Suggested disposal areas have been chosen in an attempt to min- 
imize conflict with submarine cable operation, as well as the purely 
mechanical problems connected with fisheries activities. 
RECOMMENDATIONS 
The panel is of the opinion that certain Atlantic and Gulf of 
Mexico coastal areas can be used as receiving waters for the controlled 
disposal of packaged, low level, radioactive wastes. 
Twenty-eight possible locations have been selected (figure 7, p. 34) 
that could, on the basis of presently available information, be used with- 
out limiting our other uses of coastal waters. The actual choice of dis- 
posal areas should be undertaken within the following limitations: 
1. Prior to start of disposal operations a survey of an area must 
be made to determine details of local circulation and an inventory of 
the biota, especially of bottom-living organisms. 
2. The total quantity of activity that is deposited into any one 
disposal area in any one year should be limited to 250 curies of Sr 90 
or the equivalent of other isotopes. For the equivalent amounts of other 
isotopes see Table II and the accompanying discussion on page 13. 
3. The total quantity of activity that is deposited in any one area 
during any given month should be limited to 100 curies of Sr 90 or the 
equivalent of other isotopes. 
4. Adjacent disposal areas should be separated by at least 75 
miles. 
5. No 300 mile section of coast line should contain more than 
three disposal areas unless predominant currents, both bottom and sur- 
face, indicate that no exchange between areas is possible. 
6. The waste container should be of such construction that no 
part of it or its contents will float to the surface should the container 
be broken. The practice of using steel drums as containers is recom- 
mended as giving appreciable holding time in the disposal area. 
7. Periodically during use, the area should be monitored to pro- 
vide a measure of the spread of radioactivity throughout the region in- 
cluding both the biota and the bottom sediments, and to note changes 
that might be caused by disposal operations. The results of this moni- 
toring may indicate that certain of the above assumptions should be 
changed. 
THE PROBLEM 
The U.S. Atomic Energy Commission has asked the Committee 
on Oceanography of the National Academy of Sciences - National 
3} 
