ambassador, an asean ambassador. one of the few things that could occur is create an infrastructure of the institutions of asia. you see that developing in a variety of places. but in particular, when it comes to asean, seeing that the secretariat takes on new responsibilities, new authorities, we think it's extraordinarily important. secretary clinton will be reaching out to the all the partners that participate in the asean regional forum requesting them also to send an ambassador so that david carden, who has been confirmed now for a couple of weeks, a close advisor to the president so he is not alone. he is currently serving with japanese colleague but we'd like to see that a full house going forward. we've come prepared. each year now to the asean regional forum. we spent an enormous amount of time on both security, economic,

political, and cultural. and i'll talk more about that as we go forward. and we've come, hopefully, bearing complex well-devised initiatives. last year in vietnam, we came and worked closely with a variety of countries related to the south china she -- sea initiative. and we can talk about that later. ..utheast asia more important economically to the united states than even western europe and how to make that more clearly understood by the american people has been one of the things we have worked on consequently going forward. rather be in bye country by country i thought i would spend a few minutes to talk about the institutions. it's very rare that we think about the specific institutions and what our agenda is but in particular southeast asia of a current period really calls for

it calls for having an integrated strategy about how to go forward. let me just say often times if you ask people what are the overarching goal of american policy not only in world but in a particular place you see a breakdown between the 2 world views. the one world you would say one of the most important things for american foreign policy is to sustain american leadership and american power and you do that through a variety of mechanisms. strong military commitments, underscoring the leadership role of the united states. that is a critical component of american foreign policy. there's often times a second school that says one of the most important things the united states has to do is to prepare the way for multi play, recognition that other states are rising and it is important

to create institutions and capabilities in which other countries asked to share the responsibilities of global power. too often it is the case then these two schools of thought are played off against one another. it seems to me the most creative diplomacy and important diplomacy over the course of the next several years is a blending of both. smart diplomacy asks us, demands us to take big steps to secure american power, to do what is necessary to make sure our position as a dominant economic, security and political player in doors but at the same time create capacities and institutions where are rising states and other states have a chance to interact and engage with us and also played a larger role in shaping these institutions that will define the twenty-first century as a

whole. towards that end asia has a number of institutions each with different memberships and different agendas. some have shallow roots and will be critical of the next several decades to put deeper roots to make investments in specific initiatives and institutions and to see those through to stronger to completion and stronger roots. i am going to go through what a couple of those institutions are and how the united states is proposing to engage with them. the biggest surprise i had at the regional forum two years ago was how much the institution advanced in the ten years i was out there. we spent most of our time at the ozzie on regional forum thinking about the performance and social engagements in the intervening period that has become a serious institution. it has been engaged by the most

difficult challenging issues to try to think of asia in the course of the last few years. proliferation and challenges in burma peterson acquistion is related to the best way to promote dialogue in periods around maritime security. one of the things we sought to do is to use the asean regional forum as a venue to engage key partners, friend and ally on issues of importance. one of the reasons we work closely with so many nations to underscore a set of principles around maritime security that were associated with the south china sea initiative last year. this year secretary clinton will go to bali for bilateral meetings and trilateral engagements and for the asean regional forum. one of the most important things we seek to do this year and the

asean regional forum and the east asia summit is to demonstrate clearly and with no uncertainty the deep commitment the united states has to work with china. so we will be seeking to highlight areas of common pursuit, concrete cooperation in specific projects that two countries will be prepared to work together on. we want to dispel any concerns in southeast asia that we see this as a venue for larger competition of the kind that will be destabilizing or unhelpful to southeast asia. there is a degree of competition in any relationship and there is that between the united states and china but we want to be sure we work together inappropriate manner in southeast asia. you will see as this summer unveiling a number of initiatives related to the

laramie, the initiative. i want to highlight my friend and colleague, climate change related to education, related to health that affects the states of the me, and region. we will bring a number of state institutions together to discuss ways in which we can advance the well-being of the people in this venue as well. we will also be working closely this summer and into the fall in ensuring that apec place an appropriate role in november. towards that end, at the state department, worked to shape the agenda to focus on a few specific initiatives like advance trade investment in the region and to move towards a regional intent over the course

of many years it has taken on responsibilities closer to security and we think it is appropriate that apec focus more on its own original intent in terms of the economic and financial realm. we talk about that as we get forward. the president as you all know will be win the east asia summit and the united states will be formally joining in november in indonesia. it presents us with a very important challenge. clearly this is an institution that has been up and running for years. it has an established culture. it has a work agenda in five particular areas, it is extraordinarily important for the united states to be successful that we come in and listen and join the culture that is already established and we recognize our role as --

president obama is an outstanding listener and secretary clinton are equally convinced that how we join this institution be of primary importance. we have been prepared on the existing agenda. at the same time we will try to find a few areas where we hope to make modest contributions and give our insights to where we think the institutions should go over the course of the coming years and they will be in areas associated with disaster assistance, one of the things we found in recent years, whether it be tsunamis or earthquakes, tragedy in new zealand or japan, the need for the institutions to hold capacities to rapidly respond to those challenges. that is one of the things we would like to explore when the president goes to bali.

we hope to continue the practice of the u.s. asean summit. we had our first-ever meeting in new york last year after the u.s. and the tour before meeting in singapore. we had wonderful suggestions and ideas. we are working with a variety of countries to expand the educational opportunities for students from southeast asia come to the united states and vice versa and create opportunities for a much larger group of american involved in the teaching of english for of southeast asia. the number one goal of many of the leaders we work with is the desire to see their populations more skilled in english and the role the united states can play. you will also see that several of these initiatives that will be focused closely on trade, i

think you have all seen the reports that they made good progress with lots of work to be done and i will let my trade officials talk more about that and when they are all together at apec in november, i would simply say that if you look at the totality of these organizations, different memberships and different agendas, one of the goals and ideas is to create some form of lose integration or understanding, perhaps how the asean regional forum might relate to ideas put forward by the east asia summit, how the process, meeting of the defense ministers can work on a variety of issues like piracy and howard can work in a larger set of institutional frameworks. it can work in a larger set of institutional frameworks.

this is enormously challenging. it will be essential if asia is to enjoy its promise in the twenty-first century that the institutions of asia have to reflect the growing dynamism and have to address the specific issues that confront all of us. it accepts the critical institutions in the asean regional forum that asean is the central component and the institutions are built around asean. that does not mean northeast asian issues or other issues affecting new zealand should not get intention. one of the most important things is if you look at the course of the last several years we think the way in northeast asian issues have been addressed at asean regional forum and other institutions like the e a s has left countries wanted different

approach. we want to work with southeast asia on that process as we go forward. unspecific countries i will go through this quickly but you all understand some of the things we are trying to work on and our will go through that quickly and some of the things you expect we will be wanting to work on in the next couple years. obviously given president obama's unique experience in asia it has given us an enormous opportunity to take this bilateral relationship to the next level. if you made a list of those countries important to the united states, the united states didn't recognize their importance, this wish you would be at the top of the list. incredibly important. not only its role as a leader in southeast asia but its role increasingly beyond southeast asia in the middle east and beyond. we are finding the experience of

indonesia in the last several years speak extensively and importantly to countries in the middle east that are struggling with a number of very trying and difficult domestic issues. we have been very pleased at the progress we have seen with the government working closely with the foreign minister, we have made a number of decisions about partnerships about how we work together on maritime security, a range of economic initiatives. we are beginning to see a degree of progress in relations between washington and manila that have been difficult to get traction and refining their attraction as we go forward. everyone appreciates the important role that singapore has played. i will talk in a moment about the posture in which the united states at the same time maintaining a very strong commitment in northeast asia is

seeking to do more than southeast asia to send a diversified message and increasingly link operationally the concept of the indian ocean with the pacific. points made visibly by bob kaplan in his wonderful book monsoon. one of the first countries to step up and say we want to be engaged in singapore. if you want to have good advice, even if it is tough, go to singapore. singapore will give you a clear assessment how you are doing in the region and that advice and that counsel is enormously important for us on every dimension we have been involved in over the course of the last couple years whether it is architecture or issues associated with trade, whether it is our overall position in the region as a whole. we have made important progress in the last several years in vietnam. you have seen it clearly with

respect to our economic engagement in a variety of political interactions. the only limiting factor in the current contact is the domestic situation in viet nam. we have been very clear with our friends in hanoi of our desire to take the next step in his relationship. we have to see further progress on domestic environment as a whole. strategic interaction with our friends in vietnam are extraordinarily impressive. one of the things we want to do is make clear to vietnam our desire and intention to improve this relationship going forward based on their acknowledgment of the situation they are facing domestically. in malaysia we have seen unprecedented progress on a variety of issues began with non-proliferation but not ending there. we have worked on a whole host of bilateral initiatives. the president had an excellent

meeting with the prime minister during the nuclear summit last year and this is a relationship that has traditionally underperformed and there's a recognition that working with the united states and malaysia can't go forward as a whole. i will turn to the last couple countries as we conclude here but i do want to say a few things about global posture. secretary gates and his team involved in a very intense process. the mantra of diversified politically stable arrangements, our overall goal is to secure a strong enduring american presence that sends a message of commitment not just in northeast asia but other countries in the region as a whole. it is and animating feature of the global posture and you will see in shangri-la secretary

gates unveiling some specific concepts and ideas in coming days. what is the to do list? what do we think is important going forward? i will go through those quickly. the area where i would like to see beginning with me, more consequential engagement is in thailand. we would like to work more closely. it is a complex period in thailand. you all follow the situation closely. we have an election on july 3rd. we have been involved deeply in discussions with our friends in thailand about our expectations and work closely with indonesia on the situation on the thai/cambodian border which we hope to remain peaceful in that respect. overall, we believe as a treaty ally then this is the relationship we need to focus on more and in the next several

months is likely to be decisive. cambodia and laos, both countries in which the united states had important smaller engagements with respect to our overall programs, we have put in place schedules of strategic engagement which frankly have been remarkably productive. we like to take these to the next step over the next year or so. some of the other things i would like to say, process of creating deeper institutional commitments in asia and whether it is the asean secretariat or a clearer sense of how the asean plus six engages in acts of the e a s. it sounds easy but is extraordinarily challenging. that is one of the things the united states wants to work on over the course of the next several years. the united states has a clearer

view that it is important in its consequential, if it involves the political, strategic, military issues confronting the asia pacific region and then the united states wants to see it at the table and be engaged in those conversations going forward but that process will be more challenging and take a longer period of time. most particularly is how northeast asian issues are addressed in the larger context of the asia summit and the asean regional forum. they cannot be bystanders. they have to have an active engagement in this overall process if these vehicles are to be important going forward. let me also say that despite our challenges in burma the united states remains committed to a process of dialogue. we have not changed our policy

of sanctions and various policies designed to put pressure on the regime but at the same time as our policy review has underscored we are prepared to work with the new government in a positive way given the appropriate signs if there are any coming. do you in just got back -- joe uconn just got back. it would be fair to say we have been disappointed and underwhelmed by the progress we have seen. it is often said we love when we go to china. we hear complex wonderful stories that the united states has a few claim, will stories one is that it does take two to table. we needed dancing partner to be engaged in this complex diplomacy and we want to see more from our friends and it is

not to say be patient. there has been an enormous amount of time, there has been substantial patients first from our friends in asean for years hoping and waiting for progress that has come to pass. despite our -- there's a prospect for a dialogue here. there are other key players in the country, deeply engaged with am assung suchi and others in the parliament. do we will continue that process of doing engagement going forward. one of the most important things we can do is to build institutions and awareness in washington d.c.. one of the things i often tell my friends in southeast asia is why don't these issues get as

much attention? it is because the institutions foley of late have captain of steam to support our larger goals and ambitions. the u. s. asean business council, alex has done a fantastic job but continues more support. every day when i look at this it is astonishing to me what they have put together but frankly nothing improves performance like competition. nothing improves -- i am sorry. and the ability to be able to put together consequential and important programs. every southeast asian comes to washington we want the opportunity to bring their wisdom and knowledge to bear with a group of important americans. much more in this respect over the course of the next couple years i am going to be working with a lot of institutional

supporters, think tanks and others to bring this to bare. with that, i will stop and take any questions or comments you might have. [applause] >> thank you very much. why don't we take questions so you can be comfortable? all i would like to ask is when you have a question, tell us what your name is and who you represent and please questions, not comments. >> john shannon from viet nam. last week 45 senators from both sides of the aisle send a letter to the president and earlier senator lugar sent a letter to the secretary urging the

administration to approve 16 cds and sales to taiwan as soon as possible. what kind of an impact will these matters have on the administration's decision whether to sell these to tie one. thank you very much. >> i am not going to get into any specifics associated with arms sales. i would simply say that we take -- the executive branch through every administration takes the factor varies seriously. we understand our responsibilities in that regard and recognize the taiwan relations act respects partnership between executive and legislative branch. we take that relations should very seriously. the feedback in this respect is important. the united states understands our role with respect to this across the taiwan strait.

>> i am with freedom house. thank you. given the importance of asean to the region can you tell us how you think burma and will engage as the new asean and whether that is an opportunity and how the u.s. would engage with carrying asean and prospects for the future for a mixture? >> first of all i am not sure that decision has been taken. in terms of our bilateral relationship there are several things we're looking for and tried to underscore. progress on these issues would be important in any circumstance but clearly if that country seeks to play a larger goal on international stage, we have

asked that there be a political process, a dialog between the new government and assan suchi. we think it is appropriate and we would like to see that come to pass quickly. we recognize and understand there's a large number of political prisoners inside the country. we would like to see the release, the beginning of the process of the release of the prisoners. we think that would send an important message going forward. obviously seeing a more responsible dialog between the government and the various countries, various ethnic minorities inside the country would be very welcome. we have to wonderscore that the economic performance of a country and the spending on health and welfare is among the lowest of any country in the entire world.

we would like to see some improvement in this regard and perhaps lastly but no way least we need to see burma, myanmar and respond to very clearly to international mandates associated with the u.n. security council resolutions and the proliferation of materials from north korea. we have underscored in all of our meetings the importance to see progress on each of these issues. we recognize that it is a new government and they have just signed people with new responsibilities. nevertheless we expect there to be a clear break with past presidents if there is to be a better relationship with the

international community going forward. >> what is your -- [talking over each other] [inaudible] >> tiger jones from the simpson center. in terms of postulating the framework, how would you address the intrinsic contradiction between the asean centrality and u.s. leadership and the contradiction between the u.s. leading economy which excludes china and the future chinese dominating whenever. >> it is an important question. the key thing right now for the united states is to wonderscore our commitment -- we are in the

process of dialogue with capitol hill about this, colombia and panama as well. the negotiations have reached a critical juncture. that is largely because the important stage we are at right now in terms of negotiations and discussions ongoing. i don't think i am going to get into the sort of future particular architectural or additions. i would simply say that the venue is by its design not meant to exclude. i think there is a clear statement by the key negotiators and players in the government that is very much prepared to engage with particular countries interested in a dialogue. so i don't think those possible

additions in the future at been ruled out. [inaudible] >> bill walker from policy magazine. you mentioned the shangri-la of summit and secretary gates unveiling some specifics. could you elaborate what we might expect? >> the way that works in government. he is going to be talking about the work that is being done at the pentagon at the shangri-la dialogue. that is washington talk for stand by. >> in the center here?

>> thank you. with phoenix tv. your mission to south china is an issue ended is important to address the year ago this was the issue which -- in south asia countries. do you think china is playing its role properly and what more do you expect? >> i appreciate the question. a lot of attention to this. if you look carefully and official statements by secretary clinton and all the people traveling with her and subsequently you will never find mention of any country with related to the south china sea initiative. this was an attempt to lay out some clear expectations about norms and process. one of the things we have seen in recent months that we support

completely is the dialogue that has been undertaken by indonesia has the chair with china. we support this process, dialogue between china and asean on issues related to the south china sea and the united states has tried to let that process play out. we continue to have a strategic interest as secretary clinton has underscored but the most important thing is to see the process of dialogue emerge between asean and china. in fits and starts, but there has been progress. i know that leaders in beijing are committed building stronger ties through a range of initiatives with southeast asian countries. as i tried to mention here one of the things we want to wonder

-- underscore in our meetings is the united states and china want to work together. we demonstrate that very clearly through specific initiatives. if i can for a moment say one of the things that has been very impressive of late has been the role that indonesia has played in the diplomacy of the region. you have to look over years to find such an activist foreign policy. very engaged in trying to conceptualize this dialogue between asean and china and how to make progress on these issues. indonesia's role in trying to bring thailand and cambodia together is very important. to have uncertainty at the center of asean has been disconcerting and that role has been important and the role that they have played in trying to begin a complex process of dialogue not only with stakeholders' like the united

states and europe but also the rest of southeast asia with burma and myanmar. we support that completely. indonesia playing this larger role is very welcome and the united states seeks to support it completely. >> thank you, sir. >> thank you for this opportunity. how does the united states -- this is an issue on the effort you talked about. you said you would maintain the commitment to northeast asia. better especially on the security side can the u.s. managed to enhance the commitment throughout the region? thank you. >> it is an important question. and it affects not only our military presence but our other

assets of governance including our aid work. that is the capacity that will be most urgently affected. one need only look at the statements of president obama, national security adviser donald and and secretary clinton and secretary gates, a clear desire united states shift some of the center of gravity of strategic focus from the middle east and south asia more towards asia. there is a recognition that these challenges we are facing in the middle east are extraordinarily important but the truth is the 20 first century, much of the history of the 20 first century will be written in the asia-pacific region. it is going to be important for the united states to step up our game there and that is what we are determined to do going forward. i say that in the context of a

strong commitment across the political aisle. one other point. it is the case that oftentimes we use the term asia-pacific but the truth is it is the second word in that that gets short shrift. if you look at the last 20 years where we have profoundly walked away from some of our enduring strategic moral political commitments in the pacific ocean arena, one of the things we have been attempting to over the course of the last couple years is to work with new zealand and australia and other countries to support them and put more capacity in the pacific where even small investments go along with given the challenge of poverty and climate change, health and the like. this fall will be the 40th anniversary of the pacific island quorum, the largest delegation involving every

aspect of the u.s. government from assistance from the military, from the state department and other capacities to demonstrate our strong support for an enduring american commitment in the region. i believe that there is deep understanding. what the gentleman was asking hear about congress, one of the most important interactions are have with friends on capitol hill is the desire that the united states not step back from the asia-pacific region and do what is necessary to create the infrastructure, the operating system that will allow for strong and enduring presence now and in the future. >> thank you for calling on me. this is for questions.

>> i always try to sit in that row. >> my question is regarding -- [inaudible] -- i appreciate -- my question is can you give us more specifics and government to government assistance regarding -- [inaudible] -- its link with human traffic records. do you keep them on track when it starts implementation? >> i think i understand your question. okay. we have had some important work that has already been completed on the millennium challenge corp. and we look forward to new

projects and engagements in the philippines and the pacific as well. there are enormous and important criteria that have to be followed with respect to specific investment and we work closely with the country's that meet those criteria and we were pleased to welcome the philippines into this over the course of the last several months. on the specifics associated with our military engagement i think i could give you the general overview but probably would refer you to the pentagon to go over some specifics associated with coastal life. one of our goals going forward will be to increase the capacity of friends and partners to play a role in situational awareness with respect to their own

maritime claims and a stronger degree of consultation with respect to issues that take place in the maritime realm. so you see with all of our partners in the asia-pacific region that some of our discussions have shifted from issues associated with the traditional areas of operation which tend to be associated with armies given the role that armies have played in southeast asia, increasingly naval, coast guard and other expeditionary capabilities which we think will be central to the maintenance of peace and stability in southeast asia as we go forward. >> in the back, the gentleman? >> thank you. i have a followup question about

the south china sea. you mentioned between china and asia, making progress. in the past week, we saw a new dispute between china and burma and the united states takes any position on this dispute? >> thank you. almost every week we see incidents of various kinds between fishing vessels, between scientific vessels, prospecting missions and the like. our general policy remains the same. we discourage resort to violence in these circumstances were threats and want to see a process of dialogue emerge. we communicate intensively and privately with a variety of states associated with the south china sea and we will do that as

we move forward. >> one more question of front? >> that is a hard one. >> a nice easy question? >> thank you so much for your insight. i am sure you know that kim jong il has visited china and i want to know what your take is on china trying to help north korea and how it might be in during the efforts you and your allies are trying to do in terms of adjusting nuclear issues and if you are planning to address this at the asean to china directly when you say you are working with china, how are you trying to address this issue?

>> we have not gotten a formal readout from chinese friends about the visit of kim jong il to china. we look forward to those discussions in coming weeks. our position remains the same. both privately and publicly we encourage china to make clear to north korea our expectations of what is necessary with respect to an important dialogue that needs to take place between north korea and south korea but also necessary steps that should take place before a resumption of six party talks. >> ladies and gentlemen, join me in thanking kurt campbell. [applause]

[inaudible conversations] >> today c-span2 will have live coverage of a house hearing on the transition to self government in iraq. the house foreign affairs subcommittee on the middle east and south asia will hear from state department and pentagon officials about the progress made in ending u.s. military presence in iraq. the hearing is scheduled to begin at 2:30 p.m. eastern. >> sunday on in depth the balance between security and liberty. bill the difficulties of a climate change treaty and the limits of international law. your questions for author and university of chicago law

professor eric pose near which includes law and social norm and the perils of global legalism and he will take your calls, e-mails and weeks on c-span2's booktv. >> today marks the first time our legislative branch in its entirety will appear on that medium of communication through which most americans get their information about what our government and our country does. several times today this has been referred to as a historic occasion. whether or not it will be a historic occasion is a subject for the judgment of history. >> this week marks 25 years of televised coverage of the u.s. senate. on the first day in 1986 c-span2 carried six million homes. today it is available in eighty-nine million homes. watch that first day or twenty-one thousand hours of senate coverage on line at the

c-span video library. it is all searchable, shareable and free. it is washington your way. >> at this house energy subcommittee hearing the federal energy regulatory commission electric reliability director warned that the nation's and electric grid is facing greater threats than last year. a bill known as the grid act has been proposed to address these threats. other witnesses included arizona republican congressman trent franks who has his own bill on electric grid security and several obama administration officials. the subcommittee is chaired by kentucky republican ed whitfield. >> beard this hearing to order. the hearing is called protecting the electric grid. reliability and infrastructure defense act. today's hearing focuses on protecting the electric grid's

fiscal and cybersecurity threat and vulnerability. a secure grid is of utmost importance to our national security and economic interests. cybersecurity threats and fulmer ability to the electric grid have increased in recent years and were the subject of several hearings huge bad actors have conducted cyberprobes of u.s. symptoms and cyberattacks have been conducted against infrastructure in other countries. this past february a cyberattack which is believed to have emanated from china targeted the critical infrastructure of energy and petrochemical companies in the u.s.. the ninth dragon attack was not overly sophisticated but was nevertheless successful in reaching the computer systems of

key assets. this example is one of several and is the tip of the iceberg and illustrates that we must be more vigilant in securing the nation's critical energy infrastructure including the electric grid. beyond potential cyberattacks the power system remains exposed to physical vulnerability and threats including direct terrorist attacks, weapons that can create and electromagnetic pulse, and the geomagnetic storms. federal and state agencies and industry stakeholders have sought to address these concerns. in particular through an extensive stakeholder process the north american electric reliability corporation pursuant to its authority under section 212, 215 of the federal power act has worked over the last several years to develop and implement reliability standards

and address grid security, vulnerability at a timely manner. to address these shortcomings the committee recently released a discussion draft in title but reliability and infrastructure defense act or the grid act. the bill is identical to bipartisan legislation developed by this committee last congress by chairman upton and mr. marky. the grid act provides federal regulatory commission with emergency authority to respond to image physical and cyberthreats to the power system and electric infrastructure that serves facilities vital to our national defense. this emergency authority can be triggered only upon a directive from the president. the discussion draft also provides authority to identify and remedy weaknesses that lead the grid vulnerable to

cyberattack and electromagnetic pulse events. notably this legislation also directs regulations to facilitate the sharing of information as appropriate between government agencies and owners and operators of the power system. doing so will improve communication among affected stakeholders' which will result we hope in a more secure grid. although the discussion draft is identical to last year's built we expect input from today's witnesses and insight provided by those witnesses will help improve the bill to reflect current conditions in any change circumstance. i know for example that congressman trent franks has introduced legislation that is i believe more narrowly focused than this broader approach and we look forward to his testimony to explain his views on this

area that he spent a great deal of time on as has congressman langevin. i think the witnesses for being with us. i will introduce them later but at this time i would like to yield for the purpose of an opening statement to mr rush, ranging member. >> thank you, mr. chairman and all of the distinguished guests for being here today. mr. chairman, today we are in a hearing on the reliability and infrastructure defense act or the grid act for short. this bipartisan piece of legislation is identical to the bill that was favorably reported out of the committee unanimously last year and went on to pass the house by a voice phone before getting stalled in the senate. this bill represents the type of

legislation that advances the security interests of all americans and shows what can be accomplished if we choose to work together in a bipartisan manner. i appreciate you conducting this hearing today, mr. chairman, and i hope and expect we will move this bill with the same type of cooperation and collaboration that we experienced last season as this legislation moves through committee. mr. chairman, the u.s. electorate grid consists of interconnected transmission lines and local distribution systems that deliver necessity to our homes, our offices, generation facilities and related communications systems. the design of the grid means all

of our components are interdependent so that problems and outages in one location can lead to reliability concerns in other areas. today's highly digitized world, the operational control over the transmission grid and generators are increasingly managed by computer systems such as supervisory control and acquisition system. which are linked to the internet and other communications systems as well as each other. reliance on automation and two way communication emphasize did read's vulnerability to a cyberattack. initially the increase use of systems, another smart grid capability, leave our electric

grid even more open to attack. mr. chairman, this bill will amend the federal power act to add a new section, section 2015 a, which will build the federal regulatory commission new authorities to protect the electric grid from cyberattack as well as from other threats including those from geomagnetic storms created by solar activity. additionally this bill will provide the authority to issue emergency orders to attend against a grid security threat whether by a malicious act be delayed geomagnetic storm or targeted physical attack. as the president notified the

commission, such a threat exists. mr. chairman, we are all aware of the potential threat our nation faces. by countries such as china or russia. we already conducted a cyberbombs proposed of the u.s. and grid system or by organizations -- terrorist organizations looking for ways to weaken our capabilities. cyberattacks can cause untold harm to our nation's grid from faraway locations at lower costs and ability to trace the source of these threats. it is imperative that we provide those agencies that are responsible -- attended our

nation's grid and all-american as with -- all the authority and resources that they need to keep us safe. so mr. chairman, this is an important hearing today. i look forward to hearing from our witnesses and experts on this critical issue and with that i yield back all the time i have which is one second. >> thank you for being so generous once again. recognize the ranking member, mr waxman for the purposes overstatement. >> today the subcommittee examines grid reliability infrastructure defense act. it is as bipartisan as they come. this legislation was born out of a bipartisan realization that our electric grid simply isn't adequately protected from a range of potential threats and for current process of addressing vulnerability in the

electric grid is not sufficient. in an emergency situation where the grid faces and imminent threat federal energy regulatory commission currently lacks authority to require the necessary protective measures. there are also an ever-growing number of grids and security vulnerabilities. these are weaknesses that could be exploited by criminals, terrorists or other countries to damage our electric grid. these same weaknesses make the grid vulnerable to naturally occurring geomagnetic storms. through the last congress, chairman upton and i developed the grid act on a bipartisan basis. majority and minority staff had extensive discussions with interested stakeholders and agencies. we worked with many members to answer questions to address concerns and consider their constructive suggestions. this cooperative process met strong bipartisan legislation.

on april 15th, 2010, the committee favorably reported the bill by unanimous vote of 47-zero and on june 9th, 2010, the grid act passed by voice vote on the suspension calendar. unfortunately the grid act has not become law in the last congress. we commend the chairman for taking of the grid act for consideration in this congress. this bipartisan legislation will provide the authorities and needs to address imminent threats to the electric grid with temporary emergency orders and also direct the commission to address longer term grid vulnerabilities with standards written or approved by the commission. in addition the bill includes the focus specifically on the proportions of the grid that serve facilities critical to the defense of the u.s. and the bill is budget neutral. these are important security and reliability issues and the last

congress -- and former defense secretary, national security advisers and cia directors. they feel the changes made by this bill are critical to our national security. i look forward to hearing from today's witnesses though we are likely to hear some against providing authority to address these serious threats. we work across the aisle in the last congress to develop legislation. i hope today marks the beginning of a similar process in this congress. the grid act is too important to allow special interests to weaken its effectiveness. the committee needs to act to protect the electric grid. cyberattack and direct physical attack and electromagnetic pulses and solar storms. thank you. >> thank you. today we have three panels of witnesses. on the first panel we have two members of congress, trent

franks of arizona and mr. jim langevin of rhode island. we appreciate both of you being here very much. i will recognize trent franks for a 5 minute opening statement. >> good afternoon to you, sayre, and ranking members rush and waxman. it is one of profound implication and importance to western civilization and consequently i hope the members feel inclined to read my written testimony. thank you for allowing me to testify today. .. my written testimony. i thank you again for allowing me to testify here today. mr. chairman, in our technological advancement we've captured the electron and transported its utility into almost every business, home and industrial endeavor tlohroughou the industrialized world. we've grown profoundly dependent on electricity and incute

ramentes. we find among our greatest strengths an unsettling vulnerability to enp. the effects of geomagnetic storms are well documented with nearly every space weather and emp expert recognizing the collapses these pulses can bring to electric grids. in 2008, the emp commission testified before the armed services committee of which i will a member that the u.s. society and economy are so critically dependent upon the availability of electricity that a significant collapse of the grid precipitated by a major natural or manmade emp event could result in catastrophic civilian casualties. this conclusion is echoed by separate reports recently compiled by the dod, dhs, doe and national academy of sciences along with various other agencies and researchers. all of them, mr. chairman, came to very similar conclusions. the sobering reality is that

this vulnerability, if left unaddressed, could have grave societal altering consequences. like many of you, i believe federal regulation could should be very limited. however, our first national priority is national security. and to protect our national security, we must protect our major transformers from cascading destruction. to that end, i've introduced the shield act, which differs primarily from your discussion dlast in three areas. unlike the grid act, which i commend this committee deeply for passing last year, the shield act authorizes ferc to promulgate standards necessary to protect our electricity infrastructure against both natural and manmade electromagnetic pulse events if the standards developed by the ero are inadequate to protect national security. the shield act additionally requires automated hardware-based solutions rather than procedural and operational safety measures alone. and the shield act does not

contain sign other security provisions leaving the conflicting approaches to that extremely important issue among the members of the senate in particular to be debated in a separate bill. automated hardware, mr. chairman, is particularly important when one considers the shortcomings of procedural and operational safety measures alone in response to an emp event. according to solar weather experts, there is only 20 to 30 minutes warning from the time we predict a solar storm that may effect us to the time it actually does. this is simply not enough time to implement procedures that will adequately protect the grid. furthermore, these predictions are only accurate one out of three times. this places a crushing dilemma on industry who must decide whether or not to heed the warning with the knowledge that a wrong decision either way could result in the loss of thousands or even millions of lives, and massive legal ramifications beyond expression. mr. chairman and members, we are

now 65 years into the nuclear age and the ominous intersection of jihadist terrorism and nuclear proliferation has been relentlessly hurdling toward america and the free >> but when we add the dimension of asymmetric electric magnetic pulse threat we may have show the short-term threat of the peace security in the human family in the world today. certainly there are those who believe the likelihood of terrorists of rogue states obtaining nuclear weapons may be remote and it may be a reasonable thought for the moment. but our intelligence apparatus did not foresee, it shows us regimes can change very quickly. if terrorists of rogue states do require nuclear weapons, hardening our electric grid would immediately become a desperate national priority. however, that process will take several years and while a regime change only takes a few weeks, a missile launch only takes a few

minutes. the fact that we are 100% vulnerable means we should start securing our electric infrastructure now. indeed by reducing our vulnerability we may reduce the likelihood that terrorists of rogue states would attempt such attack in the first place. mr. chairman, there is a moment in the life of every nearly problem when it is big enough to be seen by responsible reasonable people and still small enough to be solved. there's still time to mitigate the vulnerability that naturally occurring or weaponized e some, p represents to the mechanisms of our civilization. your actions today to protect america may gain you no fame orphan fair in the annuals of history, however it, may happen that in your lifetime a natural or manmade event so big has an effect so small that none but a few will recognize the disaster that was averted. and for the sake of our children and future generations, i pray

it happens exactly that way. thank you and god bless you all. >> thank you, mr. franks. >> thank you, chairman woodfield rush and ranking member waxman for allowing me to testify on what i believe to be one of the most critical national security issues facing our securing our electric grid from vulnerabilities to which i have devoted several years of my time and effort. and i wanted to be here with my colleague, mr. franks. as both a member of the house arms services committee as well as the house permanent committee on intelligence, i sit in a very interesting nexus which gives me broad transparency into the national security challenges that face our nation today. and i previously testified on this issue in 2009 after a bill

that i drafted with then homeland security chairman benny thompson which was transferred into mark's chairman act and i want to thank the mr. chairman tore including me in this discussion today. there are a number of actors who seek to do harm from foreign national station and hackers and disgruntled employees. and as threat and capability both grow so does the risk to our critical infrastructure. now, this threat is not new. in the 110th congress as chairman of the homeland security subcommittee with jurisdiction over cybersecurity, i conducted a details examination of cyberthreats to our critical infrastructure. and i want to reiterate what i made clear in my previous testimony before this subcommittee. i believe there's a threat to our security and even the american lives. and the vast majority of our critical assets are in private

hands. and because fixing vulnerabilities can be costly, security confines itself with conflict with other priorities, profit, competition and accountability to shareholders. sadly, the american people are the ones placed at risk when the owners of our critical infrastructure failed to appear for the worst case scenarios. i was pleased by earlier attention paid earlier to the cybersecurity by the president obama administration and despite some delays in the process i would like to commend the administration for taking some very serious steps in the right direction. under the leadership of cybercoordinator howard smith and his staff the white house has released legislative guidance in setting standards and best practices for protection across all sectors of our critical infrastructure. this mirrors philosophically the framework of legislation i introduced earlier this year. now, dhs has also taken important steps to become more involved in securing our critical infrastructure. the establishment of the industrial control systems, computer emergency response team

or ics cert formalized a group of experts and fly-away teams that could respond to cyberincidents across all sectors of our utilities. however, a company must still request help from the government before it can be deployed. and the simple act of having to ask often forces decision-makers and industry to steer clear of seeking help for these complex problems. i am pleased to see industry increasing stepping up to plate to combat these threat but i fear they could not move fast enough or far enough under the system. as the president of the international board of security examiners and former chief of security officers at the nerc testified last year and i quote we're not only susceptible but we're not very well prepared, end quote. now, i supported the grid act as a move to the house last year

because it seeks to address some of the unique political and regulatory challenges in our power industry today. currently, we live under a system that does not prioritize security, though. but actively penalizes open reporting and coordination. the legislation that's before us today aims to correct this but allowing federal regulators greater authority to protect americans during times of imminent crisis. it also provides for the issuance of orders to identify and mitigate vulnerabilities to protect the bulk power system from cyberattack. while this measure is a significant step forward, i'd also encourage the committee to consider provisions in my legislation and in senate and administration's proposals that expand this model to other sectors of critical infrastructure and enhance the ongoing efforts of dhs to quickly respond to a major crisis. i would also note that my concern that by specifying only the bulk power system, this

legislation excludes critical distribution systems that would lead major cities like new york and washington unprotected by the broader provisions of this bill. i'll conclude by cautioning again that inaction on this issue will make our nation increasingly vulnerable to cyberattacks from both outside and within. we know the threat exists and we have an opportunity to address it before any further damage is caused. it is the responsibility of congress and the administration to take the appropriate steps that will protect this nation. once again, i'd like to thank you, chairman whitfield and ranking member rush as well as our ranking member waxman that their attention to this very important issue and for the opportunity to testify hereby today. i certainly look forward to working with the energy and commerce committee and supporting your effort to raise awareness about securing our critical infrastructure and protecting our citizens from attack. >> we appreciate the testimony of both of you.

as you know, this is an important issue with great consequences for the country. and last year, of course, the grid act did pass the house of representatives, but was enable to get through the senate. and we are quite familiar with that. we pass a lot of things here that don't get through the senate but our objective is to get something from the house and the senate and signed by the president. and i know, mr. franks, that a large number members of the arms services committee and you serve on that as well, mr. langevin, our cosponsor on your bill, and i'm assuming, mr. langevin, that your bill and senator rockefell rockefeller's bill basically reflects the administration's proposal; is that correct? or not? >> well, i wouldn't go so far as to say that. but they both move in a similar direction. >> okay. well, i would like for maybe

both of you to just give advice to this committee on what you think we need to do to maximize our opportunity to get this passed in the senate? of mr. franks? >> well, mr. chairman, as it happened, last year i went over and personally lobbied the senate as hard as i could on the grid act even though as i laid out today, i believe that there's some critically important things that needed to be added to it or changed. i met with senator murkowski and others there in the chamber. and the big challenge was that they had differing strategies on what should be done about cybersecurity. now, let me make it so desperately clear here. i believe that cybersecurity is a critically important issue. and i think i would find myself largely in mr. langevin's camp on that issue. but the problem is that the personalities there had a little different strategies on how to address it and i'm trying to maintain protocol here, mr. chairman. they couldn't get together on

that and that's why that we felt like the issue should be separated, not because that one is more important than the other, per se, but because i just think it's going to be especially difficult. that's complicated this year, as you know, the white house just a few weeks ago, probably what you were talking about with mr. langevin, released a legislative proposal for nationwide cross-cybersecurity efforts and they are working to meet a goal for those needs. and my concern is that if we tie them together, we may weaken both of them because there's very little disagreement on the emp aspects of it. the senators were very supportive of being able to protect the grid itself. we just had some very seriously different approaches of the security element of it. >> mr. langevin, do you have a comment? >> mr. chairman, i would just say that last year we were a bit frustrated by the senate still

contemplating which path forward they were going to take. i was fortunate to get an amendment included in the house arms services defense authorization bill that would establish a white house office on cybersecurity with a director's position that would have been senate-confirmed. and it would have included updates to the fisma law. that did not get through the conference committee last year because the senate was still struggling to determine which direction they were going to take. whether it would be rockefeller, snowe or lieberman. i believe that the senate has -- is moving in the direction of resolving those issues. and i'm hopeful that now that the white house has come out with its guidance on their views on cybersecurity going forward, that will clear some of the hurdles in the senate and they'll be able to come together

and reach broader agreement which hopefully will allow the grid act, which is, obviously, an aspect -- important aspect of securing our power system will allow these issues to clear the hurdles that remain ahead. so i would say it's perseverance. we're going to have continue to keep the pressure on the senate but hopefully -- and i would say that i'm in close contact with senator sheldon whitehouse, who's also from rhode island and who is one of the leaders on the cybersecurity committee. so i'm hopeful that we'll see a lot of these issues addressed and we'll be able to get them through conference. >> well, thank you all very much. and we do look forward to continuing to work with you because both of you have been leaders in this area. and we hope that we could continue to call on you for your input and at this time, i'd

recognize the gentleman from illinois. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'll be brief. mr. langevin, you have expressed some level of restraint requiring this and you think it can be stricken in certain areas. i'm serious to say this bill if we can to the senate. again, we can persevere as you have indicated. but how do you think we can strengthen this bill? >> well, a couple of things, congressman rush. i'd like to see the approach that we're taking here addressing the challenges to the power system broadened to include other areas of critical

infrastructure. and 'cause some of them would be in this jurisdiction of the full energy and commerce committee. others may be in the area of the financial services committee. but i think that the approach that you're taking here is a positive one with respect to the power -- to the electric grid. in addition to that, i would like to see this bill address distribution systems, not just transmission, but distribution systems. as i said, it's my understanding that because distribution is not dealt with in the bill, that areas like washington, d.c., and new york would be left out of the intent and hopefully the coverage that this legislation would provide, protection it would provide to our electric grid. so i'd encourage the committee to look further at that issue. >> congressman franks, do you have any suggestions along the same lines? >> well, i think that

congressman langevin has it absolutely right. that, you know, i know we have pictures of new york and washington but we still want to keep them around for a while. and i think that it's wise to extent that to the transmission lines. again, my primary purpose here is to try to focus as narrowly as i can on maintaining the base electric grid because if that goes down, you know, our cybersecurity issues are no longer an issue because we don't have the computer systems. we don't have the electricity to run them. and it might behoove the committee of the possibility to send the grid act over as it is and in a separate version just addressing the emp issue in case there is the issue where the senate can't come together on exactly how they want to do the cybersecurity but i emphasize one last time that the cybersecurity issue is absolutely critical. i visited the power plant in arizona, just outside of my district. it's the largest one in the

nation. and we had a hacker that was two strokes away from being able to go in and begin to monkey with the reactor itself. >> mr. chairman, my state legislature, my general assembly, they just on yesterday passed a bill out and sent it to the governor addressing some of these same matters. i'm interested in the other cities that you name but i'm also interested in the third city, the city by the lake, chicago and what the threats are to the city of chicago also. with that, mr. chairman, i yield back the balance of my time. >> thank you, mr. rush. generally speaking, when we have members of the house or the senate testifying, chairman and ranking member are the only ones that ask questions. however, i would ask our friends

on this side of the aisle if they have any questions. >> i don't. but i worked with trent on his bill. and i just wanted to thank both of you for your good work. this is an extremely important issue. and, you know, as the ranking and the chairman both said, we need to get this to the point where the senate can pass it and get it to the president's desk so we thank you for your efforts. >> i yield back. >> thank you. once again, thank you all for your concern and your leadership on this issue. and we will continue to work with you as we move forward. unless you all want to stay and hear the other panel, we'll let you go on to your other activities. so thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> at this time, i'd like to call up our second panel, which includes the honorable patricia hoffman, who's the assistant

secretary, office of electricity delivery and energy reliability at the department of energy. we have the honorable paul stockton, assistant secretary of defense for homeland defense and america's security affairs at the u.s. department of defense. and we have mr. joseph mcclelland, who is the director of office of electricity -- electric reliability at ferc. so welcome to the hearing and thank you all for taking time to be with us and so give us your expertise and thoughts on this issue. so at this time, ms. hoffman, i will recognize you for a 5-minute opening statement. and i would just point out that there's little devices on the top of the table that has the red, green and yellow light, and

when it turns he red, we would like maybe having you thinking about coming to an end but we won't hold you strictly to that. ms. hoffman, you're recognized for five minutes. >> good afternoon, mr. chairman, members of the committee, i would like to extend my thanks to the chairman and esteemed members of the committee for inviting me here today to discuss cybersecurity issues facing the electric industry as well as potential legislation intended to strengthen protection of the bulk power system and the electric infrastructure. ensuring a resilient electric grid is particularly important since it is arguably the most complex and critical infrastructure that others depend upon to deliver essential services. the department of energy's office of electricity delivery and energy reliability supports the administration's strategic comprehensive approach to the cybersecurity. and specific with respect to the electric grid, we recognize that

our focus should be on seven key areas. one is facilitating public/private partnerships to accelerate grid cybersecurity efforts, 2, funding research and development of advanced technology to create secure and resilient electricity infrastructure. 3, developing cybersecurity standards that provide a baseline to protect against known vulnerabilities. 4, timely sharing of information. 5, the development of risk management frameworks. 6, facilitation of incident management and response capabilities. and 7, the development of a highly skilled and adaptive work force. cybersecurity for the electric grid must not only address threats and vulnerabilities of traditional information systems, but also address the unique issues to the electric control systems such as skate systems and other controlled devices.

the cyberstate policy review underscores the need for public/private partnerships in order to design a more secured technology and improve resilience of the critical government and industry systems and networks. as directed by hspd7, a public/private partnership must be established to effectively address national security concerns for critical infrastructure. however, private industry alone cannot be responsible for preventing, deterring mitigating effects of deliberate efforts to destroy or exploit critical infrastructure systems. our office has long recognized that neither the government nor the private sector nor individual citizens can meet cybersecurity challenges alone. we must work together. oe supports activities to enhance cybersecurity in the energy sector. nearly all of the cybersecurity activities involve public and private partnerships. through partnerships and

competitive solicitations with the doe, department of energy national laboratories industry and academia, oe has sponsored research and development of several advanced cybersecurity technologies that are commercially available and a example of these examples include, a secured serial communications for control system that has been commercialized by schweitzer engineering laboratories. a tool kid that provides auditing of security settings. this was commercialized by digital bond which is a small business. vulnerability assessments of 38 different skate systems and a common vulnerabilities report to help utilities and vendors mitigate vulnerabilities in many systems. supporting the development of cybersecurity standards, our office is collaborating with nist and other organizations to develop a framework and roadmap for operability to have

cybersecurity as a critical element. the panel cybersecurity working group released the cybersecurity guidelines for the smart grid. and they will have vend r neutral actionable guidance to utillity entities to build cybersecurity into the smart grid components at the development stage. including safeguards and implementing safeguards when integrated into the grid. some examples include working with state and local governments and agencies to put together technical briefs, education forms, workshops and exercises just to name is few. the department fully supports the administration's proposed comprehensive cybersecurity legislation focused on cybersecurity for the american people, our nation's critical infrastructure. and the federal government's own

networks and computer. specifically, the administration proposes the following legislative changes to enhance protection of critical infrastructure. voluntary government assistance industry, voluntary sharing with industry and states. and critical infrastructure security risks and mitigation. in conclusion, i'd like to thank the committee for its leadership in supporting the protection of the bulk power system and critical infrastructure against cyberthreats. we look forward to working with congress to further the dialog and i would be pleased to answer any questions that you may have. >> thank you, ms. hoffman. and mr. stockton, you're recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman, mr. ranking member, and the distinguished members of the committee, i have a detailed statement which i'll submit for the record. i want to focus on a few key points that i will make that will be helpful for you as you er and the leadership