000000Version 1 / Date of Issue: 09.18.2015 / Issuing Authority: Forensic Science Standards Board (FSSB)

OSAC Registry Approval (Legacy) 1.5, Comment Adjudication Response Template

Document Title

Requesting Unit Forensic Odontology

Unit Chair Unit Technical Contact

Name: Ken Asccheim Name: Kathleen A Kasper

Affiliation: Affiliation

Beginning Comment Period Date 5/4/21

End Comment Period Date 6/4/21

Comment Adjudication Meeting Dates 22-Aug-21

# of Members Present

Resolution Date and Vote Outcome 

Note: This template is intended for use by all Units considering a new document for addition into OSAC Registry

ADA Technical Report No. 1077-2020 Human Age Assessment by Dental Analysis

8/22/2021; 13 Yes; 0 No; 1 Abstain. 
1

23456

EF G H I J K L 

Section Page Commenter Editorial or Technical Attached File Comment/Proposals Response Rea

I think that ADA Technical Report No. 1077-2020 Human Age 

Assessment by Dental Analysis should be place on the OSAC 

Registry because it provides many careful points of guidance for 

both the dental expert and others who may need to assess the age 

of a person through dental means. Importantly, this document 

does clearly acknowledge the presence of uncertainty in the 

results of dental age assessments and generally seems to 

mandate the use of age intervals by practitioners, "The practitioner 

provides the best and most accurate assessment of an age 

interval .... Thoughtful consideration should be given to sex, 

identifiable human group, geographic population specificity, and 

environmental factors." The report also notes that "A point 

estimate of age alone is not an accurate way to describe a dental 

age estimation. It is unacceptable because it may lead an 

investigator to misinformed conclusions about the value of the 

estimation." Reporting of limitations is also called for and the 

potential for difference between biological and chronological age is 

discussed.

No response needed because no 

suggestion was made by the 

commenter.

The commenter supports 

3.15 Estimated Age Interval: 

The estimated age interval expresses the mathematically 

determined minimum and maximum associated age range at a 

particular level of uncertainty. Rather than referring in 3.15 to a 

"particular level of uncertainty," It seems likely that referring to a 

"stated level of confidence" or a "stated probability level" would be 

more correct. 

This is a valid comment and will be 

referred to the SDO

We will refer the commen

clarification during the mand

agree with the commenter 

this from enteri

3.16 Expression of Uncertainty (EoU): 

The parameter, associated with the assessment method used, that 

characterizes the dispersion of the values that could reasonably be 

attributed to the measurand. This does not seem like a standard term used in the expression of uncertainty in other scientific fields. 

A more standard term might be measurement uncertainty, which 

has a similar definition in the International Vocabulary of Metrology 

(VIM). 

 Check out this link to NIST: 

https://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Uncertainty/gloss

ary.html This is an ISO defined term and is 

exactly why we used it as written.

 Topic of comment was p

resolved by s

3.22 Level of Uncertainty (LoU)

This characterizes the dispersion of values used for measuring 

dental age assessment based on the variation within the data. 

This does not seem like a standard term used in the expression of 

uncertainty in other scientific fields. A more standard term might be 

random variability, which is often used to describe the subset of 

the uncertainty that can be seen in repeated measurements. 

 Check out this link to NIST: 

https://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Uncertainty/gloss

ary.html This is an ISO defined term and is 

exactly why we used it as written.

 Topic of comment was p

resolved by s

5.2

This section has some language about normal distributions and 

bell curves that likely could be clarified and made to align more 

closely with other descriptions of statistical models in other areas 

of scientific and medical research. 

 This standard is intended for use by 

competent forensic odontologists with the 

requisite formal education, disciplinespecific training. It is a common term used 

to describe a method where the interval is 

defined in terms of standard deviation from 

a mean

Comment is not relevant to 

being con

Will Guthrie, NIST

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 
1

EF G H I J K L 

Section Page Line Editorial or Technical Attached File Comment/Proposals Response Rea

789

11.6 Opinion/Conclusions

The Opinion/Conclusion seems to permit use of reference studies 

that do not include an assessment of uncertainty in age apparently 

without any accounting for that in the reported age interval, though 

the lack of an uncertainty assessment must be reported. A better 

solution might be to incorporate the uncertainty for comparable 

study in addition to reporting that the study used did not include an 

uncertainty assessment and documentation of the uncertainty that 

was used, the study it came from, and the relationship of the two 

populations and samples in each study. 

This sentence states that if a FO is using a 

system and it does not include an 

assessment of uncertainty that it must be 

reported since those receiving the report 

may often assume that it does. The intent 

of this section is not to discuss the merits 

and shortfalls of different methods but 

simply to be certain that they are 

appropriately reported.

We will refer the comment to 

during the mandatory review 

this comment should preven

placed in th

11.6

The Opinion/Conclusion section lack of reporting of a range of 

probabilities based on a set of plausible probability models that 

could have generated the data. This is a potentially large source of 

uncertainty that could influence the results and has not be 

mentioned. For more background on this idea, confer with Lund 

and Iyer (2017) which discusses this issue in terms of the use of 

likelihood ratios in forensic science or the recent book Noise 

(2021) by Daniel Kahneman. 

The Opinion/Reporting section is only 

advocating reporting the information that 

has been published in the methodology. 

The TR cannot request the reporting of 

additional information from the methods if it 

has not been peered reviewed and 

scientifically validated for that particular 

method. If that information is lacking, the 

TR is advocating that that information 

should be reported. The SDO is aware of 

the utilization of the likelihood ratio as it is 

currently being discussed at the ISO TC 

272 level. Unfortunately, a consensus 

opinion on its appropriate use has not yet 

been reached. However, when ISO 21043-

4 and ISO 21043-5 become standards, and 

if there is a US adoption and inclusion in 

the OSAC registry, they will be considered.

Comment is not relevant to 

being con

P. 5 

Preface P. 5 Preface

The document states that “to determine the appropriate use of this 

assessment by any entity in determining appropriate actions " [i]t is 

beyond the scope of this document to determine the appropriate 

use of this assessment by any entity in determining appropriate 

actions based on the estimated age interval as it relates to the 

chronological age of any specific individual” or to ”recommend the 

application of the assessment by any user in determining 

appropriate actions as it relates to chronological age,” yet then 

immediately proceeds to do just that in recommending its use to 

“assist the legal system in answering questions regarding 

immigration, legal age of majority, and legal age of license.” The 

preface also advises that the report “is intended for ... agencies 

utilizing the age assessment information “ Section 10.1.2 reiterates 

that the techniques have “a useful role in assisting legal authorities 

in determining the disposition of cases involving immigration, 

asylum seekers, and legal age of majority or license.” Either the 

document’s scope includes recommendations for use or it does 

not. 

 The document can be used to make an 

age interval assessment for any of the 

outlined purposes. 

The concern is outside the s

what actions any entity take

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 
1

EF G H I J K L 

Section Page Line Editorial or Technical Attached File Comment/Proposals Response Rea

1011121314

P. 5 Preface P. 5 Preface

The preface also states “However, dental age assessment is 

based on large identifiable human group populations and has an 

associated level of uncertainty.” Yet nowhere in the document is 

any description of the potential magnitude of uncertainty made 

clear. Some guidance to practitioners about what uncertainty is to 

be expected under differing circumstances would be useful. 

Particularly important may be an understanding of how uncertainty 

is affected by the mismatch between available datasets relevant to 

populations frequently subjected to this technique. If the potential 

magnitude of uncertainty is unknown by the drafters, the technical 

report should require that examiners/labs do sufficient testing to 

estimate that uncertainty before offering conclusions for use by the 

legal system 

Clarification of Comment

This statement aims to stre

importance of selecting an 

comprehensively reporting th

the TR. However, this is a g

clearly, the incorrect re

conclusion in any forensic 

consequ

P. 5 Background 

In addition, the consequences of inappropriate assessment of age 

can have emotional and legal ramifications. : If inappropriate 

means “incorrect,” that should be made clear. If “inappropriate” 

means something else, it should be explained. 

This is a valid comment and will be 

referred to the SDO

We will refer the commen

clarification during the mand

do not feel this should pre

entering th

P. 5 Background 

The phrase “emotional and legal ramifications” is extremely broad, 

and to the extent the document intends to discuss the practical 

results of error, they may go well beyond “emotional” ramifications, 

including decisions regarding the death penalty, imprisonment in 

adult facilities, and more. 

No response needed because no 

suggestion was made by the commenter.

We agree that this is a con

document, not a profess

document. The TR is ackn

scope of the document a

addressing 

P.5, 2 Scope Note 2

This is not a legal document and is not intended for that purpose. 

This statement should be deleted. What is a “legal purpose”? 

Nothing written in this document could prevent its use in court, and 

to the extent the document seeks to do so, it is misguided. If what 

is detailed herein is of value to a forensic practitioner, it should be 

of value to the legal system seeking to evaluate the evidence 

produced via its implementation. 

The statement is simply stating that it does 

not make a recommendation as to how the 

law applies the finding. It would be similar 

to a technical report for the determination 

of homicide, not stating how that 

determination is utilized in a court of law. 

Area Discussed 

P.6, 3.8 Chronologic Age 

Note: Chronologic age may be expressed in varying degrees of 

precision and can be derived from computer programs that report 

age values using multiple significant digits. To correctly interpret 

and report results, consultation with a statistician may be 

necessary. 

Comment: This standard should be deleted or should be changed 

to require consultation with a statistician before offering any 

conclusion for use by the legal system." At a minimum, a technical 

report should explain both how these programs work and how they 

have been validated with reference to validation studies. 

The Preface clearly states the criteria for 

utilization by the legal system are out of the 

scope of the document. Therefore, it 

cannot be addressed. In addition, the TR 

has made it mandatory only to use peerreviewed, generally accepted 

methodologies. This process ensures that 

experts have reviewed the statistical 

methodology used in the technique. Like 

other modalities such as DNA, the 

statistical review is performed when the 

methodology is created and published, not 

each time a DNA result on an individual 

case is published

Area Discussed 

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 
1

EF G H I J K L 

Section Page Line Editorial or Technical Attached File Comment/Proposals Response Rea

1516171819

P. 9, 4.1

The relative contributions of genetic, environmental, and other 

factors, when examining variability within and between populations 

has not been established. ... Thoughtful consideration should be 

given to sex, identifiable human group, geographic population specificity, and environmental factors. Comment: “Thoughtful 

consideration” does not provide meaningful direction to a 

practitioner. How these factors affect age estimation must be 

explained or the practitioner should be given information on how to 

express the uncertainty that comes from our incomplete knowledge 

about them. 

Like all medical determinations, forensic 

determinations do not consider the relative 

contribution of every possible theoretical 

factor that can contribute to a 

determination. However, this does not limit 

their consideration when making diagnostic 

and therapeutic determinations. This 

sentence states that currently, no 

documented evidence established the 

relative contribution of these factors. This 

document acknowledges that if an 

examiner feels a specific mitigating factor 

exists that should be considered, it can be 

reported. 

The TR is simply stating th

evidence establishing the re

factors at the tim

P. 9-10 4.3

Practitioners should maintain awareness that self-reported 

identifiable human groups may be a sensitive, multidimensional 

concept influencing the reporting of one line of descent 

Comment: It is unclear what this means. Is it trying to state that 

that self-reported race and ethnicity can deviate from the 

underlying genotypes that correlate with studied phenotypes, thus 

contributing to uncertainty? Or something else? 

Yes, that is correct. It states that selfreported race and ethnicity can deviate 

from the underlying genotypes that 

correlate with studied phenotypes.

Clarification requested and 

P.12, 5.2

The use of databases in the evaluation of tooth maturation and 

post-developmental dental changes is an essential component of 

dental age assessment. There is still no uniform consensus 

concerning the appropriate statistical methodology that considers 

both the age intervals reported in the tables as well as the age 

interval among the individual teeth utilized in the assessment. 

Therefore, the reporting of an appropriate standard deviation 

methodology is beyond the scope of this document. 

Comment: Even if no single “standard deviation methodology” can 

be identified as the best, which ones are reasonable to use? 

Without addressing this issue, an expert could be criticized as not 

following any standard practice or consensus. 

The appropriate one to use is defined in 

the individual peer-review method.

Each peer-review metho

methodology used, and tha

this document to determine 

P.12, 5.2

Comment: What is a “standard deviation methodology”? It is not a 

standard statistical phrase (although the “standard deviation” of a 

sample and a population are) and should be clearly defined. The 

mere fact that a variable is normally distributed does not define any 

statistical method. 

It is a common term used to define any 

method where the interval is expressed in 

terms of standard deviation from a mean.

 This standard is intende

forensic odontologists an

requisite formal education, 

6.1 Databases

The desired attributes of a database include: ... 

Comment: An appropriate sampling method is missing from the 

list. 

The appropriate sampling method is based 

on the type of methodology used in the 

analysis and can vary from method to 

method. 

Since the TR is advocating 

have been peer-reviewed 

concerns raised by the com

addressed a

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 
1

EF G H I J K L 

Section Page Line Editorial or Technical Attached File Comment/Proposals Response Rea

202122232425

6.4 Validation Studies 

 Comment: This section suggests but does not say that validation 

studies on various databases do not yet exist (“Testing the 

reliability of the reference datasets and methodologies to an 

unrelated population-specific database of a statistically appropriate 

size and with subjects of a confirmed chronological age can be an 

important tool for evaluating the dental age assessment process.”). 

Regardless of whether this document can point to an error rate 

that might be acceptable for legal purposes, that these validation 

studies have not been done and thus uncertainty not yet known, 

must be made more clear within the text of the document. 

The TR does not address the existence or 

lack of existence of validation studies; it 

simply encourages their use as an 

essential tool in reviewing and validating 

the process. Age tables are created by 

recording the development stage of a tooth 

and the chronological age of an individual 

to create a distribution table. 

This type of study is a ubiq

and is analogous to measur

to create a distribution ta

therapeutic decisions based 

routinely p

9 Dental Radiology 

Although the primary objective in obtaining radiographs is for age 

estimation, practitioners are bound by ethical and clinical best 

practices when assessing subjects. Even though this is a 

nonmedical or dental referral, the primary responsibility is to ensure 

that the individual is provided appropriate and accurate information 

for an individual to give informed consent. 

Comment: Given that one of the major uses of this technique is 

examining minors at the behest of government agencies seeking 

to prove that the ostensible minors are in fact adults, a discussion 

about the ethical implications of taking non-medical x-rays (and 

creating non-medical radiation exposure) is warranted. Further 

discussion about whether informed consent can even be given 

under such circumstances, and by whom, is also called for here. 

We agree that this is a concern, but this is 

a scientific document, not a professional 

practice or ethical document. The TR is 

acknowledging that it is out of the 

document's scope and out of the SDO 

scope. The FO SC would strongly support 

OSAC to create such documents.

Area Discussed 

10.1 Atlas “Atlas techniques” is a specialized term that should be defined in this guide to the available methods for age assessment. No response needed We feel atlas technique is 

described in 

10.1.1 Infant/Child 

As in section 9, a discussion of the ethical implications surrounding 

consent under these circumstances is required. The document 

should clarify how these ethical questions interact with the 

document’s command that “Where the age is not known, the 

benefit of the doubt should prevail, and he or she is presumed to 

be a child.” Presumably, any case where a dental age assessment 

is being done is one in which age is at least in question, so 

direction to the practitioner about who consent can be sought from 

and under what circumstances is necessary. 

We agree that this is a concern, but this is 

a scientific document, not a professional 

practice or ethical document. 

The TR is acknowledg

document's scope and out o

The FO SC would strongly 

such doc

10.1.2 Adolescent

Although the third molar exhibits the highest degree of morphologic 

developmental variability, it remains extremely useful in the 

assessment of age. 

 Comment: Some explanation about how, despite “the highest 

degree of morphologic developmental variability,” this tooth can be 

used (and be useful) in assessment of age is warranted. 

Third molars are the last dental 

developmental morphologic predictor of 

age. Developing teeth, even those with the 

highest degree of variability, can provide a 

more narrow age interval than most post 

formation dental techniques or skeletal 

techniques

We feel this is s

11.2 Case Identification Data 

Case Identification Data This section includes a case identification 

number and if any age-related legal documents were presented at the date 

of subject examination, birth certificate, national identification, passport, 

vaccination certificate, etc. 

 Comment: These documents are plainly biasing and have no bearing on 

the biologic age that the practitioner is ostensibly determining. While they should certainly be noted in a report if presented, the document should at 

least note they should not be seen and why. 

This section of the TR states that they 

must be submitted with the case if these 

documents exist. This section does not 

specify when that reviewer should receive 

the documents nor even deals with 

cognitive bias. Therefore, it would be 

inappropriate to be placed here. 

We will refer the comment to 

during the mandatory review 

this comment should preven

placed in th

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 
1

EF G H I J K L 

Section Page Line Editorial or Technical Attached File Comment/Proposals Response Rea

2627282930

11.3

Biogeographical Information regarding the Individual Also, include 

a written note regarding the mental and cognitive ability of the 

individual in question, their general status, and their height and 

weight. 

Comment: Nothing in this document indicates that dental age 

assessment practitioners have expertise in determining the “mental 

and cognitive ability” of an individual, and beyond addressing the 

person’s apparent general ability to understand and answer 

questions (particularly as they relate to informed consent), 

practitioners should not include such judgments in their reports. 

The TR is simply stating that if the 

information is available, it should be 

supplied. It does not state that the FO 

examiner should assess or review the 

information. 

We feel this is s

11.6 Opinion/Conclusions 

This section summarizes the practitioner's results. The final age 

assessment is a matter of the practitioner's expert judgment by 

synthesizing all available information. 

Comment: “The final age assessment” should, even according to 

this document, be“based on the data and the comparison to the 

reference populations,” not merely be a “matter of the practitioner's 

expert judgment.” 

Response to Comment

Although the actual reporting 

opinion, the methodology s

the radiographs are qua

sentence is simply statin

number is insufficient that 

their expert judgment to ass

was done 

11.6 Opinion/Conclusions 

Comment: As is clear in the document, at least some of the 

information available to the practitioner is inappropriately biasing, 

and should not be included. 

No response needed because no 

suggestion was made by the 

commenter.

Area Discussed 

11.6 Opinion/Conclusions 

Conclusion statements specific to each methodology employed 

includes estimated age, it's corresponding level of uncertainty, 

and an estimated age interval. If a reference study utilized to 

assess chronologic age does not provide this, then state it in the 

forensic report. For cases involving immigration, asylum seekers, 

and legal age of majority or license, include a probability statement 

that the individual has attained the age in question. When 

statistical mean age and standard deviation are known, statistical 

probability can be calculated. 

Comment: If a cited reference study does not include a 

methodology, its level of uncertainty, or estimated age interval and 

is nonetheless used, the practitioner should explain why it does not 

and why it is still suitable. 

This sentence states that if a FO is using a 

system and it does not include an 

assessment of uncertainty that it must be 

reported since those receiving the report 

may often assume that it does. The intent 

of this section is not to discuss the merits 

and shortfalls of different methods but 

simply to be certain that they are 

appropriately reported.

However, we will refer the c

possible need for greate

mandatory review of the 

comment should prevent 

placed in th

11.6 Opinion/Conclusions 

Comment: It is scientifically inappropriate for practitioners to 

provide a “probability statement that the individual has attained the 

age in question.” Whether an individual has attained an age in 

question requires a consideration of all the evidence, which 

includes materials outside of a dental examination (for example, 

school records). It would be more appropriate for a practitioner to 

provide a probability statement about observing this state of 

dentition if an individual had or had not reached an age in 

question. Inverting these likelihoods to arrive at a probability for the 

age would require a Bayesian analysis that is not discussed in this 

report. Indeed, there is no clear description of the statistical 

methods that are proposed and how to describe the reported 

quantities in reports or in testimony. Are the intervals in question 

tolerance intervals? Prediction intervals? Confidence intervals? If 

so, how should the interval be computed, and how should 

“confidence” be explained? 

As the document states, these issues are 

addressed in the individual methodologies themselves. The commenter is referred to 

each method for a fuller response to those 

questions.

It is beyond the scope of 

describe all methodologies. 

includes the statistical meth

beyond the scope of this d

relative mer

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha. 

8 members of the OSAC Legal Task Group: Dana Delger, Jennifer Friedman. Lynn García, Julia Leighton, Kate Philpott, Andrea Roth, Barry Scheck, Maneka Sinha.