Home
Looking into the future the Pelican feeding its young from a self-induced wound in its own breast (as depicted, mysteriously, on the state flag of Louisiana) is accepted as an appropriate symbol of both self-sacrifice and rebirth. Through his selfless efforts, man is raised from the slavery of ignorance to the condition of freedom conferred by wisdom. Given the current state of affairs in Louisiana, one hopes that the understanding of the Pelican as a symbol shall point the way towards a new consciousness of ourselves as a whole, and lead us to face our futures with strength, grace, wisdom and faith, to learn from our mistakes and carry our successes and zest for living to future generations.

Nuclear Foes Speak Out at Waterford III Hearing

The Times-Picayune
Wednesday, March 24, 1982
Section 1, Page 14
By Mary Judge

Opponents of nuclear power told an atomic licensing board Tuesday that radiation to be emitted from the Waterford 3 nuclear power plant is potentially dangerous and expressed concern about unanswered questions of waste disposal.

Opponents outnumbered those favoring operation of the power plant station in a public hearing before the Atomic Licensing and Safety Board. The board will recommened to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission whether or not to license the 1,104 megawatt station Louisiana Power and Light Co. is building at Taft.

The ALSB will continue to hear testimony from citizens from 9 a.m. to 6:45 p.m. Wednesday and from 5 p.m. to 6:45 p.m. Thursday at the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Building, 600 Camp St.

Witnesses from LP&L, the NRC and the intervenors will present testimony on the health effects of the plant later in the hearings. The hearings are schedules to continue through April 7.

During the session Tuesday, about 100 representatives of Citizens for Safe Energy gathered in Lafayette Square to hear speakers oppose the licensing motion.

Meanwhile, Save Our Wetlands (SOWL) one of two groups participating in the hearings as an intervenor, told the three-member committee, “I think we’re going to have a fuel core meltdown. That’s what’s going to stop nuclear power.”

SOWL warned a meltdown would result in 50,000 deaths immediately and $17 billion in property damage.

SOWL said the metropolitan area is already confronted with a “tremendous amount of pollution that causes cancer. We have one of the highest rates of bladder cancer here.”

SOWL also expressed concern about the lack of knowledge of disposing of radioactive waste at the end of the fuel cycle and about taking the plant apart after it has quit producing power.

“We’re frightened by the past lies, and deception of the Atomic Energy Commission,” he added, urging the commission not to allow “New Orleans to become a guinea pig like the soldiers in Nevada.”

Representatives of several area councils of the New Orleans chamber testified in favor of licensing the plant to begin producing power.

John Kucher, chairman of the West Bank Council, said his area needs nuclear energy to maintain a competitive edge.

Bruce Holson, chairman of the River Area Council, told the commission that the river parishes area needs the energy and supports the license.

Rose Loving of Algiers said she was appearing on behalf of low income citizens. “I support the licensing of Waterford 3,” said Loving who is also New Orleans Parish School Board president and director of the Algiers-Fischer Community Center. She said she assists low income citizens in coping with the high costs of utilities.

She said once the costs of nuclear energy have stabilized it should be more affordable than oil and natural gas. Loving also said nuclear energy could provide job opportunities.

Charles Bachman, a cancer patient who opposes the plant said the costs have risen six-fold from almost $300 million to almost $2 billion.

He said evacuation of the New Orleans area, within 15 miles of the plant is impossible and said all the evacuation routes from New Orleans have bridges where breakdowns and accidents might occur in a panicky situation.

“Why wasn’t Waterford 3 located a safe distance from all populated areas? Why wasn’t the power just piped into a place like New Orleans?” said Bachman.

Dr. Anna Pleasonton told the committee that the alternative of not increasing energy supply had not been considered. “Winterizing homes will provide more jobs than more energy,” she said.

Pleasonton said an environmental hearing on the plant did not consider the problem of radiation in the water supply.

Katherine B. Senter of New Orleans said she is afraid of the alleged collusion between government and the nuclear industry. She said the Prince-Anderson Act limited the utility’s liability in the event of a nuclear accident and the industry is allowed to charge construction costs to its customers and is guaranteed a profit by regulatory agencies.

“I wish government would quit pushing nuclear power down our throats,” said Senter. “We don’t need it and we don’t want it.”

Opal Gaspard of Marrero spoke against licensing the plant. She said her husband is dying of cancer after he has a “safe radiation dose” during Army testing in Nevada in 1955. Gaspard said the effects of radiation take years to detect.

Laura Carnes, president of the Young Socialist Alliance, said nuclear power poses the danger of radiation. “No level of radiation is completely safe,” she said. “Even if no accident occurs, the operation brings danger.”

The ALSB will hear testimony on the issue of emergency planning when it convenes the second round of hearings May 3 in New Orleans. At that time the board will also hear witnesses on antoher issue which the ALSB raised Thursday. The issue is the lack of a backup for the emergency feed water system. This feed water system is a backup to the water system which feeds into the steam generator.

Sheldon J. Wolfe, administrative judge and chairman of the Waterford hearing, wrote that the Palo Verde, Calif., plant has been cited for this design deficiency and, “It now appears that the Waterford 3 plant shows this design deficiency.”

Wolfe said a supplement would be issued to the Waterford Safety Evaluation Report.


FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Save Our Wetlands Inc.(SOWL) has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is Save Our Wetlands Inc.(SOWL) endorsed or sponsored by the originator. For more information go to:www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.