{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019646365422396856, 'fraction_numerical': 0.047151277013752456, 'mean_word_length': 5.236734693877551, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Interlaboratory Comparison of 226Ra and 228Ra Activity Concentrations in Groundwater and Surface Water

226Ra and 228Ra are typically monitored for groundwater and surface water compliance at legacy U mining and milling sites. Groundwater monitoring results for combined Ra (226Ra + 228Ra) reported by the existing contract laboratory at a former U mine and mill Site (Converse County, WY, USA) have been highly variable and with increasing trends at the Site compliance and background wells since the method was changed in 2005. Sample reanalysis has indicated poor reproducibility and significant analytical error in 228Ra measurements. An interlaboratory comparison was conducted to evaluate the potential causes of the high variability and analytical error. Two different methods were used for 226Ra (M903.0 and M903.1) and 228Ra (M904.0 and Ra-05). 226Ra results were less variable compared to 228Ra, and 228Ra data from the existing laboratory were qualified as estimated with high bias due to detection of 228Ra in the field blank. Compliance with the 226Ra + 228Ra groundwater standard was either met or not met, depending on which laboratory conducted the analyses. Specific laboratory techniques, rather than the analytical method, are contributing to elevated 228Ra values being reported. It was recommended that samples whose 226Ra + 228Ra results exceed the Site standard in the future be reanalyzed by the existing laboratory with a sample split also being sent to an outside laboratory for confirmatory analysis.