Applied Radiation and Isotopes 87 (2014) 429–434

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Radiation and Isotopes

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apradiso

Critical remarks on gross alpha/beta activity analysis in drinking

waters: Conclusions from a European interlaboratory comparison
V. Jobbágy n, J. Merešová, U. Wätjen
European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements, Retieseweg 111, B-2440 Geel, Belgium

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

Available online 1 December 2013 The most common gross alpha/beta standard methods used for drinking water analysis are discussed,
Keywords: and sources of interferences are reviewed from a metrological point of view. Our study reveals serious
Gross alpha/beta activity drawbacks of gross methods on the basis of an interlaboratory comparison analyzing commercial mineral
Drinking water water samples with the participation of 71 laboratories. A proposal is made to obtain comparable
Interlaboratory comparison measurement results using true standardized methods.
Radioactivity & 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Limits of gross methods

1. Introduction
Gross alpha/beta activity measurement is applied widely as a
screening technique in the field of radioecology, environmental
monitoring and industrial applications. Water intended for drink-
ing purposes has to be analyzed first 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 incorpo-
rates gross alpha/beta activity screening levels, the Institute for
Reference Materials and Measurements (IRMM) organized an
interlaboratory comparison (ILC) to check the fitness 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 influential
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: SCK
CEN, Belgian Nuclear Research
Centre, Boeretang 200, B-2400 Mol, Belgium. Tel.: þ 32 14 33 32 38.
E-mail address: viktor.jobbagy@mail.com (V. Jobbágy).
faces some specific problems that may refute the afore-mentioned
claims. There are many sources of interferences in gross alpha/beta
measurement that may corrupt the comparability of the measurement
results (Arndt and West, 2004; Rusconi et al., 2006; Semkow et al.,
2004; Montaña et al., 2012). First one is related to the radionuclide
composition of the sample. During gross alpha/beta activity measure-
ment, a mixed radionuclide composition must be simultaneously
measured. Drinking water samples may contain different naturally
occurring alpha (238U, 234U, 232Th, 226Ra and 210Po) and beta (40K, 228Ra
and 210Pb) emitters, and artificial radionuclides (241Am, 90Sr) in various
concentrations (UNSCEAR, 2000). Moreover, most of these are mem-
bers of a complex decay chain, therefore the ingrowths of the daughter
products influence the measurement result.
The second important source of interference is due to the final
source thickness that causes self absorption of the emitted particles
already in the source itself. In this respect, it is crucial to use
standardized methods (Jobbágy et al., 2010). The WHO recommends
that, "Where possible, standardized methods should be used to
determine concentrations of gross alpha and beta activities" (WHO,
2011). For this reason, the most common standard methods – based
on direct evaporation, co-precipitation and liquid scintillation count-
ing – are discussed in this paper with respect to the sample
preparation and counting techniques. Regarding the measurement
methods, the influence of the following parameters must be con-
sidered: counting efficiency, self absorption, moisture absorption,

0969-8043/$ - see front matter & 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2013.11.073
430 V. Jobbágy et al. / Applied Radiation and Isotopes 87 (2014) 429–434
chemical recovery and the interferences due to the isotopic composi-
tion 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-specific analysis.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Reagents
All the chemicals (conc. H2SO4, FeCl3, BaCl2) were analytical
grade and all the stock solutions were prepared using de-ionized
water. Three water samples, with different salinity and radio-
nuclide activity concentrations, were used for the described
experiments and in the interlaboratory comparison. Two water
samples (Water A and B) were commercially available natural
mineral waters. The third one (Water C) was prepared by spiking
de-ionized water with a known activity of 241Am and 90Sr/90Y
solutions standardized at IRMM by liquid scintillation counting
using the CIEMAT/NIST method. The total dissolved solid was set
to a final total concentration of about 10 mg/L by adding the
following inactive inorganic salts: NaCl, CaCl2 and Sr(NO3)2. The
major sources of gross alpha activity for Water A are 234U and 238U
(  40 mBq/L each), for Water B this is 226Ra (  330 mBq/L) and for
Water C 241Am (  950 mBq/L).
2.2. Sample preparation
Sources were prepared in accordance with ISO 9696/9697
(“thick source method”) or ISO 10704 (“thin source method”).
The surface density of a source prepared under ISO 9696/9697
must exceed 10 mg/cm2. An aliquot of sample was evaporated to
dryness, and the dried residue converted to sulfate form by
sulfuric acid and ignited at 350 1C for an hour (ISO 9696, 2007;
ISO 9697, 2008). The surface density of the source in the thin
source method must be below 5 mg/cm2, and has been described
previously (ISO 10704, 2009; Montaña et al, 2012; Suarez-Navarro
et al., 2002). The pH of the filtered water sample was adjusted
with sulfuric acid and heated to purge radon and CO2. Then the
radium isotopes were co-precipitated as Ba(Ra)SO4, whereas
uranium, thorium and polonium isotopes are co-precipitated with
Fe(OH)3 after pH adjustment (pH E7–8) (ISO 10704, 2009;
Suarez-Navarro et al., 2002).
2.3. Gross counting system and activity calculation
For the gross alpha/beta measurement, a 10-detector, low-
background gas-flow proportional counting system was used.
The high voltage was set to 1450 V and the counting gas (Ar/
CH4, 90/10) flow was kept stable with a flow rate of  25 mL/min.
The gross alpha/beta count of the filtered/dried precipitate was
measured in 5 h cycles repeating it several times (from three to
twelve cycles).
For the counting efficiency and self absorption experiments,
241
Am and 90Sr standard solutions were used, since these are the
most frequently used radionuclides for this purpose. Gross alpha/
beta activity concentrations were calculated from count rates by
following the formulae of the corresponding ISO standard (ISO
9696, 2007; ISO 9697, 2008; ISO 10704, 2009; ISO 11704, 2010).
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Summary of the interlaboratory exercise
After radiochemical characterization of the three water sam-
ples at IRMM, they were sent to the European monitoring
laboratories for gross alpha/beta analysis. The gross alpha/beta
reference values were determined independently from the labora-
tory comparison from the results determined by the three labora-
tories involved in the reference value determination (Table 1).
Water C is, in principle, the easiest sample to measure since its
gross alpha/beta activity concentration is the highest among the
ILC samples. However, from a measurement point of view, the
gross alpha activity is not the only key factor, but the alpha/beta
emitting radionuclides and the total dissolved solid content have
to be considered as well. Taking into account all three factors one
can make an order of difficulty in terms of measurement as
follows: Water C oWater A rWater B.
As is evident from the reported results (Fig. 1 and 2), the
outcome of the laboratory comparison exercise is far from satis-
factory. The measurement results span a wide range, e.g. for Water
C the maximum reported gross beta activity was more than 3000
times higher than the minimum reported gross beta activity.
Furthermore, several laboratories (no. 49, 50 etc.) present for
one type of sample a measurement result several times higher
than the reference, whilst for another type of sample the same
laboratory has a result several times lower. The gross alpha activity
results for Water C (spiked sample, i.e. the best case scenario) are
sorted according to the applied counting techniques in Fig. 2.
For Water A and B (natural waters) we could observe a similar
data spread but with a higher degree of variation for each
technique. Possible reasons for the diversity of results are given
in the next sections, but a detailed evaluation of the laboratory
comparison itself will be published later in a separate report.
3.2. Method comparison
It is well-known that the sample form or geometry play a
significant role in producing reliable results from thicker sources,
requiring a uniform thickness and a homogeneous layer of residue
material on a planchet (60 mm in diameter). The surface density,
influencing the self absorption of alpha and beta particles, should
be controlled and determined very carefully (ISO 9696/9697; ISO
10704; Montaña et al., 2012; Suarez-Navarro et al., 2002; Semkow
et al., 2004; Parsa, 1998). A surface density higher than 10 mg/cm2
(ISO 9696/9697) achieves satisfying counting statistics and con-
stant self absorption. The self absorption of the alpha and beta
particles limits their counting efficiency to usually less than 50%.
It should be mentioned that no energy resolution is possible with
proportional counters.
Since the sample is evaporated and later heat-treated, ISO
9696/9697 does not allow determination of the volatile radio-
nuclides (e.g. 3H, 210Po, 137Cs), which escape from the sample and
Table 1
The reference activity concentration values (Aref) in the ILC water samples with
their expanded uncertainties (Uref) with a coverage factor k ¼ 2. Reference values
determined by three laboratories external to the laboratory comparison.
Parameter Reference value with expanded uncertainty
Aref 7 Uref (mBq/L)
Water A Water B Water C
Gross alpha activity 47.5 7 22.8 434.7 7 56.6 954.5 7 77.3
Gross beta activity 309.8 7 57.4 190.4 7 32.6 1037.3 7 83.0
Total dissolved solids (mg/L) 955 7 44 3647 27 10.2 7 0.1
 V. Jobbágy et al. / Applied Radiation and Isotopes 87 (2014) 429–434
Fig. 1. Laboratory results for gross alpha/beta activity concentration for different
water samples. The solid lines indicate the reference activity concentrations (Aref) of
gross alpha and gross beta activity, respectively. Their corresponding expanded
uncertainties 7 Uref (k ¼2) are plotted in dashed lines.
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 acidified
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 (Suarez-
Navarro 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
431
Fig. 2. Laboratory results of gross alpha activity concentration sorted by techniques
for Water C. The solid line indicates the reference activity concentration (Aref) of
gross alpha activity. Its corresponding expanded uncertainty 7 Uref (k ¼2) is plotted
as dashed lines.
determination possible, no conclusion can be drawn on the
chemical recovery. It should be stressed that in the case of real
water samples it is difficult to quantify this without further
analysis as the original chemical composition is not always known
accurately. From the chemical composition of the sample, the
excess precipitate formed from the original inorganic cations could
be quantified.
Second, 40K cannot be included in the gross beta result because
it stays in the final supernatant. For this reason, the gross beta
results obtained by co-precipitation methods are always lower
than the true gross beta values. The 40K content has to be
separately determined with either a radiometric method (low
background gamma-ray spectrometry) or with a non-radiometric
method (emission flame photometry).
3.2.1. Liquid scintillation counting (ISO 11704)
Ultra low-level α/β-discrimination LSC, due to its high detec-
tion efficiency (up to 100%) and low background count rate, is a
useful tool for the determination of alpha- and beta emitting
radionuclides (Schönhofer, 1995). The basic steps of the sample
preparation for liquid scintillation counting are very simple. It
consists of a thermal pre-concentration, pH adjustment and
sample mixing with scintillation cocktail (ISO 11704, 2010).
Advantages are:

no self absorption occurs in the sample,

LSC methods can be adapted to monitor low-energy beta
emitters such as 3H and 14C (Schönhofer, 1995; Gruber et al.,
2009), and

radon in water can be determined separately using liquid
scintillation methods (Salonen, 2010).
One of the disadvantages is quenching (chemical, color and
physical) which reduces the counting efficiency; therefore, a
quench correction must be made. Furthermore, the separation of
beta energies from all alpha energies can be difficult, because it
depends on many factors in LSC counting (Rusconi et al., 2006;
Schönhofer, 2012). For this reason, the optimal setting of the
different parameters (type of the vial, cocktail, α/β pulse discri-
mination, counting efficiency) is essential for gross alpha/beta
measurements by LSC. Many other factors like the physical or
chemical behaviour of the radionuclides, dissolved ions and the
energies of the emitted particles may influence the detection, too.
As stated by Rusconi et al. (2006) the same settings should be used
during measurement and calibration.
432 V. Jobbágy et al. / Applied Radiation and Isotopes 87 (2014) 429–434

3.3. Sources of interferences
3.3.1. Self absorption
Most gross alpha/beta standard methods apply proportional
counter or solid state scintillation counters as detector (ISO 9696,
2007; ISO 9697, 2008; ISO 10704, 2009). The counting efficiency of
these methods is strongly affected by the total dissolved solids and
the surface density of the sample. The direct evaporation approach
of ISO 10704 allows the use of a binding agent that contains a
polymer “to produce evenly spread counting sources” (ISO 10704,
2009). This polymer stays on the planchet, increasing the surface
density which cannot exceed 5 mg/cm2. To get equivalent alpha/
beta self-absorption for the sample and the calibration source in a
multi-component microchemical environment is not easy to
accomplish. The sample and the calibration source must be as
similar as possible in terms of surface density, homogeneity, and
distribution of radioactivity in the precipitate. The sequence of
precipitation during evaporation, which is related to the solubility
of the dissolved compounds, also influences self-absorption
(Zikovsky, 2000). During our experiments, the typical surface
density for the ISO 10704 method varied in the range of 0.8–
1.3 mg/cm2. The self absorption factor for gross alpha counting
was 0.927 0.03 at 0.5 mg/cm2 and 0.57 70.02 at 1.5 mg/cm2.
3.3.2. Time delay and radon ingrowth
Radon ingrowth can result in variations of count rate and
measurement result. Many natural waters contain 226Ra at up to
several Bq/L concentration. From a measurement point of view,
progenies of 226Ra play a significant role in gross alpha/beta
measurements since they are produced from 226Ra continuously
after the source preparation and contribute to the gross count
rates which can vary as a function of time. A measurement started
immediately after source preparation, as required in ISO standards,
renders lower gross alpha activity than a delayed measurement as
shown in Fig. 3. Careful control of timing, such as the elapsed time
soon as possible after the time of sampling. In addition, the
duration of the drying step may vary, leading to an unknown
increase in gross count rates.
3.3.3. Calibration
Since determination of self-absorption is a crucial step, calibra-
tion standards must be appropriate for the measurement samples
(e.g. electrodeposited standard sources cannot be used for calibra-
tion of dry precipitate samples). The counting efficiency of certain
counters shows energy dependence (ISO 9696; Semkow et al.,
2004; Montaña et al., 2012). Therefore radionuclides used for
efficiency calibration have to be carefully selected. Finally, spatial
variation of the counting efficiency may also occur for proportional
counters as shown in Fig. 4, which means that a calibration source
with the same diameter as the sample should be used and both
sources must be positioned relative to the counter in the
same way.
3.3.4. Moisture
Moisture has to be controlled and kept constant during the
measurement to maintain stable measurement conditions. Some
of the participants did not take this into account. Applying the
direct evaporation approach, the adsorption of moisture from
ambient air can be comparable (up to 40%) to the net mass of
dry residue. If nitrates are still present, most dry residues are
hygroscopic. Mass change of the sample can continue during
measurement affecting significantly the self absorption.
3.3.5. Sources of bias and uncertainties
Details on sources of uncertainties for gross alpha/beta mea-
surements are given in Table 2.
40
35
30
Alpha count rate (cpm)

between source preparation and start of measurement and mea-

surement duration, are absolutely required. 25
One approach is to wait for secular equilibrium between
226 20
Ra/222Rn and its progenies (  30 days) before measurement.
To reach equilibrium with certainty is, however, difficult to assess, 15
since 222Rn can escape from the source itself. To quantify the
10
escaped/emanated radon fraction (i.e. the level of equilibrium) is
difficult because the microstructure and density of the dry residue 5
influence the emanation rate. 0
Parsa (1998) pointed out that short-lived 224Ra (T1/2 ¼3.64 d) -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
can remain undetected because of the time delays between Distance from the detector centre (cm)
sampling and routine gross alpha analysis. In order to assess the Fig. 4. Spatial variation of the alpha count rate for a proportional counter (error
224
Ra contribution, the gross alpha activity should be performed as bars represent the uncertainty from the counting statistics, with k ¼ 2).

6.0

5.5 Table 2
Alpha count rate (cpm)

Uncertainty budget for ISO 10704 gross alpha/beta activity concentration measure-
5.0
ments in water samples (Water A-B-C), giving the standard uncertainties (1 s) for a
4.5 single measurement of a single sample (5 h counting time) measured at IRMM.
y = 0.036x + 2.317
4.0
R2 = 0.967 Uncertainty component Gross alpha Gross beta
3.5 (%) (%)

3.0 Counting statistics (min–max) 2.5–12.4 1.8–6.5

2.5 Counting efficiency/Self absorption 4.5 3.1
Volume of the test sample 0.5 0.5
2.0 Calibration source 1 1
0 20 40 60 80 100 Weighing 0.2 0.2
Elapsed time (hours) Chemical yield Not known Not known
Partialn combined standard uncertainty (uc) 5.3–13.2 3.8–7.3
Fig. 3. Variation of alpha count rate due to the ingrowth of 226Ra progenies in the (min–max)
co-precipitated source (error bars represent the uncertainty from the counting
statistics, with k ¼ 2). ♯
Excluding chemical yield.
 V. Jobbágy et al. / Applied Radiation and Isotopes 87 (2014) 429–434
Not unexpectedly, the major contributions are counting statis-
tics and self absorption. The uncertainty due to sample prepara-
tion (sample volume, weighing) contributes only 1.1% to the
combined standard uncertainty. There can be a significant bias
due to the variation of counting efficiency as a function of alpha
particle energies and from the fitting of the self-absorption curve.
The bias from the counting efficiency can be up to 75% (ISO 9696),
making the appropriate calibration and determination of self-
absorption absolutely crucial. We obtained approximately 20%
bias using different electrodeposited and drop deposited calibra-
tion 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 quantified,
since the determination of the chemical yield itself is difficult 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 filtration step and some
precipitate can adsorb to the walls of the glassware as was
observed in these experiments.
4. Conclusions
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 (Montaña et al., 2012; Semkow et al., 2004), and they are far
from accurate. In some cases they fail to determine certain radio-
nuclides, therefore they give only an “activity index” rather than
an approximate activity concentration, as shown by Schönhofer
(2012) and confirmed 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 findings lead us to
conclude that gross alpha/beta methods are not fit to be used as an
independent method to assess activity concentration. Gross mea-
surement should be used for monitoring only after the radio-
nuclide composition is known from radionuclide specific analysis
of representative samples. It can be used as a complementary or
substitute method for radionuclide-specific measurement only
with important restrictions: (1) no temporary change is expected
in the radiochemical composition (no significant 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 fixed. Radionuclide specific 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 specific 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;
Jobbágy et al, 2010; Montaña et al., 2012), it is important to fix
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 defined.
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
433
are analyzed. It should be noted, however, that there is one
parameter that cannot be fixed as analysts simply cannot control
it: the original radiochemical composition of the samples.
Replacing gross methods of drinking water analysis with
radionuclide-specific methods would not take a lot of effort or
expense. Radionuclide measurements can be done using the same
instrumentation (gas-flow proportional counter, liquid—and solid
scintillation counter) that are used for gross alpha/beta analysis.
Only more expertise/proficiency and validated methods are
needed, but in a routine radiochemistry laboratory they should
already exist. Routine laboratory measurement protocols must be
up-dated to the new food safety-, health- and environment-
related challenges where rapid, specific and accurate responses
are needed. There are simultaneous methods that allow perform-
ing multi-radionuclide analysis focusing on the main naturally
occurring radionuclides of interest (226Ra, 228Ra, 210Po, 210Pb, and
the uranium isotopes) with a comparable speed to gross alpha/
beta methods such as described by Chalupnik and Lebecka, 1992;
Vajda et al., 1997; Schönhofer and Wallner, 2001; Eikenberg et al.,
2004; Benedik et al. 2009; Jia et al., 2009.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank Pieter Kwakman (RIVM, The Nether-
lands), Edmond Dupuis (SCK
CEN, Belgium), Timotheos Altzitzo-
glou, 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 Measure-
ments Conference, Cincinatti, October 30–November 4.
Benedik, L., Vasile, M., Spasova, Y., Watjen, U., 2009. Sequential determination of
210
Po and uranium radioisotopes in drinking water by alpha-particle spectro-
metry. Appl. Radiat. Isot 67, 770–775.
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, 14–18 September 1992,
397–403.
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, 101–106.
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 radio-
nuclides in drinking water in Austria: measurement and assessment. Appl.
Radiat. Isot 67, 913–917.
ISO 9696, 2007. Water Quality: Measurement of Gross Alpha Activity in Non-Saline
Water—Thick 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 Water—Thin Source Deposit Method. International
Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
ISO 11704, 2010. Water Quality: measurement of Gross Alpha and Beta Activity
Concentration in Non-saline Water—Liquid 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 α and β. J.
Environ. Radioact 100, 941–949.
Jobbágy, V., Wätjen, U., Merešova, J., 2010. Current status of gross alpha/beta
activity analysis in water samples: a short overview of methods. J. Radioanal.
Nucl. Chem. 286, 393–399.
Matthews, K.M., Kim, C.K., Martin, P., 2007. Determination of 210Po in environ-
mental materials: a review of analytical methodology. Appl. Radiat. Isot 65,
267–279.
434 V. Jobbágy et al. / Applied Radiation and Isotopes 87 (2014) 429–434
Momoshima, N., Song, L.X., Osaki, S., Maeda, Y., 2002. Biologically induced Po
emission from fresh water. J. Environ. Radioact. 63, 187–197.
Montaña, M., Camacho, A., Vallés, I., Serrano, I., 2012. Experimental analysis of the
mass efficiency curve for gross alpha activity and morphological study of the
residue obtained by the co-precipitation methodt. Appl. Radiat. Isot 70,
1541–1548.
Parsa, B., 1998. Contribution of short-lived radionuclides to alpha-particle radio-
activity in drinking water and their impact on the Safe Drinking Water Act
Regulations. Radioact. Radiochem 9, 41–50.
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, 1124–1129.
Salonen, L., 2010. Comparison of two direct LS methods for measuring 222Rn in
drinking water using α/Β liquid scintillation spectrometry. Appl. Radiat. Isot
68, 1970–1979.
Schönhofer, F., 1995. Liquid scintillation spectrometry in environmental measure-
ments. Sci. Total Environ. 173-174, 29–40.
Schönhofer, 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, 33–38.
Schönhofer, F., 2012. An LSC approach to improve (???) or better replace gross
alpha and/or beta measurements. In: III. Terrestrial Radionuclides in
Environment International Conference on Environmental Protection, Veszprém
(Hungary), 16–18 May.
Semkow, T.M., Bari, A., Parekh, P.P., Haines, D.K., Gao, H., Bolden, A.N., Dahms, K.S.,
Scarpitta, S.C., Thern, R.E., Velazquez, S., 2004. Experimental investigation of
mass efficiency curve for alpha radioactivity counting using a gas-proportional
detector. Appl. Radiat. Isot 60, 879–886.
Suarez-Navarro, J.A., Pujol, L., de Pablo, M.A., 2002. Rapid determination of gross
alpha-activity in sea water by coprecipitation. J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem. 253,
47–52.
UNSCEAR, 2000. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic
Radiation (UNSCEAR), Sources and Effects of Ionising Radiation. United Nations,
New York.
Vajda, N., LaRosa, J., Zeisler, R., Danesi, P., Kis-Benedek, G., 1997. A novel technique
for the simultaneous determination of 210Pb and 210Po using a crown ether. J.
Environ. Radioact. 37, 355–372.
WHO, 2011. World Health Organization, Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality,
fourth ed. World Health Organization, Geneva.
Zikovsky, L., 2000. Uranyl ions, nitrate ions and some major cations as causes of
anomalous results when determining gross alpha radioactivity in ground
water. Radioact. Radiochem 11, 26–28.