S.Amdt. 2972

SA 2972. Mr. KIRK submitted an amendment intended to be proposed to
amendment SA 2953 proposed by Ms. Murkowski to the bill S. 2012, to
provide for the modernization of the energy policy of the United
States, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table;
as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. REVIEW OF LONG-TERM IMPACTS OF PROPOSED DISPOSAL OF
NUCLEAR WASTE AT THE BRUCE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT
IN KINCARDINE, ONTARIO.

(a) Senses of Congress; Findings.--
(1) Sense of congress that canada should not approve
nuclear waste repository.--
(A) In general.--It is the sense of Congress that the
Government of Canada should not approve the construction of a
permanent nuclear waste repository in Kincardine, Ontario,
Canada (referred to in this section as the ``repository'').
(B) Supporting findings.--In support of the sense of
Congress described in subparagraph (A), Congress finds that--
(i) the repository would be located less than 1 mile from
the shores of the Great Lakes;
(ii) the repository could store up to 7,000,000 cubic feet
of toxic nuclear waste; and
(iii) some of that nuclear waste will remain radioactive
for over 100,000 years.
(2) Sense of congress that a growing body of organizations
opposes the repository.--
(A) In general.--It is the sense of Congress that a growing
body of lawmakers, officials, governments, and community
organizations on the Federal, State, local, and international
level publicly opposes the repository.
(B) Supporting findings.--In support of the sense of
Congress described in subparagraph (A), Congress finds that--
(i) the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate
emphasized opposition to the repository in the report
accompanying S. 1725 (114th Congress), as reported out on
July 9, 2015--

(I) expressing concern with the proposal for the repository
by Ontario Power Generation, ``which could cause irreparable
harm to the shared economic and ecological wellbeing of the
Great Lakes''; and
(II) recommending that ``the Department of State request an
International Joint Commission review of the proposal and
urge the Government of Canada to postpone its final decision
until the review of the long-term impacts of locating a
nuclear repository at the proposed site is complete and fully
evaluated by both the Governments of the United States and
Canada'';

(ii) the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative, a
binational coalition of over 110 United States and Canadian
mayors and local officials, formally opposes the repository;
(iii) the Great Lakes Legislative Caucus, comprised of
State and local lawmakers from the 8 States bordering the
Great Lakes, Ontario, and Quebec, opposes the repository;
(iv) 52 local units of government and communities in Canada
and 128 units of local government and communities in the
United States oppose the repository; and
(v) the State Senate of Michigan unanimously enacted a law
and a series of resolutions calling on the International
Joint Commission to stop the repository from moving forward.
(b) Department of State Actions.--The Department of State
shall--
(1) request that, pursuant to Article IX of the Boundary
Waters Treaty of 1909, the International Joint Commission
conduct a review of the proposed repository; and
(2) urge the Government of Canada to postpone its final
decision on the proposed repository until the review of the
long-term impacts of the repository requested pursuant to
paragraph (1) is complete and fully evaluated by both the
Governments of the United States and Canada.
______