1

In This Issue 

OSAC in Action

OSAC Program Office News

OSAC 2.0 Updates

FSSB Releases Updated Version of OSAC Organizational Priorities Document

Do We Speak the Same Language? Words and Their Meaning are Important to Standards 

Development

OSAC Registry Implementation Corner

OSAC Standards Activities at a Glance

Professional Organization Spotlight

OSAC in the News

NIST Activities

OSAC in Action

DNA Process Map Coming Soon! 

Members of OSAC’s Biology/DNA committees and the Scientific Working Group on DNA 

Analysis Methods (SWGDAM) met in January to continue their work developing a DNA process 

map for the forensic science community. Expected to be released this summer, this process 

map will describe the current practice for processing, genotyping, interpreting, and 

reporting on DNA samples.

APRIL 2020 
2

Process maps are useful tools that can help 

provide insight into forensic science methods and 

processes, identify areas for improvement, and 

discover where standards may be needed.

Read more about the process maps developed by 

OSAC’s Friction Ridge and Speaker Recognition 

Subcommittees. OSAC’s Firearms & Toolmarks 

Subcommittee is also developing a process map,

and the Seized Drugs Subcommittee will be 

launching a process mapping working session this 

summer.

OSAC at AAFS 

OSAC was excited to participate in the 2020 American 

Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) Annual Meeting

held this February in Anaheim, California. 

• Jason Wiersema, Chair of OSAC’s Crime 

Scene/Death Investigation Scientific Area 

Committee (SAC), participated in a workshop on 

Mass Disasters and Disaster Victim 

Identification (DVI) where the OSAC Registry 

Approved standard, ANSI/ASB Best Practice 

Recommendation 010, Forensic Anthropology in 

Disaster Victim Identification: Best Practice Recommendations for the Medicolegal 

Authority, First Edition, 2018 was discussed.

• Richard Vorder Bruegge, Chair of OSAC’s Digital/Multimedia SAC presented on the latest 

standards development work for the digital evidence and facial identification disciplines.

• Julie Carnes, Chair of the Video/Imaging Technology and Analysis (VITAL) Subcommittee 

and David Marks, Chair of the Speaker Recognition Subcommittee, presented on the 

latest standards development work for the VITAL and speaker recognition disciplines.

• Jeff Salyards, research representative of the FSSB, spoke about statistical learning 

algorithms for forensic scientists and progress in the forensic sciences since the 2009 National 

Academy of Sciences (NAS) Report.

• OSAC, along with our colleagues at the National Institute of Standards and Technology 

(NIST), participated as an exhibitor and shared the latest forensic science standards and 

research activities with AAFS attendees.

We look forward to engaging with our forensic science partners again at the 2021 AAFS 

Meeting in Houston, Texas. 

Credit: Pixabay

Process maps are helpful tools for forensic science disciplines. 

Credit: Nick Youngston, CC BY-SA 3.0
3

New Resources Available from OSAC’s Fire Debris & Explosives Subcommittee 

OSAC’s Fire Debris & Explosives (FD&E) Subcommittee has a new 

resource available for the forensic science community. The 

Analysis of Explosives Reference List includes books, reviews, 

guides, studies, articles, and other on-line resources. The FD&E 

Subcommittee has also updated a similar resource, the Analysis 

of Fire Debris Reference List. Both are available on the FD&E 

Subcommittee webpage. The FD&E Subcommittee appreciates 

the collaboration with The Centre of Forensic Sciences, Ontario, Canada. 

Help Evaluate OSAC’s Material (Trace) Draft Document, Standard Practice for 

Interpretation and Report Writing in Forensic Comparison of Trace Materials 

In preparation for submitting a document to

ASTM for formal standards development,

OSAC’s Materials (Trace) Subcommittee will

be conducting an interlaboratory data

collection exercise to evaluate the draft

of its Standard Practice for Interpretation and

Report Writing in Forensic Comparison of

Trace Materials.

The focus of the first round of this study will

be on forensic paint analysis. Please be on the

lookout for an announcement regarding a

web-based training session introducing

participants to the draft document and

exercise, which is expected to begin this

summer. We encourage you to share this information with your colleagues and visit the

Materials (Trace) Subcommittee webpage to start reviewing the document now, with particular

attention to Sections 1-5 and 9.

If you have questions or would like to participate in the exercise, please contact Andria

Mehltretter at ahmehltretter@fbi.gov.

Credit: Pixabay 

Help to evaluate Materials (Trace) draft document on the 

interpretation and report writing in forensic comparison of 

trace materials. 

Credit: Creative Commons
4

Participants Needed for Organic Gunshot Residue Interlaboratory Study 

OSAC’s Organic Gunshot Residue Task Group (TG) is looking for 

participants to join an interlaboratory study on the collection and 

analysis of organic gunshot residues. This study is intended to 

support a draft standard practice the TG has developed which 

contains methodologies for gas chromatography/mass 

spectrometry (GC/MS) and liquid chromatography/mass 

spectrometry (LC/MS) analyses of organic gunshot residues. 

Visit the Gunshot Residue Subcommittee webpage to learn more 

about the study and how you can participate. 

Help Develop an ASTM Training Standard on Legal Issues 

Past Chair of OSAC’s Legal Resource Committee, Judge 

Christopher Plourd, is leading efforts to develop a legal 

education standard for forensic science practitioners

titled Standard Practice for Forensic Science 

Practitioner and Forensic Science Service Provider 

Training on Legal Issues.

This proposed standard will identify the recurring and 

important legal issues that forensic practitioners and 

forensic science service providers should be aware of 

and trained on. It will be under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E30 on Forensic Sciences 

and the direct responsibility of Subcommittee E30.11 on Interdisciplinary Forensic Science 

Standards.

Judge Plourd has started a work item within ASTM and will be the technical contact for a task 

group within ASTM. He is looking for approximately 10 forensic science practitioners within 

OSAC to participate as task group members in the development of this standard. You do not 

have to be a member of ASTM to be a member of this task group. If you are interested, please 

email Judge Plourd (Christopher.plourd@imperial.courts.ca.gov) briefly describing your interest 

and your background in education and training within your forensic science discipline. 

Credit: Niels Noordhoek [CC BY-SA]

Participate in OSAC's organic GSR interlab study.

Credit: Pixabay

Help develop a standard for training on legal 

issues.
5

OSAC Program Office News

OSAC in Oklahoma: We’ve Come Full Circle...almost 

In 2015, OSAC held its first in-person meetings in Norman, Oklahoma. Five years later, OSAC’s 

Chemistry/Instrumental Analysis and Crime Scene/Death Investigation SACs and 

subcommittees (SCs) came “full circle” and met again March 10-13, 2020 in Norman. 

With approximately 160 attendees at 

the National Center for Employee 

Development, the four-day meeting 

kicked off with the plenary session. John 

Paul Jones, OSAC program manager, 

provided opening remarks and OSAC 2.0 

updates. Among the 2.0 updates, he 

shared the newly proposed SAC and SC 

structures, gave updates on the 

Resource Committee (RC) embedding 

process, and introduced the interim 1.5 

and proposed 2.0 Registry Approval 

processes. 

Karen Reczek, Forensic Science Standards Board (FSSB) Ex Officio, continued the OSAC 2.0 

discussion and provided updates on the newly established FSSB Technical Review Panel (TRP)

Task Group (TG), which will help to develop the criteria, process, and reporting format for 

technical reviews. The criteria and process under development will be piloted this summer to 

see if changes are needed prior to launch. Karen also presented a “big picture” view of OSAC’s 

standards development activities by reviewing the latest subcommittee road map efforts. 

Steve Johnson, FSSB chair, gave updates on OSAC’s organizational 

priorities and their impact on the standards development process. He 

also shared updates on the FSSB Terminology TG that will manage 

and maintain the OSAC Lexicon. The plenary session closed with Chair 

Johnson announcing the recipients of the 2020 OSAC Awards

In addition to the plenary session and concurrent committee 

meetings, the Chemistry/Instrumental Analysis SAC hosted a joint 

session and pitch meeting on the design and management of 

interlaboratory studies for seized drugs, glass evidence, and

explosives evidence.

Credit: A. Getz/NIST 

John Paul Jones, OSAC program manager, kicking off the plenary 

session in Norman, Oklahoma.

Credit: A. Getz/NIST

Steve Johnson, FSSB chair, 

sharing updates during the 

plenary session.
6

OSAC is grateful for the dedication and efforts from all members and affiliates in each of the 

SACs and subcommittees. Together, we will continue our work to strengthen forensic science 

through the development of scientifically sound and high-quality standards. 

2020 OSAC Awards 

OSAC would like to recognize and congratulate the following 2020 award recipients for their 

efforts to further the organization’s mission and objectives.

OSAC Distinguished Individual Service Awards:

• Stephen Greene for his contributions as a founding and serving member of the 

Footwear & Tire Subcommittee, especially in his role as executive secretary. 

• Christina Malone for her contributions as a founding and serving member of the 

Video/Imaging Technology and Analysis Subcommittee, especially in her role as 

executive secretary, for providing outstanding operational support, and serving as the 

subcommittee’s Google guru.

• Carl Sobieralski for his contributions as a founding and serving member of the Biological 

Data Interpretation & Reporting Subcommittee, especially in his role as vice chair of the 

Biology/DNA SAC, and for his leadership in the development of numerous standards for 

the Biology/DNA discipline.

• Chantelle Taylor for her contributions as a founding and serving member of the 

Materials (Trace) Subcommittee, especially in her role as vice chair, member of the 

Tape, Paint and Polymer TGs, and the subcommittee’s Google guru.

• Blythe Toma for her contributions as a member of the Quality Infrastructure Committee 

and helping to create the visual process maps of various OSAC processes. 

• Neil Zielinski for his continued service to the Crime Scene Investigation Subcommittee 

and his leadership in support of the Crime Scene Investigation Subcommittee’s Forensic 

Nursing Task Group.

OSAC Distinguished Group Service Award was presented to the Crime Scene Investigation 

Subcommittee for their work to reorganize the subcommittee and implement a Task Group 

Milestone initiative in order to enhance operational efficiency and effectiveness. The efforts of 

the subcommittee members and affiliates have resulted in a significantly greater increase in the 

output of original draft standards in the past year.
7

Recipients of the 2020 OSAC Distinguished Individual Service Awards (from left to right): Stephen Greene, Christina 

Malone, Carl Sobieralski, Chantelle Taylor, Neil Zielinski. Not pictured: Blythe Toma.

Credit: A. Getz/NIST

Members of the Crime Scene Investigation Subcommittee, recipients of OSAC’s 2020 Distinguished Group 

Service Award.
8

Sharon B. Nakich Award was presented to Scott Oulton for his significant contributions to 

OSAC while exemplifying the helpful attitude, work ethic, teamwork, and positive energy that 

honors the memory of Sharon Nakich.

OSAC 2.0 Updates 

By OSAC Program Manager John Paul Jones II

The FSSB, in collaboration with the NIST’s OSAC Program Office,

has implemented the following changes in preparation for OSAC 

2.0, set to launch on October 1, 2020.

Launched Interim (1.5) Registry Approval Process

This streamlined Registry Approval Process enables subcommittees to advance published 

standards directly to OSAC’s open comment period. The comment periods are announced in 

OSAC’s monthly Standards Bulletin and provide an opportunity for OSAC to obtain feedback on 

whether a standard should be included on the Registry. After the comment period closes and 

any comments are addressed, a standard is then provided to the FSSB for consideration to 

place on the OSAC Registry. This interim process was implemented in February 2020 and 

applies to all OSAC standards submitted to a standards developing organization (SDO) before

October 1, 2020.

Credit: A. Getz/NIST

Scott Oulton receiving the Sharon B. Nakich Award from FSSB chair Steve 

Johnson.
9

Implemented “OSAC Proposed Standard” Template

The cover page placed on OSAC’s Tier 3 documents (i.e., those drafted by OSAC and sent to an

SDO for formal development) has been updated. This new “OSAC Proposed Standard” template 

acknowledges the subcommittee that drafted the document, informs the forensic science 

community and other interested parties that the document is available, and requests their 

consideration of OSAC’s recommendations relating to applicable forensic science practices.

Designated “OSAC Proposed Standards” have been developed with input from experts in a 

broad array of forensic science disciplines as well as scientific research, measurement science, 

statistics, law, and policy. Under OSAC 2.0, the “OSAC Proposed Standards” will be eligible for

listing on the OSAC Registry.

Updates to OSAC’s Organizational Structure

The FSSB has approved several changes to OSAC’s organizational structure, effective October 1, 

2020. 

• Increase from five to seven SACs: The current Chemistry/Instrumental Analysis SAC will 

be split into two. One SAC will focus on drugs/toxicology and the other on trace/fire 

debris. The current Crime Scene/Death Investigation SAC will also be split into two. One 

SAC will focus on forensic medicine and the other on scene investigations. The names 

for each of these four new SACs will be finalized by early summer.

• Reduction in the number of subcommittees from 25 to 22: The following 

subcommittees will be merged to take better advantage of the similarities in expertise 

and topics they address:

o Biological Methods Subcommittee and Biological Data Interpretation & 

Reporting Subcommittee

o Fire Debris & Explosives Subcommittee and Gunshot Residue Subcommittee

o Materials (Trace) Subcommittee and Geological Materials Subcommittee

The updated names for these combined subcommittees will be finalized by early summer.

Transition of Resource Committee Members to Voting Members of Subcommittees

This activity is largely complete with only a few remaining resource committee members 

needing to make the transition to a subcommittee or stay on the specific resource task group 

that will continue after the formal resource committees sunset. The advantages of this 

restructuring were previously described in the February 2020 OSAC Newsletter.

Development of OSAC 2.0 Technical Review Panel Process

The FSSB’s Technical Review Panel (TRP) Process Task Group has met numerous times during 

the past two months to develop the criteria for the selection of TRP members and the 

processes for conducting scientific reviews of technical “OSAC Proposed Standards.” TRP

members will be selected from OSAC’s application database, and to ensure a fresh and 

objective assessment, these panels will be independent of the subcommittee that generated 

the document they will review.
10

After the process and criteria are developed, OSAC will conduct several pilots to see if changes 

are needed prior to launch. The criteria and process will be revised to address any challenges

identified during the pilots. 

FSSB Releases Updated Version of OSAC Organizational 

Priorities Document

The latest version of OSAC’s Organizational Priorities & Minimum Requirements for Standards 

Development is now available on the OSAC website. This document outlines the priorities for 

OSAC to achieve its mission and identifies the minimum topic requirements that SACs and 

subcommittees need to address when drafting forensic science standards. 

Organizational Priorities: History

In preparation for the January 2015 OSAC Meetings, the FSSB issued guidance that instructed 

OSAC units to focus their standards development activities on the following priorities:

• Existing standards that needed updating (e.g., Scientific Working Group (SWG) 

documents)

• Terminology

• Method development

• Training

• Method validation

• Existing standards to be considered for the OSAC Registry

• Topics that cross disciplines and Scientific Area Committees 

• Research Needs

• Cognitive Bias 

• Reporting

These priorities were first published in December 2014 in OSAC’s Principles of Professional 

Practice (PPP) and later updated in September 2016. At a September 2017 FSSB meeting, the 

FSSB determined there was a need to further define what should be included in OSAC drafted 

standards and to provide further guidance on these priorities. 
11

Credit: A. Getz/NIST

The history of OSAC's organizational priorities document.

Based on the outputs from the September 2017 FSSB meeting, the PPP was revised again in 

December 2017 and renamed OSAC Organizational Priorities. This updated document identified 

the overarching elements necessary for OSAC to achieve its mission and the priorities of the 

organization. Following the 2018 OSAC Leadership Strategy Session (OLSS), an FSSB TG was 

formed to review and revise this document again, this time to identify the minimum topic areas 

to be covered (regardless of the SDO used) and to coordinate with the FSSB Standardization 

Roadmap Task Group.

Organizational Priorities: Now

The latest version of the Organizational Priorities document was published in March 2020 and 

will serve as a helpful guide for OSAC units. The document was renamed Organizational 

Priorities & Minimum Topic Requirements for Standards Development and allows for a flexible 

approach to drafting standards. For example, a unit may draft one standard that covers 

multiple areas, or draft multiple standards for a single area. Regardless of the approach, the 

document describes the minimum topic requirements that units must address when drafting 

the following standards: 

• Competency standards

• Physical evidence standards

• Method development standards

• Method validation standards

• Reporting results and testimony standards

• Quality assurance standards
12

In addition to addressing the required minimum topics described in the document, all SACs and 

SCs must use OSAC Preferred Terms when drafting standards, as applicable. SAC and SC chairs 

will be responsible for implementing the requirements outlined in the current organizational 

priorities document according to the guidelines delineated in the graphic below. The FSSB will 

continue to review and revise OSAC’s Organizational Priorities document as needed. 

Credit: A. Getz/NIST

Guidelines on how to implement OSAC’s organizational priorities and the required minimum 

topics during standards development

Do We Speak the Same Language? Words and Their 

Meaning are Important to Standards Development

By FSSB Ex Officio Karen Reczek

One of the first steps in standards development is 

to define terms to ensure everyone is on the same 

page. For example, the International Organization 

of Standardization (ISO) requires new Technical 

Committees to write a terminology standard 

before starting any work items. Terms are an 

essential part of all standards. For a standard to be 

implemented correctly, users need to understand 

it the same way the writers intended. In order to 

avoid misunderstanding, definitions should be 

included for any terms that are included in the 

requirements. This is particularly important if 

technical terms requiring specific interpretation are 

being used.

Credit: Pixabay
13

When OSAC started, an organizational priority from the FSSB was having agreed upon 

terminology that all OSAC subcommittees will use. This led to the creation of the OSAC Lexicon. 

With over 4,000 terms related to forensic science, the OSAC Lexicon contains terms from 

various sources such as existing standards, reference books, Scientific Working Group (SWG)

documents, journal articles, and OSAC subcommittees. All the terms and their definitions are 

sourced, designating the origins of the entry. 

OSAC is continuously striving to improve the Lexicon. For example, we are currently working to 

obtain consensus on terms, as many have multiple entries and may vary in definition. This is a 

long-term task, however. An immediate priority is to obtain consensus on specific terms, or 

“OSAC Preferred Terms.” OSAC Preferred Terms have received input from various levels of the 

OSAC membership and have been approved by the FSSB. There are currently 16 OSAC Preferred 

Terms, with more being approved by the FSSB every month. To ensure consistency and to 

prevent inventing new definitions, OSAC committees are being instructed to use the OSAC 

Preferred Terms and definitions in their draft standards, as applicable. The FSSB has also 

directed OSAC committees to use ISO definitions, whenever possible. The FSSB has established

an FSSB Terminology TG to review and consider revisions to the current process for obtaining 

consensus and approving OSAC Preferred Terms. The Terminology TG will also manage the 

processes for updating and maintaining the OSAC Lexicon. 

Want to include a term and help us grow the OSAC Lexicon? Add it using the “Suggest a Term” 

feature. All suggested terms and their definitions will be reviewed before being added to the 

Lexicon.

Read more about the Lexicon developments and newly approved OSAC Preferred Terms on the 

Lexicon webpage and in future editions of this newsletter.
14

OSAC Registry Implementation Corner

The Association of Forensic Quality 

Assurance Managers (AFQAM) has 

added an OSAC News section to their

website. The first news item AFQAM 

shared was the joint press release

from the Houston Forensic Science 

Center (HFSC) and OSAC announcing the implementation of standards on the OSAC Registry by 

the HFSC. OSAC appreciates AFQAM’s support and we encourage you to check their website for 

future OSAC news. 

Several OSAC members will also be sharing their laboratory’s implementation efforts by 

publishing news articles in various professional association newsletters. For example, 

Jeremy Triplett, recently named as the new director of the Kentucky State Police Central 

Forensic Science Laboratory, will be submitting an article to ASCLD about how one section of his

laboratory met the challenges of implementing the OSAC Registry approved standards related 

to seized drugs. Additionally, Mark Keisler, Indiana State Police Laboratory, Firearms & 

Toolmarks section chief, also plans to submit an article for the AFTE newsletter about 

implementing OSAC Registry approved standards within his section of the laboratory. We look 

forward to reading and promoting these publications soon!

For the forensic science service providers getting ready to undertake standards 

implementation, here are some helpful tools to guide you: 

• OSAC Registry Implementation Plan

• FAQs on Implementation of OSAC Registry Approved Standards

• Laboratory Implementation Declaration Form

• OSAC white paper with detailed “How to” guidance for laboratories to implement 

standards on the OSAC Registry – COMING SOON!

These tools are also available on OSAC’s Registry Implementation webpage. Please contact 

Mark Stolorow at mark.stolorow@nist.gov with any questions or for assistance on your 

implementation journey. 

Has your organization started implementing OSAC Registry Approved Standards? 

Email mark.stolorow@nist.gov to share your implementation experience and be 

featured in a future OSAC news post.
15

OSAC Standards Activities at a Glance

Here’s a look at the standards development activities OSAC’s subcommittees are working on:

Key:

Tier 1: A document on the OSAC Registry; approved by OSAC with the highest level of vetting.

Tier 2: OSAC supported document that completed the SDO consensus process and was published by an SDO.

Tier 3: An OSAC draft document that was sent to an SDO for further development. The document was drafted with 

input from OSAC’s resource committees and approved by the SAC.

Tier 4: A working draft document inside OSAC’s development process and not yet publicly available.

For a complete list of the standards in the development process, please visit the relevant OSAC 

subcommittee webpage. 
16

Professional Organization Spotlight

By OSAC FSSB ASCLD representative Ray Wickenheiser

The American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors 

The American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors (ASCLD) is a 

nonprofit professional society of crime laboratory directors and forensic 

science managers dedicated to providing excellence in forensic science 

through leadership and innovation. The purpose of the organization is 

to foster professional interests; assist the development of laboratory 

management principles and techniques; acquire, preserve and 

disseminate forensic based information; maintain and improve 

communications among crime laboratory directors; and to promote, 

encourage, and maintain the highest standards of practice in the field.

As the organization representing crime laboratory leadership, ASCLD 

continues to support the efforts of the OSAC. ASCLD members continue to provide employees 

from their organizations to participate in the development of standards in OSAC. 

In addition, ASCLD has a Standards and Accreditation Initiatives Committee which focuses on 

promoting accreditation, standards development, and standards implementation. Through the 

weekly Crime Lab Minute newsletter, ASCLD notifies its membership of opportunities to review

these standards as they are published by an SDO and requests feedback on the impact of any 

standards recommended for addition to the OSAC Standards Registry. This committee has also 

made recommendations on standards implementation to the ASCLD Board of Directors and is 

working on an implementation resource document for the ASCLD Membership.

On February 10, 2020, the ASCLD Forensic Research Committee and Standards & Accreditation 

Initiatives Committee, with support of the OSAC and International Association for Identification 

(IAI), distributed a web-based online survey. The survey will promote understanding of the 

extent to which standards and best practice recommendations developed or approved by OSAC 

have been or will be implemented or intend to be implemented into agency/organization 

standard operating procedures. Key challenges and barriers to implementation will be captured 

as well. This survey provides an important mechanism for identifying potential solutions for

lowering implementation barriers and increase the likelihood that agencies/organizations can 

improve consistency and quality of forensic science practices using OSAC-developed standards.

On March 31, 2020, the survey closed and ASCLD has initiated their review of the data. The 

survey received 214 participant responses from the joint ASCLD and IAI membership – the vast 

majority representing U.S. city/county government (59%) and U.S. state government (24%) 

agencies. The survey captured a variety of perspectives – of the participants that responded, 

57% were practicing examiners, 28% were supervisors/managers, and 6% were quality 

assurance managers. 

Ray Wickenheiser, FSSB 

ASCLD Representative
17

Over the next few months, ASCLD will be working to analyze the results and identify potential 

solutions to support the community with the adoption of standards and best practice 

recommendations. The ASCLD expects to have a summary available by Fall 2020 and a strategy 

to assist the community by Winter 2020.

OSAC in the News

The Increasing Visibility of Forensic Chemistry

Jose Almirall, Chair of the Chemistry/Instrumental 

Analysis SAC, shares his thoughts on how applied 

research and standardization are improving the 

forensic chemistry disciplines. 

The Researcher’s Role in Technology Transition

NIST helps to understand and communicate the 

needs of the practitioner community through the 25 

discipline specific OSAC Subcommittees.

Two New Guides Aim to Train the Forensic Sciences Analysts on Paint, Tape Evidence

Two ASTM guides, initially developed by OSAC’s Materials (Trace) Subcommittee, could help 

train forensic analysts to conduct trace evidence examinations. 

The ISHI Report – February 2020

An Update from the Organization of Scientific Area Committees (OSAC) for Forensic Science.

NIST Activities 

Participants Needed for Bullet Black Box Study

NIST and Noblis are seeking participants for a bullet black box study to evaluate the accuracy, 

repeatability, and reproducibility of bullet comparisons by firearms examiners. 

In Glowing Colors: Seeing the Spread of Drug Particles in a Forensic Lab

Black-light videos from NIST will help crime labs manage an invisible risk. 

Divide and Conquer: New Algorithm Examines Crime-Scene Bullets Segment by Segment

Read how NIST scientists used advanced imaging techniques to create digital replicas of these 

important historical artifacts. 

Credit: Pixabay
18

Forensic Handwriting Examination and Human Factors: Improving the Practice Through a 

Systems Approach

A report from the expert working group on human factors in handwriting analysis.

NIST Tests Forensic Methods for Getting Data From Damaged Mobile Phones

Scientists at NIST put law enforcement hacking tools to the test.