Good afternoon Mr. Chairman.

I would like to thank the Senate Judiciary Committee for this opportunity to provide testimony here today regarding the needs of our forensic laboratories and the strong support shown by the committee in passage of two very important pieces of legislation last year - The Coverdell National Forensic Science Improvement Act and the DNA Backlog Elimination Act.

My Name is Keith Coonrod , I am currently employed by the New York State Police as Director of Toxicology, Drug Chemistry, Trace and Breath Testing in the forensic laboratory system and am here as the chair of the Consortium of Forensic Science Organizations which comprises of 7 leading forensic organizations. These include:

_ the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors (ASCLD) which represents over 400 crime laboratory managers/directors - I am currently President,

_ the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors/Laboratory Accreditation Board (ASCLD/LAB) which is the accrediting body for forensic crime laboratories for which I am currently an ex-officio member of the Board of Directors and have been Team Captain responsible for many inspections of laboratories undergoing the accreditation process,

_ the International Association for Identification (IAI) which is the oldest and largest forensic identification association in the world,

_ the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) which is a professional organization representing numerous forensic specialties such as: Criminalistics; Engineering Sciences; Jurisprudence; Odontology; Pathology and Biology; Physical Anthropology; Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences; Questioned Documents; Toxicology and a Multi-disciplinary General Section,

_ the National Association of Medical Examiners (NAME) which represents medical examiners, coroners and other physicians who conduct death investigations,

_ the National Forensic Science Technology Center (NFSTC) which is dedicated to assisting forensic science facilities to achieve the highest quality of operations, and

_ the National Center for Forensic Science (NCFS) which provides research, education, training, tools and technology to meet the needs of forensic science, investigative, and criminal justice agencies.

While the public thinks of forensics as DNA, it is essential that the committee understand that this is just one of many tools available to the criminal justice community by our forensic laboratories. While DNA is indeed an important discipline, Forensic Science is more broadly defined as the examination of evidence submitted by criminal justice agencies to forensic laboratories for the purpose of determining how that evidence pertains to the law and/or courts.

Forensic laboratories support the criminal justice community by offering services in Clandestine Laboratory Investigations, Explosive Analysis, Controlled Substance Analysis, Firearms Examinations, Alcohol Analysis, Toolmark Examinations, Toxicology, Impression Evidence, Arson Analysis, Trace Evidence Examinations, Death Investigations, Digital Imaging, Physical Match, Crime Scene Investigations, Training as well as Biological Examinations including DNA.

However, as you know the use of forensic science by the criminal justice system has increased dramatically over the past several years but our funding has not. We find ourselves in a situation where we are unable to keep up with the demands of the system and unfortunately many cases are either held up because we cannot deliver evidence on time or worse yet the prosecutor goes to court without the proper information from the forensic laboratory. It is an unfortunate reality with the staggering backlogs that not all cases submitted to our nations laboratories will be examined. Laboratories must decide which cases they will analyze.

Recently the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors completed a study to determine those resources that forensic laboratories need to adequately support our nation’s Criminal Justice Community with quality examinations of evidence in a timely manner. Forensic Crime Laboratory Managers and Directors were asked to provide an accounting of resources needed to provide quality analysis in a timely manner. A timely manner was defined as 30 days unless shorter time frames where required by a particular state’s statute.

We actually don’t know how many forensic laboratories exist in the United States as many facilities never before considered as crime laboratories are now providing forensic examinations in one or more forensic disciplines and therefore, should be included. Therefore, these results are based on a very conservative estimation of 500 forensic facilities throughout the United States. We conducted our study by surveying 224 Crime Laboratories.

The survey results show that an additional 9,000 forensic scientists are needed to properly staff our laboratories, an additional $1.3 billion is needed for adequate laboratory facilities and $285 Million is needed to purchase the equipment necessary to conduct analysis of submitted evidence. More than 26% of our nations crime laboratories do not even have basic Laboratory Management Systems (LIMS) which assist laboratories in documenting the chain-of-custody of their evidence.

The reality of the situation is that a budget of $35 million to improve our nation’s crime laboratories divided among 50 states would mean an average of $700,000 per state or $70,000 per laboratory. Mr. Chairman a crucial piece of scientific instrumentation called the Gas Chromatograph - Mass Spectrometer, which is the backbone in a forensic crime laboratory utilized to analyze a simple drug case, cost the laboratory $100,000!

The need to hire 9,000 additional forensic scientists would cost the nation’s laboratories more than $650 million. Additionally, laboratories rely on mentoring relationships to train new forensic scientists. This requires that the laboratory utilize their limited resources of seasoned forensic scientists and equipment for training purposes instead of actual casework.

To address this issue, regional forensic training centers need to be established in strategic locations utilizing existing talents and staff of universities in conjunction with local forensic laboratories. Many forensic laboratories have already started working with existing universities in addressing these needs. Discussions are already occurring between universities and crime laboratories in states such as Illinois, Florida, Virginia, West Virginia, California and New York.

Finally, less than ½ of all crime laboratories in the United States are ASCLD/LAB accredited. The quality of forensic analysis conducted in our nation’s crime laboratories is paramount. Quality analysis can be achieved by utilizing the current ASCLD/LAB accreditation process for those laboratories that are not currently accredited. Laboratories that accept money from the Coverdell National Forensic Improvement Act that are not accredited must achieve accreditation within 2 years. However, ASCLD/LAB currently does not have the infrastructure to handle this potential wave of applicants and would have to shift the substantial cost of accrediting these facilities to those laboratories already accredited unless ASCLD/LAB receives funding needed to offset these bridging costs.

As my concluding remarks Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the committee for allowing me to share with them the facts regarding the desperate needs of our forensic laboratories who provide valuable support to our criminal justice community. I thank this committee for their strong support in passage of the Coverdell National Forensic Science Improvement Act and urge your continued support in obtaining adequate funding and appropriation for this law.