The Department of Industry, Science and Resources (DISR) and the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) are the main Commonwealth agencies promoting the national dump.

ANSTO operates the research nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights in South Western Sydney. The reactor produces about 85% of Australia’s nuclear wastes (excluding uranium tailings). These include over 1600 highly radioactive spent fuel rods. Most of these wastes are in interim storage on site. ANSTO also want a new nuclear reactor to take over from the old one. A new reactor would produce radioactive wastes for another 40 years.

The Federal government and ANSTO claim that the dump is only for Low Level Wastes (LLW) and Short-Lived Intermediate Level Wastes (SLILW) made by using radioisotopes in medicine and research. This waste is a fraction of the total waste inventory. The real purpose of the dump is to dispose of the radioactive legacy of the Lucas Heights reactor and to facilitate the future radioactive waste generation of the proposed new Sydney reactor. ANSTO's Head of Waste Management confirmed in a community consultation meeting in Sydney on 10th March that: "In terms of radioactivity the major fraction of the waste going to Billa Kalina will be from Lucas Heights."

The Federal government has been looking for a national radioactive waste dump since 1979. The States have not given any support for the proposal until recently when South Australia reluctantly agreed to site the dump there.

The Federal government began a site selection survey in 1985. The survey intended to find a region with the right conditions for the dump and occurred in three phases. Despite public opposition and scientific critique the proposal has remained unchanged.

In February 1998, Senator Parer, then Minister for Resources and Energy approved the "Billa Kalina" region within which further site selection for the dump would occur.

Billa Kalina is a 67,000 sq/km region in Northern South Australia (see map). Within this vast arid region 18 sites were selected for test drilling. Before drilling could occur, the Federal government needed site clearances from the traditional owners of affected country under the provisions if the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1988.

The Kupa Piti Kungka Tjuta is an organisation that represents the senior Aboriginal women of Kokatha, Antikarinya and Arabunna country. Members of their organisation have been involved in the site clearance process. The Kupa Piti Kungka Tjuta are opposed to the radioactive dump on their country.

The so-called "community consultation" process has been undermined since 30th of April when the Federal government issued a Sec.9 Notice under the Land Acquisition Act 1989 which gives the government powers to compulsorily acquire land.

Test drilling continues and completion is not expected until later this year. Most sites are in the region surrounding the township of Woomera. It is expected that an Environmental Impact Assessment under provisions of the Environment Protection (Imact of Proposals) Act 1974 will be triggered early in 2000.

The proposed dump is referred to as "Near Surface Disposal" . This means shallow burial of radioactive waste in sealed drums, placed in trenches approximately 20 meters deep. The trenches will be backfilled with layers of rammed earth. The exact plans for the dump have never been made public.

In 1995 the Senate Select Committee on the Dangers of Radioactive Waste conducted an inquiry into the production of radioactive materials and waste management practises. They recommended against "shallow burial" and that a national waste facility should be engineered for above ground storage. They also recommended that: "the national facility will be adequately engineered to withstand all possible climatic conditions, no matter how unlikely." The Federal government has rejected these findings.

The Bureau of Resource Sciences (DISR) admits that the dump will not prevent water leakage and may not prevent intrusion by animals or plants.

The shallow buried wastes will be covered by an ‘institutional control period’ of 100 years. This means that the operating agency is responsible for the dump over this period of time. It is also claimed that the dump will have an ‘engineering integrity’ of 300 years. However, small quantities of Radium and other alpha-emitters typically found amongst low-level waste have half-lives that extend far beyond these periods. The half-life of Radium 226 is 1600 years, and gives rise to Radon, a gas, and its decay products which are the principle agents of lung cancer in uranium miners. Shallow burial will not prevent gases leaking into the environment. Other likely wastes such as Americium 241 have a half-life of 432 years and decays into Neptunium 237, which has a half-life of over 2 million years again far exceeding control periods required under law.

Despite the virtual absence of surface water, there are large reserves of groundwater in the SA desert region in the Great Artesian Basin (GAB) and elsewhere. This water resource is critical for all human activity, as well as for the unique mound springs and most life in the area. When the desert experiences an extreme climate event such as a flood, it is thought that these waters seep underground and renew groundwater. This water may leach through a shallow buried nuclear dump. If radionuclides leak from the proposed dump, it may lead to permanent groundwater contamination. This presents a direct threat to the health of people who rely on groundwater for their daily needs.

The Sydney nuclear reactor produces high level waste in the form of spent fuel rods. These are reprocessed overseas and sent back to us at 80 times the volume and just as radioactive. The returned waste is called Long-Lived Intermediate Level Waste. The government proposes to store this waste or "co-locate" it at the dump. Later, the LLILW may be buried in deep geological repositories. These are holes that are over 500 metres deep. This disposal method is highly questionable, no proposed deep geological disposal for high level wastes has proven scientifically feasible anywhere in the world.

Siting the dump in a remote area only adds "the tyranny of distance" to an already complex problem of radioactive waste management. These difficulties include maintenance of:
* Communications
* A high standard of available expertise
* Services and,
* Security

Remote dumping is an irresponsible abandonment of radioactive wastes.

In addition, radioactive wastes would be transported across the continent putting numerous communities en-route at risk to accidental exposure and contamination. There have been hundreds of accidents involving the transportation of radioactive materials all over the world. Transportation adds another dimension of risk to an already high risk and unnecessary industry. Neither the Federal government nor private insurers will indemnify against radioactive contamination.