i think it is fortunate that our current ferc commissioners are an independent lot. i understand that the commission is looking into this matter, including the question of how sensitive internal ferc documents made their way into a very high-profile news article. and i would urge that the ferc be very diligent in this, truly leave no stone unturned. i have grave questions about the irresponsible release of nonpublic information that unduly pinpoints potential vulnerabilities of our nation's grid. if this conduct is not already illegal, i have suggested that it should be. the source of the leaked information appears to be someone with access to highly sensitive, narrowly distributed ferc documents. releasing this sensitive information for publication has put the nation potentially at greater risk and potentially endangered lives, including those of the many good people who are faithfully working every day to maintain and to protect the grid. in order to learn what has happened here and to determine how better to safeguard critical information as steps are being taken

we're actively participating together with city attorney in the case at ferc, trying to make sure that we pay our fair share and no more for distribution services. >> so, we have full support in that. >> the other thing i wanted to illustrate is that most of our customers in the retail side, we charge equivalent to pg&e. and, so, with the transmission and distribution, they're not raising -- the pg&e doesn't typically raise their rate, per se. they're just raising their rate for transmitting our power through their system and distributing it. so, really, it eats into the margin. and, so, instead of paying them 1.2, we're paying 3.4 and we're still charging the same amount. and, so, that's the challenge. >> so, prior to some of these challenges coming into effect, we had a balanced plan. if you pretend you're in february of 2013, the last time we presented a balanced financial plan, fiscal year-end '16 would look like the slide you see in front of you now, where our operating costs would have increased. our capital program would still be quite robust. and we would not be dipping into re

rates that are charged on pg&e's system are set by the california independent system operator and ferc. those rates are known today and it's a postage stamp rate that anyone would pay. so, we know that. we are exempt from paying those rates right now because we have this special agreement with pg&e. but we know when that agreement rolls off, we could be subject to that same rate that everybody else is being charged. so, that's actually effective today. with respect to the distribution component -- >> hang on just a second. i'm sorry. we wouldn't expect it to be higher because we wouldn't pay a rate higher than the independent operator says we should. >> right, [speaker not understood], right now we're estimating that to be -- component of it to be in this add up that gets to 3.4 -- >> could it be less? could we expect we would be able to negotiate something that is, you know, comparable to what we've already been paying so we wouldn't go up to 3.4? >> so, we're not, we're not giving up on that effort. [multiple voices] >> there is a rate setting process that would -- that indicates wha

in this response to this report, she says in a statement, quote, ferc ordered mandatory standards totical facilities from physical security threats and vulnerabilities. at same time no single action or approach is sufficient. building a resilient grid requires a comprehensive and ongoing assessment how the system is planned, constructed, operated and secured under a range of conditions. now this comes after about a year ago, last year april, a number of assailants attack ad substation using sniper rifles,knocking out 17 different transistors in the san jose, california area, that is something you could model eight different attacks after that and cause this nationwide blackout. so it is something that certainly on the radar now. the federal government, there have been a number of hearings. ferc says they want recommendation from the industry by june how they will secure all of their energy infrastructures especially and including these transmission stations. back to you. liz: rich edson, thank you so much, i think. >> sorry. david: scary stuff. although they are taking precautions. l

>> well, i have to commend the ferc for going out and grabbing hold and taking some action and moving forward. now whit comes to sharing of -- when it comes to sharing of information, understanding who is in control of this and who needs to have the information. now, releasing the information is a separate matter and there's no reason for everyone to know what are these critical pieces of infrastructure. when it comes to the electric grid. but there are some people within the government, within the utility industry that must know this and we must communicate it fluidly, quickly and often. we saw with the blackout of 2003, it took us almost a year to understand it was olimb and squirrel involved -- a limb and a squirrel involved that 50,000 people lost their power. that's ridiculous, we can do much better than that. >> and some utility companies agreed to make some improvements. when you start talking about that kind of money it's the point you were making earlier. even if that were enough it's an awful lot of money. have. >> antonio, it is a lot of money and actually on the national s

first you go to the department of energy and you also then have to go to the federal -- to the ferc.akes a long time. and it's a kind of mixed upset as to what needs to be approved and what doesn't. but one thing to keep in mind people haven't focused on at all, country that has a lot of shale gas potential happens to be the country called ukraine. >> what about israel? israel has a lot of shale gas. a lot of gas underwater. israel will become an energy center. can we do something with that? >> when i saw the eu energy commissioner, he talked about gas coming from the eastern med as they call it coming by 2022. and think one of the consequences following the 2006 and 2009 shutdown of gas from russia to ukraine, i think this event will give a big push not only to lng and perhaps rethinking of how we handle it, but to projects like that eastern mediterranean from ppro. >> michael, i will give you the last word. i'm not an obama supporter on economic issues, but this is a war time issue. putin is the enemy. he's the devil. not president obama. president obama has made a lot of statement

a modest proposal, essentially if you just let projects which the headed ferc go to of the line, you would be accelerating projects that were not just licenses to market, but projects that are already commercially mature. i think that that would solve a lot of the confusion about whether or not we can have these 18 projects. we are not going to do it just by getting approval to projects that are already built. >> let me turn to you for a follow-up question. the seasonality of natural gas prices, we might be able to stabilize these fluctuations for consumers and producers. of course, in my home state and across the nation. there is a surge in the winter. fore is a maintenance of x production with high demand. >> it is certainly possible. the availability of storage available to these export facilities might be available domestically. if prices got higher than what the gas could get in the global markets. that could have been a useful thing, for example, if there had been some way to get lng quickly into boston. back to your earlier question, i believe that there are lots of factors th

fact, this bill carefully states that this prohibition will not affect irrigation water contracts, ferc licensing, endangered species recovery, national parks, or any other legal authorities. important environmental restoration, wildlife protection, and conservation work has been occurring for years in a positive, cooperative manner. and that's whether it's in the puget sound in my state, the chesapeake bay nearby here, or the florida everglades, all will continue and all are protected. such efforts will not be changed by this legislation. madam chairman, i want to thank and recognize the sponsor of this legislation, our colleague from colorado, mr. tipton, for all his hard work in advancing this important commonsense bipartisan legislation. it's time for the legislative branch to insert itself on he pea half of the american people and rein in the imperial overreach of the executive branch and this administration. no law gives federal agencies the authority to take private property rights as the administration is seeking to do. in fact, the constitution prohibits such takings. it's time

wanted to export natural gas had to get a permit, that's in addition to other permits required by ferc. over the last 70 years this requirement that began in 1938, ironically, was hardly noticed anywhere in the united states because we were importing natural gas into the united states. now, the united states can become the saudi arabia of natural gas. by exporting. and so technology has changed and we have an abundant amount of natural gas here in our own country. we can update the 1938 law, dismantle the bureaucratic roadblocks and take the d.o.e., the department of energy, i didn't say injury, i said energy, out of the libes granting process altogether. i think washington, this country should be supporting, not stone walling the development of this valuable resource. and we can do that by legislation. i've introduced legislation today in fact that would have the department of energy expedite the approval process for exporting natural gas to the ukraine, former soviet republics, and to europe. let's get on with it. sure it will take some time to get all the logistics set up so we can