ms. nowak: it creates a lot of uncertainty. as a regulator, the parties we regulate and the ratepayers all want certain he about where the rates will go and what we may do. when we become commissioners they don't give us crystal balls. we cannot look into the future but we have to make the best decisions based on the information before us. we ran into a similar issue with the cross-state air pollution rule, when it was hung up in the courts and utilities were , starting to make movements to comply. we have to do the best to allow them to try to recover, and we have to be judicious in spending ratepayer dollars. we will work closely and obviously monitor the legal proceedings that wisconsin is involved in so we do not unnecessarily pay ratepayer dollars. senator inhofe: mr. easterly, in your written testimony you elaborated a little bit more how the clean power plan proposal could actually increase the cost -- increase the amount of emissions. this is a position i have held ever since lisa jacks

ms. nowak: we think the very foundation in troops on states rights are read to have any -- intrudes on state's rights are read to have any state plans subjected to federal authority is a concern of ours. state energy policy should be left up to states. in connection with the department of energy, not the environmental protection agency. we have concerns about losing state authority over existing laws. >> mr. easterly? mr. easterly: do not believe epa can protect us from lawsuits under the clean air act. they can happen and they do. mr. parfitt: we don't believe we can be protected from lawsuits from third parties. as the proposal has been written. sen. barrasso: i am out of time. thank you very much. sen. fischer: thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for being here. commissioner easterly, when we had the acting administrator here earlier in the year, i asked her some questions about the heat rate efficiency assumption. we know epa relied on an analysis for that 6% heat rate. in their own terms, t

ms. nowakreally quickly? >> i didn't fully understand your question. >> mr. parfitt can you answer this as it pertains to you? >> as it pertains to the claim power plant i think the tuition their three issues here play in the first is the attribution of fossil fuel emissions co2 emissions being attributed to the energy producing states and the other issue that is at play here is the renewable energy generated in wyoming which 85% is shipped out of state. applying an escalator to that 100% of that to the producing state it's unfair. >> mr. chairman i will say this. we have a significant compromise here and you will have to help us. >> senator capito. >> i would like to thank the panel and ranking member. let me say a few words about my home state of west virginia what we have had to say about the clean power plan. our own epa has called it patently illegal invading the province that has been put forward with the finesse of the ball in a china shop. we have joined, i would note in the comments at

ms. nowak? >> if the utilities are following existing law and regulation, i think it would be very chilling effect to have them subjective to legal claims. >> everyone in their first year of economics learns about extranomalies. certainly our libertarian friends would say if you do damage to your neighbor, you should compensate for that damage. carbon and methane are produced in a million different ways. there are no states that don't produce a lot of both. but we are seeing a differential in how states are taking this on. oregon is now about 70% of its electricity is produced in not fossil format, and ms. nichols you were referring to a 2020 goal of one-third, but that didn't include your hydropower i don't believe. what is it with hydropower included? >> if we included the hydro that we receive we would be already above our 30% 33% goal. so we chose not to add it or the legislature chose not to add it, or nuclear, because they were trying to really push for new solar wind geothermal and biomas

i believe you said ms. nowak that you believe that these regulations passed the cost of electricity will go up. mr. parfitt in your state do you think it would go up also? >> yes, that is correct. >> and mr. easterly? >> yes, we just aren't sure how much but more than double. >> ms. nichols do you believe it these past and i'm not sure what you said. >> there has been a trend over decades for the cost per unit of electricity to go up but what we think is important is the bill, what the customer actually sees sees them in that event we are holding steady. we are able to hold that steady. >> even if these new rules are passed? >> i believe so. >> mr. myers? >> i concur they can reduce current emissions and keep electricity prices down. >> now ms. nowak you indicated that we spend a lot of money, if you spend a lot of money to make coal cleaner than it's ever been before and of those plants are closed are you saying those are the stranded costs and lost investments that are damaging to the ratepayers in your state?

. >> but in regard to the question, you agree with ms. nowak in the sense that if you're in cliens then you shouldn't be sued. >> there's no way that you're going to be -- when do you feel like you're going to be ozone compliant? >> at this point, we're projecting off into the future. it will be as challenging if not more challenging to meet the ozone stand aurd as it is to meet the greenhouse gas standard. i can't verify the number. i would say that the economic analysis was using all the same tools that we would have used in the same way. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, chairman. climate change is happening. human activity plays a huge roll in that. role in that. the consequences of doing nothing could be dire and expensive. do you agree with the milwaukee journal sental? >> i did not -- or do not endeavor to take on the policy behind what is before us. my role here has been analyzing it and rules that come before us: i look for three things. the environmental rule is coming. that's the lens that i look through this rule. >> environ

novak, have you done an >> ms. -- ms. nowak have you done an analysis as to how much of a rate increase would the psc have to approve to implement this plan? ms. nowak: we expected to be in the double digits, depending on which method of compliance we use. it could be in the upper 20% of an increase. right now we have more of an aggregate number for the state to comply. how that is broken down on her ratepayer increase will be fleshed out. as they come in and ask for recovery, but this is going to be a significant increase on ratepayers all across the board. low income to large manufacturers. senator inhofe: i'm going to be asking you on the record or if there is time at the end of my six minutes, if you would agree with the position many have taken, that wouldn't it be better to wait until these controversial legal issues are cleared up before requiring them to comply? i want to hear your answer to that, so i would say to you, what parts of the clean power plan will require enactment of new laws in your state, and how long wou