EVENT NAME: OSAC Forensic Science Public Update Meeting 

EVENT DATE: WEDNESDAY, 30 SEPTEMBER 2020 - 12:30 PM to 05:30 PM

Posted Questions

1. The 5-conclusions standard has also been very heavily scrutinized by practitioners in 

the Friction Ridge discipline, and there seems to be a great deal of controversy over 

this move. Does it appear as though this is actually going to become the new norm 

moving forward, at this time? 

a. Answered – The FR conclusions standard is with the ASB. As the chair of the ASB 

Friction Ridge Consensus Body, John Splain, explained in another post, that 

document should be put out for public comment soon. I would encourage 

anyone with concerns to submit comments during the open comment period.

b. UPDATE: ASB Standard 013, Standard for Friction Ridge Examination Conclusions, 

First Edition is open for public comment (Comment Deadline, November 16, 

2020). Please download the template for comments to documents posted for 

ballot, and return it to asb@aafs.org by the close of the comment period.

2. Asked: What efforts are being made to integrate NCFS's work (recommendations, 

views, etc.) into the work of OSAC 2.0, especially into the work of the subcommittees?

a. Answered - many of the NCFS's recommendations are being considered as OSAC 

continues the standards development process. It helps that some members of 

the NCFS are current members of OSAC and continue to discuss the outputs of 

NCFS.

b. Answered - When NCFS and OSAC were originally established, it was done with 

something of a 'division of labor' in which NCFS focused on broader, laboratorywide issues, whereas OSAC is more geared toward discipline-specific practices 

and procedures. Therefore, there is not a direct one-to-one correspondence of 

mission.

i. Reply - Thank you. I understand the NCFS was to be making policy 

suggestions and OSAC Subs were to focus on practice related issues - i.e. 

standards. However, I wonder if subcommittees are actively considering 

incorporating some of the practice based NCFS work products into 

standards/guides, such as those by the NCFS Reporting and Testimony 

subcommittee. It would seem worthwhile to remind the OSAC 

subcommittees of the NCFS work and suggest that they have a look at 

NCFS work products to ensure they are not overlooking valuable ideas.

ii. UPDATE: Thank you for the recommendation regarding reporting and 

testimony. OSAC is standing up an Interdisciplinary Committee to gather 

and review reporting and testimony work products produced by OSAC 
subcommittees and external to OSAC. The relevant NCFS materials will be 

included in this effort.

3. Asked: I understand that the standards can be purchased, but are there opportunities 

to access these for free or reduced price for educational purposes (i.e., university 

programs)?

a. Answered - OSAC currently has an agreement for its members to have access to 

ASTM standards. Unfortunately, Standards development Organizations (SDOs) 

do have to charge for standards to maintain their operations. Many Forensic 

Science Associations and Organizations continue to advocate for some form of 

government assistance to purchase standards.

b. Answered - In addition, OSAC also has secured access to all of ASTM's E30 

Committee on Forensic Science's 60ish standards for 30,000 criminal justice 

agencies: see that here: https://www.nist.gov/topics/organization-scientificarea-committees-forensic-science/access-standards

c. Universities may be able to negotiate specific subscriptions with ASTM under 

some other type of educational institution discount that is not part of OSAC.

i. Replied - Thank you both for the info. Final question, if I were to join 

OSAC, would I have access to all ASTM E30 standards? And would I be 

allowed to use these in forensic chemistry courses?

d. Answered - Being a member of OSAC entitles members access to the standards 

for OSAC review/approval purposes, not for business outside of that activity. 

Also, if you ever wanted to join ASTM, it is $75/year and you can get all the 

standards for free. The AAFS's ASB standards are currently available for free 

which deals with toxicology standards, so you can get those already.

4. Asked: on firearms: 3d and algorithms vs traditional: What direction going, how long?

a. Answered - The FATM Subcommittee is developing standards for both traditional 

light microscopy and 3D virtual microscopy. These standards will be able to be 

used in tandem, if a lab desires to incorporate new technology into their 

procedures. At this time, I don’t see traditional light microscopy becoming 

obsolete since even with new virtual microscopy there will be instances that it 

will not be applicable for one reason or another.

5. Asked: Have you looked to use the Judicial Outreach Liaisons (JOLs) to spread the 

word on approved standards? Seems like the information is not reaching the courts.

a. OSAC is always looking for opportunities to liaise with Stakeholders who have a 

vested interest in improving the Forensic Sciences. Please reach out the OSAC 

programs office with your thoughts at Forensics@nist.gov

b. As noted, that is a very interesting idea that we have not explored yet. If you 

could send us some advice on who to speak with about that to 

forensics@nist.gov we can begin to develop that pathway. As a heads up, we 

expect and article to be coming out soon in the ABA Criminal Justice journal on 

OSAC that was written by a Judge and retired prosecutor.

c. UPDATE: The OSAC Program Office received a follow-up email with additional 

information on Judicial Outreach Liaisons and will pursue.
6. Asked: What is the relationship between FSSB and SWGs (international scientific 

working groups? Are the guidelines issued by the SWGs recognized by FSSB?

a. Answered - SWG documents have served as the basis for some OSAC standards, 

while other SWG documents are recognized on the various subcommittee 

websites as "baseline" documents (i.e. reference).

b. Answered - The FISWG (Facial Identification Scientific Working Group) is actively 

working with OSAC's FI subcommittee to convert many of their documents into 

OSAC standards.

c. Answered UPDATE: – When OSAC was formed most standards related activities 

(including SWG activities) transferred to OSAC. Several SWGs still continue to 

meet and make substantial contributions to their relevant forensic science 

discipline (e.g. SWGDAM, SWGDRUG, FISWG). There has been a great deal of 

cross pollination of SWG and OSAC SC documents and many SWG documents are 

considered historical or baseline documents for the OSAC SCs. Many of the 

previously published SWG documents are listed on OSAC Subcommittee 

websites for continued community access. 

7. Asked: Is there a standard for examining vehicle black boxes?

a. Answered - Not yet, but that is a good topic to be addressed in the future.

8. Asked - Evidence for accidents, abductions, and other vehicle involved cases could be 

helped by looking at GPS, speed, and other captured data.

a. Answered - If this is an area of special interest to you, perhaps you should apply 

to join OSAC (if you have not already done so) so you can help get the Digital 

Evidence Subcommittee to develop such a standard (or set of standards!) 

b. Answered - Another attendee forwarded the following in response: " The SAE 

Data Collection and Archiving Committee is currently developing an Information 

Report under J3228 on Digital Forensic Evidence Sources Related to Investigation 

and Analysis of Damage and Injury Causing Incident"

9. Asked: There are 2 ASB published standards for BPA that have been heavily criticized 

as being 'vacuous'. Will these standards be reviewed by the SDO and BPA 

subcommittee?

a. Answered - As part of the OSAC Registry Approval process, all comments are 

evaluated and adjudicated by the BPA subcommittee.

10. Asked: Where would Shooting scene reconstruction fall in OSAC?

a. Answered - It should be included in the Crime Scene Investigation & 

Reconstruction Subcommittee. Also this is a link to the CSI Subs website: 

https://www.nist.gov/topics/organization-scientific-area-committees-forensicscience/crime-scene-investigation

11. Asked: Is there a plan for developing a COVID-19 related standard?

a. Answered - This has not been something that we have discussed but I would be 

interested in exactly what you feel should be addressed. Are you interested in a 

health/safety related standard to follow while examining biological materials?

12. Asked: Is this morphology the same as facial comparison morphology?
a. Answered - The facial morphology is strictly related to the face, head and neck 

area of humans. I think the Wildlife morphology is species specific to the animal 

kingdom and probably includes physiological features on a broader scale.

b. Answered - Morphology is the form or shape of a structure. so, in a way the 

wildlife morphology is similar to the facial comparison morphology. but it is not 

the same because we are dealing strictly with the face while they many more 

items to compare.

13. Asked: Are you considering distance education (online) in the training standards and 

consider the effective way to evaluate this type of training?

a. Answered - Specifically within the CS/DI Sac documents, we have not directly, 

but I think the guidance should apply regardless of training venue

b. Answered - we can bring this one up for Jose to address since there are a few 

Training standards coming out and may have some recommendations. 

14. Asked: I am at NIST, and on an NIJ working group for use of 3D scanners for forensics. 

There is an ISO standard for field checking these scanners (not a calibration or 

comprehensive method). How to ensure that using the ISO method would be valid, for 

judicial/court purposes.

15. Asked: Generic question - would OSAC mind clarifying who "owns" the standards once 

they are on the Registry? OSAC or ASB? Also - if ASB considers/approves non-OSAC 

docs, and if those docs disagree with OSAC standards, what is the OSAC position on 

who the community should follow? Sorry, it gets confusing.

a. UPDATE: The Standards Developing Organization (SDO) that publishes the 

standard that OSAC reviews and places on the OSAC Registry owns the copyright 

of that standard, as it is their work product. OSAC endorses standards listed on 

the OSAC Registry and encourages the adoption of those specific standards.

16. Asked: Will there be a veterinary segment of the new Medical SAC covering animal 

post-mortem or clinical veterinary forensics?

a. Answered - We have not dealt directly with veterinary concerns in the Medical 

SAC thus far 

i. There are several veterinary pathologists and clinicians within OSAC and 

ASB that could be tapped to explore this option, should the opportunity 

arise.

17. Asked: ISO standard is for crime scene documentation (Terrestrial Laser scanners)

a. Answered - I assume we would need to address this in a scene standard, but I 

don’t think that has been addressed yet

18. Asked: Do geological materials include plants?

19. Asked: What is the hold-up in publishing standards for FR? It appears that there are 

several submitted for the discipline but nothing to meet muster for publishing.

a. Answered - From John Splain, Chair of the ASB Friction Ridge Consensus Body: 

The public review of the Best Practice Recommendation for Articulating a Source 

Identification in Friction Ridge Examinations (ANSI/ASB BPR 012) produced 264 

comments. The disposition of some of these comments caused a delay for other 

projects before the FRCB.
b. Answered - Additional info from John: The Standard for Friction Ridge 

Examination Training Program (ANSI/ASB 014) and the Standard for Reporting 

Qualitative Source Conclusions (ANSI/STD 013) both passed procedural ballots 

for public review in August and September, respectively, and will be circulated 

shortly.

c. UPDATE: ASB Standard 013, Standard for Friction Ridge Examination Conclusions, 

First Edition is open for public comment (Comment Deadline, November 16, 

2020). Please download the template for comments to documents posted for 

ballot, and return it to asb@aafs.org by the close of the comment period.

d. UPDATE: The public comment period for ASB Standard 014, Standard for Friction 

Ridge Examination Training Program, First Edition closed on August 20, 2020. The 

document is back with the ASB FRCB for comment adjudication.

20. Asked: With friction ridge standards, do you include ten-print standards or are you 

sticking with latent examination?

a. Answered during the meeting broadcast.

21. Asked: Can you elaborate on where we are on the standard of reporting of the 5 

conclusions?

a. Answered - The standard for friction ridge conclusions is currently with the ASB 

Friction Ridge Consensus Body (FRCB). The ASB will put the document out for 

public comment once it is approved by the FRCB.

b. UPDATE: ASB Standard 013, Standard for Friction Ridge Examination Conclusions, 

First Edition is open for public comment (Comment Deadline, November 16, 

2020). Please download the template for comments to documents posted for 

ballot, and return it to asb@aafs.org by the close of the comment period.

c. Answered - The public review of the Best Practice Recommendation for 

Articulating a Source Identification in Friction Ridge Examinations (ANSI/ASB BPR 

012) produced 264 comments. The disposition of some of these comments 

caused a delay for other projects before the FRCB.

22. Asked: My question is directed towards Jose Almirall. Can you elaborate on the CTS 

collaboration with OSAC?

a. Answered - CTS, ASTM and the Seized Drugs SC are working together on 

interlaboratory exercises. If you want additional information, please reach out to 

OSAC Program Office, for connecting with the Subcommittee.

23. Material 

a. Appy to Join OSAC here: https://www.nist.gov/topics/organization-scientificarea-committees-forensic-science/apply-join-osac

b. OSAC R&D Needs are here: https://www.nist.gov/topics/organization-scientificarea-committees-forensic-science/osac-research-and-development-needs

c. Slide presentations and recorded session: https://www.nist.gov/newsevents/events/2020/09/organization-scientific-area-committees-osac-forensicscience-public

d. Subcommittee Websites: https://www.nist.gov/topics/organization-scientificarea-committees-forensic-science/osac-subcommittees