温泉科学（J. Hot Spring Sci.），62，306-317（2013）

原著

Determination of Radon Concentration in Air
Using a Liquid Scintillation Counter andan Activated Charcoal Detector
Yasunori Mori1）2）*, Sho Murata1）, Hideki Yoshimura1）, Akira Maeda1）,
Yoko Sawada1）, Kyoko Shimura1）, Tetsuo Yamaguchi1）,
Yukari Tajika3）, Tetsuo Ishikawa4） and Yumi Yasuoka3）(Received Feb. 1, 2013, Accepted Mar. 17, 2013)

活性炭型検出器と液体シンチレーションカウンタを用いた空気中ラドンの測定
森 康則1) 2)*，村田 将1)，吉村英基1)，前田 明1)，澤田陽子1)，
志村恭子1)，山口哲夫1)，多鹿優佳里3)，石川徹夫4)，安岡由美3)
要

旨

温泉法および鉱泉分析法指針（改訂）では，地下水中ラドン濃度が 74 Bq/kg 以上で温泉，
111 Bq/kg 以上で療養泉に該当すると規定されている．ラドン（222Rn）は希ガスであり，容易に空気中に揮散することから，放射能泉の利用による被ばく線量評価のためには，簡便で正確な空気中ラドン濃度の測定手法の確立が必須である．鉱泉分析法指針では，水中ラドンの分析方法として，液体シンチレーションカウンタを用いた手法が例示されている．そこで，測定法の普及を図るため，液体シンチレーションカウンタおよび取扱が簡便な活性炭型検出器を用いた
空気中ラドンの測定法を検討した．測定条件として，20～2,000 keV, 40～2,000 keV, 60～2,000
keV の 3 ウインドウ設定とし，これらのカウント数から 0～2,000 keV を外挿して求めた．また，液体シンチレータとして DPO（2,5-diphenyloxazole）＋POPOP（1,4-bis（5-phenyl-2-oxazolyl）
benzene）トルエン溶液と Insta-Fluor Plus を用い，その測定スペクトルから，適正なウイン
ドウ幅設定，液体シンチレータの妥当性を確認するとともに，変換係数や定量限界を算出することが可能となった．計算の結果，液体シンチレータとして DPO＋POPOP トルエン溶液を
1)

Mie Prefecture Health and Environment Research Institute, 3684-11 Sakura-cho, Yokkaichi-shi, Mie-ken
512-1211, Japan. 1）三重県保健環境研究所 〒512-1211 三重県四日市市桜町 3684-11．*Corresponding
author：E-mail moriy04@pref.mie.jp, TEL 059-329-2917, FAX 059-329-3004.
2）
Graduate School of Bioresources, Mie University, 1577 Kurimamachiya-cho, Tsu-shi, Mie-ken 514-8507,
Japan. 2）三重大学大学院生物資源学研究科 〒514-8507 三重県津市栗真町屋町 1577．
3）
Kobe Pharmaceutical University, 4-9-1 Motoyamakita-machi, Higashinada-ku, Kobe-shi, Hyogo-ken
658-8558, Japan. 3）神戸薬科大学 〒658-8558 兵庫県神戸市東灘区本山北町 4-19-1．
4）
National Institute of Radiological Sciences, 4-9-1 Anagawa, Inage-ku, Chiba-shi, Chiba-ken 263-8555,
Japan. 4）放射線医学総合研究所 〒263-8555 千葉県千葉市稲毛区穴川 4-9-1．

306

第 62 巻（2013）

活性炭型検出器と液体シンチレーションカウンタを用いた空気中ラドンの測定用いた際の変換係数が 1.55，Insta-Fluor Plus を用いた際の変換係数が 1.70 であった．
キーワード：ラドン，液体シンチレーションカウンタ，活性炭型検出器，放射能泉

Abstract
According to the Japanese Hot Springs Law and the Guideline of Analytical Methods ofMineral Springs (revised), a spring containing more than 74 Bq/kg of radon is regarded as a
hot spring and that with a radon level more than 111 Bq/kg is a medical spring. Radon(222Rn) is a rare gas that easily diffuses in air. Therefore, to evaluate the exposure dose due
to radioactive spring usage, it is important to establish an easy and accurate method tomeasure radon concentration in air. The Guideline of Analytical Methods of Mineral Springs
requires that a liquid scintillation counter be used to measure radon in water. In this study,
the concentration of radon in air was analyzed using an activated charcoal detector (PICORAD) and a liquid scintillation counter (ALOKA LSC LB-5) in order to validate and promote
the widespread use of the measurement method. The measurements were done at threewindow settings of 20-2,000, 40-2,000 and 60-2,000 keV and a counting rate of 0-2,000 keV
was extrapolated from these values. This study used DPO (2,5-diphenyloxazole)＋POPOP(1,4-bis(5-phenyl-2-oxazolyl)benzene) toluene solution and Insta-Fluor Plus as a liquid
scintillator. Based on the measured spectrum, we determined that it was possible to set theappropriate window width for validation of the liquid scintillator and for calculation of theconversion coefficient and detection limit. Our results indicated that both liquid scintillators
provided quantitatively satisfactory results, and the conversion coefficients were 1.55 for
DPO＋POPOP toluene solution and 1.70 for Insta-Fluor Plus.
Key words : radon, liquid scintillation counter, activated charcoal detector, radioactive springs

1.

Introduction

Radon (222Rn) is a radioactive element derived from the earth and is a chemically inert raregas. Based on the Japanese Hot Springs Law (HSL) (Government of Japan, 1948) and the
Guideline of Analytical Methods of Mineral Springs of Japan (GAMM) (revised) (Ministry of theEnvironment of Japan, 2002), a spring is considered a “hot spring” when 1 kg of the spring water
has a radon level ≧74 Bq (20×10－10 Ci, 5.5 Mache). Similarly, if 1 kg of spring water has a radonlevel ≧111 Bq (30×10－10 Ci, 8.25 Mache), the spring is considered to be a “medical hot spring”
with “radioactive hot spring” properties. According to the notification article (Ministry of theEnvironment, Nature Conservation Bureau of Japan, 1982), bathing in a radioactive springusually helps to alleviate the effects of gout, arteriosclerosis, hypertension, chronic cholecystitis,
gallstones, chronic skin disease and chronic gynecologic diseases. Drinking such spring water
usually helps in treating gout, chronic digestive disorders, chronic cholecystitis, gallstones,
neuralgia, muscle pain and arthralgia.
Even since the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant accident of the Tokyo Electric Power
Company, there have been growing concerns over low radioactive exposure from the environment.
These concerns have led to a demand for reports ensuring the safe use of radioactive springs.
Some reports have appeared on the exposure dose and safety in usage of Rousoku Hot Springs
in Gifu Prefecture, Masutomi Hot Springs in Yamanashi Prefecture and Toriido Hot Springs near
Yunoyama in Mie Prefecture (Shimo et al., 2006 ; Horiuchi et al., 2007 ; Mori et al., 2012). For307

森 康則，村田 将，吉村英基，前田 明，澤田陽子，志村恭子，山口哲夫，多鹿優佳里，石川徹夫，安岡由美

温泉科学

example, Mori et al. (2012) performed a case study at a hot spring facility using a radioactive hotspring. According to their results, only 5.2-18.0% of radon was retained in bath water after it
was transported via a pipe from hot spring storage tanks to a bathtub. Furthermore, only 0.25%
of radon remained in the bath water after two days, likely because radioactive decay anddiffusion into the air increases as a result of bathing and recirculation filtering.
Furthermore, as mentioned above, as soon as water containing radon flows from the ground,
the radon is diffused into the air. Therefore, it is necessary to measure radon in the air atradioactive spring facilities to estimate the exposure dose. Hot spring water normally has muchhigher concentrations of radon than tap water, which is why radon in hot spring water is one of
the factors contributing to increased radon concentration in air (Yasuoka et al., 2008). The
method for measuring radon in water is well established in the GAMM ; however, currently
there is no official method for measuring radon in air. Several studies have reported on the useof activated charcoal detectors and liquid scintillation counters for a concentration analysis ofradon in air (Tokuyama and Izumi, 1992 ; Passo and Cook., 1994 ; Koga et al., 1996 ; Iimoto et al.,2005) ; however, this method is highly dependent on the equipment, the model, and manufacturerof the liquid scintillation counter.
The present study focuses on these issues and investigates a suitable analytical method formeasuring the concentration of radon in air using an activated charcoal detector and a liquid
scintillation counter.

2.
2. 1

Methods

Exposure conditions in a radon chamber
At the National Institute of Radiological Sciences (NIRS), investigations regarding thecrosscheck measurements of radon and thoron are regularly carried out (e.g., Janik et al., 2009).
The crosscheck investigation conducted in 2011 had participants from 21 countries and 31
organizations.

This investigation was the 4 th International Intercomparison Exercise ofDiscriminative Radon/Thoron Detectors 2011, hereafter referred to as the “Intercomparison
NIRS 2011.” The results of that investigation have been explained in detail elsewhere (Janik etal., 2012).
For the present study, exposure of the detector in the radon chamber at NIRS was carriedout in the same manner as was done for Intercomparison NIRS 2011. The exposure conditionsin the radon chamber are listed in Table 1. An experiment on the window width setting was
carried out in a simplified radon chamber at the Kobe Pharmaceutical University.
2. 2

Measurement conditions and reagentsThis study used a PICO-RADTM radon detector (manufactured by AccuStar Labs) (hereafterreferred to as “detector”) to collect the radon in the air. The detector is a type that adsorbs
radon onto activated charcoal (Fig. 1), providing convenient handling, and high versatility.
Furthermore, a liquid scintillation counter (Hitachi Aloka Medical, Ltd., ALOKA LSC LB-5,
hereafter referred to as LSC) was also used. The measurement conditions and reagents used inthis study are listed as follows :308

第 62 巻（2013）

活性炭型検出器と液体シンチレーションカウンタを用いた空気中ラドンの測定
Table 1 Exposure conditions in the radon chamber andmeasurement data using the liquid scintillation counter.
Items

Value

Exposure start (t1)Exposure stop (t2)Exposure time (h)Radon concentration (Bq/m3)
Temperature (℃)
Relative humidity (%)
Absolute humidity (g/m3)
Air pressure (hPa)18/Aug/2011
22/Aug/2011
100
1,022±5921.6±0.1
57.8±0.3
11.0±0.1
1,007±3

Adding liquid scintillator (t3)Measuring at random (t4)24/Aug/2011
24/Aug ─ 13/Sep/2011

Netcps (maximum)

8.061）
6.382）

Netcps (minimum)

0.05093）0.1394）

1）

DPO＋POPOP solution, t4－t3＝0.52d
Insta-Fluor Plus, t4－t3＝1.01d
3）
DPO＋POPOP solution, t4－t3＝19.95d
4）Insta-Fluor Plus, t4－t3＝19.10d
2）(1) LSC measurement conditions
Measuring time : 10 min
Background correction : yes
Temperature : 15℃
Calculation method : integral bias method
TRIPLE(20-2,000 keV, 40-2,000 keV, 60-2,000 keV)(2) Reagents and liquid scintillators
Reagents :DPO : 2,5-diphenyloxazole(Wako Pure Chemical Industries, Ltd.)POPOP : 1,4-bis(5-phenyl-2-oxazolyl)benzene(Wako Pure Chemical Industries, Ltd.)
Toluene : for the scintillator(Wako Pure Chemical Industries, Ltd.)
Liquid Scintillators :① DPO＋POPOP toluene solution : DPO (20 g) and POPOP(0.5 g) were dissolved in 1,000 mL of toluene to prepare
the scintillator ; after adsorption of the detector, 15 mLof the liquid scintillator was added, as soon as possible,
to the detector.

Fig. 1 Schematic drawing and crosssectional views of the PICO-RAD,
activated charcoal radon detector(Iimoto et al., 2005).

309

森 康則，村田 将，吉村英基，前田 明，澤田陽子，志村恭子，山口哲夫，多鹿優佳里，石川徹夫，安岡由美

温泉科学② Insta-Fluor Plus : for the scintillator (PerkinElmer Japan Co., Ltd.) ; after adsorption of thedetector, 15 mL of the liquid scintillator was added, as soon as possible, to the detector.
Measurements were performed using the LSC while repeatedly changing the type of liquid
scintillator in order to determine the effect of different measurement conditions on themeasurement values and to determine the attenuation of the measurement values.
2. 3

Calculation of radon concentration
t1 was the starting time of exposure and t2 was the ending time of exposure in the radon

chamber at NIRS. After the exposure, the detector was brought in as soon as possible, added to
the liquid scintillator, and measurements were taken using the LSC. t3 was the time at which
the liquid scintillator was added, and the measurement time was t4.
With the results obtained from the measurement using the LSC, the net count per second(netcps) was converted into radon concentration according to Eq. (1) (Passo and Floeckher, 1991 ;Shefsky, 1998).
RnPBq#m 3Q/netcps-

0.693-Pt 4,t 2Q
1
-exp
3.825
0.7264r

1

1

� 1,exp ,Pt ,t Q - 1,exp ,Pt ,t Q -1-37-A …⑴r 18#24 �
r 2#24 �
2

1

4

3

netcps : net count per second
t1 : starting time of exposure in the radon chamber

2.71
B
N DL/
+4.65time of exposure in the radon chamber
t2 : ending
t
t

r

 �

t3 : Adding time of the liquid scintillator

t4 : measurement time using the liquid scintillation counterA : conversion coefficient
The constants in Eq. (1) are as follows : The unit of time is d (for day). The main constant is
0.7264 ; this constant should be expressed in units of counts per second per picocurie per liter[cps/(pCi/L)]. The main constant should be changed because the method in this study wasdifferent from the method that was required by the PICO-RAD detector system (Passo and
Floeckher, 1991). The conversion coefficient “A” was determined in this study. 1 pCi/L isequivalent to 37 Bq/m3. The decay constant is the half-life of 222Rn (3.825 d). The absorb constant(18 h) is inversely proportional to the speed with which radon diffuses into the activated charcoal
in the vial. The elute constant (2 h) is inversely proportional to the speed with which thescintillator elutes radon from the activated charcoal and the speed with which radon in the
scintillator establishes radioactive equilibrium with the decay products of 222Rn.

3.
3. 1

Results and Discussion

Validation of window width setting
A wide-range measurement spectrum from the low-energy region to the high-energy region,i.e., from 0 to 700 keV, is shown in Fig. 2. The measurement spectrum from 0 to 100 keV, which
considers only the low-energy region with a noise area, is shown in Fig. 3. The measurement
conditions were as follows : liquid scintillator of DPO＋POPOP toluene solution and ameasurement time of 10 minutes.
310

第 62 巻（2013）

活性炭型検出器と液体シンチレーションカウンタを用いた空気中ラドンの測定

Fig. 2 PICO-RAD measurement spectrum (0-700 keV) for radon of a liquid scintillation counterusing a toluene scintillator (DPO+POPOP).

Fig. 3 PICO-RAD measurement spectrum (0-100 keV) for radon of a liquid scintillation counterusing a toluene scintillator (DPO+POPOP).

As shown in Fig. 2, in the high-energy region, the region from about 250 keV to about 620
keV was named the α ray region, and this region showed a peak for radon attributable to its
daughter nuclides including 218Po and 214Po. On the other hand, as shown in Fig. 3, in the lowenergy region, the noise region was observed to be below about 18 keV.
It is important to avoid the low-energy noise region and the high-energy α ray region in311

森 康則，村田 将，吉村英基，前田 明，澤田陽子，志村恭子，山口哲夫，多鹿優佳里，石川徹夫，安岡由美

温泉科学

each window width setting when using the integral bias method. The measurement conditionsin this study involved three window settings at 20-2,000, 40-2,000 and 60-2,000 keV. With thesewindow settings, there was no overlap with the noise region or the α ray region, successfully
confirming that the settings were appropriate.
3. 2

Effect of time lapse on measurement values
Radon is a radioactive material with a half-life of 3.8 days. Thus, it is desirable to perform arapid measurement after the radon is absorbed onto the detector. However, since there arevarious factors involved, such as the transfer from the sampling site to the analysis laboratory,
the timing of adding the liquid scintillator, and radioactive equilibrium, it is necessary toinvestigate any consequent changes in the counting rate.
Thus, each coefficient of variation (CV% ; n＝5) of measurement values at the times thatelapsed (t4－t3) between adding the liquid scintillator (t3) and performing the measurement using
the LSC (t4) was determined. The results are shown in Fig. 4, and they demonstrate that ameasurement performed immediately after adding the liquid scintillator resulted in an unstable
quantitative value. The trend continued for about 20 h after adding the liquid scintillator.
Afterward, the quantitative value was stable and the coefficient of variation was also reduced.
In the GAMM, there are no specific values at which the measurement accuracy needs to be
maintained ; however, most values of the coefficient of variation in tap water analysis are set tobe within 10%, based on government recommendations (Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfareof Japan, 2003). In the present experiment, a coefficient of variation of more than 10% was due
to one of the following conditions : (1) the analysis was carried out within approximately 20 hFig. 4 Correlation between t4－t3 and the coefficient of variation (n＝5).  The X-axis shows
t4－t3 and the Y-axis shows the coefficient of variation (CV %).   t4－t3 indicates theperiod between the time when the liquid scintillator was added to the time of
measurement for radon using the liquid scintillation counter.

312第 62 巻（2013）

活性炭型検出器と液体シンチレーションカウンタを用いた空気中ラドンの測定

after adding the liquid scintillator ; (2) t4－t3 was more than 10 d (liquid scintillator : Insta-Fluor
Plus), or (3) t4－t3 was more than 14 d (liquid scintillator : DPO＋POPOP toluene solution). Thus,
it was concluded that measurements needed to be started 20 h after adding the liquid scintillator
and that they needed to be finished within a week of the addition.
3. 3

Detection limit from the background counting rate
0.693-Pt
1 were carried
1
1
Backgroundmeasurementsout by4,t
the2Qnew
RnPBq#m 3Q/netcps- detector, which was-not exposed-1-exp3.825,Pt 2,t 1Q,Pt 4,t 3Q
0.7264in a radon chamber. The measurements using DPO＋POPOP1,exp
toluene solution and 1,exp
Insta-Fluor
18#24
2#24
Plus as the liquid scintillator were carried out for 10 and 60 min, respectively.

r

�

r

�

r

The detection limit was calculated using Eq. (2) (American Society for Testing Materials,
1999).

B

2.71

r t +4.65 t � …………………………………………………………………………⑵N DL/

NDL : detection limit (cps)t : measurement time (s)B : background counting rate (BG cpm), which is converted to cps (cps)The results obtained using DPO＋POPOP toluene solution are listed in Table 2, and thoseobtained using Insta-Fluor Plus are given in Table 3.
If the measurement condition is the same as Intercomparison NIRS 2011, then the calculated
results reveal that with DPO＋POPOP toluene solution, the NDL for 10 min (600 s) of measurement
was 21 Bq/m3 at 0.0593 cps (3.55 cpm), and that for 60 min (3,600 s) was 8 Bq/m3 at 0.0237 cps (1.42
cpm). In contrast, when Insta-Fluor Plus was used, the NDL for 10 min (600 s) of measurement
was 23 Bq/m3 at 0.0590 cps (3.54 cpm), and that for 60 min (3,600 s) was 9 Bq/m3 at 0.0231 cps(1.38 cpm).
3. 4

Calculation of the conversion coefﬁcient from Intercomparison NIRS 2011
Exposure of the detector used in this study was carried out in the same manner as inIntercomparison NIRS 2011. For Intercomparison NIRS 2011, the reference value of the radon
concentration was obtained from the NIRS standard device, which was calibrated at anTable 2 Quantification limit of radon calculated
by quantitative analysis using DPO+POPOP
in toluene solution as the liquid scintillator.

Table 3 Quantification limit of radon calculated
by quantitative analysis using Insta-Fluor
Plus as the liquid scintillator.

t (s)

600

t (s)

3,600

t (s)

600

t (s)

3,600

BG (cps)BG (cpm)

0.0831
4.99

BG (cps)BG (cpm)

0.08785.27

BG (cps)BG (cpm)

0.08254.95

BG (cps)BG (cpm)

0.08284.97

NDL (cps)
NDL (cpm)
NDL (Bq/m3)

0.0593
3.55
21

NDL (cps)
NDL (cpm)
NDL (Bq/m3)

0.02371.42
8

NDL (cps)
NDL (cpm)
NDL (Bq/m3)

0.05903.54
23

NDL (cps)
NDL (cpm)
NDL (Bq/m3)

0.0231
1.38
9t : Measurement time using a liquid scintillation counter
BG : Background measurement results
NDL : Detection limit by the calculation based on Eq (2)t : Measurement time using a liquid scintillation counter
BG : Background measurement results
NDL : Detection limit by the calculation based on Eq (2)313�森 康則，村田 将，吉村英基，前田 明，澤田陽子，志村恭子，山口哲夫，多鹿優佳里，石川徹夫，安岡由美

温泉科学international standard radon facility (Ishimori et al., 2004). To convert the estimated value
obtained by Eq. (1) to the reference value, a conversion coefficient A was considered for eachmeasurement condition.
Calculation results showed a difference between the reference value obtained byIntercomparison NIRS 2011 and the measured value obtained for the measurement conditions
used in this study. The changing state of the time lapse (t4－t3) starting after adding the liquid
scintillator to the time of measurement using the LSC is shown in Fig. 5. Calculation results
showed that the value more than doubled after 8 days had elapsed for the DPO＋POPOP
toluene solution, and after 9 days had elapsed for Insta-Fluor Plus. This result showed that it
was best for measurements to be completed by the eighth day.
Furthermore, the lowest values of the conversion coefficient A out of the changing numbers
were 1.55 (DPO＋POPOP toluene solution) and 1.70 (Insta-Fluor Plus). Thus, using the DPO＋
POPOP toluene solution resulted in a slightly better retention of radon, but both liquid
scintillators provide quantitatively satisfactory results. The conversion coefficient applied in thisstudy could serve as a reference for the approximate value for the measurement conditions.
3. 5Comparison of this study and the previous method
Table 4 presents a comparison of the analytical items used in this study and those used in

the previous method (Passo and Cook, 1994). This study used the liquid scintillation counter
ALOKA LB-5, which had three photomultiplier tubes. The detection limit obtained from thisstudy was lower than that of the previous method. Therefore, when measurements using anactivated charcoal detector are performed under the conditions of this study, the observation ofradon concentration in air can be carried out more properly.

Fig. 5

314

Correlation between t4－t3 and the conversion coefficient for radon measurement.

第 62 巻（2013）

活性炭型検出器と液体シンチレーションカウンタを用いた空気中ラドンの測定

Table 4 Comparison of the analytical items for radon concentration in the air in this study andthe previous method.
Previous method1）

Items
Time of exposure in radon
chamber（t2－t1)

24-48 hLiquid scintillator

Insta-Fluor (discontinued）

This study
DPO＋POPOP toluene solution

Insta-Fluor Plus

100 h (at NIRS radon chamber)
DPO＋POPOP toluene solution

Insta-Fluor Plus

2）

Quantity of liquid scintillator

10 mL

Time of radon elution (t4－t3)

8 h-12d15 mL

LSC manufacturer ; model

PerkinElmer Life and Analytical Sciences Inc.
Tri-Carb Liquid Scintillation Counters

Hitachi Aloka Medical, Ltd.
ALOKA LB-5

LSC measurement range

25-900 keV

Integral bias method4）

Conversion coefficient (A)

1

1.55

1.70

Detection limit (Bq/m3)

below 11.1 Bq/m3

8 Bq/m3

9 Bq/m3

20 h3）-10d

20 h3）-10d1）

Passo and Cook (1994).
15 mL of liquid scintillator was the same quantity as used by Iimoto et al. (2005).
3）
Koga et al. (1996) reported that the time from days of adding the liquid scintillator to measurement days using the liquid
scintillation counter (t4－t3) should be more than 20 hours and the finding of this study was in agreement with that.
4）
Integral bias method is the radon-in-water analytical method based on the Guideline of Analytical Methods of Mineral
Springs (Ministry of the Environment of Japan, 2002).
2）

4. Conclusion
In this study, exposure of the activated charcoal detector (PICO-RAD) in the radon chamberat the National Institute of Radiological Sciences was carried out. Liquid scintillators, DPO＋
POPOP toluene solution and Insta-Fluor Plus, were added and an analysis was carried out ineach case using the ALOKA LB-5 liquid scintillation counter. The results are summarized asfollows :・Analysis of spectrum measurement values revealed that there was a noise region in the lowenergy region that was below 18 keV, and there was an α ray region from about 250 keV toabout 620 keV. Based on this finding, three points of energy from 20 to 100 keV should beconsidered when using the integral bias method with three windows settings, with an
extrapolation to 0 keV.
・From a validation experiment for the liquid scintillators (DPO＋POPOP toluene solution andInsta-Fluor Plus), a slight difference was found in radon retention ; however, both liquid
scintillators were found to provide quantitatively satisfactory results.
・By assuming the reference value from the crosscheck project of the National Institute ofRadiological Sciences to be the true value, the conversion coefficient was determined underthe measurement conditions (time of exposure in the radon chamber : 100 h, quantity of liquid
scintillator : 15 mL). The conversion coefficients were 1.55 for DPO＋POPOP toluene solution
and 1.70 for Insta-Fluor Plus.
・The most suitable timing of measurement was 1-5 days after adding the liquid scintillator.
Furthermore, measurements performed 10 days after adding the liquid scintillator resulted in
more than a 10% upward coefficient variation, which was not suitable for measurement.
315森 康則，村田 将，吉村英基，前田 明，澤田陽子，志村恭子，山口哲夫，多鹿優佳里，石川徹夫，安岡由美

温泉科学

Even since the nuclear accident at the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant of theTokyo Electric Power Company in March, 2011, there has been an unprecedented demand fromthe general public for data on environmental radioactivity. Radiation exposure is currently afocus of national attention, and the behavior of radon in air is considered one of the majorchange factors of natural radiation exposure. As a result, establishing a highly convenient andversatile analytical method for detecting radon in air is necessary to facilitate the spread ofreliable information on low exposure dose rates in the environment.
Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge a research grant from Japan Health & Research Institute. They would like to thank Dr. Hayasaka and Mr. Goto, who supported this research. In
addition, the authors gratefully acknowledge the editor and two anonymous reviewers, whose
valuable and helpful comments improved our manuscript.
References
American Society for Testing and Materials (1999) : ASTM D5072 ─ 98 Standard Test Method
for Radon in Drinking Water, 655-657.
Government of Japan (1948) : Hot Springs Law, Cabinet Order No. 125 of July 10, 1948 (inJapanese).
Horiuchi, K., Takizawa, H., Suzuki, A. and Kanroji, Y. (2007) : Radon concentration of the radioactive
spring area and the user’s radiation dose. Radiation Education, 11, 33-40 (in Japanese).
Iimoto, T., Tokonami, S., Morishita, Y. and Kosako, T. (2005) : Application of activated charcoal
radon collectors in high humidity environments. J. Environ. Radioactivity, 78, 69-76.
Ishimori, Y., Ishikawa, T. and Tokonami, S. (2004) : Radon intercomparison experiment at PTB in
Germany. Jpn. J. Health Phys., 39, 263-267.
Janik, M., Tokonami, S., Kovacs, T., Kavasi, N., Kranrod, C., Sorimachi, A., Takahashi, H., Miyahara,
N. and Ishikawa, T. (2009) : International intercomparisons of integrating radon detectors in
the NIRS radon chamber. Appl. Radiat. Isot., 67, 1691-1696.
Janik, M., Ishikawa, T., Omori, Y. and Kavashi, N. (2012) : Technical report on the 4th international
intercomparisons for integrating radon/thoron detectors with the NIRS radon/thoron
chambers. National Institute of Radiological Sciences, 1-33.
Koga, T., Inagaki, M., Morishita, H., Tanaka, Y., Nakanishi, A., Sasaki, N and Mifune, M. (1996) :Measurement of radon on Misasa district, Tottori pref. using the PICO-RAD detector and aliquid scintillation spectrometer (3). Ann. Rept. Kinki Univ. Atomic Energy Res. Inst., 33, 1123 (in Japanese with English abstract).
Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare of Japan (2003) : Notification Article No. 1010001 Oct. 10,
2003 (in Japanese).
Ministry of the Environment, Nature Conservation Bureau of Japan (1982) : Notification Article
No. 227 May 25, 1982 (in Japanese).
Ministry of the Environment of Japan (2002) : The Guideline of Analytical Methods of Mineral
Springs of Japan (revised) (in Japanese).
Mori, Y., Deguchi, A., Miwa, C., Iwasaki, Y., Suzumura, E., Maeda, K., Hamaguchi, H., Shimasaki,316

第 62 巻（2013）

活性炭型検出器と液体シンチレーションカウンタを用いた空気中ラドンの測定

H., Tanaka, N. and Kawamura, Y. (2012) : Exposed dose estimation due to radon concentrationin radioactive spring water in Mie prefecture. The Abstracts of 77th Annual Meeting of theJapanese Society of Balneology, Climatology and Physical Medicine, p. 87 (in Japanese).
Passo, C.J. Jr. and Cook, G.T. (1994) : Handbook of environmental liquid scintillation spectrometry :A compilation of theory and methods. Publ. No. PMC0387, Packard Bioscience Company.
Passo, C.J. Jr. and Floeckher, J.M. (1991) : The LSC approach to radon counting in air and water.
In Liquid Scintillation Counting and Organic Scintillators, ed. Ross, H., Noakes, J., andSpaulding, J. D. Lewis Publishers, 375-384.
Shimo, M., Oyaizu, S., Tokonami, S., Kitamura, K., Ejiri, K. and Minami K. (2006) : Radon concentrationin air and water and tentative dose estimation in a hot spring hotel of Gifu Prefecture. J. Hot
Spring Sci., 55, 177-187 (in Japanese with English abstract).
Shefsky, S. (1998) : Calibration constants for PICO-RAD radon-in-air sampling vials. The Leader
in Portable X ray technology.
Tokuyama, H. and Izumi, A. (1992) : Determination of Radon Concentration in Air with PICORADTM Detector. Annual Report of Fukui Prefectural Institute of Public Health, 31, 95-97 (inJapanese).
Yasuoka, Y., Ishikawa, T., Tokonami, S., Takahashi, H., Narazaki, Y. and Shinogi, M. (2008) : A casestudy on the effect of water from groundwater sources on indoor radon levels. J. Radioanal.
Nucl. Chem., 275, 165-172.
(A part of this study was presented at the 65th Annual Meeting of the Japanese Society of
Hot Spring Sciences on September 27, 2012)317