EPA
           United States
           Environmental Protection
           Agency
             Environmental Monitoring
             Systems Laboratory
             P.O. Box 93478
             Las Vegas NV 89193-3478
EPA600/R-92/103
May 1992
           Research and Development
Radium in Water
Intercomparison Study

A Statistical Evaluation of the
March 6,  1992 Data
                                            5168GR92NRD-8

-------
             Radium in Water
          Intercomparison Study
             March 6, 1992
      Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
            Las Vegas, Nevada

-------
            UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                        OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
               ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING SYSTEMS LABORATORY-LAS VEGAS
                                  P.O. BOX 93478
                            LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89193-3478
                                   (702/798-2100)
Dear Participant,

   Enclosed are the results of the Nuclear Radiation Assessment Division (EMSL-LV)
Intercomparison Study for Radium In Water; March 6, 1992.

   Please take a few minutes to review this report and the analytical data your
laboratory submitted to us.  If there are any apparent  discrepancies, please notify
us immediately.

   We encourage you to make use of the computer-automated data-entry system that
has been in place for some time now. As the number of participants increases, and
it becomes unrealistic for us to receive results by mail or FAX, the computer system
will be our only avenue for accepting data.

   If you have any questions or comments, please send a message via the data-entry
system or contact Frank Novielli at 702/798-2159 or Patricia Honsa at 702/798-2141.
                                          Sincerely,
                                          Frank Novielli
                                          Senior Chemist
                                          Radioanalysis Branch
Enclosure

-------
                 NOTICE

This material has been funded wholly by
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
It has been subject to the Agency's review,
and it has been approved for publication
as an EPA document.

-------
           EMSL-LV Intel-comparison Study: Radium in Water,  6-Mar-1992        1/11


   The following pages consist of separate sections for each of the nuclides in this study with four
parts per section.  After the first, each part is separated from the next by a new page or a thick
horizontal bar. The first page of each section is a statistical summary for the nuclide and starts
with a statement of the known value, the control limits, and the warning limits.
   The warning limits are placed at two normalized standard deviations above and below the
known value and the control limits are three normalized standard deviations above and below
the known value.  If you keep control charts, these values will be useful for anticipating problems
with the accuracy of your analytical methods.
   The coin shaped pie chart at the top of the summary page shows the fate of all the samples
sent out in number and percentage terms.  The pie chart starts at the top and rotates clockwise.
The first sector represents those participants who submitted analytical results within both the
warning and control limits. The next sector represents those who are in the warning region but
not out of control. The third sector represents those who are out of control, but have passed the
the outlier test. The fourth sector represents those who have failed the outlier test. The last
sector represents those participants who have failed to respond properly. This is the case if no
analytical results were returned, or less than three determinations were reported, or if the results
were received too late.  The reeding on the edge of the coin is spaced at one percent intervals, and
the sector shading becomes darker as the data reliability decreases. Sectors with zero width are
not shown.
   The table in the center shows a number of statistical quantities calculated from the submitted
data based on the mean and median values in relation to the known value, both before and after
outlier removal. The lower pie chart uses the same construction as the upper chart and shows
the distribution of properly submitted data in terms of deviation from the known value divided
into sectors representing one, two, three, and greater than three normalized standard deviations.

   The second part is an alphabetical listing, in lab-code order, of submitted data and several
calculated quantities. An entry that is shaded has been rejected because of one of the reasons
listed above or failure of the outlier test. The fifth and sixth columns are a measure of laboratory
precision. The Range analysis is a normalized value that you may use to keep precision control
charts. If this value is between 2.0 and 3.0, your analytical process precision is in the warning
zone; if it exceeds 3.0 it is out of control. The eighth and ninth columns are the differences from
the mean of all non-outliers and from the known value, respectively. A tag symbol may appear in
the last column. Each page with tags has a symbol definition summary at the bottom.  If there is
no tag symbol, the data is within the control limits, but it may be in the warning zone.

   The third part is a three-column listing of result average, tag symbol, and lab-code in average
order excluding those labs not responding properly.  In this order, all outliers and out-of-control
results appear at the top or bottom of the list.
   The last part is two bar chart displays showing frequency distributions of responding
participants. The first chart places the known value at the center and a bar at each 0.2 unit of
expected precision.  The second chart places the mean of the reported measurements at the center
and a bar at each 0.2 unit of standard deviation. In both cases, a bar includes those results within
0.1 unit up to the maximum of six. Any results more than six units from the center value are
shown cumulatively by a shaded bar one past the sixth unit. If the central tendency of the known
value distribution falls away from the center, an error in accuracy is indicated. If the distribution
is broad, poor precision is indicated. The mean value distribution is similar but uses the average
and standard deviation of reported results  as its basis.

-------
             EMSL-LV Intel-comparison Study: Radium in Water,  6-Mar-1992
                                   2/11
Radiuxn-226                         Statistical Summary                       120 Participants
The known value of this nuclide is 10.1 pCi/1 with an expected precision of 1.5; the control limits
are 7.5 to 12.7; the warning regions are 7.5 to 8.4 and 11.8 to 12.7
24(2O.O %) Failed to respond -^
13(10.8 %) Outliers •
2(1.7 %) Out of control *
     but not an outlier


         Statistic

                ; 76(63.3 %) Within all limits
Respondents
*- 5(4.2 %) In warning zone
          but within control

             Non-outliers
Mean
Std. Dev.
Variance
%Coef. ofVar.
% deviation of mean from known value
Norm. dev. of mean from known value
Median
% deviation of median from known value
Norm. dev. of median from known value
10.35
2.81
7.90
27.16
2.45
0.09
9.87
-2.31
-0.08
Grand Avg 9.85
0.94
0.89
9.58
-2.47
-0.26
9.80
-2.97
-0.32
15(15.6 %) Mora than 3 norm. S.D. .
6(6.3 %) Between 2 and 3 norm. S.D. •
            • 57(59.4 %) Within 1 norm. S.D.
                           of known value
    • 18(18.8 %) Between 1 and 2 norm. S.D.

-------
3/11 EMSL-LV Intercomparison Study: Radium in Water, 6-Mar-1992
Radium-226
Lab
A
AB
AE
AF
AI
AJ
AK
AL
AP
AW
AZ
BC
BG
BH
BK
BL
BM
BO
C
CA
CO
CE
CG
CJ
CK
CS
D
DB
DE
DT
DZ
E
ISM
EO
ER
FE
Wit
GG
GN
GO
GQ
HK
HL
HP
Res. 1
9.0
10.0
8.9
9.3
8.4
10.6
9.4
8.9
11.8
9.8
9.7
10.3
9.0
8.8
10.2
fcf
9.5
9.8
11.3
8.8
•"
9.7
11.5
-4J
10.2
10.4

10.5
9.4
11.0
9.7
9.9
''*'
11.7
9.9
9.6
- 7,0

6.8
"
9.9
8.6
9.6
10.5
Res. 2
9.3
8.7
9.9
9.3
8.5
10.4
9.6
9.2
11.4
11.0
10.2
11.8
8.9
9.1
9.8
,*& ,
9.2
8.6
11.2
9.2

9.7
12.3
47
10.0
9.3
r
10.2
9.4
11.1
9.8
9.2
/ ' ','L ,'' '''«;> ",
10.9
9.9
9.9
,y*&"'-

7.4

9.8
9.4
9.6
10.5
Res. 3
9.1
10.0
8.4
9.4
9.0
10.5
10.8
10.4
11.3
10.4
10.2
11.0
10.2
8.4
9.8
'&£-'
10.3
9.7
11.2
9.1
f
9.3
9.9
6.4
9.9
9.7
'>,?
10.2
9.5
10.6
10.0
10.1
' ~t'?*2&
10.3
10.9
9.5
\*%-

7.4
f
9.7
8.9
9.6
10.5
• s No data submitted
0 H=
Insufficient
data
X S

Exper. Rng anal Normalized deviation
Sigma (R + SR) Average (grand-avg) (known) Tag
0.15
0.75
0.76
0.06
0.32
0.10
0.76
0.79
0.26
0.60
0.29
0.75
0.72
0.35
0.23
' &44-- -
0.57
0.67
0.06
0.21
• ,, '
0.23
1.22
/' -0,9S
0.15
0.56
-
0.17
0.06
0.26
0.15
0.47
*^$|';V- '* '-"'
0.70
0.58
0.21
0.51

0.35

0.10
0.40
0.00
0.00
0.118
0.512
0.591
0.039
0.236
0.079
0.551
0.591
0.197
0.473
0.197
0.591
0.512
0.276
0.158
&31S
0.433
0.473
0.039
0.158
'
0.158
0.945
0,669
0.118
0.433

0.118
0.039
0.197
0.118
0.354
/ ' ,
0.551
0.394
0.158
0.394

0.236

0.079
0.315
0.000
0.000
9.13
9.57
9.07
9.33
8.63
10.50
9.93
9.50
11.50
10.40
10.03
11.03
9.37
8.77
9.93
>- --, ; 6*0$
9.67
9.37
11.23
9.03
, j ,
9.57
11.23
&M '
10.03
9.80
. ,
10.30
9.43
10.90
9.83
9.73
', '/• x f ''••' ^ /' s-.
10.97
10.23
9.67
6,5?
'
7.20

9.80
8.97
9.60
10.50
TAG SYMBOLS
Determined to
be an
outlier
-0.83
-0.33
-0.91
-0.60
-1.41
0.75
0.10
-0.41
1.90
0.63
0.21
1.37
-0.56
-1.25
0.10
»44§- ' -'
-0.21
-0.56
1.60
-0.94
-
-0.33
1.60
~&2&
0.21
-0.06

0.52
-0.48
1.21
-0.02
-0.14
J ','••'••
1.29
0.44
-0.21
•&n

-3.06

-0.06
-1.02
-0.29
0.75
ft s Above
-1.12
-0.62
-1.19
-0.89
-1.69
0.46
-0.19
-0.69
1.62
0.35
-0.08
1.08
-0.85
-1.54
-0.19
«4r7-3- X
-0.50
-0.85
1.31
-1.23
*
-0.62
1.31
-5.54 x \
-0.08
-0.35
*
0.23
-0.77
0.92
-0.31
-0.42
,' ' *•
1.00
0.15
-0.50
-4m x
, ^
-3.35 U
• \
-0.35
-1.31
-0.58
0.46
control limit
Jl ^ Below control limit

-------

EMSL-LV Intercomparison Study: Radium in Water, 6-Mar-1992
Radium-226
Lab

OS
OX
OY
P
PB
4PO
PG
PP
PV
PX
Q
QB
^Q.
• =
0 3
Res. 1
•* "^ "^ '!•!•'' •" •"* !/"'"' " ^
8.7
12.0
6.2
10.8
10.2
' -' '-
' '
9.8
'' '
9.2
9.2
f f
10.3
11.2
9.1
s
f '}
8.7
11.5
' '
9.7
9.9
f f
3.0
9.4
' ' '*
9.0
11.6
9.5
9.0
' '' ,' ' '
, '/„' ''n*a --
8.7
10.7
10.2
4.8
11.0
'19*$
9.5
9.6
9.7
10.2
10.0
9.5
, ' -'t&? <
Res. 2
'',',"'/' ' , ' i''4 *{,*£
9.7
12.1
9.1
10.6
9.6
-• $,*,**
tfff ff
11.0
£' ''' *#"-,
11.6
9.3
'' f 'f ff.
9.7
10.9
9.8
' ' •• $••<•'-•

8.1
13.0
f f
9.7
10.0
f f ' ' f
' ":'S,0 , -
10.1
'"**, ,"' '' '
9.7
10.2
10.3
9.3
' "...'.':. / .^ *<'.
' '' ', /t^'ik ' •* '**
',/, MmX* , ''//;
8.8
10.3
11.0
10.8
10.6
" 'nut ''
9.7
8.9
10.1
10.0
11.0
9.2
' ; 14* . ' '
Res. 3
'^,";-;^/^ '„'
9.9
11.8
9.5
10.8
10.8
'", /. "'
s,, ^ ,'' ' ' '/
8.2
'L,'f ',.';,
10.0
9.3
'"; '/''/'';
10.6
10.1
9.9
y'*"4 ,*/'
',,',"' ,
8.7
13.4
:- --
9.5
10.5
fl
'/ ^0X
9;9
^ / '/ f ' f
9.0
12.1
11.5
9.5
S.5l$'/.'.4
J'S^^;
8.3
10.4
10.5
6.7
10.4
173
10.0
9.5
9.2
9.6
11.1
9.2
"; -t&$
No data submitted
Insufficient
data
X s
Exper.
Sigma
"', ' ' ,S ' "'
0.64
0.15
1.80
0.12
0.60
f
*** f
1.40
, ,
1.22
0.06
;" , ,,..
0.46
0.57
0.44
- - '*? ' "'-:'-
', >,
0.35
1.00
'
0.12
0.32
f V
,400
0.36
;' /'>/;",„*
0.40
0.97
1.01
0.25
'/' ''%'
'"f'/z-M, /'
0.26
0.21
0.40
3.07
0.31
J45
0.25
0.38
0.45
0.31
0.61
0.17
^/ 4^d..
4/11
Rng anal Normalized deviation
(R + SR) Average (grand-avg) (known). Tag
"-*'„?' 't
0.473
0.118
1.570
0.079
0.473
' ff/ %'"
f f^ f
1.195
%'* '''"
0.945
0.039
', ' '„„ ' -,
0.354
0.433
0.315
"t
'/ ''"''
0.236
0.748
' .::•' v
f f f
0.079
0.236
,*
0.000
0.276
*ty'~ ,
.-.• f.Vf s.f.- .• .• ,f
0.276
0.748
0.788
0.197
;', '^' f ^f
" , 4$&&
0.197
0.158
0.315
3.596
0.236
0*300
0.197
0.276
0.354
0.236
0.433
0.118
0.433
'/ . „-/:'& <"'''4Z
9.43
11.97
8.27
10.73
10.20
fft f * •* '••'•' •"-•
,/ y f „ , * ''
9.67
' /''/",
10.27
9.27
•, ' ' , , •
10.20
10.73
9.60
, / " '*'',
'"
8.50
12.63
;"\<><"; <-, '"<;,-'»'
9.63
10.13
' '
' ^.00' '' '
9.80
:.rc;,^':J,r;.,L,
9.23
11.27
10.43
9.27
'"''' ','*'*?>/< " , ">
' '/ '* IftJdr /*• r
8.60
10.47
10.57
7.43
10.67
mm
9.73
9.33
9.67
9.93
10.70
9.30
„, 14.$$ '..... „
TAG SYMBOLS
Determined
to be an
outlier
't ,/--"' , '
-0.48
2.44
-1.83
1.02
0.40
ff J * f J
'
-0.21
' , "' '
0.48
-0.67
, ,^'
0.40
1.02
-9.29
' "''' "" ',

-1.56
3.21
••••'
-0.25
0.33

"«7,»I""""
-0.06
,;,., ',,, ,,,
-0.71
1.63
0.67
-0.67
'_
-4M' -
-1.44
0.71
0.83
-2.79
0.94
1044
-0.14
-0.60
-0.21
0.10
0.98
-0.64
i»06
1T s Above
11 s Below
•* '
-0.77
2.16
-2.12
0.73
0.12
;
* , If
-0.50
, ' •*'
0.19
-0.96
*
0.12
0.73
-0.58
»,
*
-1.85
2.93
*
-0.54
0.04
, *
'•4.20 X "
-0.35
' .. ^
-1.00
1.35
0.38
-0.96
•• ' *
'427 X
-1.73
0.42
0.54
-3.08 Ji
0.65
9.8$ x
-0.42
-0.89
-0.50
-0.19
0.69
-0.92
A. ^t^t ~^&
control limit
control limit

-------
5/11
EMSL-LV Intercomparison Study: Radium
in Water,
6-Mar-1992

Radium-226
Lab
'«*'
QZ
R
RD
RF
EM
RV
RZ
&
8A '
SC
SD
SF
SI
8L
SM '
88
ST;'
sw
sx
8Y
SZ
T
TA
I?
W
X
Y
2 '
Res. 1
,;**'
10.0
10.3
11.8
8.5
16.4
8.9
9.5
13.1
23.0
9.9
11.1
9.5
8.0
18.9
•" •"
7.7


"•
'
16.4
9.9
9.8

10.3
9.9
9.2
"
Res. 2
, -*vi9
9.4
10.2
11.1
11.0
17J
7.3
9.4
"'i'flfc fa
_. j&JUFh.V'
' tl J
9.4
11.2
10.1
7.9
l&l

8.7

,
s f f
', ' } ';, ' "
Vl?£
9.7
10.0

10.5
10.1
8.9
'"'< '
Res. 3
^ '',- "' f' 3

fr&i
9.9
10.0
12.3
11.0
' ' '' 1


-/ i
' ,''$

&J$T
8.7
9.3
&4?
&6*
9.8
11.3
10.1


, ' '"

•• ! ••••

<"''
__"•'',
-I/,'' /'<'\
7.9
ft*;/
•'/
8.7
'
.•
-v
* •* .•
,,! /ft
vt''-& <
if Ms, ,
10.1
10.2
' - " -",
',','\,
10.1
10.7

'' < " '&''
9.4
;>;<£
Exper.
Sigma
<,'* ' '/
0.32
0.15
0.60
1.44
-;,, '2JO
0.87
0.10
-" ' 0*1^
^W/SM'
0.26
0.10
0.35
0.06
, 0 JO
' t •''•' •'•' ,
0.58

*
'->"' '",!'
}"'>/*''-',',
>*-'"'<,$£&
0.20
0.20
'*/' : , '
0.20
0.42
0.25
U# ,./-'/,
Rnganal
(R + SR)
:;«5»^
0.236
0.118
0.473
0.984
&071 ,
0.630
0.079
' '' 0*118- -;
- ' 5.090 -''
0.197
0.079
0.236
0.039
, a? m
"•
0.394
'
',
^
x '"* '
, ' ' 0.473- ,--
0.158
0.158
' ,' ' * , '
0.158
0.315
0.197
" .' '"'''"- ' : '
Average
^m(
9.77
10.17
11.73
10.17
-- ma^
8.30
9.40
' l^T,
"* 4fft •A^t^
JSvv^rW''*''
9.70
11.20
9.90
7.93
3S^1f'
•"
8.37
^
t f f f
- '
/ /•• /'
' ,,1TJO;
9.90
10.00
"•
10.30
10.23
9.17
'<• ' '
Normalized
(grand-avg)
' ', '




'



^




'
•v

" /'
*
'f
'
' r, ••






'
f\ f\fy'-- f, s
vfdcXIf !y"
-0.10
0.36
2.17
0.36
&3?
-1.79
-0.52
3t$4 ' f
t$Ji7, -
-0.17
1.56
0.06
-2.21
10.53
•*•'•'•'•'
-1.71

ff
..
•*
'"&%&
0.06
0.17
-
0.52
0.44
-0.79
'
deviation
(known)
^'''KJU^''
S .; _, ^ •*••
-0.38
0.08
1.89
0.08
- 6M'
-2.08
-0.81
3.66
18.28
-0.46
1.27
-0.23
-2.50
10J4
" ,
-2.00




$&?
-0.23
-0.12

0.23
0.15
-1.08
' '
Tag
"'*+




X


X
X




X
" *

*
»
*
»
X


*



inimiin
Data sorted by Laboratory Average
Average
3.00
5.30
6.00
6.57
7.20
7.43
7.93
8.27
8.30
8.37
8.50
8.60













Tag
X
X
X
X
II
H






Lab
MS
CJ
BL
FN
GN
P
SI
ID
RV
ss
LS
OS
Average












• = No data submitted
0 s Insufficient data
X S
8.63
8.77
8.97
9.03
9.07
9.13
9.17
9.23
9.27
9.27
9.30
9.33
Tag












Lab Average
AI
BH
HK
CA
AE
A
Y
NE
NT
K
QB
PP
9.33
9.37
9.37
9.40
9.43
9.43
9.50
9.57
9.57
9.60
9.60
9.63
TAG SYMBOLS
Determined to be an outlier
Tag
























ft s Above control
U s Below control
Lab
AF
BO
BG
RZ
HY
DE
AL
CE
AB
L
HL
M
limit
limit

-------

Radium-226

Average
9.67
9.67
9.67
9.67
9.70
9.73
9.73
9.77
9.80
9.80
9.80
9.83
9.90
9.90
9.93
9.93
9.93
10.00
10.03
10.03
EMSL-LV Intercomparison

Data sorted
Tag Lab
PV
JS
FE
BM
SC
PG
E
QZ
N
GQ
CS
DZ
T
SF
PX
BK
AK
TA
CK
AZ
Average
10.13
10.17
10.17
10.20
10.20
10.23
10.23
10.27
10.30
10.30
10.40
10.43
10.47
10.50
10.50
10.57
10.67
10.70
10.73
10.73
Study: Radium in Water, 6-Mar-1992 6

by Laboratory Average
Tag Lab
ME
RF
R
KL
JG
ER
X
JY
W
DB
AW
NO
OX
HP
AJ
OY
PB
Q
KZ
J
Average Tag
10.90
10.97
11.03
11.20
11.23
11.23
11.27
11.50
11.73
11.97
12.63
13.27 x
13.80 x
14.23 x
15.37 x
17.00 x
17.67 x
18.63 x
18.97 x
25.93 x
/ll


Lab
DT
EO
BC
SD
CG
C
NH
AP
RD
I
LT
S
OF
QQ
RM
SZ
QU
PC
SL
SA
% Frequency distribution of responding labs(expected prec. vs known value)
in.
IU"

-6


. - - -•••-•'
*4 exp. prec. -2

"• --------- ___- _ ___________
|||||||||H|_| 	 _ ....
knLn +'2 e*P-Prec- +'4
value

'I
761"
% Frequency distribution of responding labs(std. dev. vs mean value)



° -6


•_•_!
•4 std. dev. -2

1 II 1
••|||||||||._| 	 _ _
Jan +2 8td-'dev- *
value
• = No data submitted TAG SYMBOLS ft = Above control
0 s Insufficient data x = Determined to be an outlier Jl = Below control

"1
+6
limit
limit

-------
             EMSL-LV Intel-comparison Study:  Radium in Water,  6-Mar-1992        7/11
Radium-228                         Statistical Summary                      120 Participants
The known value of this nuclide is 15.5 pCi/I with an expected precision of 3.9; the control limits
are 8.7 to 22.3; the warning regions are 8.7 to 11.0 and 20.0 to 22.3
35(29.2 %) Failed to respond .%
1 (O.8 %) Outliers '
8(6.7 %) Out of control '
     but not an outlier


         Statistic
                . 69(57.5 %) Within all limits
Respondents
7(5.8 %) In warning zone
       but within control


          Non-outliers
Mean
Std. Dev.
Variance
% Coef. of Var.
% deviation of mean from known value
Norm. dev. of mean from known value
Median
% deviation of median from known value
Norm. dev. of median from known value
     14.70
      4.15
     17.20
     28.21
     -5.17
     -0.19
     14.97
     -3.44
     -0.13
Grand Avg 14.49
             3.70
            13.66
            25.51
            -6.51
            -0.27
            14.93
            -3.66
            -0.15
9(10.6 %) More than 3 norm. S.D.
7(8.2 %) Between 2 and 3 norm. S.D. •
            .45(52.9 %) Within 1 norm. S.D.
                           of known value
     24(28.2 %) Between 1 and 2 norm. S.D.

-------
8/11 EMSL-LV Intel-comparison Study : Radium in Water, 6- Mar- 1992 ]
Radium-228
Lab Res. 1
A
AB
AE
AF
AI
AJ
AK
AL
AP
AW
AZ
BC
BO
BH
BK
BL
BM
BO
C
CA
CE
CG
CJ
CK
CS
ft
DB
DE
DT
DZ
£
EH
EO
ER
FE
FN
GG
GN
GO
GQ
HK
HL
HP
3.3
11.0
12.7
18.2
19.1
17.0
12.4
15.7
17.9
16.3
15.8
16.6

18.0
13.2
14.8
15.8
15.7
18.9
14.9
13.6
18.0
14.2
14.1
10.5
20.9
16.9
17.4
15.9
15.8
12.6
9.2
1
13.4
14.7
10.2
15.3
Res. 2
2.3
14.0
13.6
18.4
16.7
16.0
12.9
15.4
17.4
14.2
27.0
17.1

18.2
13.3
s
20.0
15.8
14.3
18.4
14.4
15.5
22.0
15.3
13.8
10.5
20.9
16.4
16.6
17.4
16.1
•* f ff. f~ff f<
f V f f S-
11.0
8.2

15.6
14.3
10.2
15.3
Res. 3
3.1
10.9
13.7
17.4
17.2
15.0
13.0
15.0
17.1
16.3
17.7
17.5
' f' '
17.0
13.1
19.1
17.4
15.0
19.0
14.9
13.4
20.0
15.9
13.4
•.•• *
f f f A
11.4
20.5
17.2
17.0
15.5
16.9
f' ff 4* ff f '••' f t f
13.1
8.0

15.1
14.5
10.2
15.3
• = No data submitted
0 =
Insufficient
data
X s
Exper. Rng anal Normalized deviation
Sigma (R + SR) Average (grand-avg) (known) Tag
0.53
1.76
0.55
0.53
1.27
1.00
0.32
0.35
0.40
1.21
5.99
0.45
" ' , ' ' '- ' t
0.64
0.10
2.78
0.92
0.70
0.32
0.29
1.16
2.00
0.86
0.35
0.52
0.23
0.40
0.40
1.00
0.57
1.10
0.64

1.15
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.151
0.470
0.151
0.151
0.363
0.303
0.091
0.106
0.121
0.318
2.326
0.136
•* f
0.182
0.030
0.788
0.242
0.212
0.091
0.076
0.318
0.606
0.257
0.106
0.136
0.061
0.121
0.121
f f ffffftf
0.288
0.167
0.318
0.182

0.333
0.061
0.000
0.000
2.90
11.97
13.33
18.00
17.67
16.00
12.77
15.37
17.47
15.60
20.17
17.07
ff f ff f f
17.73
13.20
17.97
16.33
15.00
18.77
14.73
14.17
20.00
15.13
13.77
10.80
20.77
16.83
ff-f _ 17.00 ^ ^
,/t', "+>'/"? ' ''\\
16.27
16.27
12.23
8.47

14.70 .
14.50
10.20
15.30
TAG SYMBOLS
Determined
to be an
outlier
-5.15
-1.12
-0.51
1.56
1.41
0.67
-0.77
0.39
1.32
0.49
2.52
1.14
* ""' * -
1.44
-0.57
1.54
0.82
0.23
1.90
0.11
-0.14
2.45 v
0.29
-0.32
-1.64
2.79
1.04
1.11
7"/ - " ; /;,
f f *• f f*S ,
% ' ' ' ' *
0.79
0.79
-1.00
-2.68

0.09
0.00
-1.91
0.36
IT s Above
•li 5 Below
-5.60 11
-1.57
-0.96
1.11
0.96
0.22
-1.21
-0.06
0.87
0.04
2.07
0.70
*
0.99
-1.02
*
1.10
0.37
-0.22
1.45
-0.34
-0.59
2.00
-0.16
-0.77
-2.09
2.34
0.59
0.67
'*•' . " . '*'''<
0.34
0.34
* ;
-1.45
-3.12 Ji
»
-0.36
-0.44
-2.35
-0.09
control limit
control limit

-------
EMSL-LV Intel-comparison Study: Radium in Water, 6-Mar-1992
Radium-228
Lab Res. 1
'**&£
HY
I
ID
J
JG
JS
JX
JY
K
KL
KZ
L
LM
LS
LT
-JUS
M
ME
MO
MS
N
NA
NE
NH
NO
NT
>m>
OF
OS
OX
OY
P
PB
PC
PP
PV
Q
QjB-
QQ
-;?", Jv/*2
12.9
14.3
12.6
15.9
18.5
13.5
14.6
13.2
4.1
16.6
21.1
15.2
,f '„/'',', ';"'
•*•* t t t t
24.0
17.8
16.4
14.9
16.0
14.6
8.9
14.9
18.4
14.9
16.7
14.1
14.3
15.4
12.7
15.2
8.3
10.6
6.9
10.5
ff
tft^ * •" f
Res. 2 Res. 3
9/11
Exper. Rng anal Normalized deviation
Sigma (R + SR) Average (grand-avg) (known) Tag
f ''•%ffi$^g$?T$%?£& ""; r^"' -' ', ' ?"%$?$:%*•?'£;' ~^%$$$$^*?&'&
12.5
15.1
11.7
14.8
18.3
17.2
15.3
12.5
4.1
15.8
21.1
15.4
.%•' -• f '.:• ,::y <-f .:• -V f f
f ' * ff "s *
24.0
17.9
16.2
13.8
16.0
15.8
; ' >>'{'',
9.7
14.0
19.6
15.1
"l7.8"""*"
14.0
14.3
13.7
13.0
16.0
6.9
12.7
6.5
11.0
'fr ' , '"
' ';; '"''' ' '*/" ,t' ,^' *
13.3
12.7
11.7
14.2
16.9
t f •• t f
16.0
15.9
11.8
4.6
16.1
21.1
13.3
f
25.0
17.7
15.6
11.0
ttt
15.0
15.1
-, '*'
9.2
12.6
20.8
0.40
1.22
0.52
0.86
0.87
'if ' ',; ' ",
1.89
0.65
0.70
0.29
0.40
0.01
1.16
•"" ft f f f
0.58
0.10
0.42
2.01
''','>",''«$/>
0.58
0.60
0.40
1.16
1.20
15.3 0.20
&3PJ& f ?''/'" '", ' '/'''' '''' "'
19.6 1.46
14.0
14.3
12.8
12.6
15.6
7.1
12.2
7.0
12.5

/.,*,;',
• = No data submitted
0 •
Insufficient
data
X s
0.06
0.00
1.32
0.21
0.40
0.76
1.10
0.26
1.04
f
"' ,'- ' "' ,
0.121
0.363
0.136
0.257
0.242
0.560
0.197
0.212
0.076
0.121
0.000
0.318
•V *s ff
0.151
0.030
0.121
0.591
"' '/,;/''>,, ,,'
0.151
0.182
''''„",
0.121
0.348
0.363
0.061
""'I* '*$\';'
-------
10/11
Radium
EMSL-LV Intercomparison Study: Radium
•228

Lab Res. 1 Res. 2
qu
"4$JK,' '''''
QZ
R
RD
RF
RM
RV
RZ
S
SA
sc
SD
SF
SI
SL
8M
SS
ST
sx
-03f '-
SZ
T
TA
V
W
X
T
z

Average
2.90
4.27
4.63
6.80
7.43
8.23
8.47
9.27
10.20
10.33
10.80
11.33
4.9

34.2
,.
8.0
19.4
16.8
11.7
15.2
,
-
13.7
13.0
7.6
12.4

""
15.3

12.5

18.4
14.4
18.0

12.5
15.1
/...














4.7
; ; , ,'-J
&M&'

8.5
18.7
18.0
13.9
14.7
/

13.4
12.9
16.7
12.9
••
", -
14.4
-
14.3
- -
17.6
13.1
17.8

13.2
16.6
- : , > - - -

Tag
U
u.
u
u
II
11
11






Res. 3
4.3
f/// ' ',/!
GFAvQ
.- -• /
8.2
18.7
16.6
13.5
14.8
'
f f f
14.2
10.2
6.7
13.1
f f
, , .
19.2
' ' ,
14.5
, '""..
16.7
13.2
14.5
>• j,

Exper.
Sigma
0.31
'"'','y ,*; ,
'' : -13*;

0.25
0.40
0.76
1.17
0.26
f
f f
0.40
1.59
5.53
0.36
•> f
f ' "•
2.55
.• -• s
1.10
5 ' ^ ,,, , ,, - , ,
0.85
0.72
1.97

11.4 0.91
13.8
' .• .v/ * /'
fff f
Data
1.40
? * " " '' ' ' * *
f Sf f f

Rnganal
(R + SR)
0.091
.-;,
0.500
"-
0.076
0.106
0.212
0.333
0.076
' ,
,'
0.121
0.424
1.980
0.106

"
0.727

0.303
,. ,''*,,
0.257
0.197
0.530

0.273
0.424
"!• /v
f j
in Water,


Average
6-Mar-1992



Normalized deviation
(grand-avg) (known)
4.63

'',.W
f
,
iW»t
£,<4i>

- -' '
;
'
8.23
18.93
17.13
13.03
14.90

.-,



.... .. ..
13.77
12.03
10.33
12.80
",

' '
'
•*
f f
16.30
<


13.77
'.'.. '.>;,
i,.,,;
••-
17.57
13.57
16.77
,

,
12.37
15.17
' ' ' '
'
/.- :'•
-4.38
*" '•. fff '
*iM '
, ,
-2.78
1.97
1.17
-0.65
0.18

, '
-0.32
-1.09
-1.85
-0.75
*
,
0.80

-0.32
,, , , „
1.37
-0.41
1.01

-0.94
0.30
''
-4.83
'& * '" '
iM

-3.23
1.52
0.73
-1.10
-0.27
,

-0.77
-1.54
-2.29
-1.20
'
..
0.36
"' .
-0.77

0.92
-0.86
0.56

-1.39
-0.15
''


Tag
li
:: »
X
* •
1"




#
«




« i
* :

*

*•



#


*
»
sorted by Laboratory Average
Lab Average
A
K
QU
PV
PC
RD
GN
NE
HL
SF
DB
Q
• s No data submitted
0 s= Insufficient data
X
11.83
11.97
12.00
12.03
12.23
12.37
12.50
12.77
12.77
12.80
12.90
13.03
Tag












Lab
PP
AB
ID
SD
FN
W
JY
P
AK
SI
HY
RV
Average












13.20
13.23
13.33
13.57
13.77
13.77
13.77
13.83
13.97
14.03
14.03
14.17
TAG SYMBOLS
= Determined to be an outlier
Tag












IT s Above
U ^ Below












control
control
Lab
BK
ME
AE
T
SX
SC
cs
NH
OY
OS
I
CG
limit
limit
-------
EMSL-LV Intercomparison Study: Radium in Water, 6-Mar-1992 11
Radium-228


711

Data sorted by Laboratory Average
Average
14.30
14.50
14.63
14.70
14.73
14.90
14.97
15.00
15.10
15.13
15.17
15.17
15.27
15.30
15.37
15.57

Tag Lab
OX
HK
L
GQ
CE
RZ
J
C
NT
CK
X
N
JX
HP
AL
JS

Average Tag
15.60
15.60
15.67
16.00
16.07
16.17
16.27
16.27
16.30
16.33
16.77
16.83
17.00
17.07
17.13
17.47

Lab
PB
AW
MS
AJ
M
KL
ER
EO
SS
BO
TA
DT
DZ
BC
RM
AP

Average Tag
17.57
17.67
17.73
17.80
17.90
17.97
18.00 „
18.03
18.77
18.93
19.60
20.00
20.17
20.77
21.10
24.33 tT
32.23 x
Lab
SZ
AI
BH
LT
JG
BM
AF
OF
CA
RF
NO
CJ
AZ
DE
KZ
LS
QZ
% Frequency distribution of responding labs( expected prec. vs known value)

in- - -

° -6

.- r _ — ~ "^
.. .... .---iiiillittiii
T V ' \ T o
-4 exp. prec. -2 ^0^
value

_• 	 	 	 	
!•••—• • T
*2 exp. prec. *4


wot
+6
% Frequency distribution of responding labs(std. dev. vs mean value)



....

• .


- — — ... -...••••••••••••••I.--....
° -'6

1 fa 1 1 11
-4 std.dev. -2 m^
value
+2 std.'dev. **

• s No data submitted TAG SYMBOLS tl = Above control
0 s Insufficient data x = Determined to be
an outlier H = Below control
*S

limit
limit
•4
-------