ML20010F517
| ML20010F517 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/24/1981 |
| From: | Book H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | Minatoya W MINATOYA EYE CLINIC, INC., HONOLULU, HI (FORMERLY |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20010F518 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8109100309 | |
| Download: ML20010F517 (2) | |
Text
_
.g i
/
- p Q-p AUG 2 41981 License No. 53-03694-01 A
W. T. Minatoya, M. D.
1003 Pensacola Street SEA gg %f m, Honolulu, Hawaii 96814 7d Attention: Dr. W. T. Minatoya j
Gentlemen:
g
Subject:
NRC Inspection This refers to the special safety inspection conducted by Ms. B. Ried11nger of this office on July 22, 1981 of activities authorized by NRC License Ho. 53-03694-01 and to the discussion of our findings held by Ms. Riedlinger with you at the cor.clusion of the inspection.
Tre inspection was an examination of the activities conducted under your license as they relate to radiation safety and to compliance with the Comission's rules and regulations and the conditions of your license. The inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, observations by the inspector, and a followup evaluation of a mported exposure to a film badge in excess of 10 CFR 20.101(a) limits.
During this inspection, it was found that certain of your activities appeared to be in noncompliance with NRC requirements. The items and references to the pertinent requimments are listed in Appendix A.
These items have been categorized into, severity levels as described in the Federal Register Notice (45 FR 66754) dated October 7,1980 The findings from this inspection, as well as the one conducted on February 27, 1964, indicate a repetitive item of noncompliance (see Appendix A, Item A.).
We are concerned about the repetitive nature of the items of noncompliance observed during our inspections. In addition to the need for corrective action regarding the specific items of noncompliance included in Appendix A, we are concerned about the implementation of your management control system that permitted one item of noncompliance to recur.
Consequently, in your reply you should describe in particular those actions taken or planned to improve the effectiveness of your overall management control system.
As a result of tM evaluation conducted pursuant to the reported radiation exposure to a film badge, in excess of 10 CFR 20.101 limits, it has been concluded that the film badge reading does not represent an exposure to fM['
an individual.
B109100309 810824
"~
gf NMS LIC30 53-PDR
"'c'>
...V/ dot...,,,,,,M,,03694-01 so -,)
IEDLINC ER THOMAS
. 4p' DATEf........... 1 1
LNRC FORM 318 ttO/80lNRCM O2' OFFICIAL RECORD COPY nsa '9*-na eu
W. T. Minatoya, M. D. AUG 24 1931 Since film badges were issued on June 15, 1980, further response to item B.
as described in Appendix A is not required.
Your response to this notice is to be submitted in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201 as stated in Appendix A, flotice of Violation.
If you have any questions on this matter or concerning this inspection, please telephone B. Riedlinger on 415-943-3700.
Sincerely, l
Cricinal s!gre3 bs i
H. E. Back i
H. E. Book, Chief Radiological Safety Branch I
Enclosure:
l Appendix A - flotice of Violation Sent to DMB for DCS processing.
Distributed by RV:
State of Hawaii LFMB(w/oenclosure)
RHE A. Johnson
\\
.