WHERE ARE WE WITH OSAC: 

AN IAI PERSPECTIVE 

1 
 

 

 

Steven Johnson 

Senior Vice President, West Virginia Operations 

Ideal Innovations, Inc. 

Past President, the IAI (2014-2015) 

Chair 

Forensic Science Standards Board (FSSB) 

Organization of Scientific Area Committees (OSAC) 

International Association for Identification 

2018 Educational Conference 

San Antonio, Texas 

2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Who Are the Members? 

OSAC Members FSSB Members 

■ +550 Members ■ 20 Members 

– SAC and Resource Chairs 

– Professional Societies ALL – Professional Societies 

– Researchers and 

– Researchers and Academics Academics 

– Private sector VOLUNTEERS ■ New members in 2017 

■ Expertise 

– 25 specific forensic 

disciplines 

– General expertise in 

scientific research, 

measurement science, 

statistics, law, and policy 

■ ~75 OSAC Members are 

members of the IAI 

– Dr. Dave Fowler, NAME 

Rep 

– Melissa Gische, Physics 

SAC Chair 

– Ray Wickenheiser, ASCLD

Rep 

■ Departures: 

– Dr. Sylvester “Jim” Gates 

3 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What Does the FSSB Do? 

■ Forensic Science Standards Board (FSSB) oversees the 

Scientific Area Committees and Subcommittees 

■ Establishes governance rules and policies to ensure the 

development of quality standards 

■ Encourages standards use in the provision of forensic science 

services 

■ Administers overall operation of the organization 

■ Approves standards for inclusion on the OSAC Registry 

■ Engages in all efforts related to forensic science standards 

■ Informs the forensic science community of research needs 

and gaps 

4 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What has been done? 

■ Established an OSAC Technical Publication Series 

– Valuable information gathered as part of the standards 

development process 

■ Foundational 

■ Framework 

■ Guidance 

■ Standards gaps 

– OSAC.TS.0002 -- A Framework for Harmonizing Forensic 

Science Practices and Digital/Multimedia Evidence (DMSAC) 

■ Launched Standards Bulletin October 2017 

– Updates stakeholders about standards in process 

with SDOs and OSAC Registry 

■ Revised current Organizational Priorities guidance for our OSAC 

members, which describes how OSAC works within the Forensic 

Science Community 

5 
 

 

 

Where to next? 

■ Creation of a Foundations Task Group 

– Attempting to balance the importance of each subcommittee by 

having them articulate their understanding of the fundamental 

analysis questions as they apply to the specific discipline – will 

ultimately intersect with the roadmapping strategy (see below) 

■ Standardization Roadmaps 

– Roadmapping allows the subcommittees to navigate the 

complexities of standardization management. 

– This strategy will allow OSAC to provide a “state of standardization” 

on a discipline by discipline basis. 

■ Implementation Task Group 

– Initiated by past Chair, Jeremy Triplett in the summer of 2017, the 

Implementation Task Group collaborated to identify potential 

stakeholders, anticipate potential barriers to implementation of 

OSAC developed standards and engage in processes that would 

assist those stakeholders in adopting said standards. 

6 
 

 

 

 

 

Implementation Strategy 

■ Developed a draft OSAC Registry Implementation Plan; 

finalized in Spring 2018 

■ Opened the draft document for comment in May; received 

limited comments 

■ Created a high level summary chart 

■ FSSB to prioritize tasks and begin outreach this Fall 

7 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Where to next? 

■ OLSS update 

– The OLSS met for the second time last fall with the intent to identify

communication gaps between the SAC, SCs and FSSB. 

– OLSS will meet again this September with the intention of making the

process a “forward looking” enterprise and not a focus on “what could

have been” – more a focus on “where we need to go”. 

■ Lexicon update 

– Lexicon was released for public review in March 

– Response has been mixed but generally favorable 

– There is still significant need for sourcing of many of the terms and

definition 

– Lexicon has been “back-burnered” with the emphasis on getting the

Roadmaps in place and Implementation document vetted to the forensic

science community and other stakeholders 

■ Creation of an Code of Ethics Task Group 

– Concerns over the actions of OSAC members and the potential for a

negative impact on the organization has led to the creation of this TG 

assigned to craft a code of professional responsibility for OSAC

leadership and members 

8 
 

 

 

 

 

Registry Approvals 

The OSAC Registry is a collection of endorsed forensic science 

standards. 

■ Currently there are 11 standards on the OSAC Registry 

■ Currently there are 4 standards in the approval process 

■ 200+ standards projects on the Horizon 

■ Available at OSAC website, through SDO’s portals 

– ASTM 

– ADA 

■ Partnering with SDOs 

– ADA, ASB, ANSI (NIST/ITL), ASTM, ISO, NFPA 

9 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Research & Development 

■ 103 identified research and development gaps 

■ EVERY SAC has identified a research need in their discipline 

– 13 OSAC-identified R&D needs were referenced in NIJ’s 

2017 Forensic Science R&D Solicitation 

– OSAC R&D needs are currently being supported by NIJ 

R&D awards, especially in the Footwear/Tire discipline 

■ Established Interdisciplinary Projects across the disciplines 

■ Identify particular strengths and weaknesses - of all 

disciplines - so that we may chart an effective path forward 

10 
 

Lexicon 

■ Identified and collected existing terminology related to 

forensic science 

■ All Scientific Area Subcommittees, SACs and the QIC, identified over 4K 

terms and their associated definitions 

– Terms and definitions come from a variety of sources 

■ Standards, discipline specific glossaries and dictionaries, SWG documents, 

and OSAC subcommittee generated or modified 

■ Created a database application to include all terms 

identified 

– Lexicon can be browsed and searched by discipline and/or keyword 

– Sources for these terms are complete as possible; some remain as 

”Source Being Verified” 

– OSAC Preferred Terms are identified by a when consensus has 

been reached on a definition 

11 
Accessing the Lexicon 

12 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Challenges: 

■ Conclusion Scales in the Pattern and Face Disciplines 

■ Terminology 

– not all disciplines agree on same definition for many terms 

– Why the OSAC preferred terms are important 

■ Quantifying “Significant Differences” in Trace Disciplines 

■ Addressing for whom the Standards should be written 

■ Good Enough vs. Perfect 

– “living documents” 

■ Uncertainty in Qualitative Identifications 

■ The way ahead (OSAC 2.0) 

13 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We Still Have Work To Do 

■ Within OSAC 

– Registry Approvals 

■ Continued improvement of the Registry Approval Process within OSAC 

■ Revised Technical Merit Worksheet and Guidance 

■ Quarterly FSSB reviews/approvals during in-person meetings 

– Included the Resource Committees and Statistics Task Group as 

part of the FSSB 

– Instituted an annual OSAC Leadership Strategy Sessions with OSAC 

members to seek 360° feedback 

■ Outside OSAC 

– Continue to work alongside our partners, e.g., Federal offices, SDOs 

practitioners, and other stakeholders 

– Promote the adoption and implementation of OSAC Standards to 

forensic service providers, associations, criminal justice system, and 

Federal, state, and local offices. 

14 
 

 

 

 

 

What Are OSAC’s Highest Priorities? 

■ Decrease the number of R&D Gaps 

■ Increase the number of Technical Publications made available to 

our stakeholders 

■ Expand Interdisciplinary Projects across the disciplines 

■ Publish a Foundations Report - a state-of-the-discipline document 

that describes each discipline’s current training, equipment use, 

methods, processes, measurements, traceability, reporting, 

potential for bias 

15 
 

 

 

 

 

How Can You Help? 

Work with Us. 

■ Apply to work with OSAC as an affiliate or member 

■ Subscribe to our communications 

– Newsletter 

– Standards Bulletin 

– Email Blasts 

■ Promote use of the Standards on the OSAC Registry 

■ Find an OSAC member. Let’s talk. (ribbons on) 

16 
 

FOR MORE INFO: 

“OSAC FORENSICS” 

Email: forensics@nist.gov 

www.nist.gov/osac 

As presented 14-Aug-18 

17 
Who Makes Up OSAC? 

Board and Committees 

■ Forensic Science 

Standards Board (FSSB) 

■ 3 Resource Committees 

– Legal 

– Human Factors 

– Quality Infrastructure 

■ Statistics Task Group 

– Statistician and/or 

Measurement Scientist 

appointed to each SAC 

Scientific Area Committees 

(SACS) 

– 5 SACs 

– 25 SAC Subcommittees 

■ Biology/DNA 

– 3 Subcommittees 

■ Chemistry/Instrumental Analysis 

– 6 Subcommittees 

■ Crime Scene/Death 

Investigation 

– 7 Subcommittees 

■ Digital/Multimedia 

– 4 Subcommittees 

■ Physics/Pattern Interpretation 

– 5 Subcommittees 

19 
Composition 2/8/2018 Status 

+550 members 

325 affiliates 

Employer Classification 

Federal: 23% 

State: 21% 

Local: 19% 

Academic: 17% 

Private: 16% 

FFRDC: 4% 

Job Classification 

Practitioner: 56% 

Researcher: 17% 

Educator: 10% 

Other: 10% 

Attorney: 2% 

QA Manager: 2% 

R&D Tech: 2% 

Judge: 1% 

21