Re: LSA vs A2 Requirements

["Jerry Bonanno" <jbonanno@REHS.rutgers.edu>]

Date sent:      	Mon, 29 Mar 1999 06:35:22 -0600 (CST)
Send reply to:  	radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
From:           	LIPTONW@dteenergy.com
To:             	Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
Subject:        	Re: LSA vs A2 Requirements

> 49 CFR 173.427(b)(2) does not, in itself, place a limit on the total
> activity 
> in a LSA or SCO package.  It is one of the packaging options.  This is a 
> complex area.  You have to read the whole section carefully, along with the 
> definitions in 173.403.  You should also read the guidance in NUREG 1608. 
> It 
> also sounds as if you have not met the training requirements of 49 CFR 172, 
> Subpart H.   
>  
> If you're asking this question out of curiosity, no problem.  If you're 
> actually trying to ship something, however, all I can say is that it'd
> better 
> be "Masterpiece Theater," not "The Amateur Hour." 

Bill,

If people feel that their qualifications (training) and professionalism  (reference to being an "amateur") are going to be challenged by  posting questions, they will not ask them.  If people are afraid to  ask questions and share information then the purpose of radsafe is  defeated.  I don't understand the point of trying to embarrass  someone for asking a question.

These opinions are mine alone and do not reflect those of my  employer.

Jerry Bonanno

************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html