fish was a wise one.

There is reason t2 believe that contamination was com

fined to the surface sf the Nish and cccured when the radioactive ashes

fell and entered the ships hold.

With the decision of the United States Food and Drug Administration

to monitor incoming shipments of tuna, the shipping companies operating

out of Japan initiated a requirement that the Japanese certify export
shipments as being free of radioactivity.

When I arrived in Japan on March 22, the Japanese had already monitored

their first outgoing shipment of frozen tuna.

The Ministry of Yelfare

undertook to have its sanitation inspectors trained in the use of geiger
counters and began the routine inspection of both incoming and outgoing
tuna at five ports. ill vessels were instructed to return to one of these
ports. Five geiger counters were cbtained from the Far East Command and
loaned to the Japanese, [n addition, they mustered approximately the saze
number from various sources in Japan.

On March 24, at a conference with the Japanese Goverment officials,

they asked for my recommendation for maximum permissible contamination.

They also asked that I recommend the kind of examination that should be
made

sf the

fish.

Because of ay unfamiliarity with the mechanical details of handling

tuna shipments, I suggested that [ be permitted to study tuna loading

operations scheduled for the following day. Thereupon it was arranged
that I should accompany Japanese officials to Yokohama where the Satan
was being loaded with frozen albacor.
Tuna shipments invelve many fish and it is not an easy matter to monitcr
properly with inexperienced personnel and only a few survey instmments.
Based on my inspection of the Batan, I suggested that every tenth fish be

monitored for about 1 minute by passing an open window GW probe over the
surface of the fish, paying particular attention to the gills. I also
instructed them to insert the probe into the mouth of the tuna and into
the abdominal ineision through the fish.

There remained the question of criteria for rejection of fish fcund
to be contaminated. Again it is not a simple matter to evaluate the risk
to a consumer of tuna from meesurements nade in this way, I.informed the

Japanese that I wae unable to propose a realistic figure without some
study. Om the other hand it was my belief that significantly contaminated
fish were not likely to be found. Low level fall cut to the skins of the

fish was, of course, a@ possibility.

This seemed to be of littlesignificance

in view of existing cannery practices which strips the skins from the fish
when processing begins. I told the Japanese [ would be standing by in
Tokyo, that they should continue to monitor the fish by the method I
proposed, amd that whan and if contaminated fish were found [ should be

advised and given the opportunity immediately to make a first hand inspecticn
of the fish. My recommendations would depend on what [-found.
No contaminated tuna have been brought to my attention.

Newspapers

have occasionally reported incoming shipment of contaminated fish but the
Japanese had not requested that I rake an examination of then.
tee at Ma

|

Select target paragraph3