1

Scientific & Technical 

Review Panel Final Report 

for 

2020-S-0002

Physical Stability of Facial 

Features of Adults

Organization of Scientific Area Committees (OSAC) for Forensic Science
2

STRP Final Report

2020-S-0002

Physical Stability of Facial Features of 

Adults

Organization of Scientific Area Committees (OSAC) for Forensics Science

February 1, 2021

Disclaimer:

This report was produced by an independent Scientific and Technical Review Panel (STRP). The 

views expressed in the report do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the U.S. 

Government. Visit the OSAC website for more information on OSAC’s STRP process.

Scientific & Technical Review Panel Members

• Daniel Heltemes, Arizona Department of Public Safety

• Jodie Linger, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)

• Jonathon Phillips, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

• Kelly Sauerwein, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

• Barbara Spellman, University of Virginia

• Steve Wilkins, Pierce County Sheriff’s Department
3

Report Summary:

The STRP for “Physical Stability of Facial Features of Adults” is an independent panel 

appointed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). An STRP is established

with a range of experts to consider how well a standard meets the needs of the forensic science, 

law enforcement, and legal communities, and to recommend improvements to the standards 

under review. This panel consisted of practitioners with experience as forensic facial examiners 

and researchers with experience in the forensic sciences. The STRP appreciates Lora Sims’, 

Facial Identification Subcommittee Chair, efforts while serving as the subcommittee liaison to 

this STRP during the review process. 

The STRP began its review process with a kickoff meeting on 09/22/2020 and concluded with 

this STRP final report on 02/01/2021. The panel reviewed the draft standard (Version 1.1 

04/20/2020) and prepared comments for the OSAC Facial Identification Subcommittee. After a 

vigorous review process and discussion between STRP members and the Facial Identification 

Subcommittee, the subcommittee revised the draft standard (Version 1.2 12/09/2020) in 

accordance with the panel’s comments. The panel believes this draft standard is an appropriate 

reference companion to ASTM 3149-18 Standard Guide for Facial Image Comparison Feature 

List for Morphological Analysis.

Report Components:

The STRP reviewed this draft standard against OSAC’s STRP Instructions for Review which 

include the following content areas: scientific and technical merit, human factors, quality 

assurance, scope and purpose, terminology, method description and reporting results. The details 

below contain a brief description of each reviewed content area and the STRP’s assessment of 

how that content was addressed in the Draft OSAC Proposed Standard. 

I. Scientific and Technical Merit: OSAC-approved standards must have strong scientific 

foundations so that the methods practitioners employ are scientifically valid, and the 

resulting claims are trustworthy. In addition, standards for methods or interpretation of 

results must include the expression and communication of the uncertainties in 

measurements or other results.

The STRP noted the small number of references in the document. The Limitations section 

acknowledges “the limited scientific literature available.” The panel recommended that the 

Facial Identification Subcommittee include studying the stability of facial features to their 

research needs. The Facial Identification Subcommittee concurs and has a Research Needs 

Assessment (dated 01/29/2016) publicly posted as of the date of this report.

II. Human Factors: All forensic science methods rely on human performance in acquiring, 

examining, reporting, and testifying to the results. In the examination phase, some 

standards rely heavily on human judgment, whereas others rely more on properly 

maintained and calibrated instruments and statistical analysis of data.
4

The STRP believes this draft standard serves as a reference for ASTM E3149-18. While ASTM 

E3149-18 contains a human factors component, this annex document does not. Therefore, this 

topic was not applicable to this draft standard.

III. Quality Assurance: Quality assurance covers a broad range of topics. For example, a 

method must include quality assurance procedures to ensure that sufficiently similar 

results will be obtained when the methodology is properly followed by different users in 

different facilities.

The STRP believes this draft standard serves as a reference for ASTM E3149-18. While ASTM 

E3149-18 contains a quality assurance component, this annex document does not. Therefore, this 

topic was not applicable to this draft standard.

IV. Scope and Purpose: Standards should have a short statement of their scope and purpose. 

They should list the topics that they address and the related topics that they do not 

address. Requirements, recommendations, or statements of what is permitted or 

prohibited do not belong in this section.

The STRP believes this draft standard’s scope and purpose are appropriate. 

V. Terminology: Standards should define terms that have specialized meanings. Only rarely 

should they give a highly restricted or specialized meaning to a term in common use 

among the general public.

The STRP believes the terminology in this draft standard is appropriate. 

VI. Method Description: There is no rule as to the necessary level of detail in the 

description of the method. Some parts of the method may be performed in alternative 

ways without affecting the quality and consistency of the results. Standards should focus 

on standardizing steps that must be performed consistently across organizations to ensure 

equivalent results. Alternatively, standards can define specific performance criteria that 

are required to be demonstrated and met rather than specifying the exact way a task must 

be done. For example, it may be enough to specify the lower limit for detecting a 

substance without specifying the equipment or method for achieving this limit of 

detection.

The STRP believes the method descriptions are consistent with the scope and purpose of the 

document.

VII. Reporting Results: Methods must not only be well described, scientifically sound, and 

comprehensive but also lead to reported results that are within the scope of the standard, 

appropriately caveated, and not overreaching.

The STRP believes the statements for reporting results are consistent with the scope and purpose 

of the draft standard.