1. Youden WJ. Statistical manual of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists. Arlington (VA): AOAC International; 1984. Google Scholar

2. Osborn K, Rosecrance A. You can’t compute with less-thans: censoring data restricts its use. In: Water Environment Federation Solutions. Alexandria (VA): Water Environment Federation; 1995, Volume 2, Issue 1, p. 6–7. Google Scholar

1. Youden WJ. Enduring values. Technometrics 1972;14(1):1–11. Google Scholar

2. Henrion M, Fischhoff B. Assessing uncertainty in physical constant. Amer J Phys. 1986;54(9):791–798. Google Scholar

3. Currie L. 1995. Nomenclature in evaluation of analytical methods including detection and quantification capabilities (IUPAC Recommendations 1995). Pure Appl Chem. 1995;67(10):1699–1723. Google Scholar

4. Mandel J. Evaluation and control of measurements. New York (NY): Marcel Dekker; 1991. Google Scholar

5. Taylor BN, Kuyatt CE. Guidelines for evaluating and expressing the uncertainty of NIST measurement results, technical note 1297. Gaithersburg (MD): National Institute of Standards and Technology, 1994. Google Scholar

6. International Standards Organization. ISO/IEC Guide 983.2008, Part 3: Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement. Geneva (Switzerland): International Standards Organization; 2008. Google Scholar

7. Kocherlakota N, Obenauf R, Thomas R. A statistical approach to reporting uncertainty on certified values of chemical reference materials for trace metal analysis. Spectroscopy. 2002;17(9):20–32. Google Scholar

8. Guedens WJ, Yperman J, Mullens J, Pauwels EJ, Van Poucke LC, Pauwels EJ. Statistical analysis of errors: a practical approach for an undergraduate chemistry lab—Part 1: The concepts. J Chem Ed. 1993;70(9):776. Google Scholar

9. Guedens WJ, Yperman J, Mullens J, Pauwels EJ, Van Poucke LC, Pauwels EJ. Statistical analysis of errors: a practical approach for an undergraduate chemistry lab—Part 2. Some worked examples. J Chem Ed. 1993;70(10):838. Google Scholar

1. ASTM D4210-89. Standard practice for intralaboratory quality control procedures and a discussion on reporting low-level data, designation. Philadelphia (PA): American Society for Testing and Materials; 1996. Google Scholar

2. Report of the Federal Advisory Committee on Detection and Quantitation Approaches and Uses in Clean Water Act Programs. Washington DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 2007. Google Scholar

3. Martin JJ, Winslow SD, Munch DJ. A new approach to drinking-water-quality data: Lowest-concentration minimum reporting level. Environ Sci Technol. 2007;41(3):677–681. Google Scholar

4. Oppenheimer J, Trussell R. Detection limits in water quality analysis. In: Proceedings of the Water Quality Technology Conference, 1984 Dec 2–5, Denver, CO. Denver (CO): American Water Works Association; 1984, p. 213. Google Scholar

1. Guidance on systematic planning using the data quality objectives process (EPA QA/G-4) EPA/240/B-06/001. Washington DC: Office of Environmental Information, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006. Google Scholar

1. Rossum JR. Checking the accuracy of water analyses through the use of conductivity. J Amer Water Works Assoc. 1975;67(4):204–205. Google Scholar

2. Friedman LC, Erdmann DE. Quality assurance practices for the chemical and biological analyses of water and fluvial sediments; Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations of the U.S. Geological Survey. Washington DC: U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Government Printing Office; 1982, Book 5, Chapter A6. Google Scholar

3. Oppenheimer J, Eaton AD. Quality control in mineral analysis. In: Proceedings of the Water Quality Technology Conference, 1985 Dec 8–11, Houston, TX. Denver (CO): American Water Works Association; 1986, p. 15. Google Scholar

4. Oppenheimer J. Laboratory quality control—inorganic and organic. In: Proceedings of the Water Quality Technology Conference, 1986 Nov 16–20, Portland, OR. Denver (CO): American Water Works Association; 1986, p. 23. Google Scholar