
concentrations of drugs and metabolites must be determined, and the
correlation of affects on individual performance with these concentrations
estimated. 

More accurate methods for determining time of death. One of the biggest
problems that medical examiners face is accurately determining a person's
time of death. Current objective methods for determining time of death
include measuring body temperature, determining selected changes in
body chemistry, or assessing growth stages of infesting insects in deceased
individuals. Each of these measures is highly variable, which increases the
uncertainty in predicting the time of death. More effective methods need to
be developed and authenticated under realistic conditions.

Automated and inexpensive methods for extraction and detection of drugs
and other toxins. Cost and time for testing must be reduced in order to stay
within limited laboratory budgets. One way to reduce manpower and
increase testing speed is to develop automated methods, especially for
more recently studied matrices such as hair, sweat, and saliva. There is
also a need to develop screening methods that are inexpensive and more
specific for target substances. These methods must lend themselves to
automation. Current automated screening methods produce many false
positive results, which then require performance of expensive, labor-
intensive confirmation tests.

Central database of postmortem "incidental" drug findings in deaths
unrelated to drugs. When examiners are investigating the cause of death
(other than drug related) of an individual, they look for evidence that
specifically deals with how or why the person was killed. However, in the
course of their investigations, examiners may discover additional,
"incidental" information related to drugs or other substances in this
individual. Although this information may not be directly relevant to the
cause of the death, it may provide insight into the manner of death, or the
chemistry and composition of the human body. It is important that this
information be disseminated in such a way that examiners throughout the
world could access it and learn from it. One way to accomplish this would
be through the creation of a central database containing information about
such incidental findings. Any new information could prove beneficial in
helping examiners to understand expected levels of toxins, endogenous
compounds, or the identity of substances that could interfere with routine
tests. Trends in incidental findings may also be quite useful in tracking
emerging drugs or toxins of concern, information which could be relayed
to medical examiners and public health officials as appropriate.

Forensic Biology and Molecular Biochemistry

Current Status

During the past 5 years, quality-control and quality-assurance program
improvements have been realized by forensic DNA laboratories. These
improvements have not only enhanced the reliability of the methods
employed, but laboratories have also increasingly found the criminal
justice system receptive to admissibility issues. Forensic laboratories also
have benefitted from extraordinarily valuable resources obtained through
efforts supporting a valid scientific foundation for DNA use in casework.
One of the most impressive advancements is the concerted effort to
disseminate foundational, scientific data through a variety of media
including publications, national and international meetings, workshops,
laboratory internships, and extensive laboratory collaborations.

The end product of forensic DNA analysis is data that is admissible in
court. Therefore, a clear need exists for laboratories to access current and
advanced DNA technologies in a timely and cost-effective manner.
However, most forensic laboratories are hindered from using state-of-the-
art DNA technology by relentless casework backlogs, lack of personnel,
and budgetary constraints. Although a general framework has been
established for implementing DNA analysis in casework, there is a need
for faster, more efficient analytical equipment if DNA technology is to be
used at its optimum level.

Systematic Methods

Forensic DNA analysis allows for the biologic comparison between an
individual's genetic makeup and biological evidence found at a crime
scene. Because virtual identity is possible through the statistical
representation of a DNA profile, it is essential that the DNA genetic
markers allow for the highest quality of discrimination. This is achieved
by increasing the number of well-characterized DNA loci; the more DNA
markers that can be labeled and defined, the easier it will be to make
definitive comparisons between individuals and crime scene stains.

Most cases submitted for laboratory work involve suspected biological
materials that must first be characterized as being human or nonhuman and
then as having evidentiary importance. Presumptive and conclusive
microchemical and biochemical tests are made on suspected stains to
determine what potential type of stain is involved (such as blood, seminal
residua, or saliva). Afterwards, the stains may be subjected to conventional
serological tests and DNA testing using either restriction fragment length
polymorphism (RFLP) or polymerase chain reaction (PCR) based
techniques.

With the advent of PCR in forensic science, the possibility of mass
analysis of multiplexed loci has been realized. Individual laboratory
decisions regarding the source of the genetic markers, allele detection
systems, critical validation studies, casework implementation, and most
important, interpretation guidelines, are now made easier by the efforts of
the DNA Advisory Board, the Technical Working Group on DNA
Analysis Methods (TWGDAM), availability of accreditation, and general
private and public technical support groups.

Needs

Robotics for the extraction of biologic fluids and tissues, including
differentials for semen stains. Methods for extracting biological fluids and
tissues (such as hair, bone, and teeth) are currently very time consuming,
but this problem could be remedied through development and use of
robotics. Robotics platforms can be programmed to perform certain
routine but necessary tasks, which would enable examiners to concentrate
their efforts in other areas. A critical need exists for robots for performing
differential extractions of semen stains. This particularly tedious step is
essential to the preparation of evidence for DNA testing in rape and sexual
assault cases.

Genetic analysis of botanical materials for tracking and other investigative
assistance. Biological evidence may be discovered on many types of
surfaces at a crime scene and may include botanical materials such as
plants, leaves, grasses, pollens, phytons, and other microorganisms.
Methods need to be developed so examiners can routinely detect and
analyze this information and use it to determine potential suspects as well
as the path (such as through woods, fields, or along streambeds) the
suspect might have taken before, during, and after committing the crime.

Access to microchip technology to enhance and advance DNA testing
methods. Preliminary results of research on microchip array techniques
suggest that these methods will one day eliminate the need for
electrophoresis in DNA analyses. A good deal of the work currently under
way is being performed by private industry. These companies have
recognized the potential of microchip technology in DNA-based medical
diagnostics, paternity testing, and forensic identity analyses. Research in
the public sector is needed to complement these commercial advances and
ensure that appropriate forensic applications are developed and that
realistic validations are performed using appropriate forensic challenge
scenarios and materials. 

Application of DNA testing to biological materials from animals. A
substantial number of forensic cases submitted to laboratories provide the
opportunity for applying DNA testing methods to animal hairs,
bloodstains, and other biological matrices. These materials demand
modification of existing methods of testing, and databases of population
frequencies of various discovered loci in the myriad of animal species
must be developed.

Complete assessment of additional STR marker systems. It is estimated
that more than 40, 000 potential short tandem repeat (STR) loci may be
available for humans. At this time, less than 20 have been fully evaluated
for forensic applications (although the number is increasing almost daily).
The most common goal of DNA examinations is to conclusively identify
or exonerate a single individual as being responsible for an unknown
biological stain or material. This can be best accomplished by choosing
the combination of STR loci that provides the greatest freedom from the
effects of environmental degradation, high productivity during analysis,
and maximum discrimination when results are interpreted. Clearly, there is
a substantial amount of research to be performed in this area.

Additional methodologies for the characterization of mtDNA sequences.
Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) offers the examiner the power of DNA
analysis in biological materials (such as hair, teeth, and bone) which do
not contain nuclear DNA. MtDNA tests are currently more expensive and
difficult to perform than conventional RFLP or STR DNA testing, and
given the potential for budgetary constraints and the huge demand likely to
arise when more laboratories provide mtDNA services, significant
development is necessary for these tests. In addition, extension of
applications of mtDNA analyses in more unusual types of evidence, such
as unusable latent partial prints and automobile steering wheels, could
provide significant new information for law enforcement investigations.

Repository for DNA samples with microheterogeneity for proficiency and
training purposes. There should be a collection of information about
microheterogeneity (also known as "heteroplasmy") in individuals that
examiners could access to help them interpret casework results. This
collection is especially important in the proper application and
interpretation of mtDNA results. For example, studies have shown that the
mtDNA results for hairs collected from a single individual can be different
for different hairs, although the differences generally arise in a single
location in the sequence. It has also been demonstrated that
microheterogeneity tends to occur somewhat consistently--in "hot spots"
along the sequence-- so information about these hot spots can be vital for
the proper interpretation of casework data.

Lab-Net links for interactive data interchange among caseworkers. Lab-
Net links should be established that allow examiners working throughout
the world to share and discuss information with each other. Although there
may be security concerns and privacy issues that will limit the topics of
discussion, this forum would help examiners learn from each other and
help promote the continuous quality-improvement process that this
discipline has recently enjoyed.

Sampling devices for stabilizing evidence during in-field collection.
Equipment needs to be developed that will allow crime scene personnel to
routinely collect and package evidence and maintain appropriate
temperatures until the laboratory processing begins. There are many issues
of contamination and degradation that must be addressed in virtually every
case involving biological evidence. The development of sampling devices
that will stabilize evidence, when coupled with appropriate training for
crime scene investigators, can significantly reduce the potential for
deleterious change or contamination of this evidence.

Transfer (Trace) Evidence Evaluation

Current Status

Trace evidence materials include transfer evidence of all types except
biological fluids. Although there is an extensive list of possible transfer
materials, the main types observed in crime laboratories are paints, hairs,
fibers, glass, and building materials. The use of trace evidence has
declined in recent years, primarily because forensic laboratories are
devoting resources to technologies such as DNA analysis that provide
stronger conclusions. This cutback in resources increases the casework
demand upon analysts and limits their participation in the volunteer
processes of method development, standardization, validation, and
interlaboratory studies. This is unfortunate, because the benefits of these
standard-setting and validation activities cannot be overstated. Two groups
currently working on these issues are the Technical Working Group on
Materials (TWGMAT) and the American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM) Committee E-30 on Forensic Sciences.

Recent publications on glass indicate significant heterogeneity within the
glass population. Studies that comprehensibly characterize subtypes of
materials, such as vehicle windows, allow examiners to form opinions that
experienced forensic scientists intuitively know to be stronger than "the Q
could have come from the source." Ultimately, it is greatly beneficial to
the investigative process when such stronger opinions are forensically
defensible. To this end, current efforts in materials characterizations
include the creation of databases containing analytical variables such as
the elemental composition of glass and coatings. 

In the coatings (paints and polymers) area, the FBI and Royal Canadian
Mounted Police (RCMP) have undertaken a comprehensive effort to
characterize commercial coatings. This effort will create and validate a
database to assist forensic scientists in sourcing, comparison, and
interpretation issues. Although it is not a population database, this
representative database will be very useful to practicing examiners.

Systematic Methods

The nature of the evidence (that is, the variety of materials and matrices
that can be submitted as evidence and the variety of methods for the
analysis of those materials and matrices) makes analysis in this discipline
complex. Each type of trace material requires a unique systematic
approach, and even these approaches are significantly predicated on the
size and morphology of the evidence being examined. As a result,
considerable background knowledge and interpretation are necessary when
opining on the meaning of a positive association.

Needs

Standardization of trace analysis methodologies. Trace evidence
examiners recognize that there is no single, foolproof method or series of
procedures that will provide optimum results in every case. However,
these examiners also recognize that the lack of appropriate standards may
lead to problems such as inappropriate destruction of evidence, unreliable
results, and nontransferable representative databases of material
characteristics. Initial work by ASTM and TWGMAT has led to several
standards and guides for the systematic analysis of gunshot primer residue
and glass, and more standards are under development at this time. These
efforts must continue in order to maximize the reliable information
obtained during examinations and facilitate the transfer of information
among examiners.

Enhancements of nondestructive techniques for elemental and molecular
analysis of materials. Trace evidence typically provides very small
samples for examination. From this evidence the examiner must extract as
much information as possible, yet maintain sufficient sample for retesting
or confirmatory methods, as appropriate. There are several nondestructive
techniques available for use with trace evidence, but most of them suffer
from sensitivity or selectivity problems in these applications. Significant
research and development is needed to improve these techniques or
develop new methods.

Development of portable and automated systems for improved detection of
trace materials. By its nature, trace evidence can be very difficult to locate.
The examiner's job is often tedious and is prone to errors of omission
(missed collections of trace materials from evidence) because it is hard for
anyone to maintain full concentration for extended periods of time. There
are commercially available instruments that can scan a tape-lift for fibers
or hairs, as well as determine the reflectance spectrum for detected fibers,
but similar instruments are not available for other types of trace materials.
Development of these systems could provide significantly enhanced
productivity and more thorough collections of important trace evidence. In
addition, the availability of a portable instrument of this type could
improve the collection of crime scene evidence bearing important trace
materials. However, it would be important in such applications to provide
field personnel with appropriate training.

Assistance in the design and review of proficiency tests in materials
comparisons. Evaluation of trace materials requires sophisticated analyses
and substantial background knowledge and interpretation skill. It would be
helpful for examiners to have proficiency tests that have been adequately
characterized and that were developed using more rigorous guidelines for
manufacturing. This will require substantial effort on the part of senior
examiners in this discipline, with assistance from specialists in materials
science, statistics, and manufacturing process design.

Coordination of available expertise for unique case problems. Trace
evidence data interpretation is currently affected by many different
variables, such as where the examiners received their training, in what
methods they were trained, and the availability of appropriate instruments.
There is a primary need to develop interpretation standards to ensure that
examiners provide consistent and complete conclusions from a given set
of developed data. In addition, coordination is needed on a national level
to provide useful assistance in interpreting unique case problems. One
possible solution could involve the creation of a central national laboratory
where examiners could perform extensive research and materials
characterization and disseminate this information to the international
forensic community. This approach would also improve the forensic
defensibility of testing results because interpretations would have a
stronger empirical basis.

Development and coordination of databases. Because transfer evidence
encompasses so many different types of materials, several databases are
needed to coordinate and track this information and to allow examiners to
retrieve and review the information when necessary. Coordination of
existing databases also is important; for example, manufacturers
sometimes maintain databases of their product-testing results which,
although proprietary, could assist examiners in understanding the
components and features of certain types of materials. The following are
two specific databases that could greatly assist examiners in this
discipline:

--Glass database. This would entail the creation, validation, and
publication of a database characterizing an appropriate population of glass
samples by elemental composition, morphological features, and spectral
characteristics if appropriate.

--Fiber sources database. This could assist examiners in determining the
types of fiber being examined through the compilation of morphological
characteristics, spectral and elemental data, how commonly the fiber is
distributed, products from which the fibers may be initially transferred,
and the company or country of origin.

Controlled Substance Examinations

Current Status

The determination of controlled substances is the most common service
delivered by forensic laboratories all over the world. Multiple
examinations are required to identify the drug(s) present in submitted
evidence. These examinations can incorporate microscopic,
microchemical, chromatographic, and spectroscopic methodologies.
(Some jurisdictions require quantitative estimation of the purity of drug(s)
present in exhibits.) Although most laboratories use similar examination
methods, there is no standardization on the exact number, type, or
conditions employed for tests performed in this discipline. For example,
there is some disagreement on the use of microcrystalline tests to confirm
the presence of a drug. The disagreement centers around the lack of
documentation available for peer review, and the lack of a scientific basis
for conclusions of identity drawn from a description of gross crystal
formation. Reports from laboratories are routinely accepted into court
without testimony by examiners--the attorneys stipulate to the results.

Field testing is performed in many jurisdictions. When performed by
qualified personnel, these presumptive tests complement law enforcement
efforts by decreasing the time to arraignment and by frequently lowering
adjudication burdens due to plea-bargaining agreements. All other factors
being equal, laboratories tend to have lower controlled substance caseloads
in jurisdictions where field testing is performed. Field testing is not
without controversy, however, because its accurate application depends on
the quality of training received by the individuals conducting the testing.
Law enforcement personnel are also assisted in their investigations of drug
offenses by canines trained to detect controlled substances.

Systematic Methods

Controlled substance exhibits are first weighed and described, and then
presumptive tests are performed. Confirmatory testing is then performed;
the most common approach utilizes either gas chromatography-mass
spectrometry or infrared spectrophotometry, although liquid
chromatography may be needed to detect thermally labile or polar drugs.
Finally, case records are compiled, usually consisting of hard copies of the
analytical data, preprinted "check sheets" for fast internal reporting, and
the formal laboratory report.

Special modification of these methods is required when dealing with
residues of drugs on paraphernalia or other evidence. In these cases, the
evidence may be swabbed in order to collect the residues from the
evidence. A liquid extract or eluate from the swab is then tested using
either conventional presumptive and confirmatory techniques, or may
require the use of a more sensitive method such as ion mobility
spectrometry.

Needs

Standardization of methods. There are two distinct standardization needs
in this discipline. One involves general standardization of the number,
type, and conditions employed for tests on controlled substances. The
other pertains to specific chromatographic/electrophoretic standardization
for chiral mixtures, biopharmaceutical products, and other complex
materials.

Inclusive automation of sampling and analytical methods to increase
productivity. Forensic scientists spend a great amount of effort on
controlled substance examinations that could be better spent in areas such
as crime scene response, explosives examinations, and DNA testing. In
order to increase available time and resources, it would be extremely
beneficial for examiners if automated methods were developed for
sampling and analyses, especially in bulk drug cases. Cases involving
residues are inherently more difficult to automate, but also are much less
frequently encountered in the majority of forensic laboratories.

Remote sensing equipment for enhanced field testing and investigation
applications. There is a need for improved remote sensing equipment that
investigators could use to detect the presence of controlled substances,
solvents, reagents, and synthetic precursors. This would help narrow the
field of search and interdiction, especially in large geographical areas or
buildings such as airports, hotels, and schools.

Nondisruptive ("through the packaging") sampling. If technologies were
developed that allowed for nondisruptive sampling methods, examiners
would be able to detect the presence of controlled substances without
opening the suspected container. This could increase productivity and
reduce the possibility of cross-contamination in the laboratory.

Enhanced understanding of canine detection mechanisms leading to
instrumental approaches for field deployment. When properly trained
(both the dog and the handler), canines are able to detect controlled
substances with surprising accuracy and sensitivity. Research is needed to
better understand the exact mechanism and target(s) of the canine
detection response. This research would not only allow for improved
training for canines, but would also facilitate development of instrumental
methods that mimic canines.

ANALYTICAL SERVICES

Analytical service is the support crime laboratories provide to their clients.
It is the essence of forensic laboratory work and represents the end product
of the laboratory's efforts. Analytical service includes routine and
traditional analyses common to all forensic laboratory settings. It also
includes methods development particular to the requirements of specific
cases, as well as the identification of analytical sources to perform work
that is considered nonroutine.

There is room for improvement and enhancement of casework services.
Such improvement and enhancement would be illustrated by additional
services, increased efficiency, and greater cost-effectiveness. It is critical
to examine not only the needs of the forensic community, but also the
consequences of not meeting those needs--how does it affect the criminal
justice system and the public that the forensic laboratory serves. When
police are not able to work cases efficiently, when court dates are
postponed, taxpayer money is not well spent and efficiency is reduced. An
important question to consider is whether local and State laboratories, if
they are overloaded with work and have a case backlog, should outsource
cases to Federal laboratories. A list of resources available to accomplish
casework also is needed. 

Discussed below are the following issues in casework:

--Current status of analytical services. 
--Review of product delivery requirements.
--Assessment of casework applications.
--Alternatives to consider in response to today's needs. 

Current Status of Analytical Services

The first step in assessing the current status of casework is the
identification of clients and the unique needs of those clients. Those needs
determine the services that are provided. Clients include: 

--Police/law enforcement.
--Judiciary. 

o Courts.
o Prosecution.
o Defense bar.

Police

The greatest need experienced by the police is for investigative support,
which is divided into two areas: nonsuspect casework and cases with
suspects.

--Unidentified suspect casework. These cases include work related to rape,
burglary, homicide, and other crimes where there is no suspect. Forensic
scientists have the ability to assist in these cases through tools such as
DNA databases, the automated fingerprint identification system (AFIS),
and cartridge/bullet imaging databases. Although this work is important,
follow-through on nonsuspect cases may not occur because existing
staffing levels are inundated with working cases with suspects. Ideally,
these cases should be worked within 30 days of the crime, during the
active police investigation. Laboratories must respond to the pressure of
upcoming trials; cases without trial dates often are put on the back burner
due to caseload demands. An additional investment in staffing to work
unidentified suspect cases would be a very cost-effective way to reduce
wasted police investigative time and reduce recidivism through the
identification of perpetrators.

--Cases with suspects. These cases receive more attention. Police need
results during the active investigation phase of a case, generally within 30
days after a crime is committed. Unfortunately, results often are not
available quickly, again due to heavy caseloads. Failure to meet this need
diminishes law-enforcement efficiency.

--Technical training. Technical training is another area where police need
the support of the forensic community. Instruction needs include crime
scene processing, field testing, and recruit training. While more training is
needed, time spent by scientists training police is time taken from actively
working cases. The allocation of resources for training negatively affects
case output. At the same time, the lack of training opportunities
exacerbates the case backlog situation.

Judiciary

The needs of the judiciary (the courts, prosecution, and defense bar) for
casework support touch on the following areas:

--Drug-related crimes. Drug-related crimes and drug analysis frequently
require a high percentage of a crime laboratory's total resources, in some
labs as much as 50 percent. However, drug analysis, while often politically
popular, does not identify the perpetrator of a crime. Drug analysis
competes with other cases for resources, including the investigation of
violent crimes.

--Trial preparation. Crime laboratory test results and reports are needed by
both the prosecution and the defense for trial preparation. The forensic
scientists who testify as expert witnesses also need to prepare. It is
essential to provide adequate background for court personnel, whether for
the State government or the defense. If test results are not prepared in a
timely fashion, trials can be delayed.

--Speedy trial requirements. Most States have a speedy trial requirement,
details of which vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In general, crime
laboratory results are needed within 30 days of an arrest so as not to
hamper or bog down the process.

--Court dockets. Court dockets are overloaded. The system is clogged with
continuances and compromised by plea bargains. These backlogs often are
attributed to the forensic community because of its inability to respond in
a timely fashion due to its own backlogs.

Coping Mechanisms

What coping mechanisms do forensic scientists and laboratories use to
help meet the needs of their clients? 

--A priority system that ensures cases with suspects and those going to
trial receive attention. Important cases pending arrest unfortunately are
delayed or deferred.

--Overtime for laboratory personnel must be authorized due to
overwhelming demands for results. 

--Cases may be transferred to another laboratory within a system to
equalize the backlog among laboratories.

--Laboratories may decline to process low-priority cases.

--Streamlining methods to promote efficiency also need to be examined.
Care must be taken to ensure that streamlining would not be to the
detriment of the quality of the work being performed. District attorneys
may need to become more selective in the cases they choose to prosecute.

Review of Product Delivery Requirements

The issue of product delivery requirements grows in importance when
work is outsourced to other laboratories. Product delivery requirements are
in place to ensure quality products, timely delivery, and a valid assessment
of a provider's qualifications. The forensic community must be assured
that a usable product will be obtained. If a test is performed and a result
obtained, that result must be prepared to pass peer scrutiny, regardless of
the reputation of the laboratory performing the examination. Since results
often are used in adversarial situations, the stakes are too high for anything
less. Product delivery requirements consist of the following elements: 

--Evidence control. Evidence control is measured by the presence of chain-
of-custody procedures and the assurance of the evidence-integrity
processes. Such processes include attention to seals, marking, and secure
storage.

--Analytical procedures. Analytical procedures are defined as generally
accepted procedures (as specified in Frye), scientifically valid methods (as
outlined in Daubert), and appropriate procedural documentation.

--Quality assurance and quality control. The importance of maintaining
strong quality assurance and quality control cannot be overemphasized.
Appropriate controls and standards must be in place, including instrument
calibration, traceability, and reliability. Technical peer review is an
important tool. Testimony monitoring is also very valuable. Having a
technical problem resolution process in place is key to the quality-
assurance and quality-control process--if there is a mistake, what action
should be taken? Proficiency testing, which should be reviewed by
management and approved by the ASCLD/LAB, also can play a
significant role in this product-delivery requirement. 

--Personnel qualifications. Personnel qualifications are measured in a
number of ways: certification, appropriate educational background,
relevant training, and completion of competency training.

--Physical plant requirements. Physical plant requirements include
attention to details such as controlled and limited access. This is
accomplished not only through key control but also by secured entry/exit. 

--Legal process. The legal process has a great impact on product delivery.
Not all laboratories perform the same services; services vary from agency
to agency and jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Statutory authority determines
which services are performed. Procedural requirements include subpoenas,
discovery, court orders, and the speedy-trial requirement. Expert court
testimony for civil, criminal, grand jury, and petit jury comes into play in
this area. Members of the forensic community also can be called on to
participate in pretrial conferences.

Assessment of Casework Applications

Casework applications are divided into those considered routine and those
that are nonroutine. Routine is defined as those applications provided by
most crime laboratories or those that are readily available. If routine
applications are not provided, it is due to either choice or necessity.
Nonroutine applications are those not available in most crime laboratories
and may be "one-of-a-kind" examinations. Applications considered routine
include:

--Drug analysis.
--Toxicology.
--Serology/DNA.
--CODIS (Combined DNA Index System).
--Trace evidence (e.g., fiber, paint, glass, gunshot residue explosives, hair,
metals, and plastics).
--Firearms (e.g., firearm identification, toolmarks, serial number
restoration, and ballistic imaging database).
--Documents.
--Latents (e.g., development, identification, and AFIS).
--Photography.
--Crime scene processing.
--Image analysis.

Nonroutine applications include:

--Unusual drug cases such as "designer drugs." 
--Unusual toxicology, including exotic drugs and poisons.
--Microscopic identification for nonroutine applications (e.g., unknown
particles).
--Common source determination (e.g., metallurgy, oils/grease, drugs, and
explosives).
--Mitochondrial DNA (e.g., hair).
--Nonhuman DNA.
--Computer forensics.
--Computer forgeries.
--Voice identification.
--Pathology specialties.
--"One-time" analyses of all types.

An important consideration for forensic scientists to keep in mind is that
what is nonroutine today may well be routine tomorrow. At one time DNA
analysis was considered exotic and was rarely used. Today it is a staple in
the investigative process. Nonroutine applications, such as those involving
trace evidence, also can turn into miniresearch projects that can help future
cases.

Alternatives to Consider in Response to Today's Needs

In fashioning responses to the challenges faced in providing casework
support, members of the forensic community are encouraged to consider
the following:

--Expert systems. Expert systems would capture the collective experience
and knowledge that exist within the forensic community and build on this
foundation to ensure continuous growth by reducing the knowledge loss
that occurs due to attrition of members.

--Neural networks. Neural networks would automate routine
interpretation, which would provide a great enhancement to current
training efforts. Neural networks would be a collection of examiner's aids
that would enhance the scientist's interpretive ability, not supplant it.

--Regionalization. Regional specialty centers could be developed for
outsourcing unique work. If a case had an exotic instrumental requirement,
it could be referred to a center specializing in this service. Regional and
commercial centers also could be formed for the outsourcing of routine
work, such as marijuana identification. Such centers would ensure
economies of scale. They also could provide services such as fully
automated drug analysis and fire debris analysis.

--National Outsource Clearinghouse. Outsourcing must be considered as a
way to cope with the backlog of work experienced by most forensic
laboratories. At the same time, laboratory managers must be confident that
the laboratories to which they transfer cases are able to perform credible
work. A national outsource clearinghouse could assist managers as they
seek to channel nonroutine case requests to appropriate solution centers.
Such a clearinghouse would further aid the forensic community by
establishing and monitoring routine and nonroutine analysis criteria. The
development of a "Call 1-800-FORENSIC" number would ensure that
laboratories throughout the Nation would have equal access to the most
appropriate services. Finally, the establishment of governmentally
recognized "centers of excellence" would promote the quest for excellence
within the forensic community.

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY PERSPECTIVE

One purpose of the workshop was to explore the kind of help national
Federal laboratories can provide to State and local forensic laboratories.
Representatives of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) attended the
workshop to observe and learn how the Department, especially the Office
of Research and Development, can further contribute to the forensic
community to ensure the broadest support possible.

The Office of Research and Development (NN-20) comes under the Office
of Nonproliferation and National Security. DOE's national laboratory
system represents a technical base in a variety of areas. While there are
significant opportunities to apply DOE technology strengths to law
enforcement problems, there are areas in which DOE does not have
experience, such as casework, how the criminal justice system works, or
investigative procedures. 

Major program areas of NN-20 include:

--Proliferation (Long-Range) Detection.

o Multi-/hyperspectral imaging.
o Chemical analysis by laser interrogation.
o Data analysis.

--Treaty Monitoring.

o Comprehensive test ban.
o Fissile materials cutoff.
o Satellite instrumentation.

--Materials Diversion/Detection/Deterrence.

o Warhead dismantlement.
o Special Nuclear Materials (SNM) tracking.
o Safeguards.
o Radiation detection.
o Nuclear smuggling.
o Law enforcement support.
o Nuclear materials analysis/forensics.
o Cooperative/remote monitoring.
o Counterproliferation (weapons of mass destruction).
o Broad area search and analysis.

Problems within State and local crime laboratories are diverse and vary
from laboratory to laboratory and from location to location. Suggested
actions to help include: 

--Access to national databases to help eliminate some of the differences
that currently exist among various laboratories and locations. Increased
standardization should continue to be a priority.

--Because of regional differences, DOE should continue to foster local
relationships between DOE laboratories and nearby State/local crime
laboratories.

--The Office of Research and Development (NN-20) should serve as a
"clearinghouse" or point-of-contact for research and development and
technology transfer between DOE and law enforcement to ensure the
broadest and most uniform coverage.

--A mechanism for technology transfer needs to be defined.

--Many current DOE programs may only require a slight shift in focus to
benefit the law enforcement community. Dual-use is applicable.
Opportunities exist for transferring ideas, technologies, and technical skills
that have been applied in a number of areas. For example:

o Portable Isotope Neutron Spectroscopy (PINS). PINS was developed at
the Idaho National Environmental Engineering Laboratory for the
interrogation of unexploded ordnance. The system, which is portable,
provides a noncontact, noninvasive, nondestructive method for
determining whether an artillery shell contains normal high explosives,
chemical agents, or other material. The system was fielded in the
Washington, D.C. area when some World War I ordnance was discovered
at a construction site. It also has been deployed in Australia with some
World War II munitions. This technology could be readily adapted to the
interrogation of unknown packages or containers at a crime scene.

o Team Leader. Team leader, a concept developed by Pacific Northwest
National Laboratory, is a portable computer-based system providing treaty
inspectors with site information coupled with global positioning system
(GPS) and communication support. Team Leader automatically integrates
the physical location of the inspector with map overlays of an area (visible
to the inspector in a heads-up display), together with audio, visual, and
other sensor information that is acquired by the inspector as he or she
moves about the location. This system could have law enforcement
applications for gathering and cataloging evidence at a large crime scene
or for guiding a raid on a complex facility.

PARTICIPANTS

Dr. Dwight Adams
Section Chief
Forensic Science Research and Training Center
Federal Bureau of Investigation Academy

Steve Allen
Forensic Science Training Unit
Federal Bureau of Investigation Academy

Jose R. Almirall
Senior Criminalist
Metro-Dade Police Crime Laboratory

Jack Ballantyne
Supervisor
Biological Sciences
Suffolk County Crime Laboratory

James Barrett
Project Manager
U.S. Department of Energy

Jan S. Bashinski
Chief
Bureau of Forensic Services
California Department of Justice

Vivian M. Baylor
Manager
Special Projects Office
Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Albert Boni
Manager
Nonproliferation Technologies
Savannah River Technology Center
Westinghouse Savannah River Company

Dr. Michael J. Camp
Director
State Crime Laboratory Milwaukee

Dr. Antonio A. Cantu
Chemist
Forensic Services Division
U.S. Secret Service

Maj. Robert S. Conley
Commander
Laboratory Division
Indiana State Police

Dr. Cecelia A. Crouse
Supervisor
Serology & DNA Section Crime Laboratory
Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office

Dr. David H. Dye
Head
Technology Programs 
Nonproliferation, Arms Control and International Security
Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory

Salma El-Safwany
Nuclear Engineer
U.S. Department of Energy

Dr. Alim A. Fatah
Program Manager for Chemical Systems and Materials
Office of Law Enforcement Standards
National Institute of Standards and Technology

Frank Fitzpatrick
Director
Forensic Science Services
Orange County Sheriff/Coroner

Richard Fox
Chief
Lab Operations Section
Drug Enforcement Administration 

Robert F. Gonsowski
Laboratory Director
Southern Illinois Forensic Science Center

Gary Gresham
Advisory Scientist/Engineer
Idaho National Engineering Laboratory

Jack. L. Guerrier
Principal Engineer
U.S. Department of Energy

David L. Hendren
Senior Engineer Specialist
Bechtel Nevada

Kathleen M. Higgins
Director
Office of Law Enforcement Standards
National Institute of Standards and Technology

Richard Larsen
Project Manager
Environmental Measurements Laboratory
U.S. Department of Energy

Kevin Lothridge
Forensic Laboratory Director
Pinellas County Forensic Laboratory

Peter Marone
Assistant Director
Virginia Division of Forensic Science

Steve W. Martin
Program Manager
National Security Division
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

Dr. Randall S. Murch
Deputy Assistant Director for Science
Federal Bureau of Investigation

Dr. Paul J. Persiani
Senior Nuclear Physicist
Technology Development Division
Argonne National Laboratory

Dr. Richard Rau
Program Manager
Office of Science and Technology
National Institute of Justice

Gloria H. Reynolds
2nd Deputy Chief
Detroit Police Crime Laboratory

Dr. W. Robert Scarlett
Lead Project Leader for Nuclear Materials Control
Los Alamos National Laboratory

Dr. Steven A. Schubert
Program Manager
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Department of Energy

Dr. Carl Selavka
Director of Forensic Services
Office of Forensic Services
New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services

Robert W. Sibert
Deputy Section Chief
Scientific Analysis Section
Federal Bureau of Investigation

Dr. Michael L. Smith
Chief Deputy Medical Examiner
Toxicology Office of the Armed Forces Medical Examiner

Ann Talbot
Director
Albuquerque Police Department Crime Laboratory

Bradford C. Telyea
Laboratory Director
Oregon State Police

Gregory A. Thomas
Manager
Exploratory Systems Technologies
Sandia National Laboratory

Richard E. Tontarski, Jr.
Headquarters Relocation Director
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms

Ron Urbanovsky
Director
Crime Lab Service
Texas Department of Public Safety

Dr. Peter E. Vanier
Physicist/Materials Scientist
Brookhaven National Laboratory

Carrie Whitcomb
Manager
Forensic Services
U.S. Postal Inspection Service Crime Laboratory

Dr. Richard Wilk
New York City Police Department Laboratory

Amy V. Wong
Director
Northern Laboratory
Virginia Division of Forensic Science

GLOSSARY

Note: Most glossary definitions are taken from Criminalistics, An
Introduction to Forensic Science (Sixth Edition), by Richard Saferstein,
and from the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors/Laboratory
Accreditation Board glossary.

Black Powder
Normally, a mixture of potassium nitrate, carbon, and sulfur in the ratio of
75:15:10.

Blind Sample
A proficiency test sample for which the analyst is unaware of the test
nature of the sample at the time of analysis.

Chemical Property
Describes the behavior of a substance when it reacts or combines with
another substance.

Class Characteristics
Properties of evidence that can only be associated with a group and never
with a single source.

Combustion
The rapid combination of oxygen with another substance accompanied by
the production of noticeable heat and light.

Controlled Substances (functional area)
The identification of controlled drug substances either in pure, legal, or
illicit dosage forms. (Analysis for alcohol in blood, breath, or urine may be
included in this functional area if it is the only toxicological analysis
performed by the laboratory.)

Controls
Tests performed in parallel with experimental samples and designed to
demonstrate that a procedure worked correctly.

Crime/Forensic Laboratory
A laboratory (with at least one full-time scientist) that examines
physical evidence in criminal matters and provides opinion testimony with
respect to such physical evidence in a court of law.

Crime Scene Response and Related Activities
Anything dealing with evidence collection and crime scene analysis.

Critical Reagent
Reagents such as commercial supplies and kits that have an expiration
date. See reagent.

Database
A collection of related information about a subject organized in a useful
manner that provides a base or foundation for procedures such as
retrieving information, drawing conclusions, and making decisions.

Deflagration
A very rapid oxidation reaction accompanied by the generation of a low-
intensity pressure wave that can have a disruptive effect on the
surroundings.

Detonating Cord
A cordlike explosive containing a core of high-explosive material, usually
PETN. Also called primacord.

Detonation
An extremely rapid oxidation reaction accompanied by a violent disruptive
effect and an intense, high-speed shock wave.

Digital Imaging
A process through which a picture is converted into a series of square
electronic dots known as pixels. Manipulation of the picture is
accomplished through computer software that changes the numerical value
of each pixel.

Discipline
See functional area.

DNA (functional area)
The identification and comparison of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA)
detected in "known" and "questioned" biological samples.

Endothermic Reaction
A chemical transformation in which heat energy is absorbed from the
surroundings.

Exemplar
See "known" standard.

Exothermic Reaction
A chemical transformation in which heat energy is liberated.

Explosion
A chemical or mechanical action resulting in the rapid expansion of gases.

External Proficiency Testing Program
Test program whose management and/or control is outside the laboratory
system.

Firearms/Toolmarks (functional area)
Examination and comparison of evidence resulting from discharge
and/or use of firearms; comparison of marks made by various tools.

Flash Point
The minimum temperature at which a liquid fuel will produce enough
vapor to burn.

Functional Area
A major area of casework for which a laboratory may seek accreditation.

Glowing Combustion
Burning at the fuel air interface. Examples are a red-hot charcoal or a
burning cigarette.

Heat of Combustion
The heat evolved when a substance is burned in oxygen.

High Explosive
Explosive with a velocity of detonation greater than 1, meters per second.
For example, dynamite and RDX.

Hydrocarbon
Any compound consisting only of carbon and hydrogen.

Ignition Temperature
The minimum temperature at which a fuel will spontaneously ignite.

Individual Characteristics
Properties of evidence that can be attributed to a common source with an
extremely high degree of certainty.

Internal Proficiency Testing Program
Proficiency testing program whose management and control is within the
laboratory.

Known Sample Technique
A quality-assurance procedure in which a previously identified substance
is submitted to a laboratory for examination to determine the reliability of
the laboratory's procedures.

Known Standard
A specimen of an identified source acquired for the purpose of comparison
with an evidence sample; synonymous with exemplar.

Latent Fingerprint
A fingerprint made by the deposit of oils and/or perspiration. It is invisible
to the naked eye.

Latent Prints (functional area)
Comparison of latent print impressions regardless of method of
development.

Low Explosive
Explosive with a velocity of detonation less than 1000 meters per second.
For example, black powder and smokeless powder.

Method
The course of action or technique followed on conducting a specific
analysis or comparison leading to an analytical result.

Open Proficiency Testing Program
A quality-assurance program where the examiner is aware that the sample
is a test.

Oxidation
The combination of oxygen with other substances to produce new
products.

Oxidizing Agent
A substance that supplies oxygen to a chemical reaction.

Peer
An individual having expertise in a specific functional area gained through
documented training and expertise.

Peer Review
The review of casework for technical correctness by a peer. See technical
review.

Physical Evidence
Any object that can establish that a crime has been committed or can
provide a link between a crime and its victim or between a crime and its
perpetrator.

Plastic Fingerprint
A fingerprint impressed in a soft surface.

Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR)
A technique for replicating or copying a portion of a DNA strand outside a
living cell. This technique leads to millions of copies of the DNA strand.

Polymorphism
The existence of more than one form of a genetic trait.

Practical Training
Hands-on training in a forensic method in which participants apply
methods and perform analysis.

Procedure
The manner in which an operation is performed; a set of directions for
performing an examination or analysis; the actual parameters of the
methods employed.

Proficiency Tests
Tests to evaluate the competence of analysts and the quality performance
of a laboratory; in open tests, the analysts are aware that they are being
tested; in blind tests, they are not aware. Internal proficiency tests are
conducted by the laboratory itself; external proficiency tests are conducted
by an agency independent of the laboratory being tested.

Protocol
A directive listing the procedures to be followed in performing a particular
laboratory examination or operation; the overall plan for analysis of a
particular type of evidence.

Pyrolysis
The decomposition of organic matter by heat.

Quality Assurance
Those planned and systematic actions necessary to provide sufficient
confidence that a laboratory's product or service will satisfy given
requirements for quality.

Quality Audit
A management tool used to evaluate and confirm activities related to
quality. Its primary purpose is to verify compliance with the operational
requirements of the quality system.

Quality Control
Internal activities or activities according to externally established
standards used to monitor the quality of analytical data and to ensure that
it satisfies specified criteria.

Quality Manager
An individual (however named) designated by top management who has
the defined authority and obligation to ensure that the requirements of the
quality system are implemented and maintained.

Quality Manual
A document stating the quality policy and describing the various elements
of the quality system and quality practices of an organization. It will also
reference and note the location of additional material relating to a
laboratory's quality arrangement.

Quality System
The organization structure, responsibilities, procedures, processes, and
resources for implementing quality management. Includes all activities
that contribute to quality, directly or indirectly.

Questioned Documents (functional area)
Examination of any type of printed, typed, or written material for the
purpose of identifying the source, determining alterations, or determining
other means of gaining information about the item or the circumstances
surrounding its production.

Questioned Sample
An evidence sample to be examined for the purpose of comparison or
identification.

Reagent
A substance used because of its chemical or biological activity.

Reexamination Technique
A quality-assurance technique whereby a previously examined sample is
reexamined by a different person.

Reference Standard
A sample acquired or prepared that has known properties (e.g.,
concentration, chemical composition) for the purpose of calibrating
equipment and for use as a control in experiments.

Reliability
Possessing the quality of being dependable. May refer to personnel,
materials, or equipment.

Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphisms (RFLP)
Different fragment lengths of base pairs that result from cutting a DNA
molecule with restriction enzymes.

Ridge Characteristics
Ridge endings, bifurcations, enclosures, and other ridge details, which
must match in two fingerprints in order for their common origin to be
established. Also called minutiae.

Serology (functional area)
The identification and/or comparison of genetic markers in body fluids (or
stains) with those from "known" and/or "questioned" samples.

Smokeless Powder (double base)
An explosive consisting of a mixture of nitrocelluose and nitroglycerin.

Smokeless Powder (single base)
An explosive consisting of nitrocellulose.

Spontaneous Combustion
A fire caused by a natural heat-producing process in the presence of
sufficient air and fuel.

Sublimation
A physical change from the solid directly into the gaseous state.

Technical Review
Review of bench notes, data, and other documents that form the basis for
scientific conclusions. See peer review.

Theoretical Training
Conceptual or abstract, such as training in school classes.

Toolmarks Examination (functional area)
See firearms/toolmarks.

Toxicology (functional area)
Analysis of biological samples for the presence of drugs and other
potentially toxic materials.

Trace Evidence (functional area)
Any analytical procedure utilizing either chemical or instrumental
techniques not specifically covered in other functional areas, including,
but not limited to, fire debris, paint, glass, hair, fibers, and other varieties
of trace evidence.

Validation
The process of performing a set of experiments that establish the efficacy
and reliability of a technique or procedure or modification thereof.