October 2, 2003

Aubrey V. Godwin, Director

Arizona Radiation Regulatory Agency

4814 South 40th Street

Phoenix, AZ 85040

Dear Mr. Godwin:

A periodic meeting with Arizona was held on August 19, 2003. The purpose of this meeting

was to review and discuss the status of Arizona’s Agreement State Program. I have completed

and enclosed a general meeting summary, including any specific actions that will be taken as a

result of the meeting.

If you feel that our conclusions do not accurately summarize the meeting discussion, or have

any additional remarks about the meeting in general, please contact me at (817) 860-8143 or

e-mail VHC@NRC.GOV to discuss your concerns.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Vivian H. Campbell

Regional State Agreements Officer

Enclosure:

 Agreement State Periodic Meeting

 Summary for Arizona

cc w/enclosure:

Paul Lohaus, Director, OSTP
Aubrey Godwin -2-

bcc via e-mail ADAMS distribution:

E. Collins

L. McLean

V. Campbell

L. Bolling, OSTP

K. Schneider, OSTP

L. Rakovan, OSTP

W. Maier

C. Cain

DOCUMENT NAME: S:\DNMS\SAO\Periodic Meetings\2003\Arizona summary.wpd

final: s:\dnms\ltrs-memos\ 

To receive copy of document, indicate in box: "C" = Copy without enclosures "E" = Copy with enclosures "N" = No copy

OFFICE RIV:RSAO

NAME VHCampbell

/RA/

DATE 10/02/03

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
Enclosure 1 

AGREEMENT STATE PERIODIC MEETING SUMMARY FOR ARIZONA

DATE OF MEETING: August 19, 2003

ATTENDEES:

NRC

Vivian Campbell, Regional State Agreements Officer

Elmo Collins, Director, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region IV

Lloyd Bolling, Office of State and Tribal Programs

State of Arizona

Aubrey Godwin, Director, Arizona Radiation Regulatory Agency

William Wright, Program Manager, Radioactive Materials & Nonionizing Compliance

DISCUSSION:

The following is a summary of the meeting held in Phoenix, Arizona, on August 19, 2003,

between representatives of the NRC and the State of Arizona. During the meeting, the topics

suggested in the letter dated April 14, 2003, from Ms. Campbell to Mr. Godwin were discussed. 

The discussion pertaining to each topic is summarized below.

1. Action on Previous IMPEP Review Findings

The previous Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program (IMPEP) review

was conducted during the period February 25 - March 1, 2002. The status of the

recommendations outlined in Section 5.0 of the final IMPEP report were also discussed

and are summarized below. 

a. Recommendation: The review team recommends that the Agency review all

Arizona licenses to ascertain if they require financial assurance, and take

appropriate action on each affected license to ensure that all licenses meet the

State’s financial assurance requirements. (Section 3.4)

Current Status: The State has completed the review of their licenses and made the

appropriate changes to ensure that all licenses meet the State’s financial assurance

requirements.

It is recommended that this item be closed at the next IMPEP review.

b. Recommendation: The review team recommends that the Agency reexamine their

procedure for handling allegations, consider the key elements of procedures outlined

in NRC’s Management Directive 8.8, and incorporate the elements that are

appropriate for their program. (Section 3.5)
-2-

Current Status: The State informed the staff that they have examined the

procedures for handling allegations in NRC’s Management Directive 8.8. They are

working on a draft procedure and expect to have it completed by the end of the year.

It is recommended that this item be reviewed at the next IMPEP review.

c. Recommendation: The review team recommends that the Program submit legally

binding requirements to NRC for review. (Section 4.1.2)

Current Status: As of the date of this periodic meeting, the State has not submitted

any legally binding requirements for NRC review. The status of the State’s

regulations is discussed in detail in Item 8 of this summary.

It is recommended that this item be reviewed at the next IMPEP review.

d. Recommendation: The review team recommends that the Agency review its

procedures to improve the timeliness in incorporating new rule changes into their

regulatory program, including immediately addressing the reporting requirements for

generally licensed device distributors which was due by August 16, 2001. 

(Section 4.1.2)

Current Status: Agency management described the State’s current legislative

process. Because of the length of time it takes for a regulation to become law and

the Sunset review process by the State Legislature, the Agency has been

challenged in some cases to adopt new rule changes. 

It is recommended that this item be reviewed at the next IMPEP review.

e. Recommendation: The review team recommends that the Agency make correction

to the SS&D registration certificates Nos. AZ-244-D-101-S and AZ-244-D-102-S. 

(Section 4.2.1)

Current Status: The State issued new registration certificates for both devices.

It is recommended that this item be closed at the next IMPEP review.

f. Recommendation: The review team recommends that the Agency establish

qualification requirements for SS&D reviewers and develop a formalized, written

training program. (Section 4.2.2)

Current Status: The State has not developed a formalized, written training program

for SS&D reviewers. However, the State currently has two staff registered for the

September 22-26, 2003, Sealed Source & Device Evaluation Workshop in Los

Angeles, California. 

It is recommended that this item be reviewed at the next IMPEP review.
-3-

2. Strengths and Weaknesses of the Program

Program strengths: 

Agency management identified the Radiation Measurement Laboratory as a strength of

the program. In general, the Agency has qualified and experienced staff. 

Program weaknesses: 

Program funding continues to be an challenge for the Agency. The Agency had a

17 percent budget cut for fiscal year 2003. For six weeks during the last two fiscal

years, the Agency ran out of travel funds and staff performed inspections without being

reimbursed for travel expenses. During the last budget process, the State Legislature

appropriated a budget for one year instead of the normal projected two year cycle.

Currently, the Agency does not have a budget after July 2004. 

In addition, Agency management expects significant staff turnover, including program

managers, within the next five years due to staff retirements. At the time of the periodic

meeting, the Agency had one vacancy in the radioactive materials program, two

vacancies in the laboratory and three vacancies in the x-ray program. Since the periodic

meeting, Agency management informed the Region that they have another vacancy in

the materials program due to the loss of a staff member to another Agreement State

program.

Agency management also discussed the lack of depth in the emergency response

organization. The program currently does not have enough personnel to staff a second

shift in order to respond to a major emergency event.

3. State Feedback on NRC’s Program

Agency management generally complemented NRC staff on actions taken on technical

issues. However, management expressed disagreement that NRC retains the common

defense and security authority in Agreement States. Agency management believes that

many of the compensatory measures are also measures which are used to ensure

safety. 

4. Recent or Pending State Program Changes

There are no pending State program changes with regard to reorganization and

distribution of responsibilities. As discussed earlier, Agency funding has been a

challenge because of the 17 percent budget cut in fiscal year 2003. However, the State

could not identify any areas where health and safety were compromised. The State

Legislature has requested that the Agency evaluate the steps that would need to be

taken in order for the program to become 100 percent fee funded. 
-4-

 5. NRC Program or Policy Changes That Could Impact Agreement States

Ms. Campbell, Mr. Collins, and Mr. Bolling discussed the Region IV organization,

security issues and NRC rulemaking and guidance development, specifically Part 35

and IMC 2800. Ms. Campbell assisted the State in accessing the NMED web page and

also showed the staff how to generate NMED reports.

6. Internal Program Audits or Self Assessments

Agency management has staff meetings on a weekly basis to discuss the status of

tasks that need to be completed. The Agency currently has no backlogs in inspection or

licensing. Management performs inspector accompaniments two times per year and

reviews all licensing and compliance actions. The Agency is required to report

timeliness statistics to the Legislature once a year. 

7. Status of Allegations Referred by NRC to the State

Two allegations were referred to the State by Region IV during the period. The State

has followed up on both allegations. 

8. Compatibility of Arizona Rules and Regulations

The State submitted four proposed amendments, dated June 30, 2001, for review and

comment. These amendments were received by NRC on May 21, 2003. The proposed 

amendments covered Radiography (Part 34), License Termination (Part 20),

Respiratory Protection (Part 20) and Well Logging (Part 39) NRC regulations required

for compatibility. As a result of this review, seven comments were developed. We also

reviewed the State’s response to our May 31, 2002 letter covering our review of Arizona

equivalent amendments to NRC Parts 20 and 34 regulations. We found that four of our

comments were not addressed. A comment letter, dated June 27, 2003, was sent to the

State and we are expecting a response soon. 

Additionally, the State was advised that if regulations or program requirements are

addressed by "Legally Binding Requirements" (LBRs), a copy of the LBR should be sent

to NRC.

9. Nuclear Material Events Database (NMED)

The State currently reports significant events to NRC’s Operations Center. The State’s

process appears to be effective for initially reporting events. The NRC staff requested

that routine and follow up event information be provided to the NMED on a monthly

basis and that events be closed out in the NMED system. The State agreed to close out

all events. 

10. Schedule for next IMPEP Review

The next IMPEP is scheduled for fiscal year 2006.