March 21, 2007

Mr. 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 March 1, 2007. The purpose of this meeting was

to review and discuss the status of Arizona’s Agreement State Program. The NRC was

represented by me and Randy Erickson from NRC’s Region IV office. 

I have completed and enclosed a general meeting summary, including any specific actions

resulting from the discussions. 

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) 860-8116 or

e-mail MLM1@NRC.GOV to discuss your concerns.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Linda McLean

Regional State Agreements Officer

Enclosure:

As stated

cc w/encl

Janet Schlueter, Director
Arizona Radiation Regulatory Agency

bcc: (via ADAMS e-mail distribution):

LWert

CCain

LMcLean

RErickson

SMoore, FSME

AMcCraw, FSME

LBolling, FSME

ADAMS: :Yes 9No Initials: _mlm_____ 

:Publicly Available 9Non-Publicly Available 9Sensitive :Non-Sensitive

DOCUMENT NAME: draft: C:\FileNet\ML070811130.wpd 

Final: ltrs-memos\ 

RIV:RSAO

LMcLean

/RA/

03/ 21 /07

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY T=Telephone E=E-mail F=Fax
PERIODIC MEETING SUMMARY FOR ARIZONA

DATE OF MEETING: March 1, 2007

ATTENDEES:

State NRC

Aubrey Godwin, Director

William Wright, Program Manager

Linda McLean, Regional State Agreements

Officer

Randy Erickson, Regional State Agreements

Officer

DISCUSSION: 

The Arizona Radiation Regulatory Agency (Agency) is a cabinet-level agency. The Director is

appointed by the Governor. The Agency is responsible for the conduct of a statewide

radiological health and safety program, and consists of five program areas: Radioactive

Materials/Non-Ionizing Radiation (RAM), X-ray Compliance (X-ray), Radiation Measurements

Laboratory (Lab), Emergency Response, and The Medical Radiologic Technology Board of

Examiners. The Agency has approximately 380 material licensees. 

The last Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program (IMPEP) Review was conducted

during the week of February 6-10, 2006. the review team found Arizona’s performance to be

unsatisfactory for the performance indicator, Status of Materials Inspection Program;

satisfactory but needs improvement for the performance indicator, Technical Staffing and

Training; and satisfactory for the five remaining performance indicators. Accordingly, the

review team recommended and the MRB agreed in finding the Arizona Agreement State

Program to be adequate, but needs improvement, and compatible with NRC's program. 

Because of the finding of unsatisfactory for the performance indicator, Status of Materials

Inspection Program, the MRB expressed concern that without adequate staffing levels and

proper knowledge transfer the Agency will continue to get further behind in inspections and,

over time, the quality of inspections will decline. The MRB stated that adequate funding and

support is essential to maintenance of a healthy program, which can ensure that staffing levels

are appropriate to guarantee inspections of radioactive material licensees are completed in a

timely manner and that the existing backlog be diminished. Adequate funding will also ensure

that new staff will be trained and qualified in a reasonable time frame and that high quality staff

will be attracted and retained. 

Status of State’s actions to address all open previous IMPEP review findings and/or open

recommendations.

1. The review team recommends that the Agency develop and implement a staffing plan to

fill the current vacancy, meet growing Program needs and maintain long-term stability. 

Current Status: Four positions (two x-ray, one materials, one laboratory) have been

filled since the last review, and the positions are funded. Four additional positions have

been requested for the FY 2008 - 2009 budget (two x-ray, two materials). The Program

Manager (William Wright) is retiring at the end of June 2007, and another senior staff

will retire at the end of 2007. The Agency is facing considerable staffing issues, both
-2-

present and future. The Agency is experiencing difficulty in qualifying and retaining staff. 

The Agency’s low starting salaries have made it difficult to recruit and retain individuals

with radiation protection experience. 

. 

2. The review team recommends that the Agency take appropriate measures to conduct

core inspections (including initial inspections) in accordance with the inspection priority

schedule in MC 2800, and conduct reciprocity inspections in accordance with MC 1220. 

Current Status: The 2006 IMPEP team found that there were a significant number of

overdue core inspections and core inspections completed overdue. Also, inspection of

reciprocity licensees were not being conducted as required. Since that review, the

Agency has made an effort to prioritize inspections based on their inspection frequency. 

The plan is to first inspect broad medical, industrial radiography, nuclear pharmacy,

distribution licensees, and initial inspections, and to complete the 13 increased controls

inspections. The Agency has been successful in completing these types of licenses,

and also all of the increased controls inspections have been completed. However,

approximately 187 priority 2-3 license inspections are overdue. 

The Agency has initiated actions to seek programming assistance from the Arizona

Government Information Technology Agency to enable them to improve the program

database. One of the main purposes for this measure is to be able to track and conduct

core inspections (including initial inspection) in accordance with the inspection priority

schedule in MC 2800, and to perform reciprocity inspections in accordance with MC

1220. The new database may be completed by June 2007. 

3. 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. 

Current Status: The Agency determined that 20 licensees require financial assurance

(14 have been completed). The remainder of the licenses will include financial

assurance commitments by the end of 2007.

4. The review team recommends that the Agency develop a process that allows for the

adoption of NRC regulations within the three-year time frame. 

Current Status: The State Regulation Status (SRS) data sheet was reviewed. It was

noted that several proposed regulations have been reviewed by the NRC, but the final

rules have not been submitted to the NRC for review. Additionally, several final rules

reviewed by the NRC had comments to be incorporated into the final promulgated

regulation. It was requested that the Agency submit the proposed and final regulations

to the NRC using FSME Procedure SA-201 as a guide. 

The Agency is having some difficulty keeping up with the NRC regulation changes. For

each regulation, the Agency must describe the effectiveness of the regulation and

provide the statutory authority under which the regulation is issued. The Agency must

also demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with other Agency regulations, and

that the regulation is clear and understandable. 
-3-

5. The review team recommends that the Agency develop and implement a process to

ensure that during routine inspections the QA/QC requirements in the SS&D registry

sheets are being implemented by the manufacturer. 

Current Status: The Agency has added the QA/QC requirements in the SS&D registry

sheets to the inspection form. This should ensure that during routine inspections the

QA/QC requirements are reviewed for compliance. 

Strengths and/or weaknesses of the State program as identified by the State or NRC including

identification of actions that could diminish weaknesses. 

a. Program Strengths: During this review period there has been no turn-over of

staff, and the program hired four additional staff members. 

b. Program Weaknesses: The Agency is experiencing difficulty in qualifying and

retaining staff. The Agency’s low starting salaries have made it difficult to recruit

and retain individuals with radiation protection experience. 

Feedback on NRC’s program as identified by the State and including identification of any action

that should be considered by NRC: 

It was suggested that the NRC revise the SRS data sheet to make it more useful for the

regulation writer. For example, the sheet should include an internet link to the new or

changed regulation and to the Statements of Consideration. 

The Agency stated that they support the use of global positioning systems for increased

controls licensees (radiographers and portable gauges).

Status of State Program including: Topics were discussed in the first section of this report.

Event Reporting, including follow-up and closure information in NMED: 

All events required to be reported into the NMED database have been submitted, and

the records have been closed and completed when applicable. 

Response to Incidents and Allegations: 

No allegations were referred to the Agency during this review period. 

Schedule for the next IMPEP review: 

This will be determined during the special Management Review Board (MRB) meeting.