Beginning in the early 1990s, nuclear forensic science is a relatively young field that focuses on “re-establishing the history of nuclear material of unknown origin” (Mayer, et al. 2010, p. 1). Specifically, investigators compare these unknown materials, pre-detonation in this case, based on their characteristics and process history (Mayer, et al. 2010, p. 1). In 2010, the Committee of Nuclear Forensics made ten recommendations on the procedures that could lead to improvement in investigation methods. In particular, this paper discusses Recommendation 6: “The nuclear forensics community should develop and adhere to standards and procedures that are rooted in the applicable underlying principles that have been recommended for modern forensic science, including calibration using reference standards; cross-comparison with other methods; inter-laboratory comparisons; and identification, propagation, and characterization of uncertainties'' (Committee of Nuclear Forensics, 2010, p. 11). The main objective of this paper is to compile a literature review to determine how this recommendation was followed, if at all, and produce a list of suggestions that could complement any effort towards the improvement of the field. Out of the methods recommended, that which has fostered the most growth has been cross-comparison. For example, the need for human supervision has decreased, which has decreased the need for human error (Reading, et al., 2017, p. 6013). However, areas that would benefit from development are increasing the number of disciplines in the field (Croudace, et al., 2016, p. 128). These conclusions provided the basis for improvements to other existing studies like DNA and fingerprinting.