1

Message from the Chair

I am honored to serve as the Chair of the 

Forensic Science Standards Board (FSSB) 

for 2022-2023. The FSSB and OSAC are 

privileged to have dedicated volunteers 

who unselfishly donate their knowledge, 

skills, and passion towards the generation 

of proposed standards to improve 

forensic science. We are likewise very 

fortunate to be supported by a talented 

OSAC Program Office that excels at 

service and approachability. It is thrilling 

to work with such a combined 

professional group in a noble common purpose of establishing a sound 

framework to support objective data and results to further justice. Thank 

you for your ongoing effort and commitment!

While our focus remains on developing quality standards to populate the 

OSAC Registry, we are expanding our vision to include support for the 

implementation of standards. NIST’s current partnership with the 

American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) provides fact sheets and 

checklists to support the awareness, evaluation, and implementation of 

standards. Our Registry Implementation Survey and self-declarations from 

forensic science service providers help us better understand how standards 

on the OSAC Registry are being used. We have also commenced an 

Implementer Cohort Task Group, which will be working with mentors 

whose laboratories have implemented standards to share experiences and 

assist other laboratories with implementation. We are very excited to 

facilitate labs helping labs.

 

FALL 2022 

& ANNUAL 

REPORT 

 

 

 

In this Issue

Message from the 

Chair

OSAC 2022 Registry 

Implementation 

Survey –

Preliminary Results

OSAC Registry 

Implementation 

Updates

OSAC News

OSAC: A Year in 

Review

OSAC & Other 

Forensic Science 

Events

NIST Research 

Activities

Ray Wickenheiser, FSSB Chair
2

The FSSB has also supported the development of a Reporting and Testimony guidance document. This serves as 

a model and is the first of a potential group of multidisciplinary guidance documents, the next of which will be a 

Proficiency Testing guidance document. These guidance documents will provide a roadmap for OSAC 

subcommittees as they develop their work products.

We have also approved our Long Term Strategic Plan, which has now been solidified to include various 

milestones and deliverables. This plan will chart our progress in four key areas: Inclusion, Development of 

Standards, Implementation and Continuous Improvement.

Development and implementation of standards to improve forensic science are both a long term and worthy 

efforts. It is a consensus-based approach, which is made stronger by the inclusion of a wide variety of 

viewpoints. It also comes with compromise, where documents are frequently aspirational, and it will take time 

to build our systems based on continuous improvement. Thank you again for your selfless dedication to 

improving our field of forensic science!

Best regards,

Ray Wickenheiser, FSSB Chair

2022 OSAC Registry 

Implementation 

Survey: Preliminary 

Results

Background

The OSAC Registry Implementation Survey is a tool OSAC has used to assess the state of implementation of the 

standards on the OSAC Registry. The first survey, which was open from June 10, 2021 through August 31, 2021, 

provided a snapshot and assessment of 46 standards that were posted on the OSAC Registry through March 

2021.

In June 2022, OSAC released its second survey which provided an assessment of 95 standards posted on the 

Registry through June 2022. This newsletter provides a preliminary look at the survey results. A detailed report, 

focusing specifically on the 20 disciplines and 95 standards represented in the survey, will be released in 

February 2023.

Data Analysis

OSAC received a total of 181 survey responses. Twenty-five responses from non-forensic science service 

providers (FSSPs) and foreign organizations were not included in the data analysis. 

The survey requested one response be submitted per location. For example, a state or Federal laboratory with 

multiple laboratories was asked to provide one response for each laboratory system’s city, region, or district. 
3

The OSAC Program Office (OPO) reviewed any uncertain replies to determine if responses were intended for one 

or multiple locations.

Additionally, OPO also reviewed responses from those who indicated their organization had not implemented 

any standards on the OSAC Registry to determine if any were operational laboratories that were accredited. 

OPO validated that 17 of these 18 self-identified “non-implementers” are accredited, meaning they have 

implemented either ISO 17025 or ISO 17020 which are standards on the OSAC Registry. ISO 17025:2017 is the 

General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories and ISO 17020: 2012 is 

Conformity Assessment—Requirements for the Operation of Various Types of Bodies Performing Inspection.

After reviewing and verifying any uncertain replies with the survey participants, OSAC was able to include 21 

back into the survey, resulting in a total of 177 responses that were included in the data analysis. 

Of the 177 survey respondents, 49 said their organization has not implemented any standards on the OSAC 

Registry, while 128 reported that their organization has fully or partially implemented standards on the OSAC 

Registry.

Respondents’ demographic information was evaluated to allow the results to be combined and sorted by 

organization. Data analyses were used to help visualize trends among the selections made by FSSPs, such as the 

number of standards implemented, level and priority of implementation efforts, and the key challenges 

encountered in implementation.

Respondent Demographics

Geographic Regions 

The 177 respondents represented 40 states in the U.S. and the territory of Puerto Rico. Geographic region 

groups were used as defined by the U.S. census1. The Southern region of the U.S., which includes the South 

Atlantic, East South Central and West South Central divisions, was most heavily represented in the 2022 survey. 

The Western region, consisting of the Mountain and Pacific divisions, was the second most common region 

represented. 

Geographic Regions: 2021 & 2022 Comparison

Thirty-eight states were represented in the 2021 survey. FSSPs represented 40 states in the 2022 survey 

including new representation from CT, VT, IA, NE, ND, MS, TN, MT, and PR.

The Southern and Western regions were the most represented areas in both the 2021 and 2022 surveys. See 

Table 1 for a comparison of regions and the number of respondents from the 2021 and 2022 surveys. 

1 https://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/maps-data/maps/reference/us_regdiv.pdf
4

Table 1: Comparison of regions and number of respondents in the 2021 and 2022 OSAC Registry Implementation Surveys

Organization Types 

Of the 177 respondents, most were from U.S. state government organizations (41.8%) with the U.S. county 

government (23.2%) organization type being the second most common. Other U.S. organization types 

represented included city government (15.3%), private (15.3%), federal (2.8%), and academic (1.7%) 

organizations (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Organization types represented in the 2022 OSAC Registry Implementation Survey

Organization Types: 2021 & 2022 Comparison

U.S. state government was the most represented organization type in both the 2021 and 2022 surveys. See 

Table 2 for a comparison of organization types represented in the 2021 and 2022 surveys. 
5

Organization Types 2022 (177 respondents) 2021 (155 respondents)

U.S. State Government 41.8% 47.1%

U.S County Government 23.2% 18.7%

U.S. City Government 15.3% 15.5%

Private 27% 12.9%

Federal 2.8% 5.2%

Academia 1.7% 0.6%

Table 2: Comparison of the organization types represented in the 2021 and 2022 OSAC Registry Implementation 

Surveys

Respondent Roles 

Of the 177 respondents, 32.8% were working as quality managers, followed by 30.5% working in a director or 

deputy role. Other positions represented included practitioners/examiners (18.6%), managers/section leaders 

(14.1%), and medical examiners/coroners - deputy medical examiners/coroners (4.0%) (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Respondent roles represented in the 2022 OSAC Registry Implementation Survey

Respondent Roles: 2021 & 2022 Comparison

Quality Managers were the most represented role in both the 2021 and 2022 surveys. See Table 3 for a 

comparison of the roles represented in the 2021 and 2022 surveys. 
6

Respondent Roles 2022 (177 respondents) 2021 (155 respondents)

Director/Deputy Director 30.5% 37.4%

Quality Manager 32.8% 40.6%

Manager/Section Leader 14.1% 11%

Practitioner/Examiner 18.6% 9.7%

Medical Examiner/Coroner 4% N/A

Organization Owners N/A 1.3%

Table 3: Comparison of Respondent Roles represented in the 2021 & 2022 OSAC Registry Implementation Surveys

OSAC Registry Awareness 

Survey participants were asked whether individuals in their organization were aware of the OSAC Registry. Most 

respondents, 164 out of 177 (93%), acknowledged that individuals in their organization were knowledgeable of 

the standards on the OSAC Registry. 

OSAC Registry Awareness: 2021 & 2022 Comparison

When asked this question in the 2021 survey, 153 out of 155 respondents (98%) were aware of the standards on 

the OSAC Registry (Figure 3).

Figure 3: OSAC Registry awareness: Comparison between the 2021 and 2022 OSAC Registry Implementation Surveys
7

Priority for Standards Implementation 

When asked what priority survey participants considered standards implementation for their organization, 

43.5% said it was a high priority (very important) and 33.9% said it was a medium priority (important). Of the 

177 respondents, 37 (20.9%) indicated that implementation was a low priority or not a priority at this time and 

three (1.7%) said implementation was not applicable for their organization (Figure 4).

Figure 4: Priority for standards implementation identified in the 2022 OSAC Registry Implementation Survey

Priority for Standards Implementation: 2021 & 2022 Comparison

According to the 177 respondents to the 2022 survey, implementation was seen as a higher priority compared 

to the 155 respondents in the 2021 survey (Figure 5).

Figure 5: Priority for standards implementation: Comparison between the 2021 and 2022 OSAC Registry Implementation 

Surveys
8

Key Challenges to Implementation 

OSAC wanted to learn more about the challenges organizations faced when implementing standards on the 

OSAC Registry. Survey participants were asked to select up to five key challenges from a list of 14 options. From 

a total of 434 responses to this question, 70 indicated there were no major challenges and their organization 

supports implementation policies. See Table 4 for the complete list of key challenges and number of responses.

Table 4: Key Challenges to Standards Implementation Identified in the 2022 OSAC Registry Implementation Survey

Organizations Participating in Full and Partial Standards Implementation 

This survey assessed the state of implementation, either full or partial, of the 95 standards that were posted on 

the Registry through June 2022. Of these, 79 were SDO published and 16 were OSAC Proposed Standards.

Of the 177 survey respondents, 49 indicated that they have not implemented, either fully or partially, any of the 

standards on the OSAC Registry. The remaining 128 respondents (referred to as “implementers” in the rest of 

the report) have either partially or fully implemented at least one standard on the OSAC Registry.

All 79 SDO published standards and 15 OSAC Proposed Standards have been implemented, either fully or 

partially. Only one OSAC Proposed standard, OSAC 2021-N-0009, Standard Practice for the Collection and 

Preservation of Organic Gunshot Residue Analysis, has not yet been implemented in any organizations 

represented by the survey respondents.

Full or Partial Implementation: Published Standards

As mentioned above, all 79 SDO published standards represented in this survey have been implemented, either 

fully or partially. The SDO published standard that has been implemented the most by organizations is ISO/IEC 

17025:2017 General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories. This standard 

specifies the general requirements for the competence, impartiality, and consistent operation of laboratories 

and is a key standard used to accredit forensic laboratories. Of the 128 implementers, 91 have implemented ISO 

17025:2017, either fully or partially. 
9

After ISO 17025:2017, the standard that was implemented the most was ASTM E2917-19a, Standard Practice for 

Forensic Science Practitioner Training, Continuing Education, and Professional Development. This standard 

provides foundational requirements for the training, continuing education and professional development of 

forensic science practitioners to include training criteria toward competency, documentation, implementation 

of training, and continuous professional development. Of the 128 implementers, 87 have implemented ASTM 

E2917-19a, either fully or partially.

The discipline-specific standards that have been implemented the most are in the seized drugs discipline and 

include ASTM E2329-17, Standard Practice for Identification of Seized Drugs and ASTM E2548-16, Standard 

Guide for Sampling Seized Drugs for Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis. Of the 128 implementers identified in 

this survey, 67 have implemented ASTM E2329-17 and 65 have implemented ASTM E2548-16, either fully or 

partially.

See Figure 6 for the top 10 implemented SDO published standards represented in this survey.

Figure 6: The top 10 implemented published standards from the 2022 OSAC Registry Implementation Survey

Full or Partial Implementation: OSAC Proposed Standards

Of the 16 OSAC Proposed Standards represented in this survey, only OSAC 2021-N-0009, Standard Practice for 

the Collection and Preservation of Organic Gunshot Residue Analysis, has not yet been implemented in 

organizations.

Of the OSAC Proposed Standards on the Registry, two friction ridge standards have been implemented the most. 

The first, OSAC 2022-S-0012, Standard for Proficiency Testing in Friction Ridge Examination describes the 

minimum requirements for the selection, development, validation, administration, evaluation, and 

documentation of proficiency tests to assess the performance of personnel and the overall quality system of a 

forensic service provider related to friction ridge examination. Of the 128 implementers, 33 have implemented 

this standard, either fully or partially.
10

The second most implemented OSAC Proposed Standard, OSAC 2021-N-0020, Best Practice Recommendations 

for Limited Friction Ridge Examinations, describes what limited examinations are and provides the best practice 

recommendations on how limited examinations should be conducted. Of the 128 implementers, 31 have 

implemented this OSAC standard, either fully or partially.

There were no SDO published standards available for the friction ridge discipline at the time of this survey. 

Perhaps this is the reason that the survey results support the observation that these friction ridge OSAC 

Proposed Standards were the most implemented. 

See Figure 7 for the number of respondents that have indicated full or partial implementation of the 16 OSAC 

Proposed Standards in this survey.

Figure 7: Number of implementers (out of 128) that have indicated full or partial implementation of the 16 OSAC Proposed 

Standards in the 2022 OSAC Registry Implementation Survey

Key Takeaways from 2022 Initial Survey Data:

• 128 forensic science service providers have implemented standards on the OSAC Registry. Of the 95 

standards included in this survey, 94 are being implemented. 

• Survey responses represent forensic science service providers from 40 states and the territory of Puerto 

Rico, and across a range of organization types, roles, and geographical regions.

• 93% of the survey respondents are aware of the standards on the OSAC Registry. 

• 44% of the survey respondents consider implementation a high/very important priority. 

• Survey responses identified the top key challenges to implementation as not having personnel to 

allocate to the task and not having the instruments and/or facility to support implementation. 

OSAC will be publishing a detailed report in February 2023 which will provide specific implementation 

information on each the 95 standards and 20 disciplines represented in the 2022 survey.
11

OSAC Registry Implementation Updates

OSAC Expands Outreach to Non-Traditional Laboratories

Courtesy of Steve Johnson, Outreach Contractor, OSAC Program Office

As part of the OSAC mission to strengthen “the nation's use of forensic 

science by facilitating the development of technically sound standards and 

guidelines and encouraging their use throughout the forensic science 

community”, the leadership of the organization has been reaching out to 

community stakeholders to encourage implementation of standards that 

have made it through the vetting process and are on the OSAC Registry. To 

increase this outreach effort, the OSAC Program Office (OPO) has added a 

non-traditional outreach contractor to their team to engage with those 

FSSPs that fall outside the 410 currently recognized laboratories. These nontraditional FSSPs represent thousands, if not tens of thousands, of small 

forensic operations that may only provide examination or analysis support in 

one or a few disciplines. Many of these non-traditional FSSPs are extensions of 

law enforcement agencies but a good number of them are privately owned and operated. OSAC believes these 

non-traditional FSSPs are significant stakeholders in the standards development and implementation effort and 

providing a resource to initiate communication and open channels to the organization is the next, best step to 

building the enterprise. I am fortunate and am honored to act as that representative to the OPO.

Among the disciplines that are often under-represented or (possibly) overlooked in the non-traditional realm are 

latent print examination, facial examination, footwear examination, firearms/tool mark examination, crime 

scene investigation and digital evidence (among others). Of these, perhaps the most widespread from a nontraditional FSSP perspective is digital evidence. As many of you know, digital evidence was not part of the 

original OSAC structure and came to the table nearly a year after the launch of OSAC in 2014. Since then, the 

Digital Evidence Subcommittee has been an active member of the OSAC team. There is an estimated 11,000 

digital evidence FSSPs in the United States. Trying to identify and communicate with all of them to encourage 

standards implementation will be a daunting task. A part of my duties as an standards implementation advocate, 

I will be working with OSAC’s Digital Evidence Subcommittee and the Scientific Working Group for Digital 

Evidence (SWGDE) to identify interested stakeholders and open some lines of communication. 

Latent prints, footwear/tire track, firearms, and bloodstain pattern examination are traditional law enforcement 

forensic support services and have histories that go back decades (e.g., over 100 years for latent prints!). Many 

law enforcement agencies still have small, non-traditional FSSP operations that include these (and other) 

disciplines, and they will be a target of OSAC’s expanded outreach efforts. In my experience as a crime 

laboratory manager for a medium-sized, metropolitan law enforcement agency, I understand the challenges 

these labs face achieving and maintaining the high standards of operation that are expected from FSSPs in 

today’s environment. Being an advocate for these operations with that experience as a guide, I feel I can be a 

valuable conduit of information regarding the values of standards implementation. 

Pursuant to my duties as an implementation advocate, I will be reaching out to laboratories, organizations, 

associations and other FSSPs and stakeholders to spread the word about the OSAC mission. It is hoped that this 

opportunity to expand our outreach will grow our list of “implementers” at a much greater rate. As a past 

member and chair of the OSAC Forensic Science Standards Board and a current member of the Facial

Identification Subcommittee, I understand the importance and value of our mission. 

Steve Johnson, new contractor in 

the OSAC Program Office and 

Implementation Advocate for nontraditional FSSPs
12

I am open to suggestions on who or what organization/agency may be interested in OSAC and standards 

adoption, and I invite any of you to reach out to me with recommendations for points of contact or potential 

partners. 

I recently returned from Bogota, Colombia on a separate (but equally important) mission in support of the 

forensic sciences. I was asked to present at the inaugural educational conference of the Colombian Division of 

the International Association for Identification (IAI) and was impressed and encouraged by the thirst for 

knowledge and devotion to the forensic sciences that was on display at this event. That devotion included 

interest in OSAC and a desire to attain a high-level of professionalism and utilizing scientifically based guidelines 

and standards in their labs across Central and South America. In more than one presentation, OSAC was 

mentioned as a valuable resource for their agency or organization. We should take some serious pride in 

knowing that the work we are doing is bearing fruit, not only in the U.S. but around the world. I hope I can 

continue this mission and build bridges between OSAC and the non-traditional FSSPs and appreciate your 

support as that effort engages in the coming year.

OSAC News

FSSB Member Appointments: FY 2023 

This past fall, the FSSB approved the following FSSB Executive Task Group and new FSSB members for FY 2023. 

These individuals began their roles on October 1, 2022.

FSSB Executive Task Group Members:

Ray Wickenheiser, FSSB Chair,

American Society of Crime 

Laboratory Directors (ASCLD) 

representative

Christopher Krug, FSSB Vice Chair,

Association of Forensic Quality 

Assurance Managers (AFQAM) 

representative and Quality Task 

Group liaison

Sarah Kerrigan, FSSB Executive 

Secretary, Society of Forensic 

Toxicologists (SOFT) representative

New FSSB Members:

• Sally Aiken, National Association of Medical Examiners (NAME) representative

• Elissia Conlon, New York City Office of Chief Medical Examiner Office, Medicine SAC chair

• Lynn Garcia, Texas Forensic Science Commission, FSSB liaison to Legal Task Group

• Marcela Najarro, NIST, FSSB NIST Ex Officio

To see all the current members of OSAC’s FSSB, visit the FSSB webpage on the OSAC website. 
13

Members of OSAC’s FSSB were finally able to meet in-person in December 2022 for their winter quarterly meeting held in 

Austin, TX.

OSAC Awards 

The following individuals and group were recognized for their outstanding 

and extraordinary efforts in furthering OSAC’s mission. The award recipients 

were announced and presented with a certificate at the spring 2022 OSAC 

Meetings or at the OSAC Leadership Strategy Session (OLSS) held this past

September. 

Distinguished Individual Service Award 

• Julie Carnes, current affiliate and past VITAL Subcommittee Chair

• Brian Higgins, past Human Forensic Biology Subcommittee Vice Chair 

• Kelly Keyes, Medicolegal Death Investigation Subcommittee Chair

• Ryan Lilien, Member of the Firearms & Toolmarks Subcommittee

• Kimberlee Moran, Crime Scene Investigation & Reconstruction Subcommittee Executive Secretary

• Lori Nix, Member of the Facial Identification Subcommittee, Quality Task Group representative, and 

FSSB Terminology Task Group Chair

• Jennifer Remy, Member of Trace Materials Subcommittee, Quality Task Group representative, and 

ASTM representative for hairs/fibers

• Anne Slaymaker, Drugs Subcommittee past Executive Secretary and current Vice Chair
14

Outstanding Group Award

OSAC’s Human Forensic Biology Subcommittee was recognized for their outstanding work efforts in furthering 

OSAC’s mission. 

Sharon B. Nakich Award

Matthew Gamette was the recipient of the 2022 Sharon B. Nakich Award. 

In honor of our colleague, Sharon Nakich, this OSAC peer-to-peer award 

acknowledges a helpful attitude, kindness, teamwork, or behind-thescenes contributions to support the goals of OSAC. It recognizes an 

individual who has made significant contributions to promote OSAC’s 

mission through their support of OSAC. This nominee works diligently and 

tirelessly as a champion for OSAC, at times without recognition.

Matthew is the current Laboratory Systems Director, Idaho State Police 

Forensic Services, the chair of the Consortium of Forensic Science 

Organizations (CFSO) and past president of the American Society of Crime 

Laboratory Directors (ASCLD).

He served as one of the original members of the Quality Infrastructure 

Committee (QIC), beginning in 2014, as one of the five ASCLD 

representatives. Matthew was instrumental in establishing many of the 

original procedures, structures, and methods of OSAC. Specifically, he was 

the original chair and still is on the OSAC 29 Terms Task Group, now called 

the OSAC Preferred Subtask Group of the FSSB’s Terminology Task Group. After Matthew’s two terms on the QIC 

ended, he stayed on as an affiliate. Establishing terminology was and is a monumental task given the many 

disparate definitions of scores of the most common forensic and quality terms used by different agencies, 

bodies, guidelines, and standards. Matthew has been a driving force for the consistent use of consensus terms. 

Matthew Gamette, recipient of OSAC's 

2022 Sharon B. Nakich Award

Beth Ordeman, Chair of the Human Forensic Biology Subcommittee, accepting the 

Outstanding Group Award from JP Jones, OSAC Program Manager.
15

Matthew also volunteers his time as Chair of the Consortium of Forensic Science Organizations (CFSO) that is 

active in educating stakeholders on the value of forensic science and forensic science standards.

Matthew is one of OSAC’s biggest supporters and has contributed greatly to its success. His outstanding 

volunteer activities stand out as above and beyond. He has shown he is committed long term, to furthering and 

supporting the mission of OSAC and the field of forensic science.

OSAC: A Year in Review

In addition to delivering quarterly updates, the fall edition 

of the OSAC Newsletter also serves as OSAC’s annual 

report and provides a review of OSAC’s accomplishments 

and activities over the past fiscal year, October 1, 2021,

through September 30, 2022. 

Organizational Snapshot 

In February 2022, OSAC entered its eighth year of existence and currently includes:

• 480+ members

• 390+ active affiliates

• 1,800+ member and affiliate applications

The employer and job classification of OSAC members include:
16

OSAC Registry 

The OSAC Registry reached a milestone this past August 

as the 100

th standard was added! 

The 100th and 101st standards added to the Registry were ANSI/ASB Standard 062, Standard for Topography 

Comparison Software for Toolmark Analysis and ANSI/ASB Standard 063, Implementation of 3D Technologies in 

Forensic Firearm and Toolmark Comparison Laboratories. These two firearm and toolmark standards provide 

guidance on purchasing, setting up, and implementing 3D systems. Read more about the impact of these 

standards in this NIST news release.

The first standards for the friction ridge discipline were also added to the Registry in FY 2022. These standards 

included:

• OSAC 2021-N-0020, Best Practice Recommendations for Limited Examinations

• OSAC 2022-N-0033, Standard for Processing Evidence for the Detection of Friction Ridge Impressions

• OSAC 2022-S-0012, Standard for Proficiency Testing in Friction Ridge Examination

• ASTM E3235-21, Standard Practice for Latent Print Evidence Imaging Resolution (this standard was 

drafted by OSAC’s VITAL Subcommittee but is applicable to the friction ridge discipline). 

In addition, a notable standard for the forensic toxicology discipline was added to the Registry in September. 

This standard, ANSI/ASB Standard 120, Standard for the Analytical Scope and Sensitivity of Forensic Toxicological 

Testing of Blood in Impaired Driving Investigations, establishes the various substances a forensic toxicology 

laboratory must be able to identify, as well as appropriate detection levels when testing blood samples from 

impaired driving investigations. Read more from Marc LeBeau, chair of the Chemistry: Seized Drugs & Toxicology 

SAC, Sarah Kerrigan, member of OSAC’s FSSB and forensic toxicologist about the importance of this standard. 

The OSAC Registry continues to grow, and during FY 2022 OSAC added 36 additional standards to the Registry. 

At the end of FY 2022 the OSAC Registry contained 108 standards (89 published and 19 OSAC Proposed), 

representing over 20 specific forensic science disciplines and various interdisciplinary topics (Figure 8).

Figure 8: Growth of the OSAC Registry during the past seven years.
17

To see a current list of standards on the OSAC Registry and a breakdown of standards by fiscal year, visit the 

OSAC Registry webpage.

Registry Implementation Efforts 

OSAC continued to focus its implementation efforts on traditional forensic science service providers (FSSPs) this 

past fiscal year, in addition to expanding its outreach to non-traditional FSSPs as mentioned above.

At the end of FY 2022, OSAC had received a total of 96 Registry Implementation Declaration Forms from FSSPs 

across the county and internationally, 49 of which were submitted during FY2022. These declarations include:

• 61 state laboratory locations (representing 12 states)

• 23 local/county/city laboratories

• 4 Federal laboratories

• 4 private laboratories

• 2 university laboratories

• 2 international laboratories

If your organization has implemented any of the standards on the OSAC Registry, let us know! Complete the 

Registry Implementation Declaration Form and send it to mark.stolorow@nist.gov to join the other OSAC 

Registry Implementers! 

FY 2022 OSAC Standards Activities Snapshot 

There are over 450 standards moving through OSAC’s processes! Here’s a snapshot of OSAC’s standards 

activities at the end of FY 2022:
18

Other Highlights & Accomplishments 

In addition to growing the Registry and facilitating standards activities, here are some other highlights and 

accomplishments from FY 2022:

• NIST & AAFS Cooperative Agreement: In October 2021, NIST entered into a cooperative agreement with 

the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) to develop tools, training, and resources to broaden 

awareness of forensic science standards and assist with standards implementation efforts. Standards 

factsheets are currently available for 45+ standards on the OSAC Registry and provide a clear, concise, 

and easy way to understand the purpose of a specific standard, why it is needed, and the benefits of 

implementation. Standards checklists are currently available for 50+ standards on the OSAC Registry and 

are a tool that forensic science service providers can use to track progress towards implementation, 

identify gaps or barriers to implementation, or document objective evidence of implementation or 

compliance with a standard. Standards webinars and training videos are available for free from AAFS 

Connect. Learn about the standards development process, standards development activities in various 

disciplines, and information about specific SDO published standards on the OSAC Registry.

• NIST’s Special Program Office (SPO) receives AAFS Ambassador of Forensic Science Award. NIST’s 

Forensic Science Program, within SPO, works to strengthen the scientific basis of forensic methods and 

practices through research, foundation studies and standards development and implementation. 

Members of the NIST team accepted the AAFS Ambassador of Forensic Science Award at the AAFS 

Annual Meeting in Seattle, WA on February 23, 2022. 

• OSAC All-Hands Meetings: After two years of virtual meetings, OSAC members were able to meet inperson again in Orlando, FL to continue their work on standards development. In spring of 2022, OSAC 

hosted three All-Hands Meetings. The Scene Examination SAC and Physics/Pattern Interpretation SAC 

and their subcommittees met May 16-20, the Medicine SAC and Digital/Multimedia SAC and their 

subcommittees met May 23-27, and the Biology SAC, Chemistry: Seized Drugs & Toxicology SAC, and 

Chemistry: Trace Evidence SAC and their subcommittees met June 13-17.

Photos from the OSAC All-Hands Meeting held in May and June 2022 in Orlando.
19

• Two New Process Maps Published: Along with drafting and approving standards for the OSAC Registry, 

OSAC also develops and shares other work products that support standards development and 

implementation. One type of work product, process maps, are a useful tool that can help forensic 

disciplines provide insight into their specific activities, identify areas for improvement, and identify 

where standards may be needed. The following two new process maps were published in FY 2022:

o Human Forensic DNA Analysis – May 2022

o Footwear & Tire Examination – June 2022

• OSAC Registry Implementation Survey: In June 2022, OSAC launched its second Registry 

Implementation Survey. This survey assessed the state of implementation of 95 standards posted on the 

OSAC Registry through June 2022. Of the 177 responses included in the data analysis, 128 forensic 

science service providers reported that their organization has fully or partially implemented at least one 

standard on the OSAC Registry.

• OSAC Public Update Meeting:

Each year, OSAC reports its 

activities in an open and online 

public forum and provides an 

opportunity for the public to ask 

questions and provide feedback. 

Over 400 people, tuned in to this 

year’s Public Update Meeting on 

September 13. During this virtual 

event, Ray Wickenheiser, FSSB 

chair, provided updates from the 

FSSB, and each of OSAC’s seven 

SAC chairs shared their unit’s 

activities and priorities for the 

upcoming year.

• OSAC Leadership Strategy Session: On September 20, 2022, OSAC leaders came together (virtually) at 

the OSAC Leadership Strategy Session (OLSS) to review their priorities and accomplishments and share 

challenges and lessons learned from this past year. OSAC subcommittees also shared their goals and 

priorities for FY 2023. 

• OSAC Long Term Strategic Plan: The FSSB developed and approved OSAC’s Long Term Strategic Plan

which describes objectives, deliverables, and metrics for four focus areas: inclusion, development of 

standards, implementation, and ongoing improvement. This plan was initially approved at the OLSS in 

September and further refined and approved in December 2022. 

• Improved Access to ASTM Standards: OSAC has worked with ASTM to improve access to the E30 

(forensic sciences) collection of standards. Through an agreement with ASTM, the public now has free 

access to these documents through the OSAC Registry webpage. 

• Research and Development Needs: OSAC subcommittees continue to review and identify new research 

and development needs. Academic institutions, federal agencies, and other research organizations can 

access the 170+ R&D needs on the OSAC website to help address technical challenges identified by 

forensic science service providers. 

• Digital Communications Outreach: OSAC continued to grow our digital communications presence, as 

evidenced by an increase in website views, downloads, and LinkedIn posts and followers. As our 

outreach grows, so does our ability to reach more stakeholders and educate the forensic science 

community about new standards being developed and championed by OSAC.

Karen Reczek, former FSSB NIST Ex Officio and moderator for the 2022 OSAC Public 

Update Meeting, introducing Ray Wickenheiser, FSSB Chair, for his update from the 

FSSB. 
20

Other Outreach Events

OSAC members, affiliates, and OSAC Program Office staff gave over 50 OSAC-related presentations at various 

forensic science conferences and meetings this fiscal year, some of which included:

• Association of Forensic Quality Assurance Managers (AFQAM) Annual Training Conference, October 

2021.

• AAFS Annual Scientific Meeting, February 2022. There was an abundance of standards-related 

presentations and OSAC participation at the 2022 AAFS Meeting!

• 2022 American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors (ASCLD) Symposium, April 2022. 

• International Association for Identification (IAI) Annual Conference, August 2021.

Along with giving presentations, OSAC was able to share information and engage with the forensic science 

community through these other activities: 

Final Words

OSAC continues to make great strides to help facilitate the development and implementation of technically 

sound and consensus-based forensic science standards. With almost 800 combined members and affiliates

representing forensic science practitioners, laboratory managers, academic researchers, measurement 

scientists, and experts in statistics, human factors, legal, and quality infrastructure, we will continue to work 

together to strengthen forensic science through standards.

The FSSB and OSAC Program Office would like to thank all OSAC volunteers for their time and effort and all the 

federal, state, and local government agencies, academic institutions, and criminal justice and forensic science 

organizations that support the OSAC mission by supporting their staff to participate. 
21

OSAC & Other Forensic Science Events

2023

February 13-18: 2023 AAFS Annual Scientific Meeting, Orlando, FL. There will be plenty of OSAC participation,

standard-related presentations, and a NIST exhibit booth featuring OSAC at this year’s AAFS meeting! Check the 

program information and mark your calendars! 

April 17-21: OSAC Meetings for the Physics/Pattern Interpretation, Scene Examination, and Chemistry: Trace 

Evidence SACs and subcommittees. 

April 30-May 4: 2023 ASCLD Symposium, Austin, TX. Hear from the OSAC Program Office as they share tips on 

how to “Eat the Standards Implementation Elephant” and be sure to attend the other standard-related 

presentations happening throughout the week.

May 15-19: OSAC Meetings for the Digital/Multimedia, Medicine, Biology, and Chemistry: Drugs/Toxicology 

SACs and subcommittees.

NIST Research Activities

FORENSICS@ NIST 

On November 8-10, 2022, NIST scientists shared how they are using advanced methods in metrology, computer 

science, and statistics to strengthen forensic science. The recorded sessions from the 2022 FORENSICS@NIST 

event are available on the NIST website. 

Bitemark Analysis: A NIST Scientific Foundation Review 

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has reviewed the scientific foundations of bitemark 

analysis, a forensic technique in which marks on the skin of a biting victim are compared with the teeth of a 

suspected biter. View the full draft report and the comments received as part of the public comment period on 

the NIST website. 

NIST Publishes Digital Evidence Foundations Report 

This report documents the scientific foundations of digital evidence examination and recommends ways to 

advance the field. 

Forensic Seized Drug Analysis Interlaboratory Study Engagement Survey

Several groups at NIST are working on developing a series of interlaboratory studies to support the forensic 

seized drug community. To prepare for these studies, information about the current technology and needs of 

the community is needed. Forensic practitioners actively involved in seized drug analysis are invited to 

participate in this six-question survey which is intended to gauge interest in the first two planned studies and 

better define the direction for future studies survey. The survey will close February 28, 2023.