[ RadSafe ] RE: UN2910 Labeling for EXEMPT Calibration Sources-YesorNo

Baumbaugh, Joel T CIV SPAWAR SSC PAC, 55430 joel.baumbaugh at navy.mil
Wed Jul 22 17:13:51 CDT 2009

I'd like to add that, as a bystander to this shipping-question tread, I
"REALLY" appreciated that everyone was so polite and professional - even
when they disagreed... I'm sure we've all seen/read our share of nasty
emails on RADSAFE the last couple of years.  This was a refreshing
exception... This how RADSAFE was 10 years ago...  Keep up the good

Joel Baumbaugh
(San Diego)

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On
Behalf Of Dan W McCarn

Dear Group:

Wow!  I'm glad that I posted the question! I automatically labeled the
calibration sources as UN2910 from the USA to France last fall assuming
was the most "correct" way of labeling. I also did not consider that the
improper labeling could be equally as onerous.

I did not expect such a outflow of opinions, but as Henry explained, it
been a learning experience for a number of us, especially me! Thanks to
Larry Webb and Cary Renquist for their calculations, and Robert Holcomb
his very clear explanation.
There were over 25 postings and several sideboards on this thread and I
now proceed with the shipment!  Although I've had my radioactive
materials /
safety training at the University of New Mexico several years ago, my
to transport hazardous / radioactive materials is only occasional.

I'll be sure to keep the calculations, regulations and explanatory
in the case with the sources in the event that it is challenged at the


Dan ii

Dan W McCarn, Geologist

More information about the RadSafe mailing list