The Evidence
Resources
Clinician AssessmentGet Your Risk Score FAQs Admin ToolkitMembers Economic Impact Research ArticlesMembers SIRP 2025 WebinarMembers Videos
Guidelines
What is ALARA+? US Guidelines International Guidelines News Is Not Here About Contact Donate
Join Free

Please double-check this information. This is an ORSIF research summary, researched November 3, 2026. It is not comprehensive and not always accurate: rules change, and answers may be incomplete, out of date or wrong. It is education, not legal advice. Not yet reviewed by a regulatory expert. Confirm each requirement at the source linked beside the answer, with the state program and with your facility's radiation safety officer. How this was made

In brief

ORSIF's research identified the California Department of Public Health (CDPH), Radiologic Health Branch (RHB) as the agency that regulates X-ray and fluoroscopy equipment in California. California is a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Agreement State: it has signed an agreement with the NRC to regulate certain radioactive materials itself.

CDPH's Radiologic Health Branch regulates X-ray in California. Staff ALARA and dose limits come from 17 CCR § 30253, which adopts 10 CFR Part 20 as of January 1, 2021 and applies it to all users, including X-ray registrants; an NRC change would not carry over automatically. Fluoroscopy staff likely to be exposed to 5 mR/hr or more must wear aprons of at least 0.25 mm lead equivalent, and drapes and panels may not substitute for them. The rules are silent on thyroid shields, eyewear, apron inspection and engineered shielding. Only permit holders may operate fluoroscopy, and each must pass an exam or training, with continuing education (CE) required for renewal. The federal numeric limits were not verified by this research, and most rule text comes from Cornell LII, a secondary source.

The rules, question by question

Every answer names the rule it comes from. Open "Rule text and source" to read the citation, the source page and, where it could be matched, the exact wording.

Where the rules live

Which rules apply, and whether ALARA is among them.

Is California an NRC Agreement State?

Yes

Yes. Based on the NRC Agreement State list (updated 2026-10-29).

Rule text and source
Rule
NRC list of Agreement States, updated October 29, 2026
Source
nrc.gov

Why this matters, in ORSIF's FAQs

Which rules cover X-ray and fluoroscopy equipment in California?

YesCheck the source

General radiation protection: 17 CCR § 30253 (Group 3, Subchapter 4; scope § 30252). Medical X-ray: Group 3, Article 4, starting at § 30305, plus § 30305.5 and § 30307. Operator rules: Subchapter 4.5, starting at § 30400. Text was read on Cornell LII (secondary); Cornell's heading for § 30305 appears mislabeled. § 30253 was last amended operative 7-1-2022.

Rule text and source
Rule
17 CCR §§ 30252, 30253, 30305, 30307
Source
law.cornell.edu
law.cornell.edu

Why this matters, in ORSIF's FAQs

Does California require X-ray users to keep doses as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA)?

YesCheck the source

Yes, by adoption. § 30253 adopts 10 CFR 20.1001-20.2402; 20.1101 (ALARA) falls in that range and is not excepted. "Licensee" is replaced by "User," which includes X-ray registrants. The text of 20.1101 itself was not read. The X-ray rules' "as low as is practicable" wording (§ 30307(a)(7)(A)) concerns the beam exposure rate at the patient, not staff doses.

Where ALARA lives in California: Only in a rule shared with radioactive materials. The staff ALARA duty comes from the general § 30253 adoption of 10 CFR 20, which applies to "Users" (both radioactive-materials licensees and X-ray registrants). No X-ray-specific staff ALARA language was found. Because the adoption is fixed at January 1, 2021, an NRC change would not apply automatically; CDPH would have to amend § 30253. (17 CCR §§ 30100(z), 30253(a)(5), 30305(a)(1))

Rule text and source
Rule
17 CCR § 30253(a)(1), (a)(6); § 30100(z)
Source
law.cornell.edu
law.cornell.edu

Why this matters, in ORSIF's FAQs

Dose limits

The annual limits for workers, written in millisieverts (mSv). Ten mSv equal one rem.

What is the annual whole-body dose limit in California?

YesLess certain

Federal 10 CFR 20.1201 is adopted as of 2021 and applies to any source of ionizing radiation. The standard federal figure is 5 rem (50 mSv) per year total effective dose equivalent (TEDE), but this number was not verified by this research.

Rule text and source
Rule
17 CCR § 30253(a), (a)(5)
Source
law.cornell.edu
What it says
With respect to dose limits and reporting requirements, the term "Licensed material" is to be construed broadly in context to include any source of ionizing radiation subject to the requirements of this subchapter.
This quote was matched word for word to the source page.

Why this matters, in ORSIF's FAQs

What is the annual eye-lens dose limit in California?

UnclearLess certain

Federal 10 CFR 20.1201 is adopted. The standard federal figure is 15 rem (150 mSv) per year, but this number was not verified by this research. No lower California lens limit was found.

Rule text and source
Rule
17 CCR § 30253(a), (a)(5)
Source
law.cornell.edu

Why this matters, in ORSIF's FAQs

What is the annual limit for the skin, hands and feet in California?

UnclearLess certain

Federal 10 CFR 20.1201 is adopted. The standard federal figure is 50 rem (500 mSv) per year, but this number was not verified by this research.

Rule text and source
Rule
17 CCR § 30253(a), (a)(5)
Source
law.cornell.edu

Why this matters, in ORSIF's FAQs

What limit applies to a declared pregnant worker in California?

UnclearLess certain

Federal 10 CFR 20.1208 is adopted. The standard federal figure is 0.5 rem (5 mSv) over the pregnancy for the embryo/fetus of a declared pregnant worker, but this number was not verified by this research.

Rule text and source
Rule
17 CCR § 30253(a), (a)(5)
Source
law.cornell.edu

Why this matters, in ORSIF's FAQs

Dosimeters

When a worker must wear a dosimeter, and where.

When must a worker in California wear a dosimeter?

UnclearLess certain

Federal 10 CFR 20.1502 is adopted (not excepted). The commonly published trigger is a worker likely to receive more than 10% of a limit, but this was not verified by this research. No California-specific X-ray badging threshold was found.

Rule text and source
Rule
17 CCR § 30253(a)
Source
law.cornell.edu
What it says
are hereby incorporated by reference with the following exceptions
This quote was matched word for word to the source page.

Why this matters, in ORSIF's FAQs

Where must the dosimeter be worn in California when a protective apron is worn?

Not foundCheck the source

not found. No badge-location rule, two-badge method or approved effective-dose formula was found. Under the adopted federal rule, a regulator-approved method would mean a CDPH-approved method, but no CDPH approval of a specific method was found.

Rule text and source
Rule
17 CCR § 30253(a)(2)
Source
law.cornell.edu

Why this matters, in ORSIF's FAQs

Aprons and alternatives

Protective apparel, how it is checked, and whether other systems are addressed.

Must staff in California fluoroscopy rooms wear protective aprons or other apparel?

In part

Aprons of at least 0.25 mm lead equivalent are required for everyone in the fluoroscopy room except the patient who is likely to be exposed to 5 mR/hr or more (in place since 10-1-2020). Drapes and panels of at least 0.25 mm lead equivalent are required whenever practicable. Thyroid shields and eyewear are not addressed.

Rule text and source
Rule
17 CCR § 30307(b)(1)
Source
law.cornell.edu
What it says
Protective aprons of at least 0.25 mm lead equivalent shall be worn in the fluoroscopy room by each person, except the patient, whose body is likely to be exposed to 5 mR/hr or more.
This quote was matched word for word to the source page.

Why this matters, in ORSIF's FAQs

Does California require protective aprons to be inspected?

Not foundLess certain

not found. § 30307 has no apron inspection requirement; hospital inspection programs are facility policy, not state rules.

Rule text and source
Rule
17 CCR § 30307 (silent)
Source
law.cornell.edu

Why this matters, in ORSIF's FAQs

Do the rules in California address engineered protection systems used in place of aprons?

UnclearLess certain

Engineered shielding systems are not addressed. Drapes and panels "shall not substitute" for an apron. The apron duty applies only at 5 mR/hr or more, but the rule does not say whether a system keeping exposure below that level removes the duty. § 30305(a)(2) allows "equivalent protection through other means" for existing installations, but it is not written about aprons. The topic was presented at the RTCC on April 8, 2026; no rule proposal followed.

Rule text and source
Rule
17 CCR §§ 30307(a)(11), 30305(a)(2); RTCC agenda 2026-04-08
Source
law.cornell.edu
cdph.ca.gov
What it says
Such devices shall not substitute for wearing of a protective apron.
This quote was matched word for word to the source page.

About ALARA+

Who operates the equipment

Who may use fluoroscopy equipment and what training the rules ask for.

Who may operate fluoroscopy equipment in California?

YesCheck the source

Only permit holders may operate. Physicians, osteopaths, podiatrists and chiropractors need a fluoroscopy S&O permit (§ 30463); radiologists may instead hold a radiology S&O certificate (§ 30466). Certified technologists need an RTF permit and work under a licentiate's supervision (§§ 30450, 30461). PAs need a PA fluoroscopy permit and work under an S&O-permitted physician (§ 30456.1). Unpermitted people may move the patient or equipment but may not energize the beam or select technique (§ 30305.5). No NP pathway was found.

Rule text and source
Rule
17 CCR §§ 30463, 30461, 30450, 30456.1, 30305.5
Source
regulations.justia.com
law.cornell.edu

Why this matters, in ORSIF's FAQs

What training or credentials does California require to operate fluoroscopy equipment?

YesLess certain

Licentiates must pass a CDPH-approved fluoroscopy exam (ACBR-certified chiropractors exempt); a secondary source says renewal needs 10 CE credits every 2 years, at least 4 in fluoroscopy radiation safety (§ 30403(b), not read directly). A temporary permit has been available since December 15, 2022. Technologists must be certified, complete permit school or have American Registry of Radiologic Technologists (ARRT) credentials, and pass CDPH exams. PAs need at least 40 hours of coursework plus supervised clinical training, and 10 CE hours every 2 years.

Rule text and source
Rule
17 CCR §§ 30466(a)(2), 30451(a), 30456.4(b)(1), 30403(b)
Source
law.cornell.edu
law.cornell.edu
fluorosafety.com
What it says
For the fluoroscopy supervisor and operator permit, pass a Department approved examination in fluoroscopy radiation protection and safety, and use and supervision of use of fluoroscopy and ancillary equipment.
This quote was matched word for word to the source page.

Why this matters, in ORSIF's FAQs

Changes on the way, and recent ones

Rules, bills and guidance the research found from 2025 and 2026, with the ones that touch fluoroscopy teams first.

  • BillAB 511 (radiologist assistants)

    Held in committee May 23, 2025; one tracking site lists it as failed (last action February 2, 2026)

    Bill on radiologist assistants.

    Source: legiscan.com

  • BillAB 460

    Status not confirmed

    Changes "direct supervision" for technologists doing venipuncture.

  • OtherRTCC April 8, 2026 meeting items

    No outcome found (Apr 8, 2026)

    Agenda included a SCAI presentation on modern radiation shielding tools and a CDPH item on what counts as supervision by certified supervisors and operators.

    Source: cdph.ca.gov

Also worth knowing

  • § 30253 adopts 10 CFR 20 as of January 1, 2021, so it is insulated from automatic federal change; it is shared between X-ray registrants and radioactive-materials licensees.
  • Facilities must record cumulative air kerma (or fluoroscopy time) for each patient and keep it 3 years (§ 30307(c)).
  • Users must ensure only adequately instructed operators run X-ray equipment (§ 30305(b)(1)).
  • Each facility must display its operators' certificates or permits (§ 30305(e)).
  • Room barrier design is tied to the federal dose limits (§ 30305(a)(5)).
  • The newest fluoroscopy rule changes found were operative 10-1-2020.

What ORSIF could not confirm

Questions the research could not settle. If you know the answer, tell us.

  • Check 10 CFR 20.1101, 20.1201, 20.1208 and 20.1502 at eCFR, using the version in force on January 1, 2021.
  • Check the official California code on Westlaw for amendments after 2022, and confirm the correct heading for § 30305.
  • Check CDPH's Radiation Safety and Protection Program Requirement Guidance (9/4/2024) and 17 CCR §§ 30254-30258 for dosimeter rules: https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CEH/DRSEM/CDPH%20Document%20Library/RHB/X-ray/RHB-Guide-RadProtectionProgram.pdf
  • Check the April 2026 RTCC minutes (and any October 2026 meeting) and CDPH's rulemaking page for follow-up on the shielding and supervision items.
  • Read technologist supervision rules (H&S Code § 106965 et seq.; 17 CCR §§ 30400-30403) and the § 30403(b) CE wording directly; confirm with RHB that there is no NP fluoroscopy pathway.
  • Confirm AB 460's status and any 2026 bills on leginfo.legislature.ca.gov.

Who regulates, and where to read the rules

Documents ORSIF has on file

Copies saved earlier. Rules change, so check the current text at the source.

Double-check before you rely on this page

ORSIF compiled this page from the sources linked on it and did its best. It is not comprehensive and it is not always accurate. Rules change, a rule may have been missed or misread, and the sources themselves can be out of date. Treat this page as a starting point.

Where to check

What may be missing here

  • 7 of 14 answers on this page are "Not found" or "Unclear". That means ORSIF did not find the answer in the rules it reviewed, not that no rule exists.
  • 12 answers carry a flag or a lower confidence ("Check the source" or "Less certain").
  • Researched November 3, 2026. Rules may have changed since.
  • Only the state's rules for X-ray and fluoroscopy equipment were reviewed.

Found something wrong or missing? Tell ORSIF.

Sources and terms

Terms used on this page
ALARA
As low as reasonably achievable: keep radiation doses as low as is reasonable, below the legal limits.
Agreement State
A state that has signed an agreement with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to regulate certain radioactive materials itself.
mSv
Millisievert, a unit of radiation dose. Ten mSv equal one rem, the older unit some rules still use.
Dosimeter
A badge or device worn to measure a worker's radiation dose.
Lead equivalent
The thickness of lead (mm Pb) that would give the same protection as the material described.
NRC
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
TEDE
Total effective dose equivalent
ARRT
American Registry of Radiologic Technologists
CE
Continuing education
All 18 sources the research read

Found something out of date or wrong? Tell ORSIF. Corrections are checked against the rule text and the page is updated.