An Assessment of the 

National Institute of Standards 

and Technology 

Center for Neutron Research 

Fiscal Year 2013 

Panel on Neutron Research 

Laboratory Assessments Board 

Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences 

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 

Washington, D.C. 

www.nap.edu 
 

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 5 00 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 

NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing 

Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of 

the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the 

Institute of Medicine. The members of the panel responsible for the report were chosen 

for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. 

This study was supported by Contract No. SB1341-12-CQ-0036 between the 

National Academy of Sciences and the National Institute of Standards and Technology, 

an agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or 

recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not 

necessarily reflect the views of the agency that provided support for the project. 

International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-29608-3 

International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-29608-0 

Copies of this report are available from 

Laboratory Assessments Board 

Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences 

National Research Council 

500 Fifth Street, NW 

Washington, DC 20001 

Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 

Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; 

http://www.nap.edu. 

Copyright 2013 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. 

Printed in the United States of America 
 

 

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of 

distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the 

furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the 

authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate 

that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. 

Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. 

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the 

National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is 

autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the 

National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. 

The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at 

meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior 

achievements of engineers. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president of the National Academy of 

Engineering. 

The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences 

to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination 

of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the 

responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to 

be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of 

medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute 

of Medicine. 

The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 

1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s 

purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in 

accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become 

the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the 

National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, 

and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by 

both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. C. D. Mote, 

Jr., are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. 

www.national-academies.org 

 

 

PANEL ON NEUTRON RESEARCH 

PETER F. GREEN, University of Michigan, Chair 

PAUL A. FLEURY, Yale University 

LAURA H. GREENE, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 

ANDREW HARRISON, Institut Laue Langevin 

ALAN J. HURD, U.S. Department of State 

DALE E. KLEIN, University of Texas at Austin 

WAYDE KONZE, Dow Chemical Company 

ROGER A. LEACH, DuPont Central Research and Development Division 

TOM C. LUBENSKY, University of Pennsylvania 

BRIAN MAPLE, University of California, San Diego 

V. ADRIAN PARSEGIAN, University of Massachusetts, Amherst 

DAVID A.WEITZ, Harvard University 

Staff 

JAMES P. McGEE, Director 

ARUL MOZHI, Senior Program Officer 

LIZA HAMILTON, Administrative Coordinator 

EVA LABRE, Program Associate 

v 

Acknowledgment of Reviewers 

This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their 

diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by 

the National Research Council’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this 

independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the 

institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the 

report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the 

study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect 

the integrity of the deliberative process. 

We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report: 

Todd R. Allen, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 

Susan N. Coppersmith, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 

Donald M. Engelman, Yale University, 

Julia S. Higgins, Imperial College London, and 

Thomas P. Russell, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. 

Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments 

and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor 

did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was 

overseen by Alton D. Slay, Warrenton, Virginia. Appointed by the National Research 

Council, he was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this 

report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review 

comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report 

rests entirely with the authoring panel and the institution. 

vii 

 

Contents 

SUMMARY 1 

1 THE CHARGE TO THE PANEL AND THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS 3 

2 GENERAL ASSESSMENT OF THE MANAGEMENT AND OPERATION 5 

3 NCNR IN RELATION TO NEUTRON FACILITIES NATIONALLY AND 

INTERNATIONALLY 7 

4 EXTERNAL ENGAGEMENT OF THE NCNR 10 

5 SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 14 

6 CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES 18 

7 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 19 

ix 
 

Summary 

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Center for Neutron 

Research (NCNR), with its strong tradition of hiring and developing excellent scientific 

and technical staff, is one of the leading institutions worldwide in neutron 

instrumentation, technology, and science. It is a very well-managed user facility. With 

the recent completion of a $95 million expansion, performed on time and on budget, it 

has enhanced its instrumentation capabilities and has constructed a new guide hall. This 

expansion further enhances NCNR’s ability to meet high user demands—a factor of two 

higher than capacity—for experimentation to conduct cutting-edge research. NCNR’s 

high scientific productivity is due, in part, to effective communication between the 

management and staff and with the internal and external user communities. 

To continue to respond effectively to a changing environment and opportunities 

afforded by the recent reorganization of NIST, the NCNR management should pay 

particular attention to the considerations below to ensure that the NCNR continues to 

effectively serve its mission. 

NCNR management has historically done an excellent job at short-term, tactical 

planning. The NIST reorganization now provides them with an opportunity to operate 

more strategically. Because in the near future some of the more senior scientific and 

technical staff will be retiring, formalized succession planning needs to be performed in 

coordination with the broader NIST management. 

Recommendation 1. The NCNR should develop and maintain a strategic plan 

that takes into account current and anticipated NIST organizational structures, 

mission factors, staffing, budgets, fuel and infrastructure resources, and its user 

constituency. 

While numerous interactions exist between NCNR staff and other NIST staff in 

the various laboratory units, more formalized and coordinated planning could lead to new 

opportunities, or at least enhance the effectiveness of the current interactions. This, for 

example, would ensure that collaborative projects have sufficient budget support and 

appropriately serve the goals of the organization. 

Recommendation 2. NCNR management should establish a more formalized 

engagement process with other NIST laboratory units, particularly the Material 

Measurement Laboratory, the Physical Measurement Laboratory, and the Center 

for Nanoscale Science and Technology; programmatic planning involving personnel 

should be more formally coordinated with other areas of the laboratory. 

Funding to ensure that the reactor continues to operate efficiently, with 

appropriate and timely upgrades, is essential. 

Recommendation 3. The NCNR should develop a formal plan to address the 

impending 4

He shortage and the fuel supply costs that promise to be problematic. 

1 
 

 

The NCNR has served its internal and external users well. This is, in part, 

because the NCNR management and staff have been open and responsive to feedback 

from the internal and external user communities. One important outcome of this positive 

relationship is that it has enabled the NCNR to identify areas where it needs to develop 

new facilities and instruments, as well as technical and scientific expertise. 

Recommendation 4. The NCNR should continue to develop mechanisms that 

enable effective communication and feedback from current and potential users. A 

user community workshop should be planned for the near future. Additionally, 

web-based communications mechanisms, where appropriate, should also be used. 

The impact of travel budget restrictions on the ability of NCNR staff to travel and 

to communicate with other researchers hampers their ability to effectively serve the user 

community. 

The impact of the $1 million (30 percent of the entire budget for this 

collaboration) permanent decrease in funding for the National Science Foundation (NSF) 

collaboration involving the Center for High Resolution Neutron Scattering (CHRNS) is 

of serious concern. This collaboration has had a positive influence on research in the field. 

Recommendation 5. The potential impact of the reduction in funding for the 

collaboration between NIST and the National Science Foundation involving the 

Center for High Resolution Neutron Scattering should be carefully examined, 

documented, and addressed. 

nSoft, the new program designed to enhance industrial collaborations and 

contribute toward NIST’s mission, appears to be a productive model for industrial 

outreach and engagement. 

Recommendation 6. The NCNR should continue to focus its efforts on 

recruiting additional companies into the nSoft program and should establish new 

performance metrics that differ from those used to quantify the effectiveness of 

NCNR interactions with academics. 

2 
1 

The Charge to the Panel and the Assessment Process 

At the request of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the 

National Research Council (NRC) has, since 1959, annually assembled panels of experts 

from academia, industry, medicine, and other scientific and engineering environments to 

assess the quality and effectiveness of the NIST measurements and standards laboratories, 

of which there are now six, including two user facilities, as well as the adequacy of the 

laboratories’ resources. In 2013, NIST requested that the NRC form a panel to assess the 

NIST Center for Neutron Research (NCNR). This report summarizes the findings of the 

Panel on Neutron Research. 

For the assessment, NIST requested that the panel consider the following criteria: 

1. The merit of the current NCNR scientific and technical programs relative to 

current state-of-the-art programs; 

2. The degree to which the NCNR scientific and technical programs achieve 

their objectives and fulfill the mission of the NCNR; and 

3. The adequacy of the NCNR facilities, equipment, and human resources, as 

they affect the quality of the NCNR’s scientific and technical programs. The panel should 

consider the potential impact of facility modifications completed during the recent outage 

as well as the ongoing facility developments. 

The context of this technical assessment is the mission of NIST, which is to 

promote U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness by advancing measurement 

science, standards, and technology in ways that enhance economic security and improve 

the quality of life. The NIST laboratories conduct research to anticipate future metrology 

and standards needs to enable new scientific and technological advances and to improve 

and refine existing measurement methods and services. 

To accomplish the assessment, the NRC assembled a panel of 10 volunteers 

whose expertise matches that of the work performed by the NCNR staff. The panel 

members visited the NCNR facility at Gaithersburg, Maryland, for a day and a half, 

during which time they attended presentations, tours, demonstrations, and interactive 

sessions with NCNR staff. Subsequently, the panel members assembled for another day 

during which they conducted interactive sessions with NCNR managers and with leaders 

of NCNR user groups and met in a closed session to deliberate on the panel’s findings 

and to define the contents of this assessment report. 

The approach of the panel to the assessment relied on the experience, technical 

knowledge, and expertise of its members, whose backgrounds were carefully matched to 

the technical areas of NCNR activities. The panel reviewed selected examples of the 

scientific and technological research presented by the NCNR; because of time constraints, 

it was not possible to review the NCNR programs and projects exhaustively. The 

examples reviewed by the panel were selected by the NCNR. The panel’s goal was to 

identify and report salient examples of accomplishments and opportunities for further 

3 
 

improvement with respect to the following: the technical merit of the NCNR work, its 

perceived relevance to the NCNR’s definition of its mission, and specific elements of the 

NCNR’s resource infrastructure that are intended to support the work and the users of its 

facilities. These highlighted examples are intended collectively to portray an overall 

impression of the laboratory, while preserving useful suggestions specific to projects and 

programs that the panel considered to be of special note within the set of those examined. 

The assessment is currently scheduled to be repeated annually, which will allow, over 

time, exposure to the broad spectrum of NCNR activity. While the panel applied a largely 

qualitative approach to several elements of the assessment, it is possible that future 

assessments will be informed by further consideration of various analytical methods that 

can be applied. 

The comments in this report are not intended to address each program within the 

NCNR exhaustively. Instead, this report identifies key issues and focuses on 

representative programs and projects relevant to those issues. Given the necessarily 

nonexhaustive nature of the review process, the omission of any particular NCNR 

program or project should not be interpreted as a negative reflection on the omitted 

program or project. 

4 
 

2 

General Assessment of the Management and Operation 

The NCNR is one of the world’s premiere neutron science user facilities. To 

maintain its leadership position and to continue to serve the science and technology 

communities and the larger NIST mission, it is essential that the NCNR excel in both the 

physical and managerial aspects of its operation. 

The NCNR has developed a strong managerial tradition that is well suited to its 

mission, dating back at least three decades. NCNR line management has been rightly 

characterized as open, honest, candid, and exceptionally capable technically. Evidence of 

this is found in their very successful recruitment and hiring of creative, motivated, 

enthusiastic, and highly capable early-career scientific and instrument staff over the years, 

most of whom have entered initially as limited-term hires or postdoctoral staff. 

While only a small fraction of these people stay on for long terms, the majority 

have gone on elsewhere to quite successful careers in industry, academia, and other 

national laboratories, contributing significantly to the scientific user community in the 

United States and elsewhere. NCNR management conducts rigorous and regular 

performance reviews of the staff and provides candid feedback to them. These 

management practices have enabled the NCNR to build and maintain a cadre of senior 

scientists who are among the best in their fields and who both conduct their own in-house 

research and, significantly, collaborate with and assist the broader user community. 

The more technically oriented NCNR staff have been essential in meeting the 

NCNR mission objectives related to advancing both neutron instrumentation and 

techniques. A particularly striking example of this is the recent $95 million instrument 

expansion and new guide hall project, which was completed on time and within budget. 

With its expanded capabilities, it is important that the NCNR continue and evolve 

processes to solicit user input and provide technical support to outside users. 

As the customer base and mission of NIST itself have evolved, the NCNR has 

similarly evolved. The reorganization of the NIST laboratory programs and line 

organizations in 2010 brought both challenges and opportunities, some of which are 

discussed here. The number of NIST laboratory units was recently reduced from nine to 

six and reconfigured to enable better cross-organizational planning, coordination, and 

collaboration. The position of Associate Director for Laboratory Programs and Principal 

Deputy for NIST was created to oversee and implement the reorganization. Although the 

reorganization’s goals are being vigorously pursued, achieving many of the more 

strategic goals remains a work in progress. 

The NCNR does its recruiting, hiring, and performance evaluations largely as a 

stand-alone unit, although performance review results are shared among all six NIST 

laboratories. Similarly, coordination and collaborations involving the NCNR with the 

other laboratories (Material Measurement Laboratory [MML], Physical Measurement 

Laboratory [PML], and the Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology [CNST], in 

particular) currently remain primarily at the tactical rather than the strategic level. 

Although there are dozens of scientific and technical staff from these other laboratories 

5 
who work closely and are even collocated with NCNR staff, their budgets and 

programmatic planning appear to remain coordinated mainly on an ad hoc basis. 

The reorganization itself, as well as an increased focus at NIST on mission areas 

such as advanced manufacturing, present the need and opportunity for NCNR 

management to participate more strongly in NIST-wide strategic planning, with particular 

emphasis on more formalized engagement with the MML, PML, and CNST. 

Opportunities appear potentially fruitful in areas like recruiting, promotions, succession 

planning, and facilities planning. Succession planning should be an area of focus to 

ensure continued positive operations. 

NCNR management and operational practices over the years have resulted in 

excellent relations with the broad and diverse user community. The innovative formation 

of the “expertise transfer” paradigm for industry interactions, embodied in the nSoft 

program, is an example of best practices. CHRNS outreach and educational collaboration 

with NSF shows promise in building the neutron user community as well as in more 

general awareness and appreciation of the value of neutron science. The NCNR should be 

proactive in sharing, establishing, and maintaining cross-organizational activities that 

include the development of paradigms applicable across NIST laboratories. 

The operations of the beam facilities have been very good. Continuous 

enhancements to the research programs have been achieved. It is equally important that 

the reactor itself continue to be maintained and staffed appropriately. Attention should be 

given to both the nuclear facilities and the staff. It was noted that several of the longterm reactor staff are eligible for retirement. Succession planning and recruiting efforts 

are especially important in this arena. Upgrades to the reactor should receive the same 

attention and funding as the research equipment for the research facilities. If the reactor 

is not properly maintained and modernized, the NCNR incurs the risk of having great 

research facilities but no reliable source of neutrons. 

The area of most concern for the reactor is the fuel supply. There are two specific 

areas of concern: the cost and funding for the current fuel design and the potential cost 

and reduced capabilities with a new fuel design. Appropriate funds need to be made 

available for the current fuel so that the reactor operation does not get in a situation of 

having to choose between buying the fuel or providing proper maintenance. There is also 

uncertainty about the cost of the fuel as the Department of Energy moves toward the 

development of low enriched uranium (LEU) fuel. 

In summary, the management and operation of both the NCNR research facilities 

and activities and the NCNR reactor are well done. Continued vigilance and NIST 

management attention will be required to maintain this excellent track record. 

6 
 

3 

NCNR in Relation to Neutron Facilities Nationally and 

Internationally 

A number of metrics are commonly used to provide some measure of 

performance of a user facility such as NCNR. Among them are the degree of user 

demand—or oversubscription—as well as the quantity and quality of published output. 

Other measures of performance include the number of students trained, beam-days sold 

to industry, and case studies that illustrate the impact on society at large of the research 

carried out. 

The level of user demand is not in itself a measure of performance, but rather an 

indicator of the size and strength of the community that chooses to use a particular 

institute where there is a choice. Levels of demand tend to self-regulate when they start to 

rise significantly, with users becoming discouraged if success rates drop too low. The 

over-subscription level at NCNR of approximately 2.1 indicates that it is in good health. 

Performance indicators based on published output are difficult to establish and 

interpret. Gathering reliable data is a challenge. The institute itself can use a combination 

of searches in electronic databases and information received from users and instrument 

scientists as they share news about their recent publications. Such measures of quality 

will vary between various scientific domains; for example, impact factors of journals in 

the life sciences are significantly higher than in fundamental physics. 

Probably the most widely used measure of quality by neutron scattering centers is 

the Vettier index, established by a former Institut Laue Langevin (ILL) science director, 

Christian Vettier.1

 For the purposes of this report, a pragmatic approach has been 

adopted; the Vettier approach is used as one indicator of quality and is provided 

alongside the total number of publications in Table 3.1 for all user facilities in the United 

States, together with some of the other leading centers worldwide. 

1

 This was based on a “shopping basket” list containing a number of relatively high-impact journals in 

which science performed at neutron scattering centers is commonly published. (The list was revised in 

2008 and comprises the following journals: Nature, Nature:Physics, Nature:Materials, Science, Physical 

Review Letters, Physical Review B,C,E, JACS, Macromolecules, Langmuir, Journal of Molecular Biology, 

European Physics Journal:E, European Physics Letters, and Chemistry of Materials. The appearance of 

few European publications is due to political pressure to support such journals by members of the ILL 

scientific council but does not have a significant impact on the final values.) ILL takes charge of this 

process, first gathering papers through an electronic search (Thomson Web of Science) for the occurrence 

of the word “neutron” in papers from the shopping basket that bears the name of each institute. Each paper 

found in this way is checked manually to ensure that it is appropriate. The fact that at present only one 

institute gathers the data and checks each paper manually means for practical reasons that the number of 

journals considered is relatively small and does not evolve quickly with time, so it may not reflect changes 

in the journals in which scientists chose to publish. So, for example, not all of the strongest work in soft 

condensed matter and chemistry—areas of particular strength at NCNR—is captured by this approach. A 

better approach would be for each neutron scattering center to contribute a complete list of its publications 

every year to a common database, ensuring that the impact of every publication may be taken into 

consideration—an initiative to do this was launched at the last International Conference on Neutron 

Scattering meeting. 

7 
 

Comparisons of neutron scattering centers should also take into account the 

relative size of operations, such as the number of instrument days, the number of staff 

associated scientifically or technically with each instrument, and the budget, noting that 

there is generally a delay of a year or two between performing an experiment and 

publishing the results. For example, noting the relative scale of the operations (in terms of 

instrument days, budget—that for the ILL is at least twice as large as that for the 

NCNR—and staffing levels per instrument, with 4.5 and 7.0 full-time equivalent staff 

[FTEs] for NCNR and ILL respectively), the NCNR scores very highly for the quantity 

and quality of its output and, together with ISIS (the pulsed neutron and muon source at 

the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory in Oxfordshire, U.K.), is comfortably among the top 

three centers in the world in terms of the number of high-impact publications. It will take 

a few more years before SNS (Spallation Neutron Source at the Oak Ridge National 

Laboratory), HFIR (High Flux Isotope Reactor at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory), 

MLZ (Meier-Leibnitz Zentrum, based at the FRM-II reactor in Germany), and ANSTO 

(Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation) reach a steady state in terms 

of the number of instrument days, after which a more meaningful comparison can be 

made between different institutes. 

The success of the NCNR over the years is largely attributable to their strategy of 

building on areas of strength, matching instruments with support facilities, fostering inhouse scientific and technical expertise, and attracting a strong user community to bring 

their science there as well. The instrumentation is particularly strong for the study of 

large-scale structures (SANS [small angle neutron scattering], incorporating USANS 

[ultra-small angle neutron scattering], and reflectometry), with complementary sampleenvironment equipment such as rheometers. Spectroscopy has also benefitted from 

strong instrumentation, with MACS-II (Multi Axis Crystal Spectrometer) a world-leading 

addition to the stable, and is matched by very strong user groups and in-house scientists 

in this field. This combination of strong users and in-house scientists has also ensured 

excellent output in diffraction, despite instrumentation that is not world-leading; even 

stronger science could emerge with a modest investment in an upgrade here. 

The NCNR’s instrumentation and neutron technology are among the best in the 

world. It is world-leading in the SEOP (spin-exchange optical pumping) technology for

3

He polarisation optics, and it has a small but high-quality activity in neutron optics and 

detector developments. The multiplexed reflectometer, CANDOR (chromatic analysis 

neutron diffractometer or reflectometer), promises a step-change in capability in its field 

and is likely to be of great interest to those at other steady-state sources; NCNR staff 

described exciting prospects in very-high-resolution imaging using a novel neutron 

microscope that borrows from concepts developed for the Chandra X-ray Observatory; a 

collaboration has been established between NIST, the Massachusetts Institute of 

Technology, and NASA with the aim of reaching 1 μm spatial resolution. All of this is 

indicative of an NCNR culture in which creative thinking is encouraged and thrives. 

8 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE 3.1 Comparison of NCNR with Other Neutron Facilities 

NCNRa HFIRb SNSb LANSCEc ILLd ISISe MLZf ANSTOg 

Number of 

instruments 

23 12 15 8 40 28 26 5-7 

Days of operation 

per year 

267 150 200 125 200 120 240 285 

Number of 

publications in 

2010 

323 307 231 131 552 436 172 92 

Number (and 

percentage) of 

high-impact 

publications 

(using the Vettier 

index) 

62 (19) 49 (16) 36 (16) 28 133 (16) 70 (16) 42 (24) 32 (17) 

Measure of 

facility output = 

(number of 

instruments x 

number of days) ÷ 

number of papers 

19.0 5.8 13.0 7.6 14.5 7.7 36.3 9.8 

Type of neutron 

source 

Reactor Reactor Spallation Spallation Reactor Spallation Reactor Reactor 

Megawatts 20 85 1.0 0.1 58 0.25 20 20 

NOTE: Figures represent data for 2012.
 a

 NIST Center for Neutron Research, available at 

http://www.ncnr.nist.gov/AnnualReport/FY2012/AR_2012_large.pdf. Data reported here are for mid-2011
 

to mid-2012. 

b

 High Flux Isotope Reactor at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory; Spallation Neutron Source at the Oak 

Ridge National Laboratory, available at http://neutrons.ornl.gov/media/pubs/2012-published.shtml.
 c

 Lujan Neutron Scattering Center at the Los Alamos Neutron Science Center Spallation Neutron Source at
 

the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Data supplied by Lujan.

d

 Institut Laue-Langevin, available at http://www.ill.eu/fileadmin/users_files/Annual_Report/AR12/page/publications.htm.
 e

 Spallation Neutron Source in the United Kingdom, available at http://www.isis.stfc.ac.uk/aboutisis/annual-review/2012/isis-annual-review-2012-pdf13438.pdf.

f

 Meier-Leibnitz Zentrum based at the FRM-II reactor, Germany, available at http://www.mlzgarching.de/annual-reports.
 g

 Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, available at 

http://neutron.ansto.gov.au/Bragg/proposal/PublicationList.jsp?year=2012&type=1. 

9 
4 

External Engagement of the NCNR 

ROLE OF THE NCNR IN THE INTERNATIONAL NEUTRON-SCATTERING 

COMMUNITY 

NCNR is active in the meetings of the Neutron Facility Directors (NFD) in North 

America, including Chalk River, which have met annually since the inaugural meeting at 

Los Alamos in January 2003. A valuable aspect of the meeting is rotational hosting, 

allowing leadership from all laboratories to see sister facilities. This group was 

established by a recommendation in a report by the Office of Science and Technology 

Policy (OSTP) Interagency Working Group on Neutron Science to foster inter-facility 

cooperation, mutual planning, and strategic planning, as well as collaboration and 

communication. NFD has fostered excellent coordination in outages, outreach activities 

such as schools, and policies relevant to user needs. There has also been good 

coordination in adopting facility metrics suitable to both the Department of Energy 

(DOE) and the Department of Commerce (DOC) cultures. 

Recently the NFD has taken the strategic planning recommendation more 

seriously than in the past. This is welcome news; continued coordination in 

instrumentation to meet the needs of the user community with both capacity and 

uniqueness is encouraged. As budgets slim down, technique development may be 

vulnerable to loss of attention; the NFD could have a role in formulating effective 

teamwork for advancing techniques in neutron-based research. 

In view of its strong standing among facilities for North America, the NCNR has 

a leadership obligation within NFD, perhaps superseding that of the SNS at this point in 

time. While this balance may change, the weight of NCNR’s staff expertise, its user 

group, and its advocacy power should be utilized to the best advantage of the broad 

neutron and materials research communities. 

The NCNR also plays a role in the international neutron scattering community 

through its participation in meetings of the directors of the world’s major neutron 

scattering centers. Such meetings are generally held in conjunction with the principal 

gatherings of the neutron scattering community, such as the quadrennial International 

Neutron Scattering Conference (ICNS), with the aim of discussing issues of common 

concern. For example, at the most recent ICNS meeting in Edinburgh in July 2013, the 

NCNR director led the discussion of future needs and supply of 3

He, and he participated 

actively in debate on other issues, such as detector development and a more coherent 

approach to establishing meaningful performance metrics for neutron centers. 

NCNR INTERACTION WITH THE INDUSTRIAL COMMUNITY 

The NCNR has a sizable and diverse industrial user community that includes 

more than 40 companies with direct access to the facility to perform both publishable and 

proprietary scientific experiments. These companies span a range of technology space 

10 
from petrochemicals to materials and electronics, and, increasingly, to biotechnology and 

pharmaceuticals as well. The NCNR’s heavy focus on the development of sample stages 

that allow for the manipulation of sample temperature, pressure, strain, or 

moisture/humidity is extremely useful for industrial researchers needing to understand 

performance of materials in situ. These sample manipulation capabilities, along with the 

performance of the experimental beam lines, place the NCNR among the leaders of 

neutron science facilities for industrial users. 

Many of the industrial user companies access the facility through partnerships 

with NIST scientists that are tied to larger collaborative programs ongoing within other 

NIST laboratories, and several companies access the NCNR beam lines directly through 

the general proposal process. Many industrially relevant problems are being explored in 

this facility, either through direct collaborations with industry or in partnership with 

academic researchers. The level of measurement science being developed and expanded 

is impressive and highly relevant for solving these industry problems. In addition, 

proprietary research of particular value to many industrial partners is underway. It is 

impossible to know precisely how many companies benefit from the value of NCNR 

research either through indirect collaboration with academic or national laboratories 

scientists who are NCNR users, or through the study of the published scientific output 

from non-industrial NCNR users, but the number and impact of these initiatives are 

substantial. The NCNR should work closely with industrial partners to identify and 

highlight the impact that this facility has had on technology advances and innovation that 

have resulted in financial benefits for these companies. 

Efforts should continue to enhance the impact of the NCNR in supporting the 

development of new technologies to drive the U.S. economy. For example, over the past 

3 years, a new user consortium model for industrial access based on the CRADA 

(cooperative research and development agreement) framework has been developed, 

which may prove to be a preferred way to introduce industrial researchers to the value of 

the NCNR. The first embodiment of this, called nSoft, was initiated in late 2010 and has 

grown to eight member companies, with at least four more in the process of joining. The 

goal of nSoft is to develop and share new scientific capabilities based on the consensus 

priorities of the member companies. Currently, significant progress has been reported. It 

is too early in the nSoft consortium’s life cycle to assess the impact on its industrial users; 

this model should be carefully studied and replicated if it is deemed successful over the 

next few years. 

USER GROUP CONSIDERATIONS 

The panel discussed many aspects of NCNR User Group (NUG) activities with 

both NCNR facility management and with the NUG chair. The NUG Executive 

Committee, about half of whose members were recently elected, evinced an impressive 

vibrancy and commitment to the work of the committee. Three areas of NUG activity 

were assessed: advocacy of user needs to NCNR management, advocacy of NCNR 

facility needs to the U.S. government, and facilitation of the user needs survey. 

Users find NCNR management to be receptive and responsive to many and varied 

concerns, from data acquisition to office space to child care. Since the NCNR expansion, 

there have been few user concerns to report; nevertheless, several aspects of user 

11 
experience have been improved. For example, the facility has implemented a new data 

access policy that will make retrieval easier from offsite. More significantly, the user 

community expressed the desire to be more involved with strategic planning and setting a 

long-term vision for NCNR, perhaps through a user group meeting that could be held 

despite difficulties arising from current federal travel budget restrictions. Possible 

approaches include working through regular meetings convened in the areas of materials 

(MRS [Materials Research Society] and APS [American Physical Society]) and neutron 

scattering (ACNS [American Conference on Neutron Scattering] and ICNS) to bring 

NCNR users and potential users into the planning process. 

The chair of the NUG Executive Committee evinced the NUG’s impressive 

commitment to advocacy for neutron science in Washington, D.C. Better articulation of 

NUG’s role in the National User Facility Organization (NUFO) will help NUG to 

amplify its voice to law and policy makers. The Neutron Scattering Society of America, 

in which NUG members are quite active, provides additional advocacy flows to the 

benefit of neutron scatterers and facilities. The NUG Executive Committee has a good 

mixture of practitioners and early-career and experienced people for effective advocacy. 

The NUG is ready and eager to create a new user-needs survey as a follow-up to 

surveys in 2007 and 2011. The needs of industrial, academic, and government users 

should be identified to capitalize on the NCNR’s special mission advantages in serving 

industry. The NIST deputy director for laboratory programs confirmed an increased 

emphasis at NIST on serving the manufacturing community. 

Beam Time Allocation Committee 

In general, the merit review of beam time proposals is effective and efficient. The 

Beam Time Allocation Committee (BTAC) chair discussed her committee’s work with 

the panel by phone. The NCNR’s practice to group proposals by similar instruments is 

working well. The BTAC carries an extraordinarily heavy load in SANS (38 percent) 

and Large Scale Structure (57 percent) proposals, but recruitment to the committee 

appears to meet the needs well. Although the BTAC is advisory to the NCNR director, 

the committee feels empowered in the review process by the openness and freedom in 

ranking proposals; the chair conveyed the impression that BTAC decisions are not 

overruled by management. 

EDUCATION AND OUTREACH 

The NIST education and outreach program is particularly strong and effective. 

Several NCNR outreach initiatives were highlighted. For K-8, NIST implements a variety 

of tried-and-true programs (e.g., USA Science and Engineering Festival and Bring Your 

Sons and Daughters to Work Day); and innovative programs (e.g., Adventures in Science 

and a Boy Scout nuclear science merit badge). The NCNR’s high school summer intern 

program has hosted 25 students since 2008, and its strong undergraduate summer 

research fellowship has hosted 85 students since 2000 with impressive records: 23 

publications and 82 percent of eligible students have gone to graduate school. Another 

vital education program for U.S. science is the CHRNS Summer Neutron Scattering 

School. NIST also fosters outreach through laboratory tours for a range of student ages. 

12 
 

Other important and innovative outreach activities include a Summer Institute for Science 

Middle School Teachers and a Research Experience for Teachers. These programs are 

self-propagating: teaching the teachers is always an efficient way to promote science 

education in K-12 schools—an area that is important and in need of support in this 

country. NIST’s efforts in this area are commendable. 

13 
 

5 

Science and Technology 

HARD CONDENSED MATTER 

The NCNR hosts an excellent mix of outstanding senior investigators and earlycareer, energetic, talented researchers. The early-career researchers who presented their 

research to the panel were very knowledgeable, enthusiastic, and articulate and gave clear 

descriptions of their research projects. 

Magnetism, Superconductivity, and Correlated Electron Phenomena 

The general direction of research in magnetism, superconductivity, and correlated 

electron physics is toward timely and important research problems at the forefront of 

condensed matter/materials physics. Research in this area is driven by both senior 

scientists and users of the NCNR facility. 

The NCNR is supporting a powerful program on quantum magnetism that is 

based on the unique MACS II spectrometer. The focus of this research program is on 

frustrated two-dimensional quantum magnets, and the primary interest is on exotic states 

of matter, such as spinons in Kagome antiferromagnets and resonating valence bonds in a 

triangular lattice. In this project, frustration is used as a tuning parameter to drive a 

quantum phase transition from a magnetically ordered state to an exotic nonmagnetic 

state. Eight papers based on this program have been published in high-impact journals, 

such as Physical Review Letters, Nature, and Science, during the past 3 years. Highlights 

include the first observation of spinons in two-dimensions and the observation of a 

collective continuum in a molecular magnet. 

The NCNR has also supported recent progress in neutron scattering studies of 

magnetism, superconductivity, and correlated electron phenomena in novel materials. 

This excellent and broad-based program has been very successful over the years and has 

had a significant impact in condensed matter/materials physics. One of the recent efforts 

focused on various phenomena in Mn-based compounds, for example (Ba-Sr)MnO3— 

multiferroic, (Ba-K)Mn2As2—itinerant half-filled ferromagnet, and LaMnPO— 

antiferromagnetic insulator. The compound LaMnPO, which has the same structure as 

the LaFePnO (Pn = P, As) superconductors, was studied under applied pressure to 

determine whether it would be possible to suppress the magnetic order and induce a 

correlated electron metallic state that would exhibit superconductivity. It was found that 

only modest pressures are required to transform LaMnPO from an insulating tetragonal 

structure with a large moment to a gapless orthorhombic structure with a small moment 

and no long-range order. However, no superconductivity was observed to emerge upon 

suppression of the magnetic order. 

14 
 

 

 

Superconductivity in Fe-pnictides and Chalcogenides 

NIST was an early world leader in the area of Fe-based superconductors. They 

had access to the first high-quality crystals outside of Japan and China and were the first 

to determine the magnetic structure of one of the “122” compounds, BaFe2As2 (parent 

compound), revealing the novel antiferromagnetic structure of that compound. That was 

only a few months after the discovery of the Fe-based superconductors in Japan. The 

paper that reports these results, as obtained by neutron scattering, remains highly cited. 

The NIST Superconductivity Group continues its world leadership and has done 

fundamental work on over a dozen families of Fe-pnictides and Fe-chalcogenides. They 

continue their leadership in the growth of large single crystals of all three of the 122 

families of materials, (Ba,Ca,Sr)Fe2As2, through their own work and external 

collaborations. In the Sr122 system, they identified early the low-energy spin waves and 

magnetic interactions. In the Fe-chalcogenide system (FeTeSe), they detected a spin 

resonance that bore a surprisingly close parallel to the magnetic resonance studied in the 

high-temperature superconducting cuprate Bi2212 more than 10 years earlier. This solid 

work over time is helping the field to compare and contrast the role of spin fluctuations in 

the mechanism of these two distinct families of high-temperature superconductors 

(cuprates and Fe-based). NIST included one of the early laboratories to start to test the 

S± theory for the order parameter symmetry in the Fe-based superconductors. 

Related to the work on the superconductivity is the outstanding research on 

quantum criticality in other materials that exhibit phase diagrams (carrier concentration 

versus temperature) similar to the high-temperature superconductors. They all exhibit a 

dome under which there is strong evidence for a quantum critical point (QCP). 

Superconductivity may be arising from this proximity to the magnetic state at the QCP. 

Most of the work presented was accomplished by the MACS II spectrometer—a 

noteworthy success in neutron scattering design. One of the many impressive results is 

the detection of collective molecular magnetism in LiZn2Mo3O8 at 1.5 K. The resonating 

valence bond detection on a triangular lattice is equally impressive. It is not clear how 

far MACS will take the field of strong electron correlations in condensed matter systems, 

but the future is quite promising. 

The entire neutron group and the condensed matter community benefit from a 

symbiotic relationship that substantially strengthens both. The experiments done on 

MACS II and SANS and neutron reflectivity experiments are impressive and deserve 

continued strong support. 

Fundamental Neutron Science: aCORN 

A very interesting poster titled “aCORN [‘a’ correlation in neutron decay]: A 

Measurement of the Electron-Antineutrino Correlation (Little “ܽ”)” described an 

innovative fundamental physics experiment incorporating a new approach to measure a 

dimensionless parameter ܽ within uncertainties of about 0.5 percent, which represents 

the angular correlation between the beta electron and antineutrino in neutron beta decay 

( → ݁݌݊ ߭�݁ ܽ - + +( . When combined with other neutron decay parameters, the value of 

for free neutron decay can be used to determine the weak vector and axial vector 

coupling constants gv and gA and to test the validity and self-consistency of the 

15 
Electroweak Standard Model. Previous experiments measuring ܽ relied on precise proton 

spectroscopy and were limited by systematic effects at about the 5 percent level. 

Crystallography 

Although the NCNR suite of instruments for crystallography is not extensive 

(comprising the powder diffractometer BT-1 and the residual stress diffractometer BT-8) 

and has no dedicated instrument for single-crystal diffraction, in the hands of a team of 

crystallographers with a broad profile in experience and a strong and varied user 

community, the scientific output is nevertheless very strong. Highlights include research 

featured in recent highly cited papers in the fields of porous systems and functional 

materials such as superconductors and multiferroics. Particularly striking examples 

include the location of different molecules in microporous materials used to process or 

separate different molecular species. These provide unique insights into the absorption 

mechanisms to aid their exploitation in chemical processes. This research also impacts 

industrially relevant problems, with close links to a number of companies both in 

chemical crystallography and engineering. 

SOFT CONDENSED MATTER 

Neutron scattering is a very powerful technique for studying soft matter systems. 

Because scattering contrast arises from interactions between the scattering neutron and 

the nucleus, useful scattering intensity can be obtained from common soft materials or 

biomaterials. By contrast, X-ray scattering can often be too weak, and light scattering 

(multiple scattering) can be too strong for useful experiments. Furthermore, neutron 

scattering has the unique advantage that contrast can be adjusted through deuteration to 

limit the contrast to a specific portion of the structure, further enhancing the capabilities 

of the scattering. Several examples that exploited these features were presented to the 

panel. 

By far the most widely used scattering technique of those presented was smallangle scattering, and there are three SANS instruments at NCNR. In addition, neutron 

reflectivity was used for interfacial studies, and spin-echo scattering provided 

information about dynamics. 

One of the most impressive efforts in soft matter science at NCNR is the work on 

rheo-scattering, in which neutron scattering is combined with rheological measurements. 

There are several tools that enable the neutron beam to probe all three independent 

directions required for Couette flow in a rheometer. These are tools that have been 

constructed at NCNR in response to user needs, and NCNR leads the world in this field. 

The work on shear-thickening colloidal suspensions, which have potential as body armor, 

particularly benefits from neutron scattering. The NCNR staff developed a creative way 

to utilize all the neutrons in a SANS experiment done on an oscillatory measurement to 

isolate the scattering at specific times during the oscillation. This enabled the team to 

confirm the underlying mechanism of the shear thickening—the formation of transient 

hydro-clusters for which lubrication forces, which lead to the large increase in stress 

observed at high shear rates, become dominant. These experiments are an excellent 

16 
 

example of a case in which neutron scattering data provides essential insight into the 

underlying physical processes. 

Another good example of collaboration between NCNR and users is the study of 

monoclonal antibodies, which is supported in part by Genentech and is an attempt to help 

solve an important problem that could limit the use of some new biologic, antibody-based 

drugs, which are becoming increasingly important and common. The NCNR studies 

attempted to determine the origin of a large increase in viscosity, which makes injection 

difficult, with increased monoclonal antibody concentration. There were studies using 

both small angle-scattering and spin-echo scattering to help resolve the origin of this 

increase. In both cases, the results support the hypothesis that at high concentrations the 

antibodies interact to form trimeric clusters that can further interact to form larger 

structures that lead to the increased viscosity. The results seem solid, but the data depend 

quite strongly on modeling the behavior, particularly in the case of the SANS data. 

Polymer glasses and composites of polymers and small particles are important 

industrial materials. The transition temperature of the materials from the liquid phase to 

the glass phase is often smaller in thin films in the bulk. This may be a result of 

interactions between the polymer and the interface, making it important to investigate 

interfacial properties of polymer glasses. Neutron reflectivity measurements by the 

NCNR group from thin films with one or more deuterated layers provided a direct 

measure of the roughness of the layer interfaces and of their self-diffusion coefficient and, 

thus, provide valuable insight into the glassy properties of these films and the effects of 

the interface. 

Membranes constitute a form of soft matter of importance both to biology and to 

complex fluids. Using the unique capabilities of the spin-echo technique, an NCNRuniversity collaboration produced high-quality measurements of dynamical correlations 

in lipid membranes arising from both their shape and their thickness fluctuations. 

Systems of relevance to biology, including membranes and proteins, tend to be 

quite complex, and interpreting neutron data about them is often a challenging 

undertaking. NCNR staff realize this and have begun to develop in-house modeling 

expertise. As the soft matter effort grows, however, it would benefit from more 

theoretical and modeling input. 

17 
 

6 

Challenges and Opportunities 

The major challenges facing NCNR are associated with constraints based on 

shrinking budgets, a growing user base, growing competition, and factors relating to 

maintaining a dynamic workforce. At the same time, there exist opportunities to increase 

the size and disciplinary diversity of the user base, particularly by increasing the number 

of industry users, and thereby have a notable impact on industry and manufacturing. 

An additional challenge is associated with the projected long-term shortage of 4He. 

Addressing this challenge needs to be accomplished through understanding how to 

effectively exploit the strengths of the new organizational structure. Concern was also 

expressed regarding the eventual change from the high-enriched uranium (HEU) reactor 

fuel to LEU with potential negative impact on costs, fuel availability, and reactor 

performance. The NCNR is rightly tracking developments closely and developing 

appropriate contingency scenarios. 

The budget constraints also require addressing the increases in the reactor fuel 

costs, as well as funding the effective maintenance of the facility to ensure that it operates 

at the highest levels of efficiency. Additionally, the budget shortfall in the resources for 

the collaboration with NSF and CHRNS could be problematic. The opportunities lie in 

increasing the scientific and industrial user base and in developing a broader strategic 

plan with NIST management that addresses long-term hiring plans, the current challenge 

of an aging workforce, and limited-term hires. Other opportunities would arise from 

enhancing collaborations with internal NIST users, as mentioned above. 

18 
7 

Findings and Recommendations 

The NCNR, with its strong tradition of hiring and developing excellent scientific 

and technical staff, is one of the leading institutions worldwide in neutron 

instrumentation, technology, and science. It is a very well-managed user facility. With 

the recent completion of a $95 million expansion, performed on time and on budget, it 

has enhanced its instrumentation capabilities and has constructed a new guide hall. This 

expansion further enhances NCNR’s ability to meet the high user demands—a factor of 

two higher than capacity—for experimentation to conduct cutting-edge research. 

NCNR’s high scientific productivity is due, in part, to effective communication between 

the management and staff and with the internal and external user communities. 

With the recent reorganization of NIST, new budget constraints, and a 

combination of limited-term and permanent staff, NCNR management is operating in a 

changing environment. One important change that resulted from the recent reorganization 

is that the number of laboratory units within NIST was reduced. The goal of the 

reorganization was, in part, to enable NIST to more effectively fulfill its mission, which 

includes advanced manufacturing and measurement science. While the direct impact of 

the reorganization on NCNR personnel and NCNR’s internal management structure were 

minimal, there are associated challenges and opportunities. These are especially 

important due to the highly specialized nature of NCNR’s mission. To this end, NCNR 

management should pay particular attention to the considerations below in order to 

ensure that the NCNR continues to effectively serve its mission. 

NCNR management has historically done an excellent job at short-term, tactical 

planning. The NIST reorganization now provides them with an opportunity to operate 

more strategically. Because in the near future some of the more senior scientific and 

technical staff will be retiring, formalized succession planning needs to be performed in 

coordination with the broader NIST management. 

Recommendation 1. The NCNR should develop and maintain a strategic plan that 

takes into account current and anticipated NIST organizational structures, mission 

factors, staffing, budgets, fuel and infrastructure resources, and its user 

constituency. 

Potential opportunities for recruiting and promotions need to be explored. While 

numerous interactions exist between NCNR staff and other NIST staff in the various 

laboratory units, more formalized and coordinated planning could lead to new 

opportunities or at least enhance the effectiveness of the current interactions. This, for 

example, would ensure that collaborative projects have sufficient budget support and 

appropriately serve the goals of the organization. 

Recommendation 2. NCNR management should establish a more formalized 

engagement process with other NIST laboratory units, particularly the Material 

19 
 

 

Measurement Laboratory, the Physical Measurement Laboratory, and the Center 

for Nanoscale Science and Technology; programmatic planning involving personnel 

should be more formally coordinated with other areas of the laboratory. 

Funding to ensure that the reactor continues to operate efficiently, with 

appropriate and timely upgrades, is essential. 

Recommendation 3. The NCNR should develop a formal plan to address the 

impending 4

He shortage and the fuel supply costs that promise to be problematic. 

The NCNR has served its internal and external users well. This is, in part, 

because NCNR management and staff have been open and responsive to feedback from 

the internal and external user communities. One important outcome of this positive 

relationship is that it has enabled the NCNR to identify areas where they needed to 

develop new facilities and instruments, as well as technical/scientific expertise. 

The most recent prior user community workshop was held in 2007. This 2007 

meeting had a significant impact on future planning and outcomes; facility upgrades and 

new instrument development were important outcomes. Now with the completion of the 

$95 million expansion, another workshop is necessary in order to ensure that these new 

resources effectively serve the academic and industrial communities. 

Recommendation 4. The NCNR should continue to develop mechanisms that 

enable effective communication and feedback from current and potential users. A 

user community workshop should be planned for the near future. Additionally, 

web-based communications mechanisms, where appropriate, should also be used. 

The impact of travel budget restrictions on the ability of NCNR staff to travel and 

to communicate with other researchers hampers their ability to effectively serve the user 

community. 

The impact of the $1 million (30 percent of the entire budget for this 

collaboration) permanent decrease in funding for the National Science Foundation 

collaboration involving The Center for High Resolution Neutron Scattering (CHRNS) is 

of serious concern. This collaboration has had a positive influence on research in the field. 

Recommendation 5. The potential impact of the reduction in funding for the 

collaboration between NIST and the National Science Foundation involving the 

Center for High Resolution Neutron Scattering should be carefully examined, 

documented, and addressed. 

nSoft, the new program designed to enhance industrial collaborations and 

contribute toward NIST’s mission, is off to a great start. It appears to be a productive 

model for industrial outreach and engagement. The industrial members perform 

collaborative and proprietary research. The number of members (companies) continues to 

increase. There are specific examples where the scientific interactions have been of 

important commercial benefit, and there is need for metrics that manifest these outcomes. 

20 
Recommendation 6. The NCNR should continue to focus its efforts on 

recruiting additional companies into the nSoft program and should establish new 

performance metrics that differ from those used to quantify the effectiveness of 

NCNR interactions with academics. 

21