MAR 11 1987

Memo CP-D/1S9

24 February 1987

To:

Distribution

From:

H.D. Lenunell1

Le,.-..-l..
Subject:

Sununary Record
Technical NRDC Meeting, Vienna, 7-9 October 1986

Please find attached the sununary record of the above meeting.

l~~

Clearance: J.J. Schmidt

Distribution:
S. Pearlstein, NNDC
N. Tubbs, NEA-DB
V.N. Manokhin, CJD
F.E. Chukreev, CAJaD
A. Hashizume, RIKEN
V. Varlamov, CDFE
H. Tanaka, Study Group
Zhuang Youxiang, CNDC-CP

NDS:

D.E. Cullen
D. Gandarias Cruz
V. GouloH. Lanuner
H.D. Lenunel
J. Martinez-Rico
K. Okamoto
H. Oshomuvwe
J.J. Schmidt
O. Schwerer
H. Sei ts
Wang Dahai
3 spare copies

CONTENTS

1

Sununary

2

List of participants

3

Glossary of abbreviations

5

AgendaConclusions and actions
9

1-

Compilation scope

10

2.

EXFOR general. conclusions

12

3.

EXFOR general. actions

13". Neutron EXFOR. conclusions

14

5.

Neutron EXFOR. actions

15

6.

CPND EXFOR. actions

15

7.

Photo-ND. conclusions

15

8.

Photo-ND. actions

15

9.

Evaluated data. conclusions

16

10.

Evaluated data. actions

16

11.

WRENDA

16

12.

CINDA. conclusions

17

13.

CINDA. actions

18

14.

Miscellaneous conclusions

Appendices1.

Draft of new CINDA book cover2.

List of disturbing mistakes encounteredin EXFOR TRANS tapes. to be consideredin EXFOR check programs

-

.l ­

SUMMARY
The second meeting of the technical staff of the Nuclear Reaction
Data Centers took place in Vienna, 7-9 October 1986.
The discussions
concentrated on technical matters of the jointly operated systems CINDA,
EXFOR, ENDF/B AND WRENDA.
An important topic covered the data compilation scope of the centers,
and it was notedthat there are important data types that have been requested for
applications, that are not compiled by any of the centers due tolack of manpower; see the Conclusions page 9 under the heading
Compilation Scope.
Following a recommendation by the INDC, an intercomparison of EXFOR
output formats has been performed.
Such user friendly formats aredifferent at the centers due to different computer configurations, but
all centers have now easily readable output formats where cryptic codes
were converted to legible expansions.
"Computation formats" where thedata units (e.g. in basic EXFOR data may be in b, mb, or pb) areconverted to uniform units, exist at NNDC, NEA-DB and NDS and, to someextent (i.e. not as routine operations), also at the other centers.
The EXFOR system has stabilized and does not require significant
changes any more. However, compilation rules must be updated continouslywith respect to~data types (e.g. Kerma factors),

data types that may occur in various representations (e.g. gamma­
production cross-sections),
increased sophistication of machine processing of EXFOR data.
Consequently,
agreed upon.

alarge number of conclus ions and act ions have beenWith respect to evaluated data, centers and users are waiting for the
ENDF-6 Formats Manual and for the ENDF/B-6 standards file in order tohave a common basis for further data evaluation work and normalization ofdata.
The CINDA system has been changed to a de-centralized system.
The
CINDA users will not notice any change in the appearance. But many itemsin the co-operation scheme, in the CINDA exchange format, in thecenter-internal CINDA formats, and in the retrieval scheme for the bookproduction had to be reviewed, clarified or revised.

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

CAJaD

Ms. G.M. Zhuravleva

CJD

G. Timukhin

CNDC

Wang Dahai (presently at NDS)

NEA-DB

Ms. I. Forest
H. Hofer

NNDC

Ms. V. McLane

RIKEN

Y. Tendow

NDS

D.E. Cullen
D. Gandarias Cruz
M. Lammer
H.D. Lemme1
K. Okamoto
O. Schwerer
Ms. M. seits

-

)

­

AGENDA

1.

Opening, adoption of agenda. announcements, etc.

2.

Cinda

2.1

Cinda system and Manual
various items in 4C-3/298
selection criteria for Cinda Supplement Books: 4C-3/295
quantities and definitions. e.g. polarization
Cinda check programs

2.2

Cinda exchange mechanism: 4C-3/297 item 1.1

2.3

Cinda completenesscompleteness of coverage, delays?
data index lines: EXFOR
data index lines: non-EXFOR: 4C-3/297 item 2.4

2.4

Cinda Book
book cover: proposed in 4C-3/294
introductory text: 4C-3/297 item 1.2
handbooks
EXFOR advertisement: 4C-3/297 attachment 2.2
proposal of including in Cinda a Chart of Nuclides
book production schedule: 4C-3/297 item 1.3
see also 4C-3/290

3.
3.1

Exfor
Exfor system, coding rules. Manual
Pending CP Memos
Paramagnetic effects: CP-C/161. CP-D/149
Isomers: CP-C/162. CP-D/15l
Gamma Spectra: CP-D/152
Temperatures: CP-C/164. CP-D/153
Institute in case of international cooperation: 4C-1/1S1
Permitted character set

3.2

TRANS tapes
disturbing mistakes in TRANS tapes: many memos
specific items to improve the check-programs
response to requested retransmissions

3.3

EXFOR completenesscleanup: many 4C-l Memos and response
redundant EXFOR entries: 4C-1/179

3.4

Customer services
computation format: IAEA-NDS-80: X4TOC4intercomparison of EXFOR retrievals and output
formats: reply to Memo CP-D/150
Note: so far, we received only one reply from NEA-DB.
Kindly send other replies soonest. or bring it with you tothe meeting.

3.5

Dictionaries
expansions in Diet. 7 (Books and Conf): CP-D/148
nuclides: 4C-4/46 and others

3.6

Special CPND matters

3.7

Special PhotoND matterscolumn heading M: CP-C/160
new EXFOR center in UK?

3.8

Miscellaneous
Chinese author names in EXFOR
Transliteration of Russian author names

1.

Non-EXFOR data libraries

4.1

Inventory of available libraries:
IAEA-NDS-7. IAEA-NDS-70

4.2

Status of new versions of available libraries:
INDL
UKNDL
BROND (Obninsk)
JENDL-3
ENDF/B-6 evaluations
ENDF/B-5 files in ENDF-6 format
Fission yields
Others?

- / ­
4.3

Codes
ENDF-5 codes: IAEA-NDS-29: utility programs
IAEA-NDS-39: Pre-processing codes
IAEA-NDS-79: PLOTC4

4.4
4.5
6.

Status of ENDF-6 Manual and codes
International co-operation in data evaluation
Wrenda.

Schedule and actions for next issue1.

Miscellaneous

7.1

List of nuclear data meetings: CP-D/l46

1.2

Date of next NRDC-MeetingCONCLUSIONS AND ACTIONS
1.

Compilation scope:

1.1

The IAEA Advisory Group Meeting on Nuclear Data for Medical
Radiotherapy (Delft, Netherlands, 16-20 Sept. 1985) had stated theneed for compilation of selected differential CPND (see EXFOR
conclusion 7.3 from the 1985 NRDC meeting). - None of the centers
is doing a systematic effort in this field, though a few such data
may be found in EXFOR.

1.2

Higher ener!!.y neutron data (e. g. up to 100 MeV for radiotherapy;
above 100 MeV for accelerator breeding) (see EXFOR conclusion 7.4
from the 1985 NRDC Meeting) are compiled at Brookhaven and Obninsk
but not at Saclay.
(In the NDS service area such data are notmeasured. )Considering, that the frequency of such data is not very high, thecenters recommend the NEA-DB to compile such data from the NEA-DB
service area in EXFOR. Should this not be possible, NNDC would befree to compile such data into the EXFOR file 6, subject toavailability of manpower.

1.3

Polarized neutron data (including polarized targets and polarized
beams) seem to be compiled systematically at NNDC and NEA-DB, andto some extent at CJD. (No such data in area 3.)

1.4

None of the centers is compiling systematically (d.pf). (t,df) andsimilar data that had been requested by neutron data evalutors.

1.5

R1KEN concentrates on the compilation of charged-particle induced
reaction data for the production of radioisotopes. The list of
isotopes considered is still the same as reported in INDC(NDS)-154
page 70. At present. cross-sections for the production of 1-123,
1-125 and C-11 are being compiled.

1.6

None of the neutron data centers does a systematic compilation ofneutron-induced gamma-spectra data.
However, cross-section datafor producing specific strong gamma-lines (as required, e.g. forgeophysics) are compiled by the four centers.

1.7

The neutron data centers continue to compile all data for neutron­
induced reactions (with some limitations as mentioned elsewhere inthese conclusion~. It was not possible to define a specific areaof neutron data that would be used only very little. Consequently,
no reduction of compilation workload seems to be possible.

1.8

Cold neutron data do almost not exist in EXFOR, although a numberof experimental data exists in the literature.
NEA-DB had arequest for such data.

1.9

Compilation and evaluation activities on fission yield data
(M. James. UK, and others) rely on the compilation of such data in
EXFOR.
(Older such data, that exist in the Crouch compilation,
are incomplete in EXFOR.) Compilation and eValuation activities
on delayed neutron yield data and Pn values by T. England should
also rely on EXFOR. where a new formalism for Pn values has been
introduced recently.

1.10

The EXFOR.completeness of CPND data for medical applications, i.e.
data for radiotherapy (Kerma factors, transport calculations)in tissue materials and in detector materials
excitation functions for radioisotope production
is poor.
Special efforts are needed.
NDS will contact CAJaD,
IAE-CP, NNDC, RIKEN and ask about possibilities for additional
compilation work for some well-defined data types.

2.

EXFOR general. conclusions:

2.1

When revised EXFOR entries are retransmitted, it is essential tosummarize the revision under HISTORY.
Where appropriate, an accompanying CP-Memo should be sent together
with the retransmission, indicating, for example, that theretransmissions included in TRANS-tape xxx are the response tomemo CP-xxx.
Centers are urged to respond fast and carefully to requests byother centers for EXFOR corrections and retransmissions.

2.2

The matter of isomer coding, specifically of short-living isomers,
as discussed in Memos CP-C/162 and CP-D/lSl was postponed. A memo
by F. Chukreev was announced. further discussion by exchange of
CP-Memos was encouraged so that a solution could be proposed for
adoption at the 1987 data centers meeting.
A clean solution may not be possible for two reasons:a) When new isomers are discovered. it will hardly be possible torevise old entries whether the previously unknown isomer was
included or not.
b) For many applications a short-living isomer can be ignored and,
therefore. no isomer extension will be coded although. strictly
speaking. an isomer extension could be required.

2.3

Dr. Tendow submitted a RIKEN paper summarizing recent changes in
the knowledge of isomers. This will be helpful to compilers whencoding isomer cross-sections in EXFOR.
The paper will be
distributed as a CP-R memo.

2.4

Sample temperature TEMP and spectrum temperature kT must be
distinguished carefully: kT must not be given in DEG but in eV.
Where appropriate, kT can replace the incident particle energy
EN.
Checking codesshould be updated accordingly. where
necessary.
The keyword EN-DUMMY should be avoided when moresuitable keywords exist.

2.5

The revision of Dictionary 7 on books and conferences, including
now short expandions and long expansions, was appreciated but
centers were asked to submit to NDS proposals for further
improvements.

2.6

Memo CP-D/lS2 on Gamma-spectra was adopted. This memo introduced
coding rules for gamma-ray production cross-sections as distinct
from other representations of gamma yield data.

CONCLUSIONS AND ACTIONS
1.

Compilation scope:

1.1

The IAEA Advisory Group Heeting on Nuclear Data for Hedica1
Radiotherapy (Delft, Netherlands, 16-20 sept. 1985) had stated theneed for compilation of selected differential CPND (see EXFOR
conclusion 7.3 from the 1985 NRDC meeting). - None of the centers
is doing a systematic effort in this field, though a few such data
may be found in EXFOR.

1.2

Higher energy neutron data (e.g. up to 100 HeV for radiotherapy;
above 100 HeV for accelerator breeding) (see EXFOR conclusion 7.4
from the 1985 NRDC Heeting) are compiled at Brookhaven and Obninsk
but not at Sac1ay.
(In the NDS service area such data are notmeasured. )Considering, that the frequency of such data is not very high, thecenters recommend the NEA-DB to compile such data from the NEA-DB
service area in EXFOR. Should this not be possible, NNDC would befree to compile such data into the EXFOR file 6, subject toavailability of manpower.

1.3

Polarized neutron data (including polarized targets and polarized
beams) seem to be compiled systematically at NNDC and NEA-DB, andto some extent at CJD. (No such data in area 3.)

1.4

None of the centers is compiling systematically (d.pf). (t.df) andsimilar data that had been requested by neutron data eva1utors.

1.5

RIKEN concentrates on the compilation of charged-particle induced
reaction data for the production of radioisotopes.
The list of
isotopes considered is still the same as reported in INDC(NDS)-154
page 70. At present, cross-sections for the production of 1-123,
1-125 and C-11 are being compiled.

1.6

None of the neutron data centers does a systematic compilation ofneutron-induced gamma-spectra data.
However, cross-section datafor producing specific strong gamma-lines (as required, e.g. forgeophysics) are compiled by the four centers.

1.7

The neutron data centers continue to compile all data for neutron­
induced reactions (with some limitations as mentioned elsewhere inthese conc1usion~. It was not possible to define a specific areaof neutron data that would be used only very little. Consequently,
no reduction of compilation workload seems to be possible.

1.B

Cold neutron data do almost not exist in EXFOR, although a numberof experimental data exists in the literature.
NEA-DB had arequest for such data.

1.9

Compilation and evaluation activities on fission yield data
(H. James, UK, and others) rely on the compilation of such data in
EXFOR.
(Older such data, that exist in the Crouch compilation,
are incomplete in EXFOR.) Compilation and evaluation activities
on delayed neutron yield data and Pn values by T. England should
also rely on EXFOR, where a new formalism for Pn values has been
introduced recently.

1.10

The EXFOR completeness of CPND data for medical applications, i.e.
data for radiotherapy (Kerma factors, transport calculations)in tissue materials and in detector materials
excitation functions for radioisotope production
is poor.
Special efforts are needed.
NDS will contact CAJaD,
IAE-CP, NNDC, RIKEN and ask about possibilities for additional
compilation work for some well-defined data types.

2.

EXFOR general. conclusions:

2.1

When revised EXFOR entries are retransmitted, it is essential tosummarize the revision under HISTORY.
Where appropriate. an accompanying CP-Memo should be sent together
with the retransmission, indicating, for example, that theretransmissions included in TRANS-tape xxx are the response tomemo CP-xxx.
Centers are urged to respond fast and carefully to requests byother centers for EXFOR corrections and retransmissions.

2.2

The matter of isomer coding, specifically of short-living isomers.
as discussed in Memos CP-C/162 and CP-D/15l was postponed. A memo
by F. Chukreev was announced. further discussion by exchange of
CP-Memos was encouraged so that a solution could be proposed for
adoption at the 1987 data centers meeting.
A clean solution may not be possible for two reasons:a) When new isomers are discovered, it will hardly be possible torevise old entries whether the previously unknown isomer was
included or not.
b) For many applications a short-living isomer can be ignored and,
therefore, no isomer extension will be coded although, strictly
speaking, an isomer extension could be required.

2.3

Dr. Tendow submitted a RIKEN paper summarizing recent changes in
the knowledge of isomers. This will be helpful to compilers whencoding isomer cross-sections in EXFOR.
The paper will be
distributed as a CP-R memo.

2.4

Sample temperature TEMP and spectrum temperature kT must be
distinguished carefully: kT must not be given in DEG but in eV.
Where appropriate, kT can replace the incident particle energy
EN.
Checking codesshould be updated accordingly, where
necessary.
The keyword EN-DUMMY should be avoided when moresuitable keywords exist.

2.5

The revision of Dictionary 7 on books and conferences. including
now short expandions and long expansions, was appreciated but
centers were asked to submit to NDS proposals for further
improvements.

2.6

Memo CP-D/152 on Gamma-spectra was adopted. This memo introduced
coding rules for gamma-ray production cross-sections as distinct
from other representations of gamma yield data.

2.7

The special characters " > < : ; ! ? & as adopted earlier for
CINDA (Memo 4C-312Bl) can now be used also in EXFOR in the freetext, but not within the numerical fields under COMMON and DATA.
It will be investigated (action NDS) whether additional signs canbe adopted and whether there exist ambiguities in the bit
configuration according to standards (ASCII, EBCDIC).
For thetime being lower-case characters will not be adopted.

2.B

The code "SUM" whithin the REACTION string is made obsolete. The
code "RAT" remains important, because it indicates that the data
given are not in barns but in the data unit NO-DIM.
The
keyword-headings SUM and RATIO are dropped. In dictionaries, thesecodes will be marked as obsolete. These codes will continue tooccur in entries compiled so far, and centers are not requested toremove these codes in old entries, except in the case ofretransmissions.

2.9

Centers are reminded to use the Multiple REACTION Formalism
strictly in those cases only that are given in the EXFOR Manual.
Otherwise receiving centers will have serious difficulties whenprocessing the data.

2.10

A few cases of equivalent REACTION codings were found, e.g.

..

.

isotope-production cross-section on a natural targetIttt
on an isotopic target with theabundance modifier A
A similar case exists in the case of thick-target yields forenriched samples
inelastic scattering to a fission isomer
process code INL+F
Such cases should be mentioned in the EXFOR Manual,preference was given for either of the possible codes.

and

no

2.11

Tape densities:
CJD and CAJaD still require BOO bpi; In all other cases BOO bpi
should no longer be used. RIKEN, NNDC, NEA-DB, NDS accept 1600 or
6250 bpi.

2.12

The different retrieval mechanisms and output formats of thecenters were reviewed as response to Memo CP-D/1S0 following a
proposal by the INDC to stimulate customer-friendly output
formats. An additional response from CJD was announced. NDS will
write a summary of the outcome of this exercise.

2.13

All EXFOR centers prepare EXFOR entries at the screen ininteractive mode, except for NDS where entry forms are stillused. Lack of programming manpower and priority of other projects(e . g . rewr i ti ng of CINDA code s ) did not yet permi t a more modern
system.

2.14

Under AUTHOR, a blank after a comma is permitted. to improve
legibility. Blanks between initials, and blanks between initials
and family names remain forbidden.

-

J..4

­

2.15

Heading keywords should not be identical to unit keywords.

2.16

When NDS adds a new quantity code to Dictionary 36 because thiswas encountered in a TRANS tape without prior announcement in a
CP-Memo, NDS should review the code and, if found acceptable, sendan accompanying memo with the Dict. update. Centers are remindedagain not to transmit new codes without notification.

3.

EXFOR general, actions:

3.1

NDS

(if not yet done:) to correct the EXFOR check program
which was reported to have given an error message for thecorrect quantity coding (O,O}"LDP.

3.2

NDS

to send the EXFOR check program, whenever the new version
is ready, also to NEA-DB in addition to the establisheddistributions which includes CJD, CAJaD, RIKEN, IAE-CP,
TUD.

3.3

All

to contribute to the cleanup of Dictionary 3 (institutes)
and of the reference dictionaries 5, 6, 7 and to keep them
up-to-date. Specifically: New conference proceedings andany changes in institute names or journal names should bereported to NDS.
Comments for improvements in the new"short expansions" for conference proceedings are welcome.

3.4

All

with high priority to review memos containing requests forretransmissions of erroneous EXFOR entries and to correct
and retransmit them speedily; specifically to review thelist of requested retransmissions by O. Schwerer (will besent out as a Memo)

3.5

CAJaD

as announced, to submit a CP-Memo on short-lived isomers.

3.6

NNDC

to submit suitable examples for the measurement of partial
cross-sections to short-living levels or isomers, in orderto have a basis for the discussions on how to code them in
EXFOR.

3.7

NNDC

to review in the EXFOR Manual whether the definition for
EN-DUMMY is still appropriate after other keywords such as
KT had been introduced.

3.8

NDS

to review any possible complications that may arise fromadopting in EXFOR additional special characters, e.g. [l,and to report to the other centers.

3.9

All

to update their EXFOR checking programs to include theitems included in the list of disturbing errors found in
TRANS tapes (see appendix ... )

3.10

CJD

to send the response to
retrieval intercomparison.

Memo

CP-D/150

on

the

EXFOR

-

J..j ­

3.11

NDS

to evaluate and summarize the responses to Memo CP-D/150
on the different retrieval facilities and output formats.

3.12

NDS
CJD

to take appropriate action about the transliteration of
Russian names.
Originally, the international ISO scheme
had been adopted for CINDA and EXFOR as approved by INDSWG
at that time.
Meanwhile, the US transliteration scheme
had been adopted by INIS and should probably be adopted
also by CINDA and EXFOR.

3.13

NDS

to write a Lexfor entry on the special treatment in EXFOR
of Chinese and other South-East Asian names.

3.14

NNDC

to finalize and distribute as X4 Memo the Manual updates
resulting from the 1985 NRDC Meeting.

3.15

NNDC

to update the Manual according to the conclusions of thepresent meeting.

3.16

NDS

to update the Dictionaries according to the conclusions of
the present meeting.

3.17

All

to update their computer codes according to the conclusionsof the present meeting.

3.18

All

to update their distribution lists:change Dr. B.S. Ishkhanov to Dr. V. Varlamov(Name and address for Beijing should not be changed
although Dr. Zhuang stays at Brookhaven for a limited
period. )

3.19

NDS

to contact Dr. Cai Dunjiu and clarify the EXFOR coding offission-products as mentioned in his letter of 86/9/23.

3.20

RIKEN

to distribute the paper on recent changes in the knowledgeof isomers as CP-R memo (compare conclusion 2.3 above).

4.
4.1.

Neutron EXFOR. conclusions:
In the course of the book production NNDC has reactivated the
EXFOR files 6, 7, 8 for compiling missing data sets from areas 2,
3, 4 respectively. These data will be transmitted soon.
NNDC found a number of USSR entries from the old EXFOR file 8 that
had not yet been corrected into the EXFOR file 4. These data will
be retransmitted.
NDS had deleted their EXFOR file 8 assumingthat all had been converted by CJD into the EXFOR file 4 which
turned out to be a wrong assumption.

4.2

Re Memo 4C-l/l8l pointing out the questions which center is
responsible for compilation when institutes from different areas
co-operate (e.g. Australia - Oak Ridge). centers are reminded tocontact each other in time before starting the compilation work.

4.3

A thorough review and, perhaps, reVlSlon of the quantities
relating to thermal scattering may be necessary. NNDC is asked toprepare a proposed Lexfor entry with examples. Special emphasisshould be given to the questions. which of the quanti ties are
dependent or independent on temperature, and to questions ofoverlapping quantity definitions (e.g. transition from "thermal
scattering" to "elastic scattering") .
Changes of existing
quanti ty codes should be proposed only when necessary. The code
PM+ to indicate that paramagnetic scattering is included, wasadopted following Memo CP-C/161.

4.4

For temperature-dependent cross-sections the code SIG/TEM wasadopted. The code TEM should, however. not be used for data withthe process code THS, in which case the code TEM may be
redundant. An accompanying Lexfor entry will be submitted by NNDC
(compare action 5.5).

4.5

The EXFOR completeness check by NNDC was done by comparison
against CINDA which was felt sufficiently complete (except fordelays wi th recent Ii terature and some secondary I i terature ofsecondary importance). K. Okamoto drew the attention to the factthat NDS had used, when compiling evaluted data in EXFOR-V and
INDL, the evaluator's lists of experiments as a most usefulcompleteness check of EXFOR.

5.

Neutron-EXFOR, actions:

5.1

NEA-DB
NDS
CJD

to work with high priority on compiling and transmitting
those data sets that were identified by NNDC as missing
for Z>30. The deadline for the book production at NNDC
is December 1986. Such data should be sent speedily evenoutside normal transmission.

5.2

NEA-DBNDS
CJD

to review the EXFOR files 6, 7. 8 recently compiled by
NNDC for missing data from areas 2, 3, 4, as soon as thishas been transmitted.
However, the compilation of new
data should have higher priority than the conversion of
the EXFOR 6, 7, 8 files into the regular 2, 3, 4 files.

5.3

NDS

to review action 9.7 from the 1985 NRDC Meeting to check
whether the quantity code PR/PRE,AP still exists in EXFOR
and to decide what remains to be done.

5.4

CJD

to respond to the duplicated EXFOR entries identified in
Memo 4C-l/179 and to continue similar cleanup for area 4.

5.5

NNDC

to propose an improved Lexfor entry on thermal scattering
quanti ties with examples and definitions and, whennecessary, an improved coding scheme.

5.6

NNDC

to propose a Lexfor entry on the newly introduced code
SIG/TEM for temperature dependent cross-sections.

5.7

NDS

to retransmit to CJD the tapes TRANS 3053 and UPDAT 3006
and 3008.

5.8
6.

"

NNDC

to retransmit to CJD the tapes TRANS 1194, 1197, 1211.

CPND EXFOR. actions:

6.1

CAJaD

to inform whether the data of the handbook by P.P.
Dimitriev are available in computerized form. Any format
would be welcome.

6.2

CAJaD

to inform other centers which duplicate entries should bedeleted, and to retransmit any combinations made from
duplicate entries.

6.3

NDS

to retransmit those B-entries where errors were found in
TRANS-COOS (work was almost finished).

6.4

NNDC

to retransmit that entry from TRANS-C004 where Na-22 andC-12 were inverted.

7.

Photo-ND. conclusions:

7.1

Vladimir Varlamov is now the head of CDFE.

7.2

Prof. Reid, Glasgow, had announced that he will start compiling,
through NDS, Photonuclear data in EXFOR.
Progress will bereported to the other centers.

7.3

The column
MOM-SEC.

8.

Photo-ND. action:

8.1

9.

CDFE

heading

M forasecondary momentumischangedtoto propose Lexfor entries describing the use of the BIB
keywords EMS-SEC and MOM-SEC,
and of the quantity
parameters ECO, MCO, EMC.

Evaluated data, conclusions:

9.1

UKNDL-8l is the last version that was issued.
JEF.

9.2

ENDF/B-6 Standards will be ready in spring of 1987.

9.3

No information was available on the status of the USSR evaluateddata file BROND, though the Konshin evaluations from BROND had
been distributed earlier as a supplement to INDL.

9.4

Another supplement to INDL will
evaluations and. perhaps, others.

9.5

The ENDF-6 Formats Manual is in preparation.
It
distributed to the other enters as soon as it is ready.

includeIt is superseded by

some

new

Chineseshouldbe10.

Evaluated data. actions:

10.1

NDS

to distribute, at regular intervals, tape copies of
IAEA-NDS-70, the Z-S-A index to evaluated data libraries.

10.2

NEA-DB

to distribute the new JENDL-2 FP library.

10.3

NEA-DBif existing, to provide (or quote the reference 1) the
documentation for JENDL-2 evaluations, including the FP
library.

10.4

All

to adopt the practice, as in CINDA, to quote an evaluateddata set by library-name and MAT number (plus version ormod. number where this exists).

10.5

NNDC

to transmit ECPL-86 to NDS, CAJaD, RIKEN, CNDC/CP.

10.6

NNDC

Re ENDF Formats Manual file 8, CNDC has proposed in a
letter dated 86/9/23,
tochangeunder
MT=454theterm
ttfranctional(independent) yield tt to ttindependent yield";to specify that the yields should sum up to exactly 2
instead of approximately 2.0;
tochangeunder'KT=459
theterms
ttcumulative
fractional yield" and ttdirect fractional yield".
It appears that these proposals are correct and NNDC is
asked to consider them for updating of the ENDF Formats
Manual. The term "fractional yield" should always referto the ratio "yield/chain yield".

11.
11.1

12.

WRENDAA new issue of WRENDA is to be prepared in 1987 by the four
neutron data centers, similar to the procedures of the previous
issue. Schedule and workplans will be communicated in a memo by
NDS.
CINDA conclusions:12.1

The changes of coding rules and of manual pages proposed in Memo
4C-3/298
wereadopted,exceptitems
6 and
7 (cosmetic
corrections).
In this case the assignment was left to thediscretion of the responsible CINDA centre and the procedure set
out in 4C-3/295 agreed.

12.2

The following technical details of CINDA were discussed and agreed:a) Review articles should not be blocked together with experiments.
b) The code POL should only be used if the polarization ofoutgoing
neutrons
was measured;
all other polarization
experiments should be coded under the quantities measured.

-

.J..I

­

c) Eta. alpha and nu deduced from resonance parameters should not
be coded under the quantities ETA. ALF, NU. but under RES.
d) Reminder not to code issue numbers of journals unless eachissue starts with page 1.
e) Reminder to insert a hyphen between report codes and number{s).
These conclusions should be included in the CINDA coding manual.
12.3

CINDA coverage in the past seems to be fairly complete. However.
concern is expressed about the completeness of coverage by
external CINDA readers in the NEA-DB area. Also. delays in the
coverage of current literature by CJD is observed.

12.4

The proposals for the new CINDA cover submitted by NEA-DB were
rej ected because they either conta ined too small characters notsuitable for printing. or did not advertise EXFOR.
A revisedversion of the NDS proposal (4C-3/294) was agreed as attached.

12.5

The advert i sement of EXFOR on page 1.18 of CINDA86 was accepted.
The inclusion of an example of an EXFOR entry in the CINDA bookwas considered unnecessary and dropped.
The proposal to include a chart of nuclides with CINDA issues was
dropped as being not easy to accomplish and too expensive.

12.6

The general changes in the deadlines given in the book production
schedule were accepted.

12.7

From now on only area 4 CINDA entries submitted by CJD should beentered into the area 4 subfile, so that they can keep control
over the file contents. other centers should send their area 4
entries to CJD.

12.8

NEA-DB is asked to consider compiling in CINDA. like the other
CINDA centers. neutron data above 20 MeV, as this should not be asignificant additional workload.

13.

CINDA actions:

13.1

All

to submi t proposals for manual changes
December 1986 to NEA-DB.

before

end

of

13.2

NEA-DB

to update and distribute the manual pages after receipt
of proposals (December 1986).

13.3

All

to check target nuclei entered in CINDA against EXFOR
Dict. 27. and to submit new nuclides for inclusion before
transmission of the corresponding entries to othercenters.

13.4

CJD

to make sure that mail delays are minimized. Full-scale
CINDA co-operation
cannotfunction
without
prompttransmission of correspondence and magentic tapes.
For
information of the recelvlng centres CJD should sendtelexes announcing the dispatches.

13.5

NEA-DBto thoroughly check entries submitted by external
readers, in particular the use of the quantities FPB and
FPG.

13.6

All

to ensure that the coding of index lines to non-EXFOR
data libraries is complete and up-to-date until CINDA87.

13.7

NNDC
NEA-DB
CJD

to explicitly agree to or reject (together with a counter­
proposal) the attached proposal for the new CINDA cover.

13.8

NNDC
NEA-DB
CJD

Reminder: to contribute to CINDA text pages, in particulara) to send coverage cutoff dates for literature listed
under "selected" literature scanned for the present
edition (new for CJD)b) to explicitely state any codes to be added to or
omitted from this listc) to send information on conferences indexed since thelast editiond) to check other sections of the text pages and submit
revisions and additions, in particular the sections:
Neutron Data Handbooks
Acknowledgements
Annex, section 8 (numerical data libraries)

13.9

NDS
CJD

to continue work towards full
the area 4 CINDA subfile.

13.10

CJD

to plan another visit of staff to Vienna for cleanup of
the area 4 subfile and work on action 13.9.

13.11

NDS

to continue to send to CJD
fast feedback on their CINDA entries
CINDA checking codes and updates
CINDA file (in agreed schedule)

13.12

NNDC
NEA-DBNDS

to send to CJD from now on also all area 4 entries inreader format prepared by NDS, NNDC or NEA-DB, and update
the area 4 subfile only with entries received from CJD.

13.13

NDS

The request in Memo 4C-4/46 for an update of Dictionary
27 (Nuclides) may have referred to CINDA. NDS to check.

13.14

All

to bring EXFOR index lines in CINDA up-to-date with highpriority, because CINDA is used in NNDC and elsewhere as
an EXFOR index. (CJD plans to finish this job before theend of 1986).

14.
14.1

responsibilityof CJD for

Miscellaneous conclusions:
Data transmission:
Manpower could be saved by transmission ofdata through telephone lines, which should be economic for small
data sets.
centers are encouraged to try this out and tocommunicate to each other the necessary technical arrangements(available nets, user names, etc.).

14.2

Date of next NRDC Meetings:
The next full meeting to be attended by center heads and technicalstaff will be at the Brookhaven National Laboratory, USA, 26-30
October 1987.
Note: This date was confirmed by correspondence subsequent to thepresent meeting.
The next technical meeting to be attended by technical staff (atno cost to the IAEA) is envisaged to be held in Vienna in October
1988.