1

Message from the Chair

By Laurel Farrell, FSSB Chair

Happy New Year! 

I still hear people greeting each other this 

way weeks after January 1, 2021. 2020 was 

a challenging year in a number of ways for 

everyone. Therefore, this simple heartfelt 

wish for a healthy, professionally 

rewarding 2021 just hasn’t gotten old yet.

Although challenged, OSAC members 

individually and as subcommittees (SCs)

and scientific area committees (SACs) hardly broke stride. With the 

support of the OSAC Program Office that pivoted on a dime to 

provide more virtual meeting resources, SCs and SACs continued to 

meet and move standard development work forward.

The Forensic Science Standards Board (FSSB) was no exception. We 

missed meeting in person for our quarterly meeting this December. 

Usually, this is our opportunity to get to know new members. Like 

everyone else, we have had to work to develop those relationships 

virtually. Regardless, the December FSSB meeting was a productive 

one where time was spent reviewing the standards (Tiers 1 – 5) and 

other work products in development by the SCs, and alignment with 

the OSAC Organizational Priorities was confirmed. High priority work 

continues related to terminology, and the FSSB Terminology Task 

Group developed their game plan for the near future.

FEBRUARY 2021 

 

 

 

In this Issue

Message from the 

Chair

OSAC at AAFS

OSAC Registry 

Updates

Registry 

Implementation 

Corner

OSAC in Action

OSAC in the News

Upcoming 

OSAC/Major Events

Professional 

Organization Spotlight

NIST Research 

Activities

Laurel Farrell, FSSB Chair
2

Time was also spent discussing the FSSB directive provided last September to move towards the use of 

the terms “observation”, “interpretation” and “opinion” and away from the use of the term 

“conclusion” in standards being developed and revised. The FSSB realizes that this transition will be a 

multi-year endeavor but has already seen the positive results of steps in this direction.

We ended our two-day meeting with a session that included all OSAC leadership (SC, SAC, and FSSB) that 

could join. We will continue this new tradition at each FSSB “in-person” meeting with the goal to 

increase direct interaction and communication among all that serve in leadership positions within the 

OSAC. As the saying goes – We don’t always have to agree with one another, but we need to have the 

conversation. 

I’ll end this message by promoting two outreach activities. Please read the feature article in the 

newsletter that details OSAC-related presentations at the upcoming AAFS meeting February 15-19, 

2021. Also see the article related to the first OSAC Stakeholder Engagement Meeting.

Respectfully,

Laurel Farrell, FSSB Chair

OSAC at AAFS

There will be plenty of OSAC-related content at the 

upcoming 2021 American Academy of Forensic Sciences 

(AAFS) Annual Scientific Meeting. If you’re attending the 

virtual meeting February 15-19 be sure to check out 

these standards sessions and presentations:

PLENARY SESSION

• Wednesday, February 17, 9:30 – 11:00 a.m. CST: One Academy Pursing Justice through Truth in 

Evidence

WORKSHOPS (registration fee)

• Monday, February 15, 1:00 – 5:00 p.m. CST: W9 What They Don’t Know Can Kill You

• Tuesday, February 16, 1:00 – 5:00 p.m. CST: W17 An Update on Analytical Approaches for 

Hemp/Marijuana Differentiation

• Tuesday, February 16, 1:00 – 5:00 p.m. CST: W19 Most Valuable Publications (MVPs) of Forensic 

DNA: Examining the Most Valuable Publications in the Field 

Credit: AAFS
3

CASE BREAK SESSION

• Tuesday, February 16, 7:00 – 8:00 a.m. CST: CB1 Forensics Standards Development: What’s New 

with Standards Developing Organizations (SDOs) and What is the Organization of Scientific Area 

Committees’ (OSAC’s) Role? 

INTERDISCIPLINARY SESSION

• Tuesday, February 16, 1:00 – 5:00 p.m. CST: Special Session #1 To See or Not to See: Unbiased 

Answers to Forensic Questions

STANDARDS CONSORTIUM

• Tuesday, February 16, 8:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. CST: The Implementation of Forensic Science 

Standards in an Operational Setting: Challenges and Solutions

SECTION PRESENTATIONS – CRIMINALISTICS

• Wednesday, February 17, 10:15 – 10:30 a.m. CST: B29 Defining and Explaining Comparative 

Spectral Differences within OSAC’s Trace Materials Standards

• Friday, February 19, 1:15 – 1:30 a.m. CST: B152 A Standards Development for Visual Color 

Determination and Comparison in Forensic Soil Examinations: The OSAC Subcommittee on 

Geological Materials

SECTION PRESENTATIONS – DIGITAL & MULTIMEDIA SCIENCES

• Friday, February 19, 9:00 – 9:20 a.m. CST: C19 The Organization of Scientific Area Committees 

(OSAC) Digital/Multimedia Scientific Area Committee Standards Work—Part 1: Digital Evidence 

and Speaker Recognition

• Friday, February 19, 9:20 – 9:40 a.m. CST: C20 The Organization of Scientific Area Committees 

(OSAC) Digital/Multimedia Scientific Area Committee Standards Work—Part 2: Video/Imaging 

Technology & Analysis (VITAL)

SECTION PRESENTATION – FORENSIC EDUCATION & LAB MANAGEMENT

• Friday, February 19, 2:45 – 3:00 p.m. CST: E76 Setting a New Standard in Access and Quality for 

Forensic Science and Justice Training

SECTION PRESENTATION – JURISPRUDENCE 

• Thursday, February 18, 10:05 – 10:20 a.m. CST: F4 Implementing Organization of Scientific Area 

Committees (OSAC) Standards at the Local Level: Lessons from Texas

SECTION PRESENTATION – QUESTIONED DOCUMENTS II

• Thursday, February 18, 9:00 – 9:30 a.m. CST: J11 Standards for the Examination of Documents 

Using a Digital Workspace
4

OSAC Registry Updates

First Fire Debris Standards Added to the OSAC 

Registry 

OSAC has added the first fire debris standards to the Registry. 

These four standards, revised by OSAC’s Ignitable Liquids, 

Explosives, & Gunshot Residue (ILEGSR) Subcommittee through 

ASTM, focus on the most commonly used procedures for 

preparing vapor phase samples.

Forensic analysis of ignitable liquids often involves evidential material in the form of fire debris, 

including burned or charred material recovered from the fire scene. Analysis of such fire debris generally 

follows three main steps:

1. Separation of a sample from any ignitable liquid residues that may be present in the original 

evidential material.

2. Instrumental analysis of the separated sample.

3. Interpretation of the instrumental data in order to render an opinion regarding whether an 

ignitable liquid was present in the original evidential material and, if so, its classification, as well 

as some examples of commercially available products that fall into that classification.

When separating a sample from ignitable liquid residues (step 1), there are several sample preparation 

techniques from which an analyst may choose, as there is no single extraction technique that is ideal for 

all types of original evidential material. The new fire debris standards on the OSAC Registry provide the 

step-by-step instructions required to perform commonly used procedures for preparing vapor phase 

samples and include:

• ASTM E1388-17 Standard Practice for Static Headspace Sampling of Vapors from Fire Debris 

Samples

• ASTM E1412-19 Standard Practice for Separation of Ignitable Liquid Residues from Fire Debris 

Samples by Passive Headspace Concentration with Activated Charcoal

• ASTM E1413-19 Standard Practice for Separation of Ignitable Liquid Residues from Fire Debris 

Samples by Dynamic Headspace Concentration onto an Adsorbent Tube

• ASTM E3189-19 Standard Practice for Separation of Ignitable Liquid Residues from Fire Debris 

Samples by Static Headspace Concentration onto an Adsorbent Tube

Guidance for the appropriate selection of one or more of these sample preparation techniques, as well 

as others, is provided in ASTM E3245-20ε1 Standard Guide for Systematic Approach to the Extraction, 

Analysis, and Classification of Ignitable Liquids and Ignitable Liquid Residues in Fire Debris Samples. 

ASTM E3245-20ε1 is a direct product of the work of the ILEGSR Subcommittee, and it is currently in the 

OSAC Registry approval process.

For information related to instrumental analysis, interpretation, and classification (steps 2 and 3), 

analysts currently turn to ASTM E1618-19 Standard Test Method for Ignitable Liquid Residues in Extracts 

from Fire Debris Samples by Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry. The ILEGSR Subcommittee is 

actively engaged in the restructuring and strengthening of ASTM E1618 by drafting proposed new 

Credit: Pixabay
5

standards for ignitable liquids analysis by gas chromatography (electron ionization) mass spectrometry, 

interpretation of the resulting instrumental data, and classification of ignitable liquids based upon their 

chemical composition. 

The ILEGSR Subcommittee also has additional standards related to the analysis of ignitable liquids in the 

pipeline. For example, a standard on terminology relating to the examination of fire debris is currently 

under consideration for the Registry. Revisions to a standard practice for preserving ignitable liquids and 

ignitable residue extracts, and two new standard practices related to reporting results and opinions and 

training are in the consensus approval process within ASTM. 

 

OSAC Registry Updates: FY 2021 Q1 

The OSAC Forensic Science Standards Board (FSSB) approved the following six

standards for the OSAC Registry in FY 2021 Q1:

• ASTM E3233-20 Standard Practice for Forensic Tape Analysis Training 

Program (added November 3, 2020).

• ASTM E3234-20 Standard Practice for Forensic Paint Analysis Training 

Program (added November 3, 2020).

• ASTM E1388-17 Standard Practice for Sampling of Headspace Vapors 

from Fire Debris Samples (added December 1, 2020).

• ASTM E1412-19 Standard Practice for Separation of Ignitable Liquid 

Residues from Fire Debris Samples by Passive Headspace Concentration with Active Charcoal

(added December 1, 2020).

• ASTM E1413-19 Standard Practice for Separation of Ignitable Liquid Residues from Fire Debris 

Samples by Dynamic Headspace Concentration onto an Adsorbent Tube (added December 1, 

2020).

• ASTM E3189-19 Standard Practice for Separation of Ignitable Liquid Residues from Fire Debris 

Samples by Static Headspace Concentration onto an Adsorbent Tube (added December 1, 2020).

To access these standards and see a complete list of the Registry standards, please visit the OSAC 

website.

Registry Implementation Corner

Bode Technology Awarded OSAC Standards Implementer Certificate 

Courtesy of Hannah Gillis, Bode Technology

 

Bode began incorporating OSAC Registry standards into its quality system 

review in 2019 and declared their status as an OSAC implementing 

laboratory in 2020. Bode is the first private laboratory to declare 

implementation, in adamant support of the OSAC mission to unify forensic 

standards and best practices. “Early adoption of these standards demonstrates 

Credit: Bode
6

Bode’s commitment to a best-in-class approach to quality management to ensure accurate and reliable 

results are provided to Bode’s stakeholders” said Erin Sweeney, Bode’s Vice President of Forensic 

Operations.

Bode appreciates that the OSAC standards are science-based and draw from commonly accepted 

industry standards. These include, but are not limited to, the FBI Quality Assurance Standards and the 

ISO/IEC 17025:2017. The OSAC standards consolidate much of the overlapping key objectives of these 

source documents, along with relevant material from SWGDAM guiding documents, ISFG 

recommendations, NRC reports, published literature, and expert opinions. The standards also provide 

foundational principles and supporting information to summarize the validity of the requirements, with 

scientific backing for the specified approaches. This gives all reviewing stakeholders context for the 

relevance and value in adopting the standards, to in 

turn bolster confidence in the resulting data reported 

from participating laboratories. 

Bode also values OSAC’s consensus-based approach to 

the standards development process. Through OSAC’s 

open comment process, Bode participates in the 

review of standards that are in development and 

provides input to help shape the final published 

standard. This transparency in standards development 

to include stakeholders across public and private labs, 

scientists, statisticians, legal experts, and forensic 

practitioners, brings a wide view of perspectives to the 

review process. This process also allows laboratories 

to provide additional considerations for requirements 

that may conflict with existing lab policies or may be 

overly prescriptive and difficult to successfully 

implement. 

Bode began implementation with the first two ANSI/ASB standards added to the OSAC Registry: 

ANSI/ASB 020, Standard for Validation Studies of DNA Mixtures, and Development and Verification of a 

Laboratory’s Mixture Interpretation Protocol and ANSI/ASB 040, Standard for Forensic DNA 

Interpretation and Comparison Protocols. These standards require the use of validation data to explicitly 

support the resulting standard operating procedures. Bode has developed several new implementation 

plans as a result of these standards. 

One change Bode implemented was an administrative update to interpretation documentation. 

Inherent to mixture interpretation are analyst considerations of valid assumptions in evaluation of a 

DNA profile. While Bode’s Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) detailed these considerations, not all 

assumptions were clearly documented in the case file, particularly in relation to allele edits made under 

consideration of differential carryover or expected contributor inclusion to a profile. The change in 

policy, which maintains the same analytical procedure, increases transparency by documenting any 

assumptions that were considered. While it was challenging to find a balance between being 

prescriptive enough to guide staff while also allowing room for analyst discretion to cover all scenarios 

encountered in casework, the policy change improved clarity of the case file and allows for technical 

review of the validity of the assumptions under which the interpretation was generated. 
7

Another change Bode implemented is the expansion of validation implementation procedures to include 

SOP mixture verification. ANSI/ASB 020 introduces a requirement to perform a verification study of nonvalidation known data to confirm the validation-based SOP is applied as expected to the variety of 

sample types and data ranges encountered in casework. While Bode has always included a wide range 

of sample types in its training competency tests, there was not a formal evaluation of the SOP efficacy 

before releasing it for use in casework. The qualification of the analyst was evaluated, more-so than the 

qualification of the procedure. This new process allows Bode to confirm that the SOP has been 

understood and applied as intended, and to ensure consistency among analysts within the laboratory. 

ANSI/ASB 020 also recommends reviewing previous validations for compliance, and to supplement with 

additional validation studies where necessary. Through this process Bode was able to identify some 

areas of opportunity where supplemental validation studies will be beneficial.

Bode will continue to review and implement the relevant OSAC registry standards into its quality 

management system as they are approved. “We look forward to continued collaboration in the standard 

development process and appreciate the extensive efforts from all participating contributors to support 

this initiative” said Sweeney. 

HFSC’s Commitment to Continuing Education and Implementation 

Courtesy of Ramit Plushnick-Masti, Houston Forensic Science Center

The Houston Forensic Science Center (HFSC) has implemented an annual 

company-wide continuing education goal to align with approved OSAC 

standards.

All HFSC staff are required to complete 16 hours of continuing education 

annually. This goal works especially well for forensic practitioners 

licensed by the Texas Forensic Science Commission, which has its own 

continuing education requirement. 

“We are giving credit not only for training but also for presenting to 

others to make clear that we not only support gaining and 

strengthening knowledge, but also that we believe scientists must 

share their findings and collaborate to be truly successful,” said Dr. Peter Stout, HFSC’s CEO and 

president. 

HFSC’s company goal is part of its commitment to adopt OSAC standards. HFSC’s board of directors 

approved a resolution in 2018 that committed the lab to voluntarily adopt and implement all applicable 

OSAC standards posted to the registry. 

At the same time, staff have independently expressed a desire and need for training and continuing 

education. This goal guarantees HFSC is behind the push for growth and ensures the subject is top of 

mind for everyone.

“The 16-hour continuing education requirement puts a spotlight on our commitment to developing staff 

at all levels,” said Dr. Amy Castillo, HFSC’s COO and vice president.

Credit: HFSC
8

Staff developed an all-encompassing tracking system that also provides information on qualified 

trainings and visibility on whether the goal is being met.

“The information is displayed on a continuing education dashboard that we built internally. The 

dashboard can be filtered by staff name, section, date range and more,” Dr. Castillo said. The dashboard 

adds a layer of visibility and accountability for staff and helps analysts stay organized when it comes 

time to renew certifications or state-mandated licensing requirements. “We’ve ensured staff have a 

wide selection of webinars, books and in-house training, among other things, to help them reach their 

goal,” Dr. Castillo said. “We want to send a message that training is never a burden, but a priority.”

ASCLD and AFQAM Support OSAC Registry Implementation 

Two professional organizations have declared their 

support of the OSAC Registry through policy 

recommendations. Both organizations are represented on 

the OSAC Forensic Science Standards Board.

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. ASCLD supports 

policies that support the ongoing development of 

standards with significant forensic practitioner 

involvement and leadership. In its 2020-2021 National 

Outreach Priorities & Agenda, ASCLD noted its support of OSAC and encourages forensic science service 

providers to evaluate and implement the standards on the Registry whenever possible.

The Association of Forensic Quality Assurance Managers (AFQAM) is a professional organization whose 

mission is to promote standardized practices and professionalism in quality assurance management for 

the forensic science community. As an organization based in quality, AFQAM encourages forensic 

science service providers to evaluate and implement the standards on the OSAC Registry whenever 

possible, as reflected in its position statement. 

OSAC appreciates the support from ASCLD and AFQAM and looks forward to continuing to work with 

both organizations to advance forensic science through standards development and implementation.

OSAC Registry Implementer: Kentucky State Police Forensic Laboratories 

Kentucky State Police (KSP) Forensic Laboratories were 

recognized by OSAC for voluntarily implementing the 

standards on the OSAC Registry related to seized drug 

analysis. KSP labs are one of the first laboratory systems 

in the country to adopt these standards. Read more

from Laboratory Director Jeremy Triplett about KSP’s 

implementation efforts.

Credit: Pixabay
9

OSAC in Action

OSAC Holds First Stakeholder Outreach Meeting 

On January 27, 2021 OSAC held its first Stakeholder Outreach Meeting. The purpose of this and future 

meetings is to formalize OSAC’s engagement with key stakeholder groups, share ideas to better support 

the forensic science community, and find common goals to work towards.

This initial meeting focused on standards developing organizations (SDOs), certification bodies, 

proficiency testing providers, and accreditation bodies and provided an opportunity for OSAC leadership 

to share their plans and priorities for the future. Stakeholders were also encouraged to share the ideas 

and challenges they see related to forensic science standards development and implementation,

including how these activities may impact their future efforts. 

A summary of this meeting will be shared on the OSAC website once available. Additional regularly 

scheduled meetings with other forensic science stakeholders are being planned. 

Firearms Process Map Now Available 

OSAC’s Firearms & Toolmarks 

Subcommittee, in partnership with the 

Association of Firearm and Tool Mark 

Examiners (AFTE), has developed a 

process map that describes the 

process that most firearms examiners 

use when analyzing evidence.

This map provides a behind-the-scenes 

perspective into the various 

components and complexities involved 

in the firearms examination process

and can be used to identify best 

practices, reduce errors, assist in 

training new examiners, and highlight 

areas where further research or 

standardization would be beneficial.

According to Erica Lawton, Chair of OSAC’s Firearms & Toolmarks Subcommitee, “The Firearms Process 

Map fills a much-needed gap in documenting the methodology and decision-making process taking 

place each day by examiners throughout the United States as well as internationally.”

The Firearms & Toolmarks Subcommittee would like to thank the following task group members for 

their work on this process map: Gerard Dutton, Zachary Carr, Stephanie Happ, Stacey Hartman, Bridget 

Chambers, William (Bill) Demuth, and Ron Nichols. Thanks also to Melissa Taylor, Heather Waltke, and 

Blythe Toma for being the facilitators and Visio Operators for this project.

Read more about the Firearms Process Map in this OSAC news update.

Overview of the Firearms Process Map
10

Participate in OSAC’s Seized Drugs Subcommittee Marijuana Analysis Survey 

Members of OSAC’s Seized Drugs Subcommittee are 

conducting a survey to collect information on current 

forensic science practices for the analysis of marijuana.

The survey focuses on collecting information related to 

decision limits for qualitative analysis, as well as sample 

preparation and methodology for quantitative analysis of 

seized marijuana drug evidence. The information 

collected will be used to gain a better understanding of 

the different approaches being applied to the 

differentiation between marijuana and hemp by forensic 

science service providers.

The information will assist the Seized Drugs 

Subcommittee in their development of a consensus-based standard that is useful and practical to the 

forensic science community. 

Laboratories that perform seized drug analyses can participate in this survey until February 15, 2021.

OSAC in the News

OSAC’s Firearms & Toolmarks Subcommittee Develops Firearms Process Map

Forensic Magazine reshared this OSAC news update highlighting the Firearms Process Map. This article 

was also shared in Mirage News. 

Kentucky State Police Crime Lab Recognized by OSAC for Commitment to Standards

Read more about KSP’s adoption of OSAC Registry standards in this Forensic Magazine article. 

Continuing Education: HFSC’s Investment

Learn about the OSAC Registry standard that requires 16 hours of annual continuing education and how 

it’s driving policy at the Houston Forensic Science Center (HFSC). 

The Bite Mark Dentists and the Counterattack on Forensic Science Reform

This Albany Law Review paper mentions OSAC and the work being done to advance forensic science 

standards. 

The ISHI Report – November 2020

This edition of the ISHI Report provides updates on OSAC’s new structure and processes as well as the 

human forensic biology and wildlife forensic biology standards moving through the Registry approval 

process.

OSAC Got a Refresh

Our colleagues at The Center for Statistics and Applications in Forensic Evidence (CSAFE) shared the 

announcement about our restructuring in its October Newsletter.

Credit: Pixabay
11

Upcoming OSAC/Major Events

February 2021

10 CSAFE Webinar: Treatment of Inconclusive Results in 

Error Rates of Firearm Studies

15-19 2021 AAFS Annual Scientific Meeting (virtual)

25 OSAC’s Crime Scene Investigation & Reconstruction 

Subcommittee – virtual meeting 

March 2021

11 CSAFE Webinar: Handwriting Analysis in CSAFE

April 2021

8 CSAFE Webinar: IRT for Forensics: A Re-analysis of the 

FBI “Black Box” Study

12-16 OSAC’s Facial Identification Subcommittee – virtual 

meeting

29 OSAC’s Crime Scene Investigation & Reconstruction Subcommittee – virtual meeting

May 2021

17-20 OSAC’s Dogs & Sensors Subcommittee – virtual meeting

June 2021

1-3 OSAC’s Trace Materials Subcommittee – virtual meeting

24 OSAC’s Crime Scene Investigation & Reconstruction Subcommittee – virtual meeting

Professional Organization Spotlight

American Academy of Forensic Sciences 

The American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) is a multidisciplinary professional organization that 

provides leadership to advance science and its application to the legal system. The objectives of the 

Academy are to promote professionalism, integrity, competency, education, foster research, improve 

practice, and encourage collaboration in the forensic sciences. With over 6,900 members divided into 

eleven sections, AAFS is unique in representing the forensic community as a whole. Included among the 

Academy’s members are physicians, attorneys, dentists, toxicologists, anthropologists, document 

examiners, digital evidence experts, psychiatrists, physicists, engineers, criminalists, educators, and 

others. Representing all 50 United States, Canada, and 70 other countries worldwide, they actively 

practice forensic science and, in many cases, teach and conduct research in the field. The AAFS 

represents its membership to the public and serves as the focal point for public information concerning 

the forensic science profession. It provides service to our community through the Journal of Forensic 

Mark your calendar for these OSAC and other forensic 

science events
12

Sciences (an internationally recognized scientific journal), the Academy Newsfeed, its annual scientific 

meeting, conducting of webinars, and the initiation of actions and reactions to various issues of concern.

In 1973, AAFS became affiliated with the Forensic Science Foundation (FSF), a nonprofit organization 

committed to studying the application of science to the resolution of social and legal issues. The FSF has 

become the educational, scientific, and research arm of the AAFS. Charitable donations to FSF are used 

to promote public education concerning all disciplines in the forensic sciences; to develop and conduct 

education and training programs; to develop new ways to improve the forensic sciences; and to support 

research in fields relating to the forensic sciences.

The AAFS recognized the need to support the OSAC’s development of a national registry of consensusbased standards. AAFS members are active participants on all the OSAC subcommittees. In February 

2016, AAFS created the Academy Standards Board (ASB), a wholly owned subsidiary organization 

accredited by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) as a standards development organization 

(SDO). This organization works closely with OSAC and its subcommittees by developing American 

National Standards (ANS) based on OSAC documents. To date, ASB has published 44 ANS with 12

approved for the Registry and over 100 additional draft OSAC standards going through the standards 

development process.

AAFS is proud of our role working with OSAC and the forensic science community to advance the field of 

forensic science both nationally and internationally. AAFS is represented on the OSAC Forensic Science 

Standards Board.

NIST Research Activities

A national survey of handlers of evidence is in progress and will be live 

until April 2, 2021. Click here for more information and to participate. 

NIST Study Will Help Labs Distinguish Between Hemp and Marijuana

New NIST Fire Calorimetry Database is Available to Answer Your Burning 

Questions

K9 Chemistry: A Safer Way to Train Detection Dogs