Version	1	/	Date	of	Issue:	10.29.15	/	Issuing	Authority:	Forensic Science	Standards	Board	(FSSB)

OSAC	Research	Needs Assessment Form

Title	of	research	need:

Keywords:

Submitting subcommittee(s): Date	Approved:

(If	SAC	review	identifies	additional	subcommittees,	add	them	to	the	box	above.)

Background	information:

1.	 Description	of	research	need:

2.	 Key	bibliographic	references	relating	to	this	research	need:

3a.		In	what	ways	would	the	research	results	improve	current	laboratory	capabilities?

Development	of	methods	capable	of	comparing	IL	extracted	from	fire	debris	to	a	suspected	source.

 1. Smallwood B, Philp R, Allen J. Stable carbon isotopic composition of gasolines determined by isotope ratio monitoring gas chromatography mass spectrometry. Organic Geochemistry. 2002;33(2):149–59.

 2. Heo S-Y, Shin W-J, Lee S-W, Bong Y-S, Lee K-S. Using stable isotope analysis to discriminate gasoline on the basis of its origin. Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry. 2012;26(5):517–522.

 4. Schwartz, Zeland; An, Yan; Konstantynova, Kateryna I.; Jackson, Glen P. Analysis of household ignitable liquids and their post-combustion weathered residues using compound-specific gas 

chromatography-combustion-isotope ratio mass spectrometry. Forensic Science International (2013), 233(1-3), 365-373.

·

·

 5. Vergeer P; Bolck A; Peschier L J C; Berger C E H; Hendrikse J N. Likelihood ratio methods for forensic comparison of evaporated gasoline samples. Science & Justice: Journal of the Forensic Science 

Society (2014), 54(6), 401-11.

Currently	direct	links	between	IL	extracted	from	fire	debris	and	a	suspected	source	cannot	be	

made.

Source	Attribution	for	Ignitable	Liquids	from	Fire	Debris

Fire	debris, ignitable	liquids, source	attribution,	probabilistic	methods

Fire	Debris	and	Explosives 29JAN16
Version	1	/	Date	of	Issue:	10.29.15	/	Issuing	Authority:	Forensic Science	Standards	Board	(FSSB)

3b.		In	what	ways	would	the	research	results	improve	understanding	of	the	scientific	basis	for	the	

subcommittee(s)?

3c.		In what	ways	would	the	research	results	improve	services	to	the	criminal	justice	system?

4.		Status assessment	(I,	II,	III,	or	IV):		

This	research	need	has	been	identified	by	one	or	more	subcommittees	of	OSAC	and	is	being	provided	as	an	

informational	resource	to	the	community.

Major gap	

in	current	

knowledge

Minor gap	

in	current	

knowledge

No	or	limited

current	research	

is	being	

conducted

I III

Existing current	

research	is	being	

conducted

II IV

Current	methods	or	a	knowledge	base	do	not	exist.	This	would	be	novel	research.	Future	studies	

could	build	upon	initial	results.

Creation	of	direct	links	between	criminal	activity	and	suspect(s)	would	dramatically	improve	the	

investigation	of	these	events.

							I
Version	1	/	Date	of	Issue:	10.29.15	/	Issuing	Authority:	Forensic Science	Standards	Board	(FSSB)

// Approval	date:

(Approval	is	by	majority	vote	of	subcommittee.		Once	approved,	forward	to	SAC.)

1.		Does	the	SAC	agree	with	the	research	need?				Yes					 							No							⃝		

2.		Does	the	SAC	agree	with	the	status assessment?				Yes															No							⃝	

If	no,	what	is	the	status assessment	of	the	SAC:

Approval	date:

(Approval	is	by	majority	vote	of	SAC.		Once	approved,	forward	to	NIST	for	posting.)

Subcommittee February	12,	2016

SAC