discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259393075
CITATIONS
READS
243
3 AUTHORS, INCLUDING:
Jana Mereov
U. Wtjen
European Commission
16 PUBLICATIONS 68 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE
H I G H L I G H T S
Gross alpha/beta standard methods for drinking water analysis are discussed.
Large spread of results (up to 2 orders of magnitude) observed in comparisons.
Sources of interferences are reviewed.
We propose to use true standardized methods to obtain better measurement results.
art ic l e i nf o
a b s t r a c t
The most common gross alpha/beta standard methods used for drinking water analysis are discussed,
and sources of interferences are reviewed from a metrological point of view. Our study reveals serious
drawbacks of gross methods on the basis of an interlaboratory comparison analyzing commercial mineral
water samples with the participation of 71 laboratories. A proposal is made to obtain comparable
measurement results using true standardized methods.
& 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Gross alpha/beta activity
Drinking water
Interlaboratory comparison
Radioactivity
Limits of gross methods
1. Introduction
Gross alpha/beta activity measurement is applied widely as a
screening technique in the eld of radioecology, environmental
monitoring and industrial applications. Water intended for drinking purposes has to be analyzed rst for gross alpha/beta activity
content according to many different national and international
standards and recommendations. Anticipating the new European
Union (EU) Drinking Water Directive (EC, 2012) which incorporates gross alpha/beta activity screening levels, the Institute for
Reference Materials and Measurements (IRMM) organized an
interlaboratory comparison (ILC) to check the tness for purpose
of this method and the performance of European monitoring
laboratories. On the basis of the reported values from the 71
participating laboratories, we review some of the most inuential
parameters on gross measurements.
The claimed main advantages of the gross alpha/beta methods
are the relatively low costs, rapidity and simplicity. Although it is
one of the simplest, it is also one of the most disputed radioanalytical
methods because the determination of gross alpha and beta activities
n
Corresponding author. Present address: SCKCEN, Belgian Nuclear Research
Centre, Boeretang 200, B-2400 Mol, Belgium. Tel.: 32 14 33 32 38.
E-mail address: viktor.jobbagy@mail.com (V. Jobbgy).
0969-8043/$ - see front matter & 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2013.11.073
430
chemical recovery and the interferences due to the isotopic composition of the water sample. Experimental comparisons of the
gross alpha/beta standard methods were done using real drinking
water samples with different salinity and radionuclide activity
concentration.
Besides the pitfalls of the gross measurements, the paper also
tries to give examples where gross measurements can be used as a
rapid alternative technique to the radionuclide-specic analysis.
Water B
Water C
434.7 7 56.6
190.4 7 32.6
3647 27
954.5 7 77.3
1037.3 7 83.0
10.2 7 0.1
431
the residue during heat treatment. Therefore, the gross alpha and
beta activity concentration might be underestimated. For instance,
210
Po losses, varying with the chemical form of the element, have
been reported beginning above 100 1C (Momoshima et al., 2002;
Matthews et al., 2007). However, ISO 9696 claims that losses of
polonium are not expected for samples which have been acidied
with nitric acid and subjected to sulfation and treated at 350 1C
(nitrate salts have been converted to the sulfate form).
Some of these drawbacks of the thick source approach can be
avoided by using co-precipitation of the water sample (SuarezNavarro et al., 2002; ISO 10704). On one hand, this method needs
more chemical treatment than the evaporation methods. On the
other, more uniform and homogeneous residues can be obtained,
especially for higher salt concentrations (e.g. in mineral waters).
However, it suffers from two very severe drawbacks. Firstly,
since neither is a radiotracer applied nor is gravimetric yield
432
25
20
15
10
5
-3
-2
-1
0
1
Distance from the detector centre (cm)
Fig. 4. Spatial variation of the alpha count rate for a proportional counter (error
bars represent the uncertainty from the counting statistics, with k 2).
6.0
5.5
Table 2
Uncertainty budget for ISO 10704 gross alpha/beta activity concentration measurements in water samples (Water A-B-C), giving the standard uncertainties (1 s) for a
single measurement of a single sample (5 h counting time) measured at IRMM.
5.0
4.5
y = 0.036x + 2.317
4.0
R2 = 0.967
Uncertainty component
Gross alpha
(%)
Gross beta
(%)
2.512.4
4.5
0.5
1
0.2
Not known
5.313.2
1.86.5
3.1
0.5
1
0.2
Not known
3.87.3
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
20
40
60
80
100
Not unexpectedly, the major contributions are counting statistics and self absorption. The uncertainty due to sample preparation (sample volume, weighing) contributes only 1.1% to the
combined standard uncertainty. There can be a signicant bias
due to the variation of counting efciency as a function of alpha
particle energies and from the tting of the self-absorption curve.
The bias from the counting efciency can be up to 75% (ISO 9696),
making the appropriate calibration and determination of selfabsorption absolutely crucial. We obtained approximately 20%
bias using different electrodeposited and drop deposited calibration sources (for alpha energies of 4 MeV to 7 MeV). However,
positioning of these sources was more important as shown in
Fig. 4. The uncertainty from chemical yield cannot be quantied,
since the determination of the chemical yield itself is difcult in
the case of the co-precipitation approach of ISO 10704. Due to
chemical manipulations, the yield can never be assumed to be
100%. Loss of precipitate occurs during the ltration step and some
precipitate can adsorb to the walls of the glassware as was
observed in these experiments.
433
4. Conclusions
Acknowledgments
4.1. Recommendations for the gross alpha/beta method applied
to drinking water analysis
It was shown that gross methods are not as simple as usually
stated (Montaa et al., 2012; Semkow et al., 2004), and they are far
from accurate. In some cases they fail to determine certain radionuclides, therefore they give only an activity index rather than
an approximate activity concentration, as shown by Schnhofer
(2012) and conrmed by the data spread from this laboratory
comparison. The difference between laboratory results in this ILC
is sometimes two or three orders of magnitude, which is far
beyond the measurement uncertainties. These ndings lead us to
conclude that gross alpha/beta methods are not t to be used as an
independent method to assess activity concentration. Gross measurement should be used for monitoring only after the radionuclide composition is known from radionuclide specic analysis
of representative samples. It can be used as a complementary or
substitute method for radionuclide-specic measurement only
with important restrictions: (1) no temporary change is expected
in the radiochemical composition (no signicant ingrowth of
progenies during the measurement); (2) no complex decay chains
are present; (3) a true standardized method is used; and (4) the
measurement parameters are xed. Radionuclide specic analysis
should be repeated on a regular basis in accordance with the
drinking water directive concerning check and audit monitoring
(EC, 1998). Any suspected change in parameters requires more
frequent nuclide specic analysis.
4.2. True standardization of methods
The main reason for unreliability of gross methods and
the noncomparability of gross alpha/beta measurement results is
the lack of knowledge of the real radionuclide composition of the
water. Since there are many variables playing a key role in gross
measurement (Arndt and West, 2004; Semkow et al., 2004;
Jobbgy et al, 2010; Montaa et al., 2012), it is important to x
as many parameters as possible. The radionuclides used in the
calibration, the geometry of the source, quenching parameters, the
chemical form and any time delay must be clearly dened.
Acceptable time delays for each step (e.g. between sampling and
sample preparation, source preparation and start of measurement)
must be set in the written measurement standards, which is
particularly important when 226Ra- and 224Ra-containing waters
The authors wish to thank Pieter Kwakman (RIVM, The Netherlands), Edmond Dupuis (SCKCEN, Belgium), Timotheos Altzitzoglou, Mikael Hult and Andrej Rozkov (EC-JRC-IRMM, Belgium) for
their contributions to the reference value determination.
References
Arndt, M.F., West, L.E., 2004. A study of the factors affecting the gross alpha
measurement, and a radiochemical analysis of some groundwater samples
from the state of Wisconsin exhibiting an elevated gross alpha activity. In:
Proceedings of the 51st Annual Radiobioassay and Radiochemical Measurements Conference, Cincinatti, October 30November 4.
Benedik, L., Vasile, M., Spasova, Y., Watjen, U., 2009. Sequential determination of
210
Po and uranium radioisotopes in drinking water by alpha-particle spectrometry. Appl. Radiat. Isot 67, 770775.
Chalupnik, S., Lebecka, J., 1992. Determination of 226Ra, 228Ra and 224Ra in water
and aqueous solutions by liquid scintillation counting. In: Proceedings of Liquid
Scintillation Conference on Radiocarbon, Vienna, 1418 September 1992,
397403.
Eikenberg, J., Bajo, S., Beer, H., Hitz, J., Ruethi, M., Zumsteg, I., Letessier, P., 2004. Fast
methods for determination of antropogenic actinides and U/Th-series isotopes
in aqueous samples. Appl. Radiat. Isot 61, 101106.
EC, 1998. European Union Council Directive 98/83/EC of 3 November 1998 on the
Quality of Water Intended for Human Consumption.
EC, 2012. COM/2012/147 Final of 28 March 2012: Proposal for a Council Directive
laying Down Requirements for the Protection of the Health of the General
Public with Regard to Radioactive Substances in Water Intended for Human
Consumption.
Gruber, V., Maringer, F.J., Landstetter, C., 2009. Radon and other natural radionuclides in drinking water in Austria: measurement and assessment. Appl.
Radiat. Isot 67, 913917.
ISO 9696, 2007. Water Quality: Measurement of Gross Alpha Activity in Non-Saline
WaterThick Source Method. International Organization for Standardization,
Geneva.
ISO 9697, 2008. Water Quality: Measurement of Gross Beta Activity in Non-Saline
Water. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
ISO 10704, 2009. Water quality: Measurement of Gross Alpha and Gross Beta
Activity in Non-saline WaterThin Source Deposit Method. International
Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
ISO 11704, 2010. Water Quality: measurement of Gross Alpha and Beta Activity
Concentration in Non-saline WaterLiquid Scintillation Counting Method.
International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
Jia, G., Torri, G., Magro, L., 2009. Concentrations of 238U, 234U, 235U, 232Th, 230Th,
228
Th, 226Ra, 228Ra, 224Ra, 210Po, 210Pb and 212Pb in drinking water in Italy:
reconciling safety standards based on measurements of gross and . J.
Environ. Radioact 100, 941949.
Jobbgy, V., Wtjen, U., Mereova, J., 2010. Current status of gross alpha/beta
activity analysis in water samples: a short overview of methods. J. Radioanal.
Nucl. Chem. 286, 393399.
Matthews, K.M., Kim, C.K., Martin, P., 2007. Determination of 210Po in environmental materials: a review of analytical methodology. Appl. Radiat. Isot 65,
267279.
434
Momoshima, N., Song, L.X., Osaki, S., Maeda, Y., 2002. Biologically induced Po
emission from fresh water. J. Environ. Radioact. 63, 187197.
Montaa, M., Camacho, A., Valls, I., Serrano, I., 2012. Experimental analysis of the
mass efciency curve for gross alpha activity and morphological study of the
residue obtained by the co-precipitation methodt. Appl. Radiat. Isot 70,
15411548.
Parsa, B., 1998. Contribution of short-lived radionuclides to alpha-particle radioactivity in drinking water and their impact on the Safe Drinking Water Act
Regulations. Radioact. Radiochem 9, 4150.
Rusconi, R., Forte, M., Caresana, M., Bellinzona, S., Cazzaniga, M.T., Sgorbati, G.,
2006. The evaluation of uncertainty in low-level LSC measurements of water
samples. Appl. Radiat. Isot 64, 11241129.
Salonen, L., 2010. Comparison of two direct LS methods for measuring 222Rn in
drinking water using / liquid scintillation spectrometry. Appl. Radiat. Isot
68, 19701979.
Schnhofer, F., 1995. Liquid scintillation spectrometry in environmental measurements. Sci. Total Environ. 173-174, 2940.
Schnhofer, F., Wallner, G., 2001. Very rapid determination of Ra-226, Ra-228, and
Pb-210 by selective adsorption and liquid scintillation spectrometry. Radioact.
Radiochem 12, 3338.
Schnhofer, F., 2012. An LSC approach to improve (???) or better replace gross
alpha and/or beta measurements. In: III. Terrestrial Radionuclides in