A300
Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; General Maintenance Action
Human Factors
Towards the end of the climb segment; I glanced down at the ACARS screen and noticed we had a message. The chime did not go off since we were still in the climb. When I checked the message; it said something to the effect of; 'There was an error in the loading of DG (Dangerous Goods) on the aircraft. I'm working to get the details. Standby by for further details.' Several minutes later; a message came in stating that a can had been loaded in Position 1L in error. It was slightly lighter than noted on out weight and balance (about 70 pounds; if I recall correctly); not a concern. Of note; it had some DG; and the concern was that it included some radioactive DG (0.8 TI). The Dispatcher stated that it was up to all of us to decide if we would continue or not. The Captain and I discussed our options and referenced the FOM. We noted that up to 50 TI (Transport Index) could be loaded in Position 3 without a waiver and that it seemed that would probably be a higher exposure than the 0.8 TI loaded in [Position] 1L; but that we did not have the expertise or information to determine that for sure. As we were getting ready to forward some of our questions to the [Dispatcher]; he sent us a message stating that he was contacting the experts. After consultation with the Duty Officer; Safety representative; and DG experts; they determined that the exposure should be well within limits. This agreed with our hunch; and calmed any fears we had about continuing. We were also notified that the destination ramp would have a DG specialist meet us and take reading on the jet when we arrived; so we continued uneventfully to the destination. As promised; the DG specialist met us and took readings from both the supernumerary area and the cockpit. All were well below limits.The cause was either or combination of human error; inadequacy of training; or process breakdown. I can't say for sure as I'm not sure exactly how the error was made. During loading; I know the crew had problems loading a can. I believe they ended up off-loading the can and transferring the cargo to a new can. We were then delayed while the ramp agent and a manager had to confirm the loading of the can in order to get a final weight and balance. I'm not sure if this was the can in question; if that distraction led to the improper loading of this can; or if the two events were unrelated. Fortunately once someone realized the error; they brought it to attention even though we had already departed.
The hub manager called after takeoff to inform [Dispatch] that the weight and balance manifest was incorrect and that the actual can in Position 1L was not the can on the manifest. The actual can had a different weight and also was carrying radioactive DG (Dangerous Goods). Radioactive material can only be loaded in Position 3 and aft. After conferring with the Captain; Duty Officer; Flight Safety Senior Manager; and DG Admin Safety Manager it was determined the flight could safely continue to ZZZ1. The can in [Position] 1L contained 0.8 TIs of Yellow 2.
A-300 First Officer reported troubleshooting a Hazmat load violation during climb as a result of a Dispatch ACARS message of a Hazmat cargo load violation. After consulting with Operations experts completed an uneventful flight.