A coalition of Northeastern governors has sent a letter to the Senate objecting to a plan that would send nuclear waste to several regional repositories until a permanent site is opened. They were, of course, acting in their own self-interests. No one wants a nuclear repository within his or her borders, especially when the prospects for a permanent site seem iffy, at best.

And yet the governors' concerns are correct from a public-policy standpoint, as well. Utah's politicians have been making this argument for years. In the politically volatile world of nuclear waste, temporary easily could become permanent. And, in the meantime, spent nuclear fuel rods might be in transit all across the county.

If the Goshute reservation site in Utah were the only temporary repository in operation, the waste would be constantly in transit from points east. If the pending plan were to go into effect, 31 states would house temporary repositories, which means spent fuel rods would be in constant transit in all parts of the continent.

The industry would say this is of little concern. The rods are stored within casks that are virtually impenetrable. But that, of course, argues for their continued storage where they are.

The first permanent storage site, long planned for Yucca Mountain in Nevada, is far behind schedule and faces many more legal and political challenges. As it now stands, the projected opening date is in 2017, which is 19 years late. A federal appeals court moved that process along an inch or two this week by rejecting some of Nevada's legal claims against the dump, but many more challenges remain. In the meantime, the government may face lawsuits because it didn't live up to its contract to begin accepting waste in 1998.

Of course, politicians nationwide have competing motives for the way they act. The Northeastern governors don't want dumps in their own states, but they also worry that a temporary storage scheme would divert attention from building Yucca, which they do want. Here in Utah, we have similar worries about a temporary site that could become permanent, but Yucca is worrisome, as well.

Barring any significant breakthroughs that would make nuclear recycling more efficient than it currently is, the best alternative remains to keep the waste where it is.