ms. nichols: we believe it would. it was defeated here, but within california, it was put on the ballot. the voters chose to keep that system. they became convinced it would lead us to a cleaner energy environment. senator merkley: they wanted to see carbon dioxide produced in the most cost effective manner. isn't the clean power plan based around that same principle? states developing their own plan with a range of different choices. ms. nichols: it is clearly allowable. i know epa was familiar with our program, but i understand they tried hard, it doesn't seem like they have succeeded it yet, to indicate to states that they would have the ability to design a plan that fit their own unique situation. senator merkley: thank you. senator inhofe: thank you, senator merkley. senator bozeman. senator bozeman: thank you very much. ms. nichols, following up on senator merkley's question, you are out of compliance for ozone. the regulatory impact says the annual cost to california would be $800 million to $2.2 billion a year

ms. nichols let me ask you a quick question. we had a hearing last week on ozone and the new regulations that are going to be put into effect. is every county in california compliant with the current ozone regulations that we have presently? >> no, senator, we're not. we have remaining challenges in both southern california and in the central valley in meeting the ozone standards, and the new ozone standard will add an extra challenge as well as some extra time to that effort. >> so you put that on top of what we're doing here with the clean power, and -- >> we care about our citizens, senator, yes. >> well i care about that as well. >> yes. we rely on the science. >> in terms of how we're going to meet this challenge, in terms of our timelines, extension of timelines, extension of measures, what's going to be the best, mr. parfitt from wyoming? what's going to be the easiest to lay down on this clean power plant that will make the biggest impact to meet the challenges? deadlines, timelines, lower standards, less reductions? >>

ms. nichols were playing a role in this. >> without objection so ordered.in my 30 seconds, two documents one from the census bureau this is california has the highest u.s. poverty rate comparing income to the cost of living across the state and secondly from the manhattan institute migration from california to oklahoma increased by 274% in the 2000's. >> you are lucky to get us. >> with that we are adjourned. [inaudible conversations] >>> order. welcome the public to this foreign affairs committee and what i strongly suspect will be the last opportunity to question the former secretary and his team on world events. foreign secretary welcome. good to see you here today. >> thank you. >> foreign secretary, this committee published a report a couple weeks ago on the finance performance and administration of the foreign office. we rather felt the foreign office was at a bit of a crossroads. in our judgment, it had done a good job over the last five years but it is spread rather thinly. the choice now is whether or not we maintain that spread or deepen it which

ms. nichols: i believe so. mr. myers: i would concur that you can reduce emissions and keep prices down. sen. sessions: ms. nowak, you indicated, you have spent a lot of money to make coal cleaner than it has ever been. if those plans are closed, are you saying those are, stranded costs? lost investments that are damaging to ratepayers? ms. nowak: the costs for new generation only do not take into account paying for units that have been recently built. power plants are paid for over many years. ratepayers will be paying for plants run much less while at the same time paying for new electricity. sen. sessions: mr. easterly, i would ask you to see if you can say yes or no on that. let me ask a simple question. it seems to me mandates, regulations, drive up costs. in an economic sense, they are the same as raising taxes and having the government do it. the government could raise taxes on everybody and then pay for cleaning up power plants or whatever they want to do. i just want to translate this into reality for the

ms. nichols were playing a role in this. >> without objection so ordered. in my 30 seconds, two documents one from the census bureau this is california has the highest u.s. poverty rate comparing income to the cost of living across the state and secondly from the manhattan institute migration from california to oklahoma increased by 274% in the 2000's. >> you are lucky to get us. >> with that we are adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] .. the heads of several justice department divisions including the fbi, dea, us marshals, and the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives. >> good evening, everybody. so great to see every one of you. the jam and i am about to talk to and introduce also needs no introduction. he is is as someone at our table said, the men of the our. i think he is a man of courage and i and i think we all applaud his service and his creativity and the inspiration he has brought with his current service at the federal communications commission. we are all excited to hear what you have to say command we are

ms. nichols, following up on senator merkley's question, you are out of compliance for ozone. the regulatory impact says the annual cost to california would be 800 million dollars-two $.2 billion a year. to think individual should be able to sue for noncompliance? -- do you think individuals should be able to sue for noncompliance? >> under the clean air act, they have the ability to sue epa or the state. california has submitted an implementation plan. we are moving forward steadily bringing down levels of ozone. we have come into compliance. >> your argument is the same as hers. if you are doing things as required by law, you should not be sued. >> one of the regions we are here to defend the carbon plan. the epa plan. it helps us with our ozone standard. we need all the help we can get. >> with regard to the question you agree with the testimony that if you are in compliance you should not be sued? >> i went to law school, too. we were taught anybody can file a lawsuit. sometimes they can win. >> i am an optometrist. >>when do you are going to be ozone compliant? >> at this

ms. nichols uber referring to a 2020 goal of wonder but that didn't include hydropower.what is it with hydropower included? >> if we included the hydro that we received we would be above are 30%, 33% goals. so we chose not to add it or the legislature chose not to edit or nuclear because they were trying to push forward solar wind geothermal biomass. >> if that percentage was included with other non-fossil? if you include the other non-fossil? >> we would be about 40%. >> you have got to aim for oregon. we are at 70%. we often respect greatly the examples you are setting particularly you have set up a marketplace. if we turn back in time there was a proposal that came really from a right-wing think tank about using markets to regulate sulfur dioxide to take on acid rain. the concept was not to regulate every smokestack but to proceed to set up a marketplace and verify the most cost-effective solutions would be adopted. how did that work out or do you have memory of that? >> senator that was the assistant administrator at epa when we implemented the program and i'm very p

ms. nichols: thank you chairman, ranking member members of the committee. i am mary nichols, and i am honored to be here to support epa's proposed clean power plan, which we believe will unlock state innovation across the country to protect our people and grow our economies. the framework proposed by epa is a workable, practical plan that will cut carbon solutions along with -- pollutions along with other forms of pollution, as long as increasing efficiency. it provides an opportunity for a better future. this is a future that we are already working to create in california. our success story has been one of bipartisanship. the 2006 california warming -- global warming solutions act was signed by our republican former governor, shorts and dagger -- arnold schwarzenegger who appointed me to this position and by jerry brown, who has reappointed me and has placed climate change at the core of his agenda, championing our enormously successful carbon market wrapping up green energy programs, and working nationally and internationally to spread solutions that will

ms. nichols: you are not wrong. we have experienced growth across the board. particularly in the clean energy sector in california because of our policies. we are the leading state in terms of investment in clean technology and renewable energy in the country. solar energy in particular is booming. we have samome natural advantages. solar energy in particular is booming. there needs to be transition time for all industries in all states. when we implemented our cap on carbon emissions with a trading program, there were many who were concerned about the rising cost of electricity to our manufacturing sector. no governor can afford to take no governor can afford to take risks with lights going out. that's job one. no matter how much we care about the environment and greenhouse gases, we know our job is to make sure the lights stay on. i think it's important to recognize this proposal does have within it the flexibility and the time needed. i recognize the concerns, and i think they are legitimate concerns, but i would assert the proposal which they will be modif