we already going to be in a positive the energy committee

will come to order. the committee is holding a hearing entitled repairing our infrastructure legislation to advance security. due to the covid-19 health emergency in today's hearing john stewart videoconferencing members and oppress in the hearing room must wear a mask in

accordance. for members remotely your microphones will be on mute for the purpose of eliminating background noises. members remotely john stewart please note you must unmute your microphone john stewart and subjects for live stream and c-span. from different locations at today's hearing all recognition

for members will go in the order of subcommittees and you're ready. john stewart the e-mails provided to just now and the document will be entered into the record as we conclude today's hearing and i want to recognize myself for five minutes for in opening statement. good morning, all. what a distinct honor it has been for me in chairing the subcommittee the past three years and i wish to thank all the members who've reached out

to me with well wishes following my recent announcement. this has been an honor to serve with such a fine assortment on both sides of the aisle and i want you to know that we are not done yet. i look forward to continuing the work with all of you in the congress, to continue to advance legislation that will help all americans. john stewart i want to thank

everyone on this call and in this hearing. i want to thank you for joining us for enhancing the energy infrastructure and energy products act. john stewart and transportation only as strong as its weakness and unfortunately, last year we saw the infrastructure fail leaving americans without power and costing over 100 lives.

john stewart all americans deserve access to energy and they need to know john stewart to achieve this goal, we must work together once again just like we did in 2005 when we wrote and passed the energy power act. and ensuring system is reliable.

we must continue that effort and i want to stress this point. it doesn't final and must be on the legislative process. i look forward to hearing from the witnesses and any questions from members of the subcommittee. to my republican friends, i want to emphasize the reliability but we are all concerned about and for this reason we are ready to work hand in hand with you and we are open to your suggestions and events the best pathway forward. with that, i look forward to

today's hearing and discussions and recognize from the great state of michigan for five minutes for an opening statement. you are recognized. >> thank you, my friend, mr. chair man. we are glad you recovered from covid that you had over the holidays. we are glad to see you in person. and as it relates to your announced departure at the end of the year, you've had a lot of fine chapters in your life. we know that this is in the last one. you've got a great book and we are all proud to be your friend and no you have future chapters i had a view. i want to thank the witnesses for appearing to provide their testimony today. welcome back, chairman glick. it's nice to have you here and welcome to this acute terry deputy for your commerce hearing

we look forward to working closely with you and your role as the doe. i know many of us are deeply concerned about the direction of the country under this president's leadership. we all saw the economic report last week and the consumer prices and inflation rose 7% in december. the highest rate in 40 years. that labor shortages every sector impacting the entire economy. energy prices are soaring to seven year highs in american families in need are suffering. this administration's anti-fuel, fossil fuel agenda is directly contributed to recruit high gas prices and utility bills and this winter's season is now upon us. the administration's response to the skyhigh energy bills is to shut down critical pipelines like keystone xl about a year ago, and for michigan potentially line five, the ban on drilling federal land,

forcing americans to buy more expensive and less reliable electric cars and appliances and not really solutions. two weeks ago a brutal storm hit the east coast and half a million folks lost electricity. hundreds of drivers were stranded, maybe thousands were stranded on freezing roads overnight. just think what would have happened into the people that could have died if all the cars were electric and people couldn't use natural gas to heat and cook. if it's not already clear to everyone we rely on fossil fuels and their day is not over. simply put, the fantasy land of the offshore wind farms, rooftop, solar and electric batteries are not going to cut it. the topic of this hearing is completely off base out of touch with realities facing america today. we need a real leadership from the administration and the democratic majority. america is facing an economic crisis and energy crisis for the legislative hearing to increase energy prices further and eliminate fossil fuels for

shutting down pipelines. the bill today that we are going to be talking about is a sweeping power grab preemptive states and local jurisdictions for regulating all types of energy infrastructure from oil and natural gas to the gas stations where americans fill up to the appliances in their home. this will would dramatically expand, transforming the relatively tiny agency and the behemoth with regulatory powers over america's energy system. we are not just talking about interstate pipelines, both power systems across the state lines. this bill would impose new federal taxes, regulations of all energy in the country. americans are not asking for that bill. so with the unanimous consent i'd like to enter into the record a letter from state regulators for people to deliver energy to homes and businesses. without objection i would hope. the letters laid out a specific concerns of the legislation concerns that i believe are shared by many members of the committee on both sides of the

aisle. mr. chairman, respectively i would argue we should focus our efforts on a bipartisan bill, hr 3078. the pipeline in lng facility cybersecurity preparedness act, we introduced this bill in response to the colonial pipeline attack last year and we still have the important work to do to get the bill across the finish line. in october of last year, republicans on this committee wrote to the secretary granholm to conduct oversight of the handling of the energy crisis and we also wrote to the chair man alone in the hearing to investigate how the administration's actions are to the energy price increase. everyone is energy prices are the number one issue right now. the highest prices and seven years. yet the majority is not scheduled a hearing. i would use today's hearing to come from the real issues facing americans and what is the administration doing to lower the prices. why is the president asking russia and opec to pump more oil while putting american energy workers out of a job?

and why is for delaying the decisions on critical natural gas pipelines that would improve the reliability and lower utility bills for every american? those are the questions on the minds of americans and they deserve the attention of the committee and with that, i yield back the balance of my time. >> the chair now recognizes mr. colón for five minutes for an opening statement. >> thank you, chairman. for holding the hearing today on your important legislation to address the reliability and security of the nation's energy infrastructure. the need for today's hearing then legislation is by recent events. we all watched with concern most february is the winter storm devastated natural gas infrastructure in texas contributing to widespread power outages and significant loss of life and some members of the committee even experience to those events first hand. in the wake of the texas power

crisis, we held multiple oversight hearings and learned the power outages were caused in part by inadequate natural gas fuel supplies, texas is failure to establish meaningful winterization and other standards to ensure reliable natural gas delivery. those findings are corroborated by recent joint reports on the winter storm from the federal energy rig three commission and of the north american electric reliability corporation. among other things, this joint report concluded that, and i quote, generating unit outages and natural gas supply and delivery were inextricably linked during the storm. the report recommended that a working group consider whether congress should best a single agency with responsibility for ensuring the pipeline reliability. i want to commend the chairman for taking those recommendations seriously introducing hr 608 for the energy product reliability organization act. while members today may have different perspectives on how to best protect the country from emerging threats, it is clear to me the status quo is insufficient, and congress must

act to ensure the reliability of the infrastructure. given the current reliance for power generation it is critical to examine how we can best ensure the natural gas fuel delivery system is not again failing to keep lights on. the winter storm didn't because the only major fuel supply reliability failure last year. in may cyber criminals attacked the colonial pipeline companies business systems ultimately halting the delivery of more than 2.5 million barrels of petroleum products daily for several days. and this major disruption caused gasoline shortages across 17 states and the district of columbia. the pipeline was restarted with the five day from the department of energy, but the cyber attack laid bare the vulnerability of the pipeline infrastructure. a chair man rushes bill places the authority to issue cyber security standards where they should be, with energy experts that have a vested stake in the security of the power infrastructure. the 2005 after the california energy crisis and the 2003 blackout of the northeast raised

concerns about the continued reliability of the electric infrastructure. in this committee, we responded in a bipartisan manner. we are to create an electric reliability organization to oversee the bulk power system by all accounts, they americans enjoy greater electric reliability because of it. today we are again confronted to shine a light on the inadequacy of the current regulatory regime. i hope we can respond with similar bipartisan matters by establishing the stakeholder driven entity to maintain the reliable delivery of natural gas petroleum and other energy products until we fully transition away from the fossil fuels to carbon free electricity and transportation sectors. this bill, chairman rushes bill is of vital importance in today's hearing providing committee members an opportunity to learn more about the scope and necessity of an energy energy productreliability organ. this hearing is the beginning of the process, and i look forward to hearing from consumer advocates, industry stakeholders

and others about how we can best tailor this legislation to safeguard the nation's pipeline infrastructure. we must find common ground reforms to bolster the reliability and security of the pipeline and power infrastructure. the committee has a long history of bipartisan cooperation on these issues, and i hope that we can work together to ensure the nation's pipeline and related facilities are operable during extreme weather events. protecting from cyber exploitation and able to address the reliability and security changing in the world. i want to thank the witnesses for joining us today and i yield back the balance of my time. thank you, mr. chairman. >> john stewart the ranking member of the full committee for opening statements. john stewart. >> thank you, chairman rush.

as he recently announced your retirement, let me say we've appreciated your friendship and working relationship on energy and commerce and look forward to you finishing strong here in congress. tomorrow marks the one year of president joe biden's failed energy policies, jeopardizing energy reliability, energy affordability and americans energy independence. today russia is on the verge of ukraine and underscores the importance of energy in national security. putin wants control of the black sea to block american energy imports to ukraine. the imports that help the ukrainian freedom fighters, those that are seeking self-determination. this administration is instead helping putin on day number one a year ago. president biden blocked the keystone pipeline, but yet greenlighted for putin. this makes no sense. energy is so important to our

national security, to our economy, jobs, competitiveness. the energy information administration reported energy prices rose more than all commodities over the last year. 50% higher than at the beginning of 2021. another projection shows little to no prospect for relief. we have the highest inflation in 40 years from the grocery store to the gas pump, animal inflation is hitting low and middle income americans the hardest. what americans pay for energy matters. it drives all aspects of the economy, touching every supply chain and every part of our lives. it matters to farmers who are growing our food, the manufacturers that make the products we need to come of the truck drivers who deliver them. it matters to the store owners who are struggling to keep their shelves stocked, the restaurant managers who need to keep food on their menus and their lights on. it matters to americans who are stretching their budgets to feed their families and fill up their

gas tanks, drive their kids to school, get themselves to work. the price, affordability and reliability of energy's isfoundation to our way of life and to peace and security around the world. we cannot afford another year of these failed policies. to understand the risk for americans, look no further than the dribbling example of current european and uk energy crisis. the skyrocketing rates upwards to three times what we have in the u.s. it's a direct result of the radical policies that grow the nations to rely upon whether in pending renewables and increasingly, russian energy, which threatens europe. thankfully for our security, wehad american lng exports made possible by the shale technology revolution. these experts supported energy and price relief to the european allies and help drive cleaner energy and power. but that's all being threatened

right now. energy security matters. it matters for economic security. it matters for national security. and it also supports cleaner energy systems. after a year of president joe biden's energy crisis, we should reset our energy policy oversight to focus on priorities for maintaining energy and economic security. that's why republicans are leading on the securing cleaner energy agenda. now, specifically regarding today's discussion on the pipeline, russia and china will not stop their campaign to dominate global demand for fossil fuels. nor will the impact on everyday americans disappear. we ignore the harmful impact of replacing pipelines with weather dependent renewables. we need affordable and reliable supplies. and anything we do that impedes affordable, reliable energy will be harmful to our families, workers and the nation.

america's abundant energy supplies and world-class system of fuels and electricity powers the competitiveness and ultimately our security. this is what insurers america's manufacturing and industrial competitiveness and what provides a strategic resource and flexibility to confront our adversaries and assist our allies and the pipeline that delivers these strategic resources are among the safest environmentally friendly and cost-effective methods. today's hearing questions what is necessary to assure people have energy and power they need when they needed most. about assuring people have energy and power when they needed cannot be an excuse for sweeping duplicate of the entity been chosen by the federal government into every part of the complex energy system. with this legislative proposal appears to do, and given this

administration's record, i do not support this extensive authority. i look forward to working with the majority on this and i hope that we can head a different direction. i welcome the witnesses and i will yield back at this time. thank you mr. chairman. >> the chair would like to remind members that pursuant to committee rules, all members written opening statements shall be made a part of the record. i would like to welcome our witnesses now that are present for today's hearing. the honorable chairman of the federal energy regulatory committee and joining him is the

honorable deputy secretary of the u.s. department of energy. it's so good to see you again and i want to thank each of you for joining us today and we look forward to your testimony. at this time it is my honor to recognize each member for five minutes to provide your opening statement. before we begin, i would once again john stewart the system for testifying in person. further, there is a series of lights. the lights will initially be green. the light will turn yellow when you have one minute remaining. please begin to wrap up your testimony at that point.

the light will turn red when your time expires. once again, welcome and you are now recognized for five minutes for opening statements. >> thank you, chairman rush and ranking member upton, mcmorris rodgers and members of the subcommittee thank you for inviting me to appear before you today to discuss hr 6084 the energy product reliability act which addresses the needed to enhance the reliability and security of the nation's energy pipeline. i applaud the committee's leadership for working to ensure reliable energy supplies for the american people. the energy policy act of 2005 gave the federal energy regulatory commission the key role to ensure the reliability of the power system. the commission certified of the north american electric reliability corporation at the electric reliability organization. developing standards that reduce

and irrelevant would comply with any standards. it also provides for the enforcement of electric reliability standards including penalties for violations. they may impose penalties that are noncompliant subject to the review by the commission. in addition, independent authority to conduct its own investigation and impose penalties on any entity that violates the reliability standard. there are currently 93 mandatory standards for the power system, 12 of which addresses cyber security. these mandatory reliability standards have made great strides to improving reliability of the system. in contrast there is no comparable regime for natural gas and other pipelines to transport energy products including gasoline and propane. the lack of mandatory reliability standards especially for natural gas pipeline poses a risk to the reliability of the bulk power system and the interdependency of the nation's gas and electric infrastructure.

in 2021, natural gas by electric generation facilities accounted for approximately 37% of u.s. electricity generation. for pipeline failure or cyber attack disrupts gas supplies, electric generation capacity depended on the pipeline could be lost, possibly leading to blackouts from the electric grid. this is more than a hypothetical situation. as described in the report released on november 16th, the staff engaged in a joint inquiry into the massive blackout across texas and limited power outages and the surrounding states during which stormy erie. although the joint inquiry identified several factors that contributed to these, one of the primary causes with is the lack of natural gas available for the generation. the extreme cold reduce the natural gas production and privacy capabilities into this impact was exacerbated because many of those facilities that were not frozen were unable to operate because they lost electric power. it is unclear how well the natural pipelines actually feared because there was limited natural gas to transport. to address the risk of the

disruption of the natural gas disruption that could negatively impact the operation of the system, report recommends that congress, state legislators and regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over natural gas infrastructures facilities adopt the new requirement for the operation of natural gas infrastructure. these organizations include the designation of a single federal agency with authority over the pipeline reliability. the challenges to the energy pipeline reliability go beyond extreme weather. last year's ransom where attack against the colonial pipeline illustrates the serious cybersecurity threats facing the nearly 3 million miles of pipeline that transport natural gas, oil and other energy products across the united states. as a result of the text, colonial pipeline shut down for several days. price spikes and shortages in texas and new jersey. similar attacks serving electric generators have the potential and reliability of the electric grid. in my view it's critical the energy pipelines also be subject to mandatory cybersecurity standards in fact, the former

chair man and i publicly called for the establishment and enforcement of the mandatory cybersecurity standards for the pipeline several years ago. the legislation that is the subject of today's hearing ager 6084 is similar to the legislation adopted establishing the mandatory reliability for the power system. i'd like to highlight certain pieces that should help address the risk that i've described. first it calls for the creation and certification of the energy product reliability organization similar to the process that led to the designation. the decision calls for the development of the standards to ensure the reliable delivery to the products and although it is responsible for the development of the reliability standards for the first instance, legislation would provide the commission the authority to order the development of the reliability standards to required to issue an emergency standards if warranted. finally, the decision would provide the commission with authority to review actions and independently investigate and penalize any reliability standards.

i think the committee for the opportunity to share my perspectives today. legislation to establish and enforce the reliability standards for the pipeline network to better secure the reliability of the nation's energy infrastructure for the basis of extreme there and cyber attacks i applaud the committee for taking this long overdue issue, taking up this issue and amends the technical assistance during the legislative process. i'd like to close my testimony today with a note of gratitude to chairman rush. as colleagues mentioned, he's preparing to leave the house at the conclusion of this session. throughout his 30 year career in the house of representatives, i have admired his devotion to his constituency and commitment to addressing the challenging and consequential energy policy questions of our time. thank you, chairman, for your support of the commission and leadership. and with that i look forward to today's discussion and answering your questions.

>> mr. chairman, you are muted but i presume you are introducing mr. turk. there you go. >> thank you. john stewart you are recognized for five minutes for an opening statement. >> good morning and thank you for the opportunity to be with you today to discuss the department of energy's role in making sure the energy system specifically oil and natural gas pipelines, which is the issue of the hearing today, are reliable, secure and resilient. and let me out a special thanks to the chairman for his leadership and years of service. i know everyone wishes you all the best in your future chapter in life.

i would also like to thank the ranking member for your strong support for many years. thank you very much. and thank you to the chair man and ranking member mcmorris rodgers for their leadership of the full committee as well and thanks to all the members of this incredibly important subcommittee for your commitment to strengthen the nation's energy system and for the trust and investment you've placed in our department. the department of energy risk management agency for the entire energy sector and our dedicated team brings a wealth of unique expertise to do everything from helping companies identify cybersecurity vulnerabilities in the first place to addressing supply chain risks for the energy sector. as the president stated in the national security memorandum in july of last year, cybersecurity threats pose control and operation systems, they pose a threat to control and operation systems that are among the most

significant and evolving issues that we face today. it's why we need to work hand-in-hand public and private sector working together and there's certainly a lot more to do and it's a crucial time for this committee to take on this issue to have the hearing to work on the legislation to discuss and come up with a plan to ensure reliability and security of the energy systems that all of our american citizens, all of our american people depend on. and we at the department of energy take this responsibility incredibly seriously to make sure we have reliable and affordable energy for all americans. the congress and the subcommittee have provided us and will need to continue to provide us the foundation and framework to fulfill this responsibility. we are grateful for the commitment to strengthening the resilience including on the cybersecurity side. shortly after the colonial pipeline incident which i personally spent a lot of time

on and i know a lot of you focus on this issue as well the committee introduced for key pieces of legislation on cybersecurity and we very much look forward to continuing discussion not only in this hearing but also on the energy product reliability act in particular. over the last decade the department of energy has build trusting relationships across electricity, oil and natural gas industries and with the key states and local government agencies. we think it is absolutely critical to focus on the full oil and gas supply chain when we talk about energy security upstream and midstream and the downstream. that's why we work daily with electricity and oil and gas owners and operators to assess the risk and to mitigate impacts. we work with owners and operators in 26 trade associations covering the entire oil and gas supply chain across the u.s. and canada as well and

the ceos and trade associations representing the electricity sector. we work with a full range of our interagency partners and of course under the white house leadership. and let me say i am particularly glad to be here with the chair man for his personal leadership providing terrific examples of how to successfully coordinate up and down the full supply chain when it comes to the electricity sector. we all needed to work together as an ecosystem to respond quickly and effectively to all the threats to the energy system including on cybersecurity. we saw the effectiveness of this many times over the past year. one example being the may 2021 colonial pipeline ran somewhere attack where our whole of government approach helped decipher the problem, restore service up and down the east coast in a matter of just a few

days and we are ready to take action to prevent similar events from happening in the future and we do need to think beyond the pipeline as well. we have seen attacks around the world including in saudi arabia from the cybersecurity side. we need to work together to shore up against all cyber threats and other impacts across the energy system. we need to simultaneously maintain security and resiliency and affordability of all the energy systems while supporting innovation to address other major threats including on the climate climate change front here the federal interagency are working day and add a day out to address this complex and ever-changing threat environment and we simply can't do this important work without the leadership and support of congress and especially the subcommittee. so in the coming weeks and months all of us in the

department of energy look forward to working with you and your colleagues in congress on this important topic. thank you and i look forward to answering all of your questions. >> we will now conclude opening statements. we will now move to the members questions and each member will have five minutes to ask questions and now we will begin by recognizing myself for five minutes. you stated especially for the

natural gas pipeline pose a risk to the reliability. you've touched on this topic before including the opening and in the wake of the release of the report on the impact. this is the first time we had to issue a joint report on the impact. could you elaborate on the threat now of the reliability

standards this poses to the reliability of the power system and fee ability to keep the lights on in their home? >> as the requester and noted i think the best example may again be what happened last february in texas with regards to the winter storm and we had the staff engage in the inquiry and there were two major conclusions as to what the causes were for the loss of so much capacity of the electric generation capacity in texas which is a very significant amount. one of the causes was the fact

it wasn't sufficiently weatherized. it got very cold as we know so they just were not operable and the plans had to shut down but the other major cause was over 50% of the generations in texas was fueled by natural gas in large part because the production facilities froze and also because of those that lost electric supplies and because of that they had to shut down and they were not able to provide additional gas, so in never ending circle of problems. we needed to have a system where we can ensure the reliable fuel for electric generation and that particularly includes natural

gas john stewart john stewart and the security industry and the policy thank you mr. chair

man not only for the question we shared the department of energy secretary grand how i met myself we spent a lot of time trying to make sure not just on cybersecurity but throughout energy, we had an energy workforce at that apartment and more broadly that represents all of the challenges of everyone around the country. the 9% figure that you highlight is just not good enough and we need to do more. we can't do more we should do marty and frankly we need to be more successful with cybersecurity if we do more hiring from a full range of our american talent. so, we are doing an awful lot. let me give you one particular example we ran a 2021's labor force competition and invited to

21 minority serving institutions to be fundamentally a part of that so we can attract more and more top talent to be part of the cybersecurity solutions going forward, so again, thank you mr. chair man for all of your leadership on that issue. >> mr. upton for five minutes to ask questions. >> thank you, mr. chairman. when i was chair of this committee i pushed, we all did for the all american strategy to help lead the effort and launch the plan that was in place as a part of that we saw the expansion of experts that was in the obama and the trump trumpadministration and created thousands of jobs and sent the

signal we would increase supplies for more production and a big role in reducing carbon emissions not only here but around the world as well. i was reminded by my member, kathy mcmorris rodgers it was six years ago that i led a bipartisan group of members from this committee to ukraine and we talked a lot about the lng exports and the importance is a signal to the free world and of course as we look at today's crisis, the alternative to the l and g experts to us probably russia, not something that a lot of us are anxious to see happen also knowing the impact of dirtier gas. this morning when i came in i looked at the national journal and was troubled by a story. for the imports and the story

references and anonymous source that says there's no change in the position on the l and g who requested to be anonymous and to speak freely. we continue to have various tools in the toolbox but the band currently isn't under consideration. can you confirm that it isn't under consideration? >> thank you very much, ranking member to know not to be an unnamed source for these types to put your head down and you do the work that you are empowered to do. thanks for your leadership on many of these issues including your leadership on the methane emissions, which are focused on a lot and really appreciate all that aside. we've been blessed in our country with a wide range of energy resources across the spectrum, and we are certainly

trying from the department of energy to make sure with the support and thanks to the members the bipartisan infrastructure legislation that gives us an opportunity to push out even more, whether it's hydrogen or electricity resilience, supply chains or more generally. this country's l and g has been increasing for many years and that certainly does have benefits and because energy security benefits. the european colleagues to european countries to a number of other countries. >> you would agree the ban on exports would be a bad idea. >> we have been looking at the full range of tools we've got in our toolbelt for affordability. that's why we did the release. >> i don't know that individual. one of the issues we are hearing about is there's some effort perhaps to shrink the license time, the licensee's companies

get as it relates to exports. is that one of the tools in the toolbox, i hope not. >> the way that of the lng authorizations are set up, there's the responsibility into the doe responsibility of the congressional legislation that gives both responsibilities in these areas. we are following the statutes and requirements of that. burke makes decisions. >> i would like to get an answer before my time expires. >> so, we take our response ability seriously. we are trying to do but congress has told us to do them to take into account the issues that should go into the national interest determinations one of the decisions. >> i think the certainty of the contract ought to be imperative to the companies if they make decisions that impact lots of money. >> and i certainly talk to a range of companies and

understand that need for contractor will certainty the end of the certainty that provides not only to the companies but the partners abroad. >> last question now that i'm under the 22nd mark. we have an issue called line five that you are well aware of. a number of folks have been waiting for a formal response from this administration as to whether this lineup to be replaced or not. we worked with all the different players to get the line replaced which many of us would like to see that impact on the great lakes. can we expect a formal response to the court's request as to where the administration stands? >> the department of energy doesn't have the jurisdiction in that area so we still have to defer to the white house colleagues that do have that responsibility. >> my time is expired and i yield back.

>> the chair now understands the chairman of the full committee has been called away so now you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman for your leadership and congratulations on your announcement. with heat waves and other devastating wildfires across the west this is a direct threat to the energy system and we saw that in february 2021. in this case one key failure was the natural gas infrastructure was unable to function under the condition. in my own home state of california with wildfires into andthe position of the significt amounts for the electric grid so regardless of the technology in

question were the extreme weather threat we've done this effectively in the electric power sector through the north american electric reliability appropriation. so i want to applaud the department of energy also for the building a better grid initiative for the key pieces of the bipartisan infrastructure legislation including the power act that would make it more reliable, resilient and cleaner and a piecemeal glittery approach that maintains the resilience of some parts while neglecting others we need to commonsense standards to ensure reliability across the entire system from the transmission pipelines and i commend the chair man for proposing legislation that would work towards that end. i wonder if you could speak to the reliability benefits and iss provided to the power system

already especially against extreme weather. thank you very much for the question, congressman. so the standards have been in place for probably 15 years or so but i think they've been quite successful. there's been a number of outages over time and a lot of it related to the local system with the distribution lines and so on but if you recall there was some significant problems with the grid before this requirement. there was a major blackout in the eastern part of the united states and so far with of these standards i believe it's gone a long way to avoid those type of catastrophes. >> it was quite an experience with amateur traffic directors

trying to get people through. could you also speak to the status of the proposed rulemaking on the transmission and maybe elaborate on how the building a better initiative could improve electric reliability? >> thank you again for the question and as you know well because i know you are active on this issue, electric transmission plays an important part in terms of reliability. it provides certainly acts of resilience to the grid to deal with extreme weather conditions whether it be wildfire, tornadoes, whatever it may be so there's no doubt reliability benefits is one of the major reasons that we need to develop they've issued a proposed rulemaking last year to address the series of questions how we will reform the planning transmission allocating costs

for transmission dealing with the interconnection of the facilities to the electric grid and things like that and we have the number of comments my hope is that we will have an actual notice of the rulemaking and my goal is to start with a final rule on some of these issues by the end of the year. what is your response to folks that say there's no federal role with respect to similar regime on the gas infrastructure. >> as i mentioned before on the bulk power system is heavily dependent on the reliability of the gas pipelines so there is a federal role there and secondly, we talk about the interstate natural gas pipelines.

the states might not be capable at least of addressing those particular issues with the interstate pipeline. >> i think that's clear and i appreciate the opportunity to discuss it today. thank you and i will yield back. >> the gentle man yields back into the chair now recognizes the ranking member for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. at the testimony outlines the responsibilities for preparing and responding to hazards to risks and threats to the delivery of the nation's energy and power. the core mission of doe is after national security is energy security and we must maintain reliability and affordability. on the risk of american disengagement from fossil fuels

and shifting geopolitical power to the adversaries of russia and china. >> thanks for the question and i think just as you said and i don't think anyone would disagree with this, we need to do three things at the same time, we need to make sure we have affordability for all of our american citizens, all of our american people and we spend an awful lot of time on that. we need to make sure there is national security energy security and we also need to make sure that we are promoting and pushing on the sustainability side of things and making sure that we have a proactive and ambitious and aggressive plan to reduce the carbon impact and we don't have the impact of extreme weather that we've seen all across the country this past year. over $145 billion worth of damage caused by that. >> are you making up recommendations to the administration on the geopolitical impact of shifting from fossil fuel to china and russia?

>> what we have been recommending all along is both make sure that we are moving as ambitiously as we can on this clean energy transition to have a variety -- >> i'm going to run out of time. very quickly. excuse me. i'm going to move on. i have a record i would like to submit for the record that i wrote to secretary granholm to oversee what doe is doing and the dependence on the minerals and help develop the domestic supply chains for these minerals and i ask that this document to be entered into the record. and i know that you have not reviewed this letter. i would like to ask at another time for you to come and grieve the members of this committee on the plan to develop more secure and domestic supplies for critical minerals and technologies to meet the goals that you've just outlined. it's going to be very important that we are developing domestic supplies otherwise we would be dependent on china and they will shut us down.

they identify the vulnerabilities in the power system that came from china and other adversarial actors that issued an order to block components that put critical electric infrastructure at risk. this administration immediately rescinded that orderly and proposed a renewed electricity supply chain initiative seeking information from stakeholders. you mentioned a set of hundred basis points in your testimony. does the electric supply chain security part of this and what is the status of the work to block the complaints from adversaries that put the system at risk? >> this president has made the supply chains and critical minerals and absolute top priority, and we are spending a lot of a lot of time and the department of energy. we've got now a dozen in-depth exercises and review studies looking at the full supply chain out of completely agree with you we need to diversify the supply chain on the minerals and including for batteries and doing more domestic production, more domestic efforts all across

the supply chain and working with reliable allies all across the country. so we'd be more than happy to come back up, myself personally, others from the department, and to give the committee a full briefing and give your guidance and thoughts on how we can make sure we work together -- >> i look forward to working with you on that. thank you very much. china overwhelmingly dominates the global critical minerals supply chain, including 90% of silicon waiver used for solar panels. 80% of the rare earth minerals that go into wind turbines and electric vehicle motors. do you have concerns that rely upon chinese supply chains for energy resources and technologies can make the grid less reliable? and secondly, recent comments from a known or made headlines this weekend because of his answers and that there is a low level of interest in the ongoing genocide in china. ..

>> i completely agree with you madame ranking member on the concerns about china. on the labor side and on having the as surety a supply over time going forward. and me in the administration working hand-in-hand with congress have to get serious about putting in place the ability to build up our domestic manufacturing. pd manufacturing is a great example paramedic congress and

the groundbreaking work to get technology and the place it has gotten to we didn't do to have the incentive to make sure we have in place the manufacturing infrastructure to take advantage of that now all that moves to china and a few other countries around the world to have incentives like the fema legislation like the build back better agenda to make sure we can do the domestic production that we need to happy to work hand-in-hand with a series of incentives a real plan to build a mystic manufacturing with the supply chain all of these supplies and materials we get from china not to be beholden from one country. >> we need the infrastructure package if included mining in the united states of america anxious for that administration to come to unleash if we are really going

to do this we need to be honest about what it will take i do look forward to working with you. >> we now recognize in our representative from the great state of pennsylvania and what a pleasure it has been serving with you in congress the past 27 years on the energy and commerce committee i wish you the very best and i note that we both have things we still want to do we just won't be

doing them in congress after this year so thank you again thank you and the ranking member for holding these hearings. at some recent high profile event the disruption to our energy supply and the need for reliability will only increase as we see more extreme weather events and the proliferation of cyberattacks. the reliable delivery of energy whether gas or oil or electricity is obsolete critical so i'm glad the committee is having this hearing on legislation to finally bring standards to this sector to ensure that consumers will have power when they need it. chairman, pennsylvania is only second to texas and domestic natural gas production but the reliability issues that might happen in texas such as baylor to account for cold weather in the winter may not arise in other regions do you think oil

and gas reliability standards should very dependent on the geography and climate and likely to take those factors into account from the act that it would create? >> the standards themselves would be set and the apr oh word recommend of the standard should be applied to certain sections of the country that happens on the electric side depending where the utility is located but the legislation would provide flexibility to provide that for those around the country for their

circumstances. >> deputies secretary the department of energy is still on the front line combating cyberagainst energy infrastructure can you tell us what type of cybersecurity threats posed the greatest threat to the reliability of energy infrastructure? we have threats across the board to be honest. >> with the colonial pipeline situation. a very sophisticated threats. is not just electricity or pipelines we need to be prepared for all of that. to into your previous question

we completely agree. we have mandatory standards. working hand-in-hand with the private sector but then mother the pipelines and other infrastructure in one state. >> while tsa is theoretical responsible for setting the standards for the pipelines. can you elaborate halibut energy experts in charge of creating enforceable reliability standards? >> i think it would differ

from the current authority it is over cybersecurity and physical security not those reliability standards that impacted and second as i understand it the tsa standards only last for one year and it can propose to approve those standards to be modified over time and it's very important and then to renew these standards and that certainty for pipeline companies to make those investments. >> my time is expired and i yield back. >> thank you very much

mr. chairman for our witnesses for being with us today. and also congratulate you for your years of service in the house of representatives we wish you all the best in your years ahead. late last year approaching the beginning of winter and home heating costs were surging to us 70 or high shutting down a critically important pipeline and my good friend from michigan has already touched on that bed in response i wrote a letter was several my colleagues expressing her concerns with tens of thousands of jobs to jeopardize economic activity and exacerbate fewer shortages and price hikes across the midwest. and then several days later the white house back down the idea to intervene in shut down the pipeline however michigan governor witmer continues to play politics to shut down the

pipeline as the biden administration is still in consultation over the pipeline space. also to join my colleagues the gentleman from michigan to introduce the act with that executive authority for operation cost 40 and one —- border energy infrastructure. with the deputy secretary and again in keeping with the great tradition of this committee with the former chairman dingle to the name and estimate was named after asking a series of yes or no questions if there is no unsafe or hazardous condition to warrant to shut down quick. >> i am not personally aware of that other agencies have the jurisdiction are not a lot of time i have prepared. >> in late 2020 yes or no

based on safety data president you pipelines are considered the most efficient method for transporting energy products? >> as a general rule for those in and talking significant volume. but what about line five? >> i personally haven't spent time and i don't know the analysis. i have not personally consulted on that issue. >> who is being consulted on? >> we can certainly have a discussion and an answer for the record. >> we really need to get that

because we are talking of billions of dollars that can impact ohio and michigan. you mention also that cybersecurity. in the wall street journal. about a coordinated attack. and then talk about cyberin this community how important it is an last year those that signed into law as part of the infrastructure bill to boost bridge security will you commit to quickly implementing these two bills to enhance bridge security for public-private partnerships threats to cyberattacks? >> we have silly have to we have to do more and

cybersecurity. and the president the chairman said so and eager to work hand-in-hand with any piece of legislation we can provide technical expertise and advice what makes a lot of sense. is the lng export van to the administration? >> i statutory authority is looking at the national interest if we look at affordability. >> that the question is it being considered? yes or no. >> we are looking at the full range. >> i can interpret you say yes? >> we're doing the analysis more broadly. >> thank you very much. do you agree the united states interest to provide natural gas to reduce energy dependence.

>> again there is a very significant energy security benefit from lng going to europe and japan. and look at the affordability of us consumers and look at the environmental sustainability of the footprint as well. but certainly their energy security benefits. >> i'm trying to get a yes or no because to make sure when i was with the chairman. i guess my time is expired i yield back. >> the gentle man recognizes the gentle lady from california who is also announced the retirement now recognizing the minority for

five minutes. >> and for your friendships and working for years to improve the reliability. including the two bills to improves the security deputy secretary not much has been devoted to pipeline cybersecurity and that the last of a central agency with energy expertise to oversee pipeline cybersecurity creates confusion which in turn reduces security.

with the doe and 2018 how has that built up the internal expertise and capacity but the cyberthreat? >> thank you very much not only for the question but for the years and years and then in many ways. so this is a top priority for doe these are terrific group of colleagues and we focused on everything from leveraging our expertise from cutting-edge technology on the cybersecurity side and coordinate with the energy sector not just electricity sector but oil and gas meant to bring that expertise for the private sector and to make sure we have the ability to have information and sharing from the public and private

sector has been incredibly important along those lines and what i think is a very robust regime and that is the model i think has worked quite well and we have silly need to have mandatory standards on pipelines but it goes beyond the pipelines and refineries in the supply chain on the oil and gas side as well. >> a pretty comprehensive answer pretty briefly what about artificial intelligence. >> and then i artificial intelligence machine learning for all of those capabilities with the computing capabilities of the national labs in particular. and absolutely a role that it can play on pipeline safety in addition to a number of other

areas and we need to make sure if we are bringing artificial intelligence to bear that that kind of technology is not have to in ways that are detrimental that is on the reliability front. >> many are working to the reliance but then in texas like the winter storm there is climate change and then the extreme weather event to pose a risk to the viable products yes or no quick. >> . >> anyway in which serves the functions for the organization

response setting standards for the system? >> so congressman i appreciate the question but i think the incentive is that the electorate that generally has been pretty good with that texas situation in that cold weather event back and 11 the report recommended there be standards whether those facilities and then unfortunate that is water down into guidance because it is a very competitive business it want to make the investment their competitors not going to make that investment but it is

necessary to require everyone to engage in and if we had done that in 2011 we probably wouldn't have the disaster last february in texas. >> those standards. >> and the chairman now recognizes. >> mr. chairman, thank you and congratulations to you to come through you defeated covid over the holidays but after your decision not to return next year, your voice and your passion for so many people

across america will be sorely missed. with all due respect however this bill may be well intended that the committee should be addressing the rising energy cost of today heating bills could increase as much as 54 percent this winter and with the build back better plan democrats want to add a tax on natural gas that would raise by an additional 17 percent on top of it. fortunately this bill is dying in the senate. is your party tone deaf people across america are struggling and according to health advisor one out of four americans went without basic needs that this fails to

address that and with pipeline development. i get that environmental justice report it specifically says no new pipelines in america. and all while supporting and last year with the new president and your party in the majority the committee held only 74 hearings and markups. and contrast that with 2017 and president trumps first year in office and republicans were in the majority. this committee held 106 hearings and markups. that is 50 percent more.

when those streamline and to remove barriers for job creation. it is no wonder the public does not trust congress. we are headed in the wrong direction. and we should be liking on —- to reduce energy cost. that the natural gas act to conduct a public interest review for that to move forward do you believe it's in the public interest to have access to reliable supply of natural gas? yes or no. >> yes. >> and now to redefine public interest to include climate change and the social cost of carbon which will hinder pipeline development.

because of that new england currently imports natural gas and we know russian gas is 40 percent dirtier than american gas. and then to import gas and it's also more affordable. >> thank you for the question. i don't disagree with the premise that it is enforcing greenhouse gas emissions on pipeline development. >> those have told us that if we don't engage with that analysis with that impact might be on greenhouse gas emissions but then that is the

problem we have more uncertainty and more delay and less gas production. >> do you think you think it sends a message of trust and then to rely on foreign nations? >> in that situation is complicated but there hasn't been enough demand to bring in new pipeline development not that is much better but the natural gas supplied is primarily from africa and not russia. >> i yield back. >> the chair recognizes on his steamed environment for five

your recognized okay that chair now recognizes the gentleman for five minutes. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from ohio. >> thank you mr. chairman.

it is a bit ironic that now we are finally hearing having a hearing on protecting our nation pipeline infrastructure because my democratic colleagues and has been over one year to conduct an all-out assault on reliable and affordable fossil fuels and infrastructure needed to transport these resources to market. but this hypocrisy is nothing new going back to may 2021 the colonial pipeline which supplies half of the fuel consumed from the east coast , as we all remember it suffered a major cyberattack. secretary granholm from the white house podium admitted when it comes to moving america's fuel she said pipe is the best way to go. do you agree with secretary

granholm is pipe the best way to go? >> thank you for the question is a referenced earlier. >> it is yes or no. do you agree with secretary granholm? that need the elaboration. >> yes there are. >> okay. i don't know about you but i do agree that pipe is the best way to go with a litany of pipeline actions it makes you wonder who is responsible for american energy security because president biden is not listening to his energy secretary or people like you that think it is the best way to go we all know about the administration's actions against the xl keystone pipeline which provides energy so consider shutting that down

have any of you heard of the pipeline? $1billion to carry reliable affordable natural gas from appellation to new jersey the full committee chairman home state. last fall it was canceled due to massive opposition from environmentalists and radical left-wing politicians do my colleagues really want to secure our pipeline or just side with a radical environmentalist and shutdown the pipelines in favor of whether renewable energy sources? it seems to me many democratic friends cannot seem to make up their minds. but you were previously the deputy director of the iaea a report stated that we need to

move and energy economy and dominated by renewables like solar and wind instead of fossil fuels do you agree with that we can move to an economy dominated like solar and wind instead of fossil fuels quick. >> we need to do two things simultaneously giving that climate imperative. >> you don't want to debate climate change program asking a simple question. do you agree with the agency's statement we can move to an energy economy dominated by renewable wind and solar quick. >> we need to move aggressively with a variety of clean energy resources. >> so you agree we should protect what we have and diversify?

>> that's a second part of the answer as we moved to the robust future we need to make sure energy is reliable and secure. >> how do you make sure the energy is reliable and secure if the efforts to shut down the very pipeline that take that energy to market? and that challenges we see across the country. and then from the pandemic. with supply and demand and then since 1953. since 1953 it's been running and it had nothing to do with the pandemic. >> that's not the issue

causing the current affordability challenges across the country. right now we don't have enough supply matching up with demand as the economy comes back and the economy is doing quite well. we don't have enough supply on the wheel side to match up as by redoing the kinds of things we're doing with the strategic petroleum reserve as we get more product on the market. >> we should be doing everything we can to increase production and user on resources in america nasa but this administration is doing that would bring down the price of gas at the pumps and lower the cost groceries on the shelf. i yield back. >> . >> thank you for your years of

service. to safeguard the energy service from weather to cyberterrorism i have two questions and hydro power is an inexpensive form as energy as the hydro capital of the country. the infrastructure investment and jobs act provided a much needed investment in the hydro industry was proud to support that legislation. with the impact of client cheat on —- climate change over the past year at least that to be taken off-line so for your investments to increase resiliency is critical as we continue to rely on hydro power. what additional measures did the administration take to address these challenges to

rely on that type of power quick. >> thank you for the question and your focus rightfully so. it is such an incredibly important part of the clean energy generation currently. and we feel hydro power needs to play a more important role going forward. whether the funding provided in the legislation and thank you for your leadership for all the other efforts on hydro power to make sure we retain the existing hydropower that we have and additional ways to bring additional where it makes sense and using hydro for storage to balance and was solar and wind we are spending a lot of time and attention on hydropower and also we need to

take into account climate change impact on hydro resources to make sure we are prepared to deal with that as well. >> thank you for mentioning the way to store energy and we agree adding that is already in existence is another way to increase our use. and the extreme weather causes gaps as it did in texas three weeks ago scrambling to find alternative sources those to have increased visibility and where it is and then to propose legislation to help ameliorate and with the current supply system.

>> so increase transparency of the natural gas market would benefit consumers. sometimes electric generation so it has significant advantages for better transparency. i don't believe the legislation before as which is primarily focused on liability and that is more reliable. so those pipeline systems with those and they keep it going in extreme weather.

and with the canadian natural gas supply chain how do you see that being concluded for cybersecurity? >> in so that reliability standard process is not only operating in the united states but also canada and mexico. so the standards that are applied there actually go to review by the canadian government because they are similar in most standards for the united states and the bill before us with the pipeline reliability organization with

canada and the united states. i yield back. >> now the gentle man is recognized. >> thank you very much mr. chairman i'm pleased to have two administration witnesses here today is surging energy prices it's important the committee exercises oversight with those that have energy security and affordability i am disappointed the oversight and investigations subcommittee has not been allowed to hold a single hearing how the policies may have played a role in the energy crisis. in fact the oversight investigations subcommittee hasn't been allowed to hold the hearing from september 29th the last year and tell tomorrow's hearing on cleaning

up cryptocurrency. the energy impact supply chain. shifting gears. in your testimony you said the devastating and then the supply chain risk of critical hardware and software and those of that february 2021 winter storms and the colonial pipeline incident and testimony here today we hear about hydropower and climate impact and how they should be looked at and that's important. have you had numerous briefings with other federal agencies and industry on the's issues as you imply on page number one of your written statement? >> absolutely. >> can you give an estimate

how many have occurred. >> and we spent on a daily basis i don't know what number of other fund doe. >> dozens with other agencies. >> focused on affordability and reliability and all the issues that you reference. >> how many briefings have you participated in with other federal agencies to clean up cryptocurrency energy impact or block chain? we cannot get in answer this morning from your agency. >> i have personally spent time on this working on not only the impact of block chain and digital impacts today but into the future. >> it would be fair to say focus more the issues you put

in your written statement than what you talk about today such as cybersecurity? would that be fair and problems with the supply chain? and the issues you put in your statement when you testify to previously today? yes or no. >> we work on all of these personally i probably spend more time on cyberon —- cybersecurity. >> have you talked about those issues in the last four months? have you talked about those in the last four months? >> and so from the actions you have told me about and i appreciate it, it seems perhaps that just maybe the oversight and investigations subcommittee have been focus the energy use of

cybersecurity or those issues related to cryptocurrency and energy mr. johnson just brought up another one we heard about hydro. all these issues of the cause for the cost increase you are about to get into a debate with mr. johnson but the oversight investigations subcommittee which hasn't met performance has jurisdiction over healthcare like nursing shortages, broadband, internet,g not only for energy but all kinds of sectors including why does the house have masks made from china when we can have those made in the united states of america? this is what the house provided us. but i greatly appreciate you being here today. these are important issues. but i feel the subcommittee

patient find their own course sometimes i agree with chairwoman sometimes they don't that is the importance subcommittee not using one is not being used in it is a shame and a waste. and then as we see china and india both increasing substantially increasing their use of coal to find new technologies to make it better we can do it it is united states of america. we can make it back. >> .

>> thank you for your great work as subcommittee chair on energy. welcome. considering the boundaries between the responsibility. and then to require that coordination. and then how do we think of the jurisdictional divides? >> thank you for the question. the way we handle electricity reliability. and then to address the issue. and with that powers system with a big generation facility and then essentially left to the states for the reliability

of the distribution system. but then to have a significant role to play. with the love of the distribution companies. and then to play a very significant role. and it is an issue on electricity and reliability. >> and the federal government and the organization? >> and also the way the legislation is currently drafted to make a distinction from the distribution and the interstate grid of the natural gas pipelines is something i would recommend the committee take a look at.

and as a model for this proposal to overcome the federal state coordination? with electricity system? >> and then with a series of regional reliability organization spread out throughout the country more focused on reliability issues and that plays a big role to coordinate with the association an individual state commissions. and then working together on the same issues. >> even with this legislation is there a role for energy security planning and preparedness by the state? >> and those miles of pipe around the country in the

federalist government and with that bigger issue but the local level issues that are already within the jurisdiction and then to ensure the local pipelines are operating reliable gas service. and with the public-private coordination is there anything you can tell us about the need to improve coordination between federal and state and reliability and cybershoes? >> it is an excellent question to focus on the question of public and private and federal state and local as well. and then working hand-in-hand with others any other enter agencies. there is a full plan in place

to rely cybersecurity everybody needs to be on board. >> and you feel a better initiative? and then restart resiliency across the country with modern and reliable transmission systems reliable for those with unreliable delivery structure so how do you see pipeline reliability and cybersecurity standards complementing the broader goals with the more resilient energy system? >> first of all money thank you congressman who supported the legislation i gave a $16 billion and then to have very effectively to promote the reliability it is tied

hand-in-hand with natural gas we are part of the energy system. at the value chain just as the model has worked well for electricity. >> thank you to tsa to have mandatory standards put in place for pipeline and then those five standards including refineries and other parts of the value chain as well. having a coherent system in place to do what we need to do. >> thank you so much. with that i yield back.

>> thank you mr. chairman and thank you for your service to your country and in your retirement i you continue to promote the policies and the things you have been doing on behalf of your constituents. >> thank you deputy secretary. and americans around the country are still facing the consequences of the dreadful state of american energy and this month my constituents and indiana are paying gas prices 40 percent higher than last year and winters underway and those that have to develop more paychecks for their energy bill to forgo other necessities like food and medicine stunning levels of inflation have hamper the american economy the last several months and are ongoing and not short-term

unfortunately the biden administration has not effectively address the fundamental problem this committee should be conducting oversight and then to find ways to expand the regulatory footprint rather than resolving key problems and therefore i'm disappointed that is not the central topic of today's hearing. and then from what i was headed here but as it relates to lng and crude oil exports. is the ban on the table it

want to dress energy cost. and then with the lng side and then not something we are currently discussing. >> thank you for that answer with the mismanagement of this strategic petroleum reserve and it is intended as a safeguard from the effects of a natural disaster in the energy market. and then also authorized a series of drawdowns and with that life extension modernization program.

i'm concerned administration is circumventing congress and the statutory limitations under the energy policy conservation act under political manipulation. yes or no the law must make an emergency declaration that a severe energy supply interruption exist before authorizing the drive down. is that correct? >> there are a number of ways and then that was announced was not an emergency designation that we use for the 50 million barrels 18 million barrels of that was the congressionally mandated sale that we moved up the timing of that all consistent with congressional authorization. the other 32 million barrels was an exchange we use the mechanism for that particular moment in time because our

economy has heated up at the supply of oil has not match that that's why we have the pressures and the price has gone up. >> and that what we have in the market and then to when they had that price reduction. >> i think he did it before thanksgiving because of polling numbers were down in the american people were mad energy prices were going up and honestly based on your answer 99.9 percent of the american people cannot decipher the reason why he did it. so why didn't he make that finding as an interruption did they refuse to authorize the collective drawdown of their reserves? we spent month-to-month looking at the tools we have had on this and we came forward with an incredibly well put together a plan at a

particular moment in time with significant movement in the market and when that supply from the us and brazil and others matchup with that demand the prices will go down but then we have a peek at the curve in the exchange mechanism to help shave that off for more supplies. >> i think it was used to get around congress personally. fair enough. i yield back. >> the chair recognizes the chairman of the subcommittee of investigations for five minutes. >> thank you so much mr. chairman and thank you for your service to this committee and also that means a lot.

i also want to think the ranking member of the oversight subcommittee for already preparing in advance for wonderful hearing on energy use and cybersecurity issues tomorrow. and i also want to say i would have a hearing investigation every week. under the pandemic only one of the two committee is wired for the ability to do web accept the same time but i have been asking that chairman to have both committee hearings up and running so we can have a robust number from the rest of my democratic members of the investigation get ready

starting with cybercrimes tomorrow. i have a number of questions but several colleagues on the other side of the aisle has implied that it is the policy to get natural gas from china and russia. so talk for a brief moment what that policy is in terms of importing natural gas from foreign sources. >> thank you for the question. as an independent agency come i cannot speak with the administration's position that i will say that the commission has over a number of years a large number have proposed lng

export facilities and it's our job to ensure they are operated safely and it will have an adverse effect on the environment. we have seen the demand. >> you are not answering my question. i have other questions. with that independent power producers and then forced to pay national gas prices but they did not to fill their contract so i just want to ask you underwrite legislation is that for similar cost in the future? >> yes. thank you it's a great question because i think that's the reason were here today talking about energy prices but we need to talk about what happened when those are no longer reliable.

you saw what happened to the natural gas system in texas and only did that bring down electricity and cause blackouts but also raise natural gas prices for the entire region tumors in colorado and kansas and elsewhere they still pay exorbitant rates in large part because of the supply and demand system is out of whack so that is one of the benefits of this legislation to promote a more reliable natural gas system to reduce cost on the natural gas for consumers as well. >> so those of the current lack of reliability standards and one is an emergency energy production. can you tell us why it is

essential to give the commission the ability reliability standard it isn't always nimble enough the department of energy has emergency third authority to have that authority on the natural gas side to implement emergency reliability standards when those conditions warrant. >> deputy secretary, with that infrastructure security has issued a directive with the tsa timeline. and then briefly with those

designations? >> we work hand in hand with the agency partners including tsa as well and we were very pleased there are mandatory standards on the book for pipelines that tsa has put out although that is a to have those issues for more than a near to have that longer-term peace and also standards on refinery and other parts of the value chain as well. >> thank you so much for your service. >> you are recognized for five minutes. >> i wish you all the best may have one year left glad we

have a chance to work with you and we look forward to seeing you here. for the keystone xl p. the pipeline would have created tens of thousands of jobs and ensure a stable supply of nearly 800,000 barrels per day of crude oil from our closest ally into trading partner in canada, my neighbor. if president biden hadn't revoked the keystone pipeline but allow the u.s. to produce more gasoline and diesel which would help us reduce imports from the middle east and russia and unbelievably especially in light of the fact that secretary

granholm is a former governor of michigan. it delivers the majority of michigan and regions and other essential fuels for heating, agriculture and manufacturing. political whims should not decide whether michiganders can heed to their homes or not. so i've introduced the protecting international pipelines for energy security pipes act which would prevent president biden from putatively shutting down existing energy pipelines like line five without a congressional approval. deputy secretary, welcome. thank you for being here. do you support the construction of pipelines from canada to increase the domestic supply of oil and refined products, yes or no? >> just to be clear we don't have the authority on that front. >> we will talk about that

later. i've heard that statement and i have some concerns. but yes or no, do you support pipelines from canada to increase the domestic supply of oil products? >> one thing and i think we should be clear on this, it's not the pipeline issue that's causing the current affordability challenge that we have. >> do you support the construction? >> when i look at any energy infrastructure -- >> i'm not going to get the answer. i only have a certain amount of time. he did doe conduct an analysis to conduct the security impacts of canceling the keystone permit? >> so that was before my time. i'm sure there was an analysis. i should say i don't know what analysis was done. >> i'm amazed secretary granholm, having been in front of us before, last year, and asking questions about the

keystone pipeline, line five pipeline as well, that you were not prepped to respond to questions that you knew we would ask because there is great concern because it impacts my district and many other districts. let me ask you this question. did doe want the white house to cancel the keystone xl pipeline to lead to job losses in energy price increases? have you heard that? >> i don't have any knowledge of that analysis or what that would mean. >> what precedents does keystone xl set for other pipelines and electric transmission facilities? >> again i don't think the pipeline issue is the affordability issue that you and other members have flagged as a primary concern and that we are working on in this administration. we are looking at the tools we have in the near term -- >> it isn't working. >> john stewart. >> look at the price at the pump, the price on my farm,

constituents as they are trying to drive late fees and harvests and the costs appropriating. canadians are filing a claim under nafta to reclaim $15 billion in economic damages caused by president biden's keystone pipeline permit. i'm concerned american taxpayers will be forced to pay this penalty, another casualty of the biden administration's anti-fossil fuel agenda. in the few seconds that i have left, and your response to the congressman latta and ranking member upton, you indicated he doe hasn't conducted any analysis of the current impact of closing line five. if that's the case and the administration ought to be having from the department of energy consultation, advice that deals with energy in this country, it amazes me that that is not happening. regardless of whether you think you have priority or responsibility for that, the

consultation to this administration to give them the reality of what energy resources are needed and how to get them to people to do it in the safest way possible, in fact the way it was done before january 20th, and with that i will yield back. >> the chair recognizes now the gentle lady from the great state of california, ms. matsui for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman. i also want to say thank you for your many years of service and i look forward to working with you the rest of this term and i look at with curiosity what your next chapter will be and look forward to that. i want to thank both witnesses for being here with us today. deputy secretary turk, your testimony identifies many ways in which the department of energy engages with industry to address cyber security threats.

yes or no, do any of those programs result in mandatory and enforceable cyber security standards? >> it's an independent part of doe and has responsibility for electricity both power and terms of the mandatory standards, and we help on their mandatory standards. >> okay. i'm also interested to see other sides of the standards to protect critical energy infrastructure. >> i've certainly come to the conclusion having dealt with cyber security more than i thought i would frankly is the deputy over my first year, a little less than first year, and i've come to the conclusion we do need mandatory standards across the board when it comes to critical infrastructure. it's too important. we can't just rely on every company doing what they should do and we need to have a

baseline mandatory standard. so, electricity, pipelines, refineries throughout the value chain, doing it in a commonsense way with an awful lot of discussion with the private sector but we need to be prepared. we need those mandatory standards in my opinion. >> thank you. looking ahead for the potential offshore wind development of california's coast it's important for the stakeholders to have an opportunity to provide influence into the development of this industry and that's why i was thrilled to see the administration investing and building a better and more reliable electric inc. including from offshore wind. the deputy secretary and chair man, can you speak to both roles in that initiative and how your

agency uses their experience engaging with stakeholders to ensure to offshore that it's collaborative and inclusive? >> thank you for the question and for flogging offshore wind. at the potential for offshore wind is huge we have a 30 gigawatts target and i think we should be even thinking more boldly than that, even more numbers than that certainly beyond 2030. the capacity factor for offshore wind is higher than onshore wind. it balances out a number of parts to the clean energy generation piece of it. we are spending an awful lot of time including on the innovations of the cost reduction side including for floating offshore wind which would be so important for california and off the west coast. then we are working with others on the transmission side. we need to make sure we are building an infrastructure to bring those offshore capacities into the fold and have that be

an incredibly important and resilient part of the energy infrastructure. >> absolutely. mr. chair man would you like to comment? >> i appreciate the question. so, we are going to be providing technical assistance to the department of energy and the initiative in particular with issues related to offshore wind, interconnecting the facilities to the grid, vitally important for the development of those technologies. secondly, we actually have our own grid reform initiative underway, which we are hoping to establish a regulatory reform and regulations. we are focused on what's needed to access what is undoubtedly going to be a substantial demand in terms of offshore wind and the east coast and also as you mentioned of the west coast. we are going to need to figure out what is the most efficient way to build these. do you build one transmission facility and access and collect from a bunch of different offshore facilities or do you do it on a case-by-case basis building a line out to each

individual offshore wind generating farm. those are the type of issues we will be dealing with in terms of where we are on the transmission reform initiative. >> in addition to offshore wind, what lessons can we take from claimant and cybersecurity to ensure the deployment of new clean energy sources john stewart. >> if you look at the situation in texas with extreme cold and the west coast with regards to extreme heat and wildfires and if you look with regards to obviously hurricane iodide that took place and the devastation that occurred, we need to make the grid much more easily into than it currently is to address and withstand some of these extreme weather conditions and we are engaged and we've opened up a docket and held a conference which is our version of a congressional hearing and we are looking at what initiatives we can pursue to essentially encourage utilities to make the grid more resilient

to these extreme weather conditions. >> thank you very much, and i will yield back. >> the gentle lady yields back and the chair now recognizes the gentleman from south carolina for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chair man and welcome back. it's a joy to serve with you. the spr released a blip in the gasoline and diesel prices. prices did go up as mr. turk said and will continue to go up as demand increases throughout the winter months but it will go back down when the weather warms and the demand increases at least for a little while until we get into the summer vacation travel season then the demand goes up and prices will go up and supplies. about one thing the administration did is acknowledge that these are basic economics of supply and demand. the way to address this energy crisis is by increasing supply,

not stifling it, which is democrat policy, stifling energy production in this country. the title of this hearing is pipeline reliability but the democrats really don't like pipelines. that's obvious. they shut down the pipeline, the gentleman from michigan talked about it in fact they shut down the atlantic coast pipeline. there is an article here that says the congressional progressive caucus has been successful in finding restrictions of natural gas production through fracking and blocking the pipelines including the atlantic coast pipeline. senator sanders celebrated efforts by progressives to cancel. another example of democrats not liking the pipelines is the fact that there is no pipeline taking available natural gas up to the new england states. the lack of the pipeline requires because they have a thirst for energy in new

england. they don't like looking at the wind turbines of the coastline. they don't want pipelines because they think that it might -- they are going to import from russia and africa and other places and import it to the united states, providing 32 new england. it's there for the energy, they just don't want american gas through the pipeline, reliable or not as the title of this hearing is. mr. glick, are you familiar with the letter sent to you by over 40 democrats on the fifth of january, 2022? >> yes, i am. >> okay. i've got a letter here and it raises concern with the affect that anticipating increases in the heating and energy cost will have on their constituents this

winter. we are all concerned about the costs on our constituents. i agree with another point in the letter low income households have a burden. republicans have talked about this for a long time. there are certain sources of energy that cost more to produce and that's wind and solar and other things. so there letter addresses that. said letter demands they investigate whether market manipulation rather than an environmental agenda or supply constraints are causing natural gas prices to rise over 30% on average for consumers last year. not supposed to use the word hypocrisy in congress. i was told that when i first came here, but this is hypocritical because the same policy, limiting offshore drilling, ending leases, not wanting to have hydraulic fracturing, not having pipelines to bring the gas where the need and demand is, using dirty or

burning gas to heat homes and produce electricity, all that is hypocritical. it's also hypocritical to try to say there's market manipulation, when the administration is shutting down production in this country. while at the same time promoting energy sources that cost more to produce and that cost is pushed down to the lower income people that they are talking about here. hypocrisy at its finest. at the biden administration revoked the permit on the keystone pipeline, halted all new federal oil and gas leases, green lighting the completion of russia's north stream to pipeline, another hypocritical thing. the same delegates are concerned with high energy prices for constituents championing, blogging the natural gas pipeline which is just amazing. so mr. glick, do you agree the pipelines are the safest methods to transport oil and gas? >> we are not in the business of examining safety of the pipeline transportation -- >> well i do, i'm going to stop

you there. we have gas here in the united states john stewart i could go on and on. also i think the renovation of the government mandates on the energy sector we continue to lead in oil and gas production as well as reduce emissions. i think europe is going to find that of them being the hold on russia for their energy sources once the north stream to ads to the north stream one pipeline that brings gas there, and vladimir putin continues to use that as a leverage of policy and political influence. they are going to wish they had u.s. lng ships and terminals to offload that in europe. anyway, i'm out of time and with that, mr. chairman, i will yield back. >> the chair now recognizes john

stewart mr. chairman thank you very much and i want to thank chairman john stewart into the deputy secretary for being here today to answer questions. over the past year, we have seen many events including some tragic ones in my home state of texas that really show the importance. i wrote a letter last year and i support the joint inquiry to investigate operations of the power system and i think there is a need to have a conversation about the benefits and challenges about the rest of the country. electricity as all of us know is essential as food and water and we can't have the reliable electricity if we do not have reliable natural gas. it's critical and i think they have a role to play in some regulation of the pipeline with increasing transparency.

this legislation addresses that and one of the issues laid out in the report. it's also critical as we address the problem that we take a serious look at the rest of the infrastructure that supports the electric grid including natural gas production. as many of you know, we are busting with natural resources including natural gas that helps fuel the economy and keep us competitive globally. it's all the more important that we take action to ensure the resources are there when we need them the most, like during the historically cold winter storm that we had. while the legislation addresses some of the concerns, a lot of the problems were related to the

disruptions particularly with a frozen wellhead and i was hoping chairman glick could describe the extent in particular can you speak to the oversight through the pipeline? >> thank you very much for the question. so, we have authority over slighting the interstate natural gas pipelines under the national gas act and we have some authority over the regulations of the transportation. primarily we have authority over the jurisdiction of the pipeline, transportation of natural gas over the national pipeline but there's also intrastate that provide some intrastate service and in those cases we also regulate pursuant to section 311 of the natural gas policy act.

>> given the oversight of both, does ferc state the oversight as sufficient? >> we don't have the ability to do that. primarily they are subject to the commission. >> given that we know the asset john stewart subsequent issues have been avoided if there was additional visibility on the pipeline? >> i think the major issues were essentially weather conditions

and secondly they lost their power, there wasn't essentially a system set up and i think texas has looked at that and have to make sure they are not cut out from those facilities. so those were where the response ability's lie with the impact and what caused the blackouts of texas. i don't -- >> what if there were capacities for similar to the bulletin boards available for the pipelines do you think [inaudible] >> i think generators, to have more insight especially as mentioned, to have more transparency to what's going on would allow them to go out and purchase natural gas elsewhere instead of at the last minute which certainly caused some of the problems and drove up prices in the region. >> thank you. mr. chairman, i will yield back.

>> the chair now recognizes the gentleman for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman and your presence will be missed. i wish you well. i've been sitting here listening to the responses from the witnesses and i'm kind of stuck somewhere between perplexed and confused and ashamed at how unwilling you are to give a straight answer to a straight question and how little you seem to know about some of the subject matter. you were asked about pipeline safety. i don't care if that is your area of expertise or not, you ought to know that the safety record for pipelines is impeccable. 99.999% safe. it is by far, without question,

except apparently by you to come of the safest means of transporting energy. it's also the least expensive. and if it is a big deal for american families. as i pointed out many times on the committee i grew up dirt poor, so i have a real burden for the low income families and what they are experiencing right now especially going into this winter. we've had two snows in alabama, which is a little bit remarkable, but people are literally going to be choosing between eating and heating because they can't afford their energy. you saw what happened in europe over the last few years as they've pivoted away from natural gas and tried to go to almost all renewables particularly in the uk i think it was either the winter of 2016, 17 or 17, 18 they had almost 17,000 people they

classified as excess winter deaths because they couldn't adequately heat their homes. is that the kind of policy that this administration supports? mr. glick. >> i can speak for for ferc that our responsibility is to ensure that the rates and terms of transportation fuel and in terms of electricity and generation within our jurisdiction is reasonable so it's not acceptable when they go up especially extremely high. we take a number of initiatives to try to reduce. >> here's with the administration is doing and you've made this point. you said the demand is up and supply is down. that was your answer, wasn't it? >> i agree with that. >> deputy secretary turk made that point. here's the thing if you understand the price is a function of supply and demand,

when you shut off the construction of a major pipeline like keystone xl and threatened to shut down other pipelines, when you restrict access to energy resources that were making us energy independent, you create a situation with russia and opec where the president is having to go hat in hand on bended knee because the supply is now affected. do you understand that? apparently you understand that. >> just to be clear -- >> what is throwing us out here in the near term is covid when the demand went way down and production went way down, the economy is roaring back. >> and restricting access to the resources on federal land.

you took zero action to address the demand issue which is going to continue to be an issue and you basically gave a geopolitical windfall to russia and that brings me back to this other point about how insane these policies are considering the conditions that we face right now with an adversarial russia and i believe an enemy in china and adversaries in the middle east making us more dependent on foreign oil because we have policies preventing us from constructing the infrastructure that we need that is the safest most economical infrastructure for the energy delivery and from turning ourselves off from access to the resources that we have to the key to keep prices down and keep families whole in the sense of

their economic wholeness and regards to the national security. with that, mr. chair man, i will yield back. >> the gentle man yields back. the chair has been made aware that [inaudible] has returned. you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, chairman rush. i wanted to ask turning glick, your testimony explains the north american electric liability corporation is [inaudible] but there is no comparable there organization to issue the reliable so how does the status quo affect ferc's ability to implement the recommendations for the recent ferc joint report on the winter storm in erie that identified these reliability standards for both electric and gas industry? does it mean ferc can implement the recommended standards for the electric industry but not for the gas industry?

>> essentially, yes. ferc working along with an erc working with recommendations as weekends we don't have the authority to implement the recommendations regarding natural gas and reliability. >> let me ask the deputy circuitry turk, section 215 of the power act also requires them to issue cyber security standards necessary to maintain the reliable operation of the power system. from the doe vantage point, is the sector specific agency responsible for the energy industry, does the success in issuing cyber security standards for the electric industry demonstrate that the proposed energy product reliability organization can perform a similar function for the oil and gas sector? >> we think that the model has worked quite well in the electricity and bulk power market and again, tsa has put us on mandatory standards on the books for the year on emergency standards for the pipeline but it doesn't cover the refineries or other parts of the chain and it's only for a year as well.

>> and so, do you think that this proposed agency could perform a similar function for oil and gas, the oil and gas sector? >> to decide who has what authorities is for congress and we are happy to have further conversations on the regime that's been placed that makes the most sense in this please. i will say ferc and nerc have done a good job on the electricity bulk power side. >> let me go back to chairman glick. the electric reliability organization was the product of bipartisan work of members of the committee and passed the act of 2005 the republican congress and signed by republican president and that has withstood the test of time and demonstrates that industry let's the stakeholder process oversight to establish meaningful reliability standards to protect the reliability of the bulk power system so given that this proposed energy product reliability organization is expressly modeled on the electric reliability

organization, do you think the industry led us to colder processes established by chairman rush's legislation can likewise be a successful mechanism for protecting and reliability of the oil and gas infrastructure? >> the electricity model has worked very well with its will decision you mentioned created in 2005 and a similar model would work with regard to the pipeline reliability. >> let me just say i wanted to comment on my republican colleagues. there are still some of them here and some that are your virtual, but i guess i just don't like to criticize you guys, but you continually criticize today the biden administration's move to tap the strategic petroleum reserve to address energy prices and i do think that that was significant and was necessary, so i don't really understand why that criticism is taking place, but i do want to say that i support

the biden administration's efforts, and i also want to, you know, with regard i also want to highlight that republicans on the committee use this for the 21st century bill that also supported so if we can use this to pay for healthcare legislation, why are you all of a sudden opposing using it to address energy prices? i'm not looking for a response but i just have to comment on the fact that i thought that that made a lot of sense and i don't really understand the criticism of it. that is just my comment. i'm not asking you if to comment but if you want to, you can otherwise i will yield back. okay. i will yield back, mr. chairman. >> the chair now recognizes the gentle lady from arizona for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chair man. i wish you the best on your

future endeavors. my questions are for chairman ferc. i am concerned that ferc is second guessing what the commission made under the prior. for example, recently issued five notices of intent to prepare new rules and the environmental impact projects for which ferc already determined that final environmental assessment was sufficient, so going forward, chairman ferc glick can they make final decisions and then stick with the decisions? >> thank you for the question, ms. lesko. >> they never said those reviews were insufficient.

those were staff analyses and didn't make that determination either. we are dealing with the acquirements and i want to use an example over the last several years, the courts have repeatedly said ferc is not doing this right. and other agencies are not essentially reviewing the pipelines sufficiently in terms of the environmental impact. what happens is we issue the orders and at the court to sentence them back to us and it takes several years to go back over the initial reviews and all it does is cost extra money and many cases pipelines to cancel the projects from happening in the past. so what we are trying to do is follow with the law is telling us, so we are trying if you look at the last several court cases they were saying we have to do an environmental impact statement to review the environmental impacts of the particular projects, so we are doing so in the long run it will expedite the process and not to slow it down. >> thank you for the answer. my next question is also for you. in order [inaudible] which was recently implemented,

ferc changed well-settled practice and created new project risks. order 80 to 71 significantly restricts what companies can do while request the hearing of the certificate which can delay a pipeline [inaudible] necessary to conduct project surveys from environmental and cultural resource permits, it also announces the presumptive state on all pipeline certificates pending receiving proceedings which is contrary to the congressional direction at the national gas act and further the order is not clear about what a pipeline needs to prove to list the stay. the order provides incentives for project opponents to delay the project. we all know there will be

infrastructure projects that have taken longer and longer in the recent years. how much delay do you expect to ferc's recent order age 71 to match the pipeline development timeline considering most of these have taken years to design, permit and build? >> order age 71 was a response to the courts which essentially told ferc that we were not handling the process efficiently in terms of ensuring land owners have their day in court and i want to quickly explain under the natural gas act when you get a certificate you automatically go to court and take land by eminent domain. for those people, landowners and others challenging the decision it takes a little while because of the way that it's written to get to court so age 71 says we are going to delay the effect of the certificate to give those

parties enough time to make the challenge and then go to court and if the court then stays and if they don't then they can go and move forward with taking land by eminent domain but it's all about making sure they have their day in court before it is taking by eminent domain. >> how much time do you think that will added to the already long time it takes to get permitting? >> if any time i can't give a specific time, but very little in large part because the process is limited number eight to 71 with the commission did his limit the time period to 90 days, so essentially you have to be to 90 days or earlier if it acts on the proposal earlier before you can actually go to court and seek eminent domain. that's early on in the process it's not necessarily going to delay the development of the pipeline itself because it takes a long time even if you take the land you need to permits from other state agencies and other federal agencies. >> thank you. i will yield back.

>> the gentle lady yields back, and the chair now recognizes the gentle lady from florida, ms. tester for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. charan. and mr. chair, you leave quite a legacy here in congress and back in your home community, and i know you're not done yet. and thank you to the witnesses, charan glick and deputy secretary turk for being here. you know the deadly texas freeze last february demonstrated how important it is that we weatherize our existing infrastructure and do everything we can to belong to the higher costs and risks fueled by the current climate crisis. this congress has acted on several strategies to lower the cost for consumers and businesses and make the grid more reliable especially upgrading and expanding our electric grid, investing in

energy efficiency, conservation, distributed clean energy resources and clean backup storage. today we are focused on the pipeline infrastructure angle and the reliability standards. if there is an untold story a lot of people don't know, but there was an article in the texas monthly i believe it came out just recently that the gas industry received $11 billion in windfall profits from the texas freeze. without reliability standards, the gas industry will continue to reap windfall profits while leaving customers out in the cold, and it's not just texans that are impacted. the price went up 30 fold in southern california. minnesotans had to pay an extra

$800 million. so chairman glick, tell us more about the cost of consumers in other parts of the country having to cover the cost because of the failure of the texas grid. >> i appreciate the question, ms. castor, and i recently read that article as well and i would say if we are talking about impact on consumer bills, the bill increases we've seen as a result of what happened in texas and surrounding states last winter, by many folds, we are talking about much higher increases than the other great issues that we've been talking about today, and in large part it was because of the supply and demand. gas production's abilities, the natural gas around the country, gas facilities in texas froze. many of them became inoperable as did the processing stations so what gas was left both in

texas and elsewhere it dropped dramatically and you mentioned 800% or 700%, they had a significantly an enormous rate increase, so the benefit of the bill that we are talking about today or the concept of ensuring the reliability of the gas infrastructure, that was more reliable. the facility didn't freeze, they didn't get cut off from the electricity supply we would have seen the rate increases would be much smaller only basically due to the fact that there was more demand for the gas because of that. so i think this is not only important from the reliability and certain terms of making sure that people's lives are protected, which is the most important but also the pocketbook and this legislation i think with the idea behind the legislation would promote what i believe will keep the energy prices both electricity and natural gas prices much lower if we have a more reliable natural gas pipeline system. >> i agree. deputy secretary, would you like to add your views? >> happy to, and thanks for all

your leadership in the climate committee in particular and all else. so, i think you're absolutely right to focus on the cost of climate change to american consumers. $145 billion last year's one estimate from extreme weather exacerbated were caused by climate change, so we need to look at all of our tools to make sure there is not manipulation in the market and to ensure affordability including on heating for those consumers who are having challenges and the price of gas at the pump right now is too high. this administration thinks it's too high. that's why we are doing the kind of things we are doing. we have 4.5 billion in light heap and emergency rental assistance that's going to help pay energy bills along those lines. we've got 14 utility companies to avoid a shutoffs for those consumers who are having challenges during this covid crisis, so we absolutely have to keep our eye on that

affordability issue. >> and i think chair man russia's energy product reliability act fills that important cap whether we are talking about cybersecurity or the rising costs and risks fueled by the climate crisis. so, thank you very much, and i will yield back. >> the gentle lady yields back into the chair recognizes the gentle man from indiana. >> thank you chair man rush and make ranking member upton and thank you to the witnesses for appearing before our committee. the bill before us today misses the mark in addressing issues facing my constituents this winter. rental assistance helps pay the rent. it doesn't help pay the utility bill. right now families across indiana's six districts are paying more to heat their home, cook their meals and drive to work. unfortunately, hr 6084 is

currently written as an unworkable solution in search of a problem. our discussion today about reliable energy distribution for electricity generation should focus on access to abundant fuel supplies at an affordable price, as both of you have mentioned today. if the majority in the biden administration want to push the electrification of our economy, particularly the transportation economy, we would need more production of natural gas and expanded capacity of new pipelines to meet the increased electricity demands. it's clear however that the construction of new interstate natural gas pipelines under this administration could grow increasingly difficult, like line five that the chairman and ranking member upton asked about earlier. for a state like indiana, that does not have substantial local resources of natural gas,

interstate pipelines serve as an economic lifeline. having spent my career in the energy distribution industry, i know firsthand the pipelines are the safest most reliable form of transportation. robust and competitive markets for the fuel distribution is the best way to ensure the businesses and consumers have reliable access to affordable energy. adding the regulatory regime that oversteps the state and local authorities like hr 6084 is in the answer, and i'm not real sure that it clears things up and keeps things out of court. in particular i am concerned that this bill could expand federal authorities into intrastate pipelines that are already regulated by my indiana utility regulatory commission. when i speak with local distribution companies like southeastern indiana gas companies mile end, they are not asking for federal government to

wear on additional regulations. a company like southeastern needs access to gas supplies at a competitive price so they can offer affordable services to hoosiers in our community. when we consider our future energy outlook i am concerned that vulnerabilities to reliable fuel transportation could arise from a lack of supply and an overregulated market, not because ferc needed more broad and unchecked authority personnel or money. determine glick, it appears that this administration has a singular focus on the complete electrification of our economy from the cars we drive to the stove tops we use. as we've discussed today, the goal is the electrification natural gas will need to play a significant role. expanded pipeline capacity will be all but required to meet the increased electricity demands of our economy. the agenda of this

administration may only deter necessary investments into new pipeline construction. reliable financial investments into the new pipelines will require certainty of a stable market and regulatory environment. however, competition between federal and state oversight authorities could cloud the purgatory future and introduce more uncertainty to potential investors. if certainty is what people needed to make investments, how will a regulatory regime like that of 6084 impact the cost of constructing new interstate or intrastate pipelines that meet electricity demands and are you supportive of new natural gas pipelines? >> first of all, i would say thanks for the question. i would say first of all, i don't think that it would add any cost, any impact in terms of

the construction of the natural gas pipelines were the construction -- this focuses legislation primarily on -- >> wouldn't you agree a pipeline company, some of the increased regulations for cybersecurity may have additional expenses for their company, which would reduce the amount of dollars they have available for investment. >> the long and short-term we see this on the electricity side. i think if you talk to the other electricity companies they would argue now that we have the reliability standards on the electricity side it would reduce the cost, because they become more reliable and don't have to buy backup power sometimes to the extent of the facilities they don't have to build a facility over and over again every time a hurricane comes to land and their source, so i think actually in the long term, we are talking about a more reliable system making sure the cost to consumers go down. >> you and i disagree on that. i think more regulation costs more money but i think you for your time and i will yield back.

>> the gentle man yields back. the gentleman from oregon for five minutes. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. and thank you for your historic leadership on the committee and your tenure in congress. mr. glick to get a little perspective here, but has been the trend in pipeline failures and pipeline incidents over the last years is a disturbing to increase? >> i would have to get that information for you for the record. i'm not aware of that. >> okay. it's kind of important because if we need to change the regulatory framework it would be because i assume we are having more problems. >> if i could interject quickly. i think we kind of scene in texas last winter there's problems with natural gas infrastructure with greater incidences of extreme weather in terms of pipelines themselves i would have to come up with some figures. >> that would be helpful.

is there evidence that the pipeline companies are not maintaining the pipelines adequately, not doing their due diligence? >> i don't have any evidence of that, no. >> that also seems kind of important to me to help make a decision. i guess but as the agency doing right now to ensure pipeline safety? that is obviously an area of expertise for doe. what are your goals? >> it is primarily we have authority when we cite a new interstate national pipeline we have authority to ensure the pipeline essentially will be in the public interest, so we do review the safety elements before it is constructed but once it goes in operation those issues are handed over. >> so they are doing a lot of that stuff already. okay. what is the industry doing to increase the safety of the pipeline, some are older and have been quite some time.

>> i would recommend talking to the industry but they said they are making increased investments to deal with the pipeline. we know the system is aging around the country and then on cybersecurity what they tell us is they are making certain investments. i would say though there's always a weak link in the system and i would go back again to the recommendations made in 2011 that were voluntary recommendations to weatherize power plants and they said we are going to do it, we are going to invest and make sure the next time cold weather comes around we are going to be ready. the fact they want to make the investments with someone else if the competitor wasn't willing to make so that is a lesson we need to learn whether [inaudible] >> it sounds like we need oversight. i would assume the department of energy, you have regulatory authority to do that with of the

states if it's intrastate the states would have that authority. it could be brought up to speed on that. i have some concerns about the nerc in this space to be honest with you. we've had some catastrophic wildfires out in oregon, and the whole west coast for that matter, towards colorado. it's been devastating. and i don't see where nerc's playing out to prevent those catastrophic wildfires. i will say congress has stepped in and in many cases. we passed a bill that myself and the representative from california put together that is hopefully now going to be implemented that talks about making it easier for power companies to do and have street removal of power lights of way. that's critical as we've seen in the fires i don't care if it is california or you name it, to get those rights of way cleaned up. sometimes it's federal agencies like the forest services doing

their due diligence and sometimes it's the companies and our bill hopefully will do that and i would assume your agency will monitor that worked pretty closely. one of the nice things we've done here most recently in the bipartisan infrastructure bill that passed here this year, both parties, everyone involved is setting aside money for wildfire litigation in our energy network to improve transmission and make it more reliable. there are grants provided for different companies, different jurisdictions to apply for. what is the timeliness and getting that money out the door and i don't know if that is for you, mr. glick or you, mr. turk. >> so, this is a game changer, just as you said of the investment in the bipartisan infrastructure legislation whether it's wildfires, reliability more generally in the electricity sector, we are working right now to get all of that set up. some of it requires new offices.

we said we need to hire at thousand additional people to make sure we are doing this in the way we should be doing it. if anybody that's listening wants to come work at the department of energy, we would be happy for them to apply. we are going to try to do this quickly. we can't wait whether it's wildfire risks, and we certainly feel like there is a necessary mandatory minimum that everyone should be doing and if many parts of the industry are doing what they should be doing that is a vulnerability from the national security infrastructure perspective and we need to make sure we've got that foundation that we can build upon. >> thank you and i will yield back, mr. chairman. >> the channel recognizes the

gentleman for five minutes. >> thank you mr. charan added before i go into my questions on pipeline i would like to address why i personally was critical of the relations to the strategic oil reserves and that is because the best case scenario is that was a point for the administration to look like they were doing something for high energy costs. the worst case scenario is that it shows a complete lack of knowledge by the administration and the most powerful country in the history of the world as to how actually the energy markets work because the month before they released the strategic oil reserve, the price was 8148. the month after they released the strategic oil reserve, the price was 79, 83. as of now it is 84.93. the month before the strategic oil reserve was released, compared to the month after the strategic oil reserve was released, gasoline went down by a whopping one cent, but don't worry about it because right now january it is up 93 cents year-over-year and it has real consequences because now we feel

the strategic reserve at a significantly higher price costing taxpayer money. so just to be clear that is when and why we would be critical of decisions like that. within its first week of taking office, president biden issued executive order 14008, tackling the climate crisis at home and abroad. and amongst its many problematic provisions of section 209, which requires agencies to target perceived fossil fuel subsidies and take steps to ensure federal funding is not subsidizing certain energy sources. aside from the fact the president is intent on picking winners and losers at the expense of national security, reliability and affordability, it's come to my attention that employees at the department of energy seemed to have taken it upon themselves to inform the various organizations that the department will not continue to support research in the fossil fuel space. employees have referenced president biden's executive order when advising get out of words through fossil energy programs and applying the executive order precludes them

from honoring certain awards. mr. turk, is it true the department will no longer support research and fossil energy? >> so, we support research across the energy spectrum, including an awful lot of research we have more funding coming from the bipartisan infrastructure legislation -- >> let me be more specific. does the department to support research technologies like carbon capture and sequestration the result in the reductions? >> we are absolutely investing in the utilization storage. the department has for many years but now we have 10 billion and more for the administration programs in the bipartisan infrastructure legislation that we look forward to working with north dakota and other states around the country. >> i want to turn specifically to programs utilized in north dakota that have a substantial impact on the fossil energy research and understanding what the department will prioritize over the next year. the department's fiscal year 2022 budget zeros out the unconventional fossil energy technologies budget line. this seems to be a huge mistake

a given the energy independence the united states has developed over the last decade. while the department is seeking to eliminate future funding for the program, will you commit to the department funding the key energy projects that have already been awarded and are underway in north dakota? >> i would have to look at the particular projects that we were talking about to make sure that i'm giving a responsive answer, so i'm happy to take that for the record. >> through the energy and environmental research center in north dakota, is involved in the department's regional carbon sequestration partnership? with over 120 public and private sector stakeholders, the co2 reduction partnership plan is laying the groundwork for permanent, safe and practical underground storage of carbon dioxide from industrial facilities in the region. the department has worked with us in the past, and i'm hopeful that they will continue to honor the commitment to provide continuing funding for the regional partnership including the co2 partnership.

in addition to working on carbon sequestration, they have assembled a key test center for the solid fuel cells for the department of energy. it's anticipated for the previous proposal that this center will receive 2 million in the fiscal year 2022 to continue to support the research efforts. will the department committed to honoring this fuel test center and other previously? >> happy to get to you on the particulars. we don't yet have the budget we are still on acr so it's difficult to plan for those kind of things. let me underscore as well on the website we have a nominee to lead the fossil energy carbon management office and we hope he's confirmed very quickly so he can help north dakota and other states around the country. >> i think i speak for all of my colleagues that essay we would like more of a say in confirmations, but that happens on the north end of the capital, and with that i will yield back. >> the gentle man yields back into the chair now recognizes

the gentleman from new hampshire. >> thank you mr. chair man and thank you for organizing the hearing today to discuss federal efforts to strengthen pipeline safety and reliability. and a chair man rush, i also want to take a moment to recognize you at the first energy subcommittee hearing after your recent retirement from congress, you have distinguished yourself over a lifetime of service [inaudible] and to this nation and the country is a better place because of your commitment to justice and dedication to ensuring the most vulnerable among us are not left behind. >> thank you. >> colonial pipeline cyber attack drove home the nation's energy system is only as reliable as the security of the digital system that served as the backbone for america's energy distribution, and i'm pleased to the committee is reviewing the energy product

reliability act which will enhance the cyber security and reliability of the nation's infrastructure. most americans would be shocked to learn the federal government has done little to ensure that the nation's pipelines are secure. as we saw after the colonial style cyber attack the failure to provide clear guidance has a direct impact on consumers. up and down the east coast, gas prices surge because the cyber attack and americans were left waiting in line to fill up their cars and pay more for the fuel they need. the results of the future of cyber attacks could be even worse. the north american electricity reliability commission, nerc, has formed of a potential winter electrical outages in new england due to constraints on the natural gas supply. the compromise during the cold

snap and the impact on home heating will be immediate. what would be the effects on new hampshire if the pipelines delivering natural gas to new england were compromised by a cyber attack? >> so, currently new england a significant portion of the elect generation facilities are fueled by natural gas and fueled with heating oil for instance but a lot of them are just fueled directly by natural gas, so it's like 18,000 megawatts, something like that in new england fueled by natural gas and so clearly if there's a disruption with regards to pipelines for instance this facilities can no longer run on a very cold day in particular in the winter, that would certainly change the reliability of the grid in new england. >> and will this bill, the

reliability act for security and reliability deliver natural gas to the region? >> establishing some sort of mandatory processes such as we have on the electric grid decide where the natural gas pipeline, my opinion would certainly enhance the reliability and reduce the threat of the gas supply disruptions which would lead to electricity supply disruptions. >> thank you. now, switching years, it's important to the committee to note how these resources can help support more systems. in the hearing earlier this year, david hardy, the ceo gave testimony to this committee where he emphasized that offshore wind turbines are built to operate in extreme winter climates. during the polar vortex when new england faced an extreme cold snap, resources were held to back up the system.

in the event a cyber attack limits the natural gas supplies in england could a more diverse power generation portfolio that includes clean energy resources like offshore wind and hydro help prevent electricity shortfalls? >> the short answer is absolutely and offshore wind can be incredibly important. hydro can be important and thank you for your leadership and effort on that front. we feel incredibly strongly it is an important part of the equation. storage is such an important part of the equation. hydrogen if we can get clean hydrogen at the volumes we would like. so there's a variety of diverse sources and the infrastructure bill that was passed bipartisan from the congress gives new authority to push those out as quickly as we possibly can. >> i can't do better than that.

very kind and kudos to the three, i call it a damn good idea and would use this moment to ask the chair man if we could schedule he subcommittee hearing and energy committee on hydro in the near future and with that i would yield back. >> mr. chair man, i think you are on mute. >> the chair now recognizes the gentle lady from california for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman for holding this important hearing on pipeline reliability and for your work to elevate this issue. in the last year we've seen the

consequences of the country's dependence on fossil fuel from the gas supply issues during the texas winter storm and power outages to the hacking of the colonial pipeline that threatened the energy supplies of parts of the southeast and mid-atlantic. america needs to aggressively transition off fossil fuels to clean energy for the climate, environmental justice and our energy security. but while we work to reduce dependence, residents and businesses can't afford the severe disruptions that can come with pipeline breaks into cyber attacks. these descriptions also pose threats to workers and of the environment and national security. we need improved reliability, safety and environmental standards for the pipelines and accountability for when they are not followed. my first question is for you, deputy secretary. in october of last year there was a major oil spill caused by the rupture of an underwater

pipeline. 4.5 miles off the coast of long beach near my district. while the investigation is still ongoing indications are disrupting the pipeline months before the spill was detected and it could have been ongoing long before it was detected. it's also important to have reliability standards for offshore energy pipeline. is that accurate, and how does your department work with the department of interior, which has primary jurisdiction over off-line pipelines to ensure energy security and environmental hazards such as leaks or breaks can be detected? >> welcome a congressman, let me completely agree with you that we've got to go very ambitiously and aggressively on a full range of clean energy sources, good for the climate, affordability, resiliency and reliability, and at the same time make sure the existing energy infrastructure is secure and safe and reliable.

we work hand-in-hand with the department of interior, not just on the underwater pipeline issue, but a variety of other key issues as well, and whether it's underwater pipeline or pipeline on land, certainly from our perspective, we need a minimum set of standards to make sure that all of our populations across the country, including those on the coast, like yours in california, are protected. >> okay. are there any adequate federal standards in place to secure offshore energy infrastructure from hazards such as leaks or breaks and offshore pipelines that can devastate the environment? >> so the chair man should certainly come in here as well. my understanding is there is regulatory at least on the safety side. i think it has some coverage but maybe it's in tandem with other parts of interior as well on this particular issue. but again this is one thing that's come up again and again on this hearing is avoiding a patchwork and making sure that we've got coherence, and what we

focus on from the department of energy side of things is making sure we have coherence across the energy systems and across the whole parts of the energy systems in particular, and we just need to make sure that that's the case for any infrastructure related to energy from our perspective. but if you would like to comment further on the existing authority. >> just quickly, i do believe that there is responsibility into the interior department has a responsibility over the safety of those particular facilities. thank you for working with the department of interior. i believe it's important we have reliability standards regardless of where the pipelines are underwater or above ground. deputy secretary, how vulnerable are the offshore oil attacks and what can be done at the federal level to improve the security of the computer systems? >> so from our perspective, but we see in classified settings in

the public reporting is there is a variety of threats, criminal gangs, ran somewhere and state actors as well across key parts of the energy infrastructure so the offshore rigs are certainly part of the critical part of the key energy infrastructure as it currently exists and we need to make sure they are safe just like electricity is safe, so we can't have any weak links. >> great. thank you. i'm out of time about what i'm going to do is submit my question for the national gas infrastructure and we will look forward to getting a response to that and with that i will yield back. >> the gentle lady yields back into the chair now recognizes the gentle lady from delaware.

[inaudible] no, no. [inaudible] we have mr. carter ready to go. >> the chair recognizes mr. carter for five minutes. you are recognized for five minutes. thank you mr. chair man and both of you for being here. it's another, i know it's for the pipeline reliability but it's not often that we get the chair man of the ferc as well as the department of energy in front of us. instead of discussing the creation of a new level of bureaucracy for pipelines, we should be fighting the current energy crisis. mr. chair man, i want to read from the department of energy's website. the mission of the energy department is to ensure america's security and prosperity by addressing a

nuclear challenge for the transformation science and technology solutions. a year ago the united states of america was energy independent. there are some of those that would say we were energy dominant. we were actually exporting and now we would say that the department of energy was actually adhering to its mission pretty well at that time. i am old enough to remember the late 70s when we realized that we were too dependent on foreign countries for the energy needs and we did something about it. we set out to achieve energy independence and we achieved that. we did that to the plaintiff as i indicated a second ago that we actually were able to achieve energy dominance. but today that's not the case. energy prices have skyrocketed. at the most obvious on my constituents as the prices at the pump. the energy information agency raised its outlets for gas for 2022 saying that we are at risk

of hitting four dollars a gallon as a national average. the aaa last week said at the ts prices and ridge i have increased nearly a dollar more than this time last year. i have the honor and privilege of representing the two metro areas of savannah and brunswick and they in my district have the average, the highest average gas prices in the state, higher even than in the atlanta metro area so the metro areas are, which are in my district, these two areas are only 22 of the country's busiest seaports where we've seen firsthand how the energy crisis is exasperated the supply-chain crisis. american families and businesses are being crushed by expensive utility bills. electricity is up over 6% in the last year and natural gas over 25%. also energy costs are the top driver of the record inflation we see today. so families are feeling it

everywhere. deputy secretary turk, i want to ask you considering the department of energy's mission, as i quoted before, what are you doing to ensure american energy security and affordable energy for all americans? >> thank you for the question, and i have to say i feel incredibly proud to be a part of the department of energy in this administration and i think that we are pushing all of the authorities that we have in funding streams including 62 billion in new funding authorities the congress is given in the legislation to build the diverse, secure, affordable, reliable energy we need in the future, not just today but five years, ten years to benefit all of our u.s. citizens and people around the country. and prices are too high right now. covid has thrown the supply and demand for oil and gas out of whack and we are suffering from that. we have a near-term problem it's not caused by pipelines or other things. it's caused by covidien we are trying to deal with that.

it was to try to shave the top part of that curve is the domestic supplies and other supplies around the world for oil catch up with where the demand is because we are now increasing our economy coming up out of covid which is a great thing but energy supplies haven't matched up with that. in 2022 we will have the supplies meet the demand we are just in a real tough spot right now but -- >> do you think it's important to maintain its energy independence? >> absolutely, and i think it should be important for europe, japan and others around the world. >> but we are talking about the united states of america. i remember the former secretary of state saying what a great asset it was to travel to other countries and know that we had energy dominance and energy independence, yet we don't have it now. we've had to ask the middle east to put more oil to do it.

i know the administration made available 50 million barrels of oil to lower the prices for americans. how much of an effect did that release on the prices? >> energy security is also offshore wind and solar. what we designed was a carefully set sail and exchange tied together for that particular moment in time on the supply and demand disruption. on the exchange part, but we designed that to do is shave off the top part of the curve, provide some affordability, provide additional affordability protection for american consumers who are paying too much, completely agree with you on that and the exchange means oil and gas companies return more products into this the back

and there are forces outside of the immediate control but we are doing everything we can to promote affordability. >> [inaudible] >> my time is expired and i will yield back. [inaudible]

recognizes the gentle lady from texas for five minutes thanks to you and the ranking member for holding this hearing and for allowing me to participate. i would like to thank the witnesses for taking the time to testify. energy reliability is key to entering safety and security of the energy supplies. in my home state of texas weasel just last year the real-life impact of the supply disruption. at the potential collapse of the grade during the coldest days of the year and it really can't be overstated. looking at the action we've seen from state legislators and governors they were not truly prepared for the next. there's improvements that can be

made and we look forward to discussing this with the panelists today. it's prevented the expansion where it is needed and to my understanding, the proposed organization that we are talking about in the draft would forbid them from setting standards for the adequacy of the infrastructure. for example, there had been tremendous growth in the generating capacity but the pipelines that deliver haven't been expanded and in the last few weeks they had to resort to using the oil to meet their energy needs.

in the 2021 it was a power source so i want to ask the witnesses to quickly answer whether you agree that currently had constraints and also the regulatory body as discussed in this legislative draft should include the authority to look at the pipeline capacity issues when considering overall reliability. it isn't whether they need new gas pipelines but the capacity

to get additional energy. they have the authority and we have to determine whether it is needed or not to authorize the pipeline and in new england with theissue hasn't been necessarily government permitting but pure economics. natural gas pipeline developers unless the electric generators decide to pay them throughout the year for the pipeline capacity when in fact it's only ten days out of the year when it's really cold so there's been a kind of two ships passing in the night a situation with regards to generators and gas pipelines which is why the pipeline capacity hasn't been built in new england. with regards to the provision

into building the transition capacities, so i think there's an issue about usurping the state's jurisdiction to build the distribution utilities so it's more of a jurisdiction to have that responsibility to build pipeline capacity when it is needed. >> in the interest of time certainly new england is very complicated, but we need to work with the state and local utilities to bring some fixes because it isn't right for the consumers that face this kind of prices and challenges. >> thank you for that quick answer. five minutes does go quickly so i would submit my second question for the record.

with that question i cited an article with unanimous consent but thank you again for letting me participate, and i yield back. they have ten legislative days to submit for the record i would

request unanimous consent to enter into the record the following. [inaudible]