North Carolina Newspapers

8The Daily Tar HeelFriday, August 29, 1986 Satiu Sar iHm 9-? var t editorial freedom JlMZOOK, Editor Randy Farmer, Managing Editor ED BRACKETT, Associate Editor DEWEY MESSER, Associate Editor Tracy Hill. News Editor Grant Parsons, university Editor LINDA MONTANARI, City Editor JILL GERBER, State and National Editor Scott Fowler, sports Editor DENISE SMITHERMAN, Features Editor ROBERT KEEFE, Business Editor Elizabeth Ellen, Am Editor DAN CHARLSON, Photography Editor HdlitefO(oQs Play it safe Sunday Before the next issue of The Daily Tar Heel reaches the campus Tuesday, thousands of UNC students will be stripped of a fundamental privilege the legal right to consume alcohol. Labor Day 1986 will no doubt bring a tremendous change in student spirits about spirits. The topic has dominated campus conversations since students returned two weeks ago. Reports have circu lated about stockpiles of liquor in warehouses and underaged drinkers caught using fake driver's licenses. Interest is high to determine exactly how the UNC social scene will be affected. But some disturbing rumors have circulated about how students will down their last legal beer. Prognos ticators foresee a tremendous "prohi bition party" on Franklin St. Sunday night thrown by students staying in Chapel Hill over the weekend. The expected celebration has been com pared by some local media to the 1982 bash after UNC won the men's national basketbal championship. It was an evening worthy of mass celebration and consumption. Sunday, Aug. 31, 1986, will not be the same kind of evening. Instead of basking in a glorious victory, the victims of the new law will be legally drowning their sorrows at favorite downtown nightspots for the last time. Instead of euphoria, there will be disappointment, and perhaps bitterness. Use of the word "victim may seem exaggerated. However, the initiative to push the drinking age hike through state legislatures reigns as one of the largest single cases of blackmail ever committed. States faced the threatened loss of federal highway funds for non compliance. President Reagan is the perpetrator of this "crime, and he is getting away with it. However, Sunday night should not be seen as an opportunity for vindi cation. Revelers need not set as their goal the closing down of Franklin St. Irresponsible drinking was an excuse used to pass the law. Don't make it a valid point. W ork release needs reform Twice within the last six months, a N.C. prison inmate convicted for rape escaped Orange County work release and allegedly raped a woman. "The statistical odds really abounded on us," John G. Patseavouras, director of the state's Division of Prisons, told the Durham Morning Herald. But the situation should be treated more seriously. How can someone charged with so severe a crime be allowed to participate in work-release programs? Patseavou ras said an inmate's crime is one of the major factors considered in approving work release, in which an inmate temporarily leaves the prison for a regular job. Then why was Bryant Williams Jr., an inmate in the Orange County prison, approved for work release by the N.C. Parole Commission? He is accused of raping an Orange County woman after escaping while on work release. It was also through the request of the N.C. Parole Commission that Robert Lee Carter, an inmate at the same prison, was on work release in April. Now he's charged with leaving the job, kidnapping and raping an elderly woman. According to a spokesperson for the N.C. Division of Prisons, a committee of officials from surrounding prisons interviews inmates and studies their records before recommending transfers to a lower-security prison. The recommendation is then reviewed by a second committee, and may be examined again if the convict's crime is serious. When an inmate is being reviewed for a minimum security program, the committee may also recommend work release. There is another way. If an inmate is in a minimum-security prison, the N.C. Parole Commission can request the program to see how an inmate handles limited freedom. The Depart ment of Corrections has the final say on these requests, but usually approves them, Patseavouras said. Orange County District Attorney Carl Fox has rightfully asked prison authorities to revise the program, recommending those convicted of rape be denied work-release privileges. E. Cooper Ayscue, Orange County prison's superintendent, told the Morning Herald he did not know how many prisoners on work release have been convicted of rape. He should know. Whether or not Orange County citizens are as inter ested as Fox in allowing no convicted rapist to participate in work release, the two incidents should not be taken so lightly as to be called a "statistical oddity. It is one oddity to which no Orange County citizen would like to contribute. The Daily Tar Heel Editorial Writer: KathyNanncy Editorial Assistant: Nicki Weisensee Omnibus Editor: Sallie Krawcheck Assistant Managing Editors: Jennifer Cox, Amy Hamilton, Donna Leinwand and Jean Lutes. News: Lisa Allen, Andrea Beam, Rick Beasley, Helene Cooper, Michelle Efird, Jennifer Essen, Jeannie Faris, Scott Greig, Mike Gunzenhauser, Maria Haren, Nancy Harrington, Suzanne Jeffries, Teresa Kriegsman, Laura Lance, Scott Larsen, Alicia Lassiter, Donna Leinwand, Mitra Lotfi, Jackie Leach, Brian Long, Guy Lucas, Karen McManis, Laurie Martin, Toby Moore, Kathy Nanney, Felisa Neuringer, Rachel Orr, Gordon Rankin, Liz Saylor, Valerie Stegall, Rachel Stiffler, Elisa Turner, Laurie Willis and Bruce Wood. Jo Fleischer and Jean Lutes, assistant university editors. Kelly Hobson and Eric Whittington, wire editors. Sports: Mike Berardino, James Surowiecki and Bob Young, assistant sports editors. Bonnie Bishop, Greg Cook, Phyllis Fair, Paris Goodnight, Laura Grimmer, Louise Hines, Greg Humphreys, Eddy Landreth, Mike Mackay, Kathy Mulvey, Jill Shaw and Wendy Stringfellow. Features: Eleni Chamis, Jeanie Marao, Kathy Peters, Katie White and Susan Wood. Arts: James Burrus, Alexandra Mann and Rob Sherman. Photography: Charlotte Cannon, Larry Childress, Jamie Cobb, Tony Deifell and Janet Jarman. Copy Editors: Karen Anderson, assistant news editor. Dorothy Bans, Beverly Imes, Gerda Gallop, Lisa Lorcntz, Sherri Murray and Sally Pearsall. , Editorial Cartoonists: Adam Cohen, Bill Cokas and Trip Park. Business and Advertising: Anne Fulcher, general manager; Patricia Benson, advertising director; Mary Pearse, advertising coordinator, Angela Ostwalt, student business manager; Eve Davis, student advertising manager. Ruth Anderson, Jennifer Garden, Kelli McElhaney, Christy Mennitt, Beth Merrill, Anne Raymer, Julie Settle, Peggy Smith, Kent Sutton and Ashley Waters, advertising representatives; Mindell Rosenberg, office manager and Mary Brown, secretary. Oistributioncirculation: William Austin, manager. idutiion: Brcndu Mot nd Stacy Wynn. C. Ron Allen and Rita Galloway, production assistants. Printing: The Chapel Hill Newspaper to! ililli fililii mmm - SPSS J- i " .V.V. VV0- I? 5 . mm mm ipspsi - y POWER PLANT Location: 20 miles south of Raleigh Size: 10,723 acres Plant Generating Capacity: 900 megawatts at capacity Construction Cost $3.6 billion Number of Employees: approximately 700 Construction Began: 1978 DTHDan Chartson Cooling tower at Shearon Harris plant heaFomi Harris - CASH, CP&L reps debate controversial N-plant The UNC chapter of the Coalition for Alternatives to Shearon Harris held its first meeting this week to rally opposition to the nuclear power plant under construction southeast of Raleigh. Members of the UNC chapter of the Coalition for Alternatives to Shearon Harris (CASH) have criticized the plant for skyrocketing construction costs and possible dangers to area residents in case of a serious accident. A member of CASH and a spokesman for Carolina Power & Light addressed the criticisms. Representing CP&L is Roger Hannah, a news spokesman for the company. Repres enting CASH is Mark Reichard, a sopho more international studies major from Columbia, S.C.a co-founder of the campus chapter of CASH. Mark Reichard, CASH What about Shearon Harris is CASH opposed to? "First of all, CP&L's safety record is not good. For example, in 1982-83, CP&L had more worker exposure to radiation than any other plant in the nation. "But basically, we're concerned about construction faults in the plant. CP&L says that the dome is so strong that you could fly a 747 into it and it wouldn't break it. What they ignore, is that it's supposed to ( keep explosions in and it won't do that. "The economic part of it doesn't add up either. In 1971, they originally said they were going to build four reactors for $1.05 billion. Now, it's 1986, and they've built one for $3.6 billion. "Also, an alternative suggestion is to convert the Shearon Harris nuclear plant to a coal plant. They say it will cost $5 billion dollars to do this, as opposed to $100 million for decommissioning it in 40 years when the radioactivity gets too high. But what they're overlooking is that the coal plant could be used forever, while the nuclear plant will get 40 years' use at the most.'' Do you feel that there is a need for another energy plant? "No. CP&L says the energy growth is between six and 10 percent when, actually, it's at between zero and two percent.'' Do you feel that their containment is sufficient? "No. CP&L keeps emphasizing their, concrete and steel containment structures in explaining why an accident couldn't happen here. But steel is already beginning to boil at 2,800 degrees, and concrete begins to decombine at 2,400 degrees. In a core meltdown, temperatures of 5,000 degrees are reached, far above what's needed to breach Harris' containment." Can you compare Shearon Harris to Chernobyl? "Even the NRC admits that there is a 50 percent chance of a full-scale meltdown within the next 20 years to a degree which we're not equipped to handle, possibly resulting in an accident worse than Chernobyl." CP&L also claims that they have been given a clean bill of health as far as safety is concerned by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). How do you feel about this? "The NRC is a direct outgrowth of the old Atomic Energy Commission, whose first mandate in their charter was to promote nuclear power however possible. For instance, they have never refused a request for a permit to build a nuclear plant. They bend over backwards to help the nuclear industry." What else are you concerned about? "Nuclear waste. It will be around for thousands of years, even if it's buried. In Barnwell, S.C., where they have a nuclear plant, there is also one of the highest rates of cancer in the country. "Also, they say nuclear fuel is cheaper than coal that's true, but nuclear power plants cost 25 percent more to operate, which means we will be paying 25 percent more in electric bills." What kinds of accidents could happen at Harris? "There are much nastier possibilities than the traditional meltdown (where the area affected wouldn't be inhabitable for thou sands of years). In one case, the roof of the containment structure would be ruptured, sending radioactive steam, molten metal and concrete debris for miles around. This is know as a core melt ejection accident. "A variation on this scenario, called a power excursion accident, could result in the lid of the reactor vessel being blown right through the containment structure, causing ballistic damage as well as spewing waste. Since the first accident could result in minutes and the second in perhaps three hours no evacuation plan could have time to take effect." Arent there systems to prevent such accidents? "Yes, but the Harris record is not good. In May 1986, an emergency service water pump (used to cool equipment employed during a nuclear accident) failed to operate during routine tests. Extensive testimony has been given before the NRC about construe-, tion and safety problems. Unfortunately, the NRC, which is little more than a nuclear industry cheerleader, ignored the problems." What do you have to say in conclusion? , "If things go perfectly, the plant will be all right. But if you look at the history of nuclear plants, it's nothing but a series of accidents and failures." Roger Hannah, CP&L What is the need for the Shearon Harris nuclear power plant? "The main reason that the plant needs to open is the energy demand of consumers in this area. "The N.C. Utilities Commmission requires that we reserve 20 percent of capacity above what the average demand would be, in case of emergencies ... if we did not have the Harris plant operating within the next few years, we would fall below that 20 percent by 1987. "That's despite having conservation plans in place. Some opponents allege that we could save the necessary electricity through increased conservation, but . . . our service area is growing so quickly we still need the plant." . What are the alternatives to providing energy through the Shearon Harris plant? "The alternative would have to be a coal fired plant and that's not really a viable alternative at this point." To convert the Shearon Harris facility to a coal-fired plant would cost about $5 billion, he said. "Opponents say we could rely on hydroe lectric facilities, but North Carolina is not the best state for the use of hydroelectric facilities. "We could buy some electricity from out- of-state, but as a regular practice, the farther away you go to buy electricity, the more you have to pay to wheel that electricity from one utility's lines to another. And most utilities won't guarantee that power on a long-term basis; in cases of emergency, their own customers would come first." Tell about the safety factors built into the Shearon Harris plant. "First, some of the comments that have been made in regard to similarities between Shearon Harris and the Chernobyl plant are ridiculous. There are similarities but there are bigger differences. "The Chernobyl plant had . . . chunks of graphite that carried the heat out of the reactor. They did have some water involved but most of the heat was carried away by the graphite . . . there were concrete walls on the sides (of the reactor), but the top amounted to almost no more than a warehouse. So almost anything that hap pened, the resulting radiation or whatever would go out the top. "Shearon Harris is a water-cooled reactor ... there is also what we call a multiple barrier effect. The uranium is packed in little ceramic pellets, which are wrapped in zirconium alloy tubes." The reactor vessel is encased in several inches of steel, packed in steel-reinforced concrete 4 12 feet thick at the sides, 2 1 2 feet thick at the top, with a concrete base, he said. Some residents are concerned about the production and storage of radioactive waste. "I just think there is no completely safe way to produce electrical power. One of the disadvantages of coal products is you do have emissions, which some have linked to . acid rain and other problems ... the nuclear plant is by comparison a very clean plant. "The high-level waste for a nuclear plant will be about 30 tons, which is more than it sounds because uranium is one of the heaviest elements. You're talking about a cube you could fit into your kitchen, maybe. "The federal government plans to open a national facility in the West in the 1990s for the storage of high-level waste ... at this point, all the high level nuclear waste is still at the nuclear plants." Should citizens be concerned that this high-level waste will be stored at the Harris plant? "The high-level waste is stored in a fuel handling building and is essentially as safe as the reactor is. The building is designed to resist earthquakes, disasters, damage to explosion. Critics have said there were investigations of structural damage and other problems during construction. From 1984 to March of this year, they (the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board) heard hundreds of witnesses testify . . . and after all this, April 28, the Atomic Licensing Board resolved the issue in the company's favor and the Nuclear Regulatory Commis sion issued a license to operate a low generating plant. There have been accusations the company has overrun construction costs. "They (opponents) have said several times it cost much more to build than was planned. The plant was first planned in 1971 ... it would be difficult to find a product that hasn't increased in cost several times in 15 years. ' ' , '. -' ? '. . . :s Mark Reichard was interviewed by Editorial Assistant Nicki Weisensee; Roger Hannah was interviewed by Editorial Writer Kathv Nannev.