Report No. 722 Waters Proficiency Testing Round 132 - Biochemical Oxygen …capeyork.myownserver.net/~ptaasnau/documents/722.pdf · 2015-04-09 · Oxygen Demand (BOD) Report 548 A7002

SD 9.17.02

Report No. 722

Waters Proficiency Testing

Round 132

- Biochemical Oxygen Demand, Chemical Oxygen Demand, Total

Organic Carbon -

July 2011

Acknowledgments

PTA wishes to gratefully acknowledge the technical assistance provided for this program by Mr K Charlson of EML (Chem) Pty Ltd (Vic). Also our thanks go to Environmental Resource Associates (ERA) for the supply of samples and Global Proficiency Pty Ltd (Melbourne, Australia) for the distribution of samples.

© Copyright Proficiency Testing Australia, 2011

PO Box 7507 SILVERWATER NSW 2128, Australia

SD 9.17.02

CONTENTS

1. Foreword............................................................................................................................1

2. Program Features and Design...........................................................................................1

3. Statistical Format ...............................................................................................................2

4. PTA and Technical Advisor’s Comments ..........................................................................4

5. Outlier Results ...................................................................................................................7

6. Reference.. ........................................................................................................................7

APPENDIX A – Results and Data Analysis

Biochemical Oxygen Demand………….………………...………………………………........... A1

Chemical Oxygen Demand……………..………………...……………………………………… A4

Total Organic Carbon……………………………………...……………………………….......... A7

APPENDIX B – Sample Homogeneity

Homogeneity Testing…………………………………….…………………………………………B1 APPENDIX C – Documentation

Instructions to Participants …………………………………………………………………………C1

Method Codes………………………………………………………………………………….…….C3

Results Sheet……………………………………………………………….………………………..C4

1

SD 9.17.02

1. Foreword

This report summarises the results of a proficiency testing program on the determination of Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD), Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) and Total Organic Carbon (TOC) in waters. This is round 132 in a planned series of programs involving the analysis of chemical and physical parameters of waters. The exercise was conducted in June 2011 by Proficiency Testing Australia (PTA). The main aim of the program was to assess laboratories’ abilities to competently perform the prescribed analyses. The Program Coordinator was Ms Y Christie and the Technical Advisor was Mr K Charlson of EML (Chem) Pty Ltd (Vic). This report was authorised by Ms F Ward, PTA Quality - Business Development Manager.

2. Program Features and Design 2.1 Each laboratory was randomly allocated a unique code number for the program to

ensure confidentiality of results. Reference to each laboratory in this report is by code number only.

2.2 Laboratories were provided with the "Instructions to Participants" and "Results Sheet"

(see Appendix C). Laboratories were requested to perform the tests according to their routine methods.

2.3 Participants were provided with one sealed glass ampoule (labelled R132) containing

solutions of biochemical oxygen demand, chemical oxygen demand and total organic carbon.

2.4 A total of 55 laboratories received samples, comprising:

- 44 Australian participants; and

- 11 overseas participants, including:

- Cuba (1), Indonesia (1), Malaysia (2), New Zealand (1), Papua New Guinea (1), Singapore (3), Thailand (2).

Of these 55 laboratories, 3 were unable to submit results by the due date. 2.5 Results (as reported by participants) with corresponding summary statistics (i.e.

number of results, median, normalised interquartile range, robust coefficient of variation, minimum, maximum and range) are presented in Appendix A (for each sample and for each of the analyses performed).

2.6 A robust statistical approach, using z-scores, was utilised to assess laboratories’

testing performance (see Section 3). Robust z-scores and z-score charts relevant to each test are presented in Appendix A.

2

SD 9.17.02

The document entitled Guide to Proficiency Testing Australia, 2011 (reference [1]) defines the statistical terms and details the statistical procedures referred to in this report.

2.7 A tabulated listing of laboratories (by code number) identified as having outlier results

can be found on page 7. 2.8 Prior to sample distribution, a number of randomly selected samples were analysed

for homogeneity. Based on the results of this testing (see Appendix B) it was considered that the samples utilised for this program were homogenous. As such, any results later identified as extreme could not be attributed to any notable sample variability.

3. Statistical Format

For each test, where appropriate, the following information is given:

- a table of results and calculated z-scores;

- a list of summary statistics; and

- ordered z-score charts;

3.1 Outlier Results and Z-scores In order to assess laboratories’ testing performance, a robust statistical approach,

using z-scores, was utilised. Z-scores give a measure of how far a result is from the consensus value (i.e. the median), and gives a "score" to each result relative to the other results in the group.

A z-score close to zero indicates that the result agrees well with those from other

laboratories. Whereas, a z-score with an absolute value greater than or equal to three is considered to be an outlier and is marked by the symbol “§”.

Each determination was examined for outliers with all methods pooled. The table on

page 7 summarises the outlier results detected. 3.2 Results Tables and Summary Statistics Each of these tables contains the results returned by each laboratory, including the

code number for the method used, and the robust z-score calculated for each result. Results have been entered exactly as reported by participants. That is, laboratories

which did not report results to the precision (i.e. number of significant figures) requested on the Results Sheet have not been rounded to the requested precision before being included in the statistical analysis.

A list of summary statistics appears at the bottom of each of the tables of results and consists of:

- the number of results for that test/sample (No. of Results);

- the median of these results, i.e. the middle value (Median);

- the normalised interquartile range of the results (Normalised IQR);

3

SD 9.17.02

- the robust coefficient of variation, expressed as a percentage (Robust CV) - i.e. 100 x Normalised IQR / Median;

- the minimum and maximum laboratory results; and

- the range (Maximum - Minimum).

The median is a measure of the centre of the data. The normalised IQR is a measure of the spread of the results. It is calculated by multiplying the interquartile range (IQR) by 0.7413, a factor which converts the IQR to an estimate of the standard deviation. The IQR is the difference between the upper and lower quartiles (i.e. the values above and below which a quarter of the results lie, respectively).

Please see reference [1] for further details on these robust summary statistics.

3.3 Ordered Z-Score Charts On these charts each laboratory's robust z-score is shown, in order of magnitude, and

is marked with its code number. From these charts, each laboratory can readily compare its performance relative to the other laboratories.

These charts contain solid lines at +3 and -3, so that outliers are clearly identifiable

as those laboratories whose "bar" extends beyond these "cut-off" lines. The y-axis of these charts has been limited, so very large z-scores appear to extend beyond the chart boundary.

4

SD 9.17.02

4. PTA and Technical Advisor’s Comments Consensus values (median) derived from participants results are used in this program. These values are not metrologically traceable to an external reference. Sample preparation was undertaken according to Environmental Resource Associates’ Standard Operating Procedures to ensure samples were fit-for-purpose, homogenous and stable. 4.1 Robust CVs are comparable with those from previous programs:

Robust CV Comparison Table

Analyte Program Sample Median (mg/L) Robust CV (%) This Round R132 55.00 9.6 Report 654 1 68.40 19.7

Biochemical Oxygen

Demand (BOD) Report 548 A7002 118 13 This Round R132 91.50 8.3 Report 654 1 110.0 9.4

Chemical Oxygen

Demand (COD) Report 548 A7002 192 7.4 This Round R132 36.45 4.3 Report 654 1 43.85 5.2

Total Organic Carbon (TOC)

Report 548 A7002 77 4.3 With reference to Biochemical Oxygen Demand, Chemical Oxygen Demand and Total Organic Carbon tests, the median is the lowest in this round compared to previous rounds. The robust CV is the lowest in this round for Biochemical Oxygen Demand and Total Organic Carbon. 4.2 Outliers are identified on page 7. Laboratories receiving an outlier should examine

their procedures to determine, if possible, the reason(s) for error. 4.3 BOD Outliers

Participants’ investigations of outlier results from previous programs revealed errors due to: • Incorrect dilutions; • Failure to calibrate dissolved oxygen meters; • Transcription errors; • Contamination of dilution water; • Evaporation of water seals during incubation; • Seeding not used or seeds not properly activated when required; and • High dissolved oxygen in blank due to algae growth in plastic tubing.

5

SD 9.17.02

4.4 COD Outliers

Previous programs have revealed errors due to:

• Contamination of deionised water (organic material from deioniser resin column);

• Transcription errors; • Calculation errors; and • Contamination from glassware not properly cleaned. COD is an empirical test and strict adherence to the method of analysis is required.

4.5 TOC Outliers

Previous programs have revealed errors due to:

• Calibration standards; • Incorrect dilutions; • Transcription errors; and • Instrument malfunctions.

4.6 General Comments The overall performance of laboratories for the three parameters is pleasing when taking into account the lower than expected %CVs obtained compared to previous programs, in conjunction with the low concentration levels. For BOD, it appears that nearly all laboratories used the same APHA method. These methods have had little change over the years and this may be why the correlation between the laboratories may be getting better. Method Code 1 ((SM 19, SM 20, SM 21, (5210B)) was most commonly used in the analysis of BOD. The statistics for this method are tabulated below.

Method Code 1 No. of participants: 40 Median: 55.0 mg/L NIQR: 5.15 For COD it also appears that most of the laboratories used APHA methods. Methods 5220B, 5220C and 5220D again show good correlation (for COD, the homogeneity of the sample has assisted in the analysis). Method Code 5 ((SM 19, SM 20, SM 21, (5220B)) and 7 ((SM 19, SM 20, SM 21, (5220C)) were most commonly used in the analysis of COD. The statistics for these methods are tabulated below.

6

SD 9.17.02

Method Code 5

No. of participants: 11 Median: 93.10 mg/L NIQR: 5.71 For TOC it also appears that most of the laboratories used APHA methods. Methods 5310B, 5310C and 5310D again show good correlation (for TOC, the lack of solids in the sample has been of much assistance). Method Code 14 ((SM 19, SM 20, SM 21, (5310B)) was most commonly used in the analysis of TOC. The statistics for this method are tabulated below.

Method Code 14 No. of participants: 19 Median: 36.40 mg/L NIQR: 1.15 The reported measurement of uncertainty (MU) varies between laboratories. This may be due to variation in how MU values were calculated. Laboratories should compare their value with the data from this program. To conclude, participants should be pleased with the outcome of this program. The number of outlier results is at a minimum, while the variation between laboratories is low. This shows strength in the procedures and the laboratories performing them.

Method Code 7 No. of participants: 20 Median: 90.50 mg/L NIQR: 8.23

7

SD 9.17.02

5. Outlier Results

Laboratories reporting outlier results are listed in the following table:

Analysis Lab

Code Biochemical Oxygen Demand

Chemical Oxygen Demand

Total Organic Carbon

1 §

53 §

94 §

97 §

107 §

307 §

374 §

395 §

449 §

463 §

464 §

468 §

1 A “§” indicates the occurrence of a z-score outlier result (i.e. those results for which

|z-score|≥3.0). 6. Reference

[1] Guide to Proficiency Testing Australia, 2011 (This document can be found on the PTA website, www.pta.asn.au)

SD 9.17.02

APPENDIX A

Results and Data Analysis

Biochemical Oxygen Demand.…………………………...………………………………........... A1

Chemical Oxygen Demand…..…………………………...……………………………………… A4

Total Organic Carbon……………………………………...………………………………........... A7

SD 9.17.02

Biochemical Oxygen Demand Results

Sample

R132

A1

SD 9.17.02

R132

Lab Code

Result ± MU1

(mg/L)

Robust

z-score2Method

Code3

1 76 ± 10 3.96 § 1

30 45.3 # -1.83 1

44 53.5 ± 10 -0.28 1

48 42.0 ± 10 -2.45 1

49 55.6 ± 31 0.11 1

53 15.6 ± 11.43 -7.43 § #

66 50 ± 5.344 -0.94 1

77 58 ± 6 0.57 1

88 68 ± 10 2.45 1

94 35.7 ± 5.0 -3.64 § 1

95 52.0 ± 6.8 -0.57 1

97 47 ± 4.7 -1.51 1

107 63 ± 3 1.51 1

126 58.8 ± 6.5 0.72 1

147 55 ± 8 0.00 1

161 59.5 # 0.85 3

164 52.2 # -0.53 1

173 70.0 ± 12 2.83 1

178 64.5 ± 5 1.79 1

192 55 ± 9.9 0.00 1

215 68.0 ± 10 2.45 1

228 53.7 # -0.25 1

1

2

3

Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)

Where reported, results are shown with their corresponding measurement uncertainty (MU).

"§"s denote outliers (i.e. those results for which |z-score | ≥ 3.0). Robust z-scores are calculated

as: z = (A - median ) ÷ normalised IQR , where A is the participant laboratory's result.

Please refer to Appendix C (page C3) for method code descriptions.

Results by Laboratory Code

A2

SD 9.17.02

R132

Lab Code

Result ± MU1

(mg/L)

Robust

z-score2Method

Code3

234 60.0 ± 11.0 0.94 1

259 55 ± 7.9 0.00 1

287 57.7 # 0.51 1

288 46.4 ± 8 -1.62 1

291 58 # 0.57 1

297 >7.1 ± 1 NA 3

302 58 ± 9 0.57 1

307 55.4 ± 8.32 0.08 1

332 54.0 ± 11 -0.19 1

350 62.0 ± 3 1.32 1

353 55 ± 11 0.00 1

360 55.5 ± 8.1 0.09 1

361 39.9 # -2.85 1

369 53.5 ± 10 -0.28 1

374 32.2 ± 4.0 -4.30 § 1

376 61.2 ± 9.3 1.17 1

377 53.5 ± 6.5 -0.28 1

404 55 ± 5 0.00 1

449 52 ± 3 -0.57 #

463 56.7 ± 15.0 0.32 1

464 60.8 # 1.09 1

468 39.6 ± 4.7 -2.91 1

44

55.00

5.30

1.00

9.6%

15.6

76

60.4

1

2

3

Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) cont.


"§"s denote outliers (i.e. those results for which |z-score | ≥ 3.0). Robust z-scores are calculated

Maximum:

Range:

Normalised IQR:

No of Results:

Median:

Robust CV:

Uncertainty of the Median:

Minimum:

as: z = (A - median ) ÷ normalised IQR , where A is the participant laboratory's result. Please note that z-scores are unable to be calculated for > or < results.



A1

SD 9.17.02

Biochemical Oxygen Demand - R132 - Robust Z-Scores

Robust Z-Scores

Ordered R

obust Z-S

core Charts

A3

Biochem

ical Oxygen D

emand - R

132

468

361 48

30 288 97

449

164

369

377

228

332

147

192

95

66

44

94

374

53

259

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

lab code

z-sc

ore

360

49 463

287

77 291 161

234

376

350

107 178 88 21

5 173

1

353

404

307

464

302

126

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

lab code

z-sc

ore

SD 9.17.02

Chemical Oxygen Demand Results

Sample

R132

A5

SD 9.17.02

R132

Lab Code

Result ± MU1

(mg/L)

Robust

z-score2Method

Code3

1 95 ± 10 0.46 5

30 88.8 # -0.36 7

44 93.1 ± 9.3 0.21 5

48 96.0 ± 13 0.59 7

49 102 ± 16 1.39 5

53 101 # 1.25 #

66 82 ± 5.220 -1.25 6

77 75 ± 5 -2.18 7

88 96 ± 7 0.59 7

94 94.0 ± 11.3 0.33 7

95 87.0 ± 3.0 -0.59 13

97 99 ± 9.9 0.99 7

107 120 ± 5 3.76 § 7

126 96.0 ± 8.6 0.59 13

147 87 ± 16 -0.59 7

161 90.0 # -0.20 12

164 83.3 # -1.08 5

173 102 ± 15 1.39 6

192 90 ± 9.0 -0.20 5

215 93.0 ± 13 0.20 12

228 108 ± 5.7 2.18 7

1

2

3


"§"s denote outliers (i.e. those results for which |z-score | ≥ 3.0). Robust z-scores are calculated as: z = (A - median ) ÷ normalised IQR , where A is the participant laboratory's result.


Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)


A4

A6

SD 9.17.02

R132

Lab Code

Result ± MU1

(mg/L)

Robust

z-score2Method

Code3

234 97.2 ± 9.8 0.75 5

259 95 ± 6.8 0.46 7

287 92.0 # 0.07 5

288 111 ± 20 2.57 7

291 96.7 # 0.69 5

302 94 ± 8 0.33 5

307 121 ± 18.5 3.89 § 7

320 91 # -0.07 7

332 93.4 ± 10 0.25 6

350 90.0 ± 6 -0.20 7

360 86.3 ± 7.0 -0.69 5

361 85.5 # -0.79 7

374 84.5 ± 21.1 -0.92 7

376 85.7 ± 10.3 -0.77 7

395 81.0 # -1.39 5

399 89.7 ± 5.8 -0.24 7

404 86 ± 13 -0.73 6

449 79 ± 3 -1.65 7

463 65.9 ± 16.0 -3.38 § 7

464 51.4 # -5.29 § 6

468 68.1 ± 8.2 -3.09 § 13

42

91.50

7.58

1.47

8.3%

51.4

121

69.6

1

2

3

Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) cont.





Maximum:

Range:

Normalised IQR:

No of Results:

Median:

Robust CV:

Minimum:


A5

A5

SD 9.17.02

Chemical Oxygen Demand - R132 - Robust Z-Scores

Robust Z-Scores

Ordered R

obust Z-S

core Charts

A6

Chem

ical Oxygen D

emand - R

132

77 449 39

5

66 164

374

404

360

147 30 399

161

192

350

376

361

95

468

463

464

320

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

lab code

z-sc

ore

332

94 302

1 259

48 291

234 53 49 17

3 228 28

8

107

307

287

215

44

97

88 126

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

lab code

z-sc

ore

SD 9.17.02

Total Organic Carbon Results

Sample

R132

SD 9.17.02

R132

Lab Code

Result ± MU1

(mg/L)

Robust

z-score2Method

Code3

1 38 ± 3 1.00 14

17 36.6 ± 3.7 0.10 14

30 39.4 # 1.89 19

44 36.5 ± 4 0.03 14

66 36.6 ± 0.89 0.10 14

94 36.4 ± 3.5 -0.03 14

97 31.3 ± 2.5 -3.31 § 19

126 36.8 ± 0.7 0.22 14

153 34.0 ± 2.4 -1.57 14

192 35.0 ± 2.8 -0.93 14

234 36.1 ± 4.0 -0.22 14

287 37.6 # 0.74 14

307 34.9 ± 5.52 -1.00 14

332 34.6 ± 3.5 -1.19 14

361 36.9 ± 3.898 0.29 14

374 33.7 ± 4.2 -1.77 15

376 35.7 ± 3.6 -0.48 14

377 35.7 ± 1.2 -0.48 14

387 38 # 1.00 20

395 42.7 # 4.01 § 14

400 34.8 ± 1.0 -1.06 14

431 35.4 ± 2.5 -0.67 14

449 76 # 25.41 § #

463 36.7 ± 9.18 0.16 14

24

36.45

1.56

0.40

4.3%

31.3

76

44.7

1

2

3






Maximum:

Range:

Normalised IQR:

No of Results:

Median:

Robust CV:

Minimum:


A7

SD 9.17.02

Total Organic Carbon - Ampoule R132 - Robust Z-Scor esO

rdered Robust Z

-Score C

harts

Total O

rganic Carbon - R

132

A8

332

400

307

192 431

376 94

44 66 463

126

361 28

7

1

395

449

234

377

17

153

374

97

30

387

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

lab code

z-sc

ore

SD 9.17.02

APPENDIX B

Sample Homogeneity

B1

SD 9.17.02

Homogeneity Testing Samples for this program were obtained from the Environmental Resource Associates (ERA). As such, all samples are subjected to rigorous stability and homogeneity testing. On the basis of this testing, the ampoules utilised for this program were considered to be homogeneous.

SD 9.17.02

APPENDIX C

Documentation

Instructions to Participants………...……………………………………………………………… C1

Method Codes………..………………………………………………………………….…………. C3

Results Sheet………………………………………………………………………………………. C4

D1

SD 9.17.02

PROFICIENCY TESTING AUSTRALIA

WATERS PROFICIENCY TESTING PROGRAM

CHEMICAL ANALYSIS ROUND 132 MAY 2011

BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (BOD)

CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND(COD)

TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)

INSTRUCTIONS TO PARTICIPANTS

Please note the following before commencing the analysis of the samples. 1. Samples i) One sealed 15mL screw-top vial supplied by Environmental Resource

Associates (ERA). The vial contains BOD, COD, TOC concentrates. ii) Aliquot from the vial will require 200-fold dilution in reagent grade water.

iii) Helpful Points: ▪ The demand concentrate is preserved with hydrochloric acid, therefore the resulting diluted standard may have a pH < 6.5. ▪ It is necessary to seed dilutions of this standard prior to BOD analysis.

Please note: where possible, proficienc y testing samples must be treated as a routine laboratory sample.

2. Sample Preparation Caution: Analysis must begin immediately after ampoule is opened.

i) Adjust ampoule temperature to 20º C ii) Add approximately 100 - 200 millilitres (mL) deionized water to a one-litre

volumetric flask. iii) Shake the vial prior to opening.

iv) Using a volumetric pipette, volumetrically pipette 5.0 mL of the concentrate

into the 1000 mL volumetric flask.

v) Dilute the flask to the final volume with deionized water. vi) Cap the flask and mix contents well.

vii) Immediately analyse the diluted sample by your normal procedures. viii) Report your result as mg/L for the diluted sample.

C1

D2

SD 9.17.02

3. Tests Requested For the sample prepared from the ampoule.

i) Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) ii) Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) iii) Total Organic Carbon (TOC)

If unable to perform the above please note this on your Results Sheet. 4. Safety i) The sample is for laboratory use only. ii) Participants should have sufficient experience and training to take the

necessary precautions when handling the ampoule, prepared samples, other chemicals required for the analysis, and materials for disposal.

iii) Use of safety glasses, gloves, and fume hoods, where appropriate during the

determinations, is recommended. 5. Reporting (a) Report results using three significant figures. For non detection, report results

using < preceding the laboratory's reporting limit. (b) Report results in milligrams per litre (mg/L).

(c) In addition to reporting the results, record the method of analysis using the attached codes.

(d) Laboratories are also requested to calculate and report an estimate of

measurement uncertainty for each reported measurement result. All estimates of measurement uncertainty must be given as a 95% confidence interval (coverage factor k ≈ 2) and reported in mg/L

6. Testing should commence as soon as possible after receiving the ampoule

and results reported NO LATER THAN 17 JUNE 2011 to:

Yvette Christie Proficiency Testing Australia PO Box 7507 SILVERWATER NSW 2128 AUSTRALIA Phone: +612 9736 8397 Fax: +612 9743 6664 Email: [email protected]

7. For this program your laboratory has been allocated the code number shown

on the attached Results Sheet. All reference to your laboratory in reports associated with the program will be through this code number, thus ensuring the confidentiality of your results.

C2

D3

SD 9.17.02

Method Codes to be used for the Results Sheet

ANALYSIS METHOD REFERENCE CODE

SM 19, SM 20, SM 21, (5210B) 1

USEPA (0405.1) 2

In-house method 3


Other (please specify) 4

SM 19, SM 20, SM 21, (5220B) 5

SM 19, SM 20, SM 21 (5220C) 6

SM 19, SM 20, SM 21 (5220D) 7

USEPA (0410.1) 8

USEPA (0410.2) 9

USEPA (0410.3) 10

USEPA (0410.4) 11

In-house method 12



SM 19, SM 20, SM 21 (5310B) 14

SM 19, SM 20, SM 21 (5310C) 15

SM 19, SM 20, SM 21 (5310D) 16

USEPA (0415.1) 17

USEPA (0415.2) 18

In-house method 19



Method Reference Key

(a) SM 19, SM 20, SM 21 APHA “Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater” 19th Edition (1995), 20th Edition (1998), 21st Edition (2005)

(b) USEPA USEPA 600/4 – 79 - 020

C3

D4

SD 9.17.02

PROFICIENCY TESTING AUSTRALIA WATERS PROFICIENCY TESTING PROGRAM

CHEMICAL ANALYSIS ROUND 132

BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (BOD) CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD) TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TO C) MAY 2011

RESULTS SHEET

(mg/L)

Laboratory Code

ANALYSIS Result ±MU* METHOD CODE




Please note: where possible, proficiency tes ting samples must be treated as a routine laboratory sample.

(a) For each prepared sample (diluted from the ampoule) only a single result is requested.

(b) Report results using three significant figures. For compounds not found, report results

using < proceeding the laboratory's reporting limit (c) Report results in milligrams per litre (mg/L) (d) MU* Laboratories Measurement Uncertainty (MU) if known for the result. Please

report in mg /L ______________________ ________________________________ DATE SIGNATURE

Return results NO LATER THAN 17 JUNE 2011 to Yvette Christie Proficiency Testing Australia PO Box 7507 SILVERWATER NSW 2128 AUSTRALIA Phone: +612 9736 8397 Fax: +612 9743 6664 Email: [email protected]

INSTRUCT WATERS PROF TEST PROG 132

C4

D5

SD 9.17.02

- End of Report -

Documents

Report No. 722 Waters Proficiency Testing Round 132 - Biochemical Oxygen …capeyork.myownserver.net/~ptaasnau/documents/722.pdf · 2015-04-09 · Oxygen Demand (BOD) Report 548 A7002