Credit: NIST
This Bulletin provides an update on forensic science standards moving through the development process at Standards Developing Organizations (SDOs), and those that are moving through the Registry Approval Process at the Organization of Scientific Area Committees for Forensic Science (OSAC).
Items of note:
- Two new standards have been placed on the OSAC Registry! ISO 17025:2017 General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories (from an OSAC Interdisciplinary Subcommittee) and ANSI/ASB Standard 017, Standard Practices for Measurement Traceability in Forensic Toxicology, First Edition (from the OSAC Toxicology Subcommittee) were both approved June 18, 2019 for placement on the Registry.
- Three standards are currently open for comment for placement on the Registry:
- From OSAC's Dogs & Sensors Subcommittee - ASB Technical Report 025, Crime Scene Death Investigation - Dogs and Sensors - Terms and Definitions, First Edition, 2017. Comment period closes July 2.
- From OSAC's Disaster Victim Identification Subcommittee - ANSI/ASB Best Practice Recommendation 007, Postmortem Impression Submission Strategy for Comprehensive Searches of Essential Automated Fingerprint Identification System Databases, First Edition, 2018. Comment period closes July 18.
- From OSAC's Disaster Victim Identification Subcommittee - ANSI/ASB Best Practice Recommendation 010, Forensic Anthropology in Disaster Victim Identification: Best Practice Recommendations for the Medicolegal Authority, First Edition, 2019. Comment period closes July 18.
- ASTM has published two new standards: ASTM E2917 - Standard Practice for Forensic Science Practitioner Training, Continuing Education, and Professional Development Programs has been revised to E2917-19a and ASTM E2825 - Standard Guide for Forensic Digital Image Processing has been revised to E2825-19.
/Public Release. This material from the originating organization/author(s) might be of the point-in-time nature, and edited for clarity, style and length. Mirage.News does not take institutional positions or sides, and all views, positions, and conclusions expressed herein are solely those of the author(s).View in full here.
