Where to store the nuclear waste

Spent-fuel pools, which were only intended for temporary use before shipment to reprocessing plants, have become overcrowded long-term storage areas that may no longer be either adequate or safe. Twenty-six reactors (four in New England) could be forced to shut down by 1990 unless they can expand their pool capacity by reracking or pin compaction. Both options are controversial because of public health and safety concerns that would be associated with a loss of coolant. Opponents also object to utilities losing their incentive to seek alternative storage solutions. The Maine Yankee plant and others, arguing that they must have the storage space now, prefer reracking and consolidation to replacing reactors with oil-fired equipment. DOE supports the utility approach, but is also spending $6 million a year on nuclear-waste-storage research. A demonstration of dry storage will begin this fall at the Browns Ferry plant. On-site alternatives range in cost from $10 to $204 per kilogram. New legislation to allow reprocessing and Away From Reactor storage will have to cope with financing restrains