SEC. 2.
The Legislature finds and declares that due to the following unique circumstances regarding the former Santa Susana Field Laboratory, a general statute cannot be made applicable within the meaning of Section 16 of Article IV of the California Constitution.(a) Founded in late 1940s, the Santa Susana Field Laboratory (SSFL) was a facility dedicated to the development and testing of nuclear reactors, rockets, missiles, and munitions. The location of SSFL was chosen for its remoteness in order to conduct work that was considered too dangerous to be performed in more densely populated areas. In subsequent years, however, southern California’s population has mushroomed. Today, more than 150,000 people live within five miles of the facility, and at least half a million people live within 10 miles.
(b) Throughout the years, approximately 10 nuclear reactors were operated at SSFL, in addition to several “critical facilities” (low power reactors); a sodium burn pit in which sodium-coated radioactively contaminated objects were burned in an open pit; a plutonium fuel fabrication facility; a uranium carbide fuel fabrication facility; and a Hot Lab used for remotely cutting up irradiated nuclear fuel.
(c) The Hot Lab suffered a number of fires involving radioactive materials and at least four of the 10 nuclear reactors suffered accidents, including a partial meltdown.
(d) The reactors located on the grounds of SSFL were considered experimental, and, therefore, had no containment structures. Reactors and highly radioactive components were housed without the large concrete domes surrounding modern power reactors.
(e) The most famous accident occurred in July of 1959, when the Sodium Reactor Experiment (SRE) experienced a partial core meltdown releasing radioactive gasses and particles into the atmosphere over a period of weeks. Recent studies have concluded that this accident may have caused hundreds of cancer cases in the Los Angeles area.
(f) One of the disposal procedures at the site in the 1950s and 1960s would consist of workers disposing of barrels filled with highly toxic substances by shooting the barrels at a distance with shotguns, so that they would explode and burn, releasing some of their contents in the form of gasses and particulates into the air. In the mid-1990s a similar practice involving the illegal disposal by open air burning led to the death of two workers at the facility.
(g) Additionally, large amounts of toxic chemicals were released into the soil, air, and groundwater and surface water. For example, the rocket test stands were routinely washed off with TCE, approximately half a million gallons of which were allowed to percolate into the soil and groundwater. Significant contamination exists by perchlorate, heavy metals, PCBs, dioxins, volatile organic, and semivolatile organic compounds, in addition to radioactivity.
(h) In 1989, the United States Department of Energy (DOE) found widespread chemical and radioactive contamination at the site, and a cleanup program commenced. In 1995 the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and DOE announced that they had entered into a Joint Policy Agreement to assure that all DOE sites would be cleaned up to standards consistent with EPA’s Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) standards, also known as Superfund. Those standards would have required a full characterization of the site and cleanup of the remaining contamination to standards deemed protective by EPA. In 2003, DOE declined to follow the 1995 Joint Policy and chose to instead rely on less protective cleanup standards. EPA declared that under the circumstances the site would not be safe for unrestricted release but only for day hikes with restrictions on picnicking; however, DOE continues to insist upon unrestricted release despite the use of sitewide cleanup standards not in keeping with the 1995 Joint Policy and EPA CERCLA guidance.