and we had, basically, the head of nerc come before the subcommittee and ostensibly testify that, yes, that they determined that the electric grid is very secure and, quite frankly, that individual misled congress because they hadn't actually ascertained the information that they said that they did, and they sub keptly had -- subsequently had to recant their testimony and apologize to the committee. so my work on the homeland security subcommittee is where in many ways it started, but i co-chaired the national security on cyber -- national committee on cybersecurity where we had experts both in and out of government from around the country sit on this commission and help us to develop a blueprint of how best to provide cybersecurity for the country and produced a pretty robust document that helped us to show where we really need to be to make sure we get this right. >> host: do you hear from your constituents on this issue? >> guest: some. in particular companies that are in the i.t. field, in the i.t. sector in the cybersecurity sector that understand how important this issue really

and nerc has also raised issue on reliability. as secretary of energy responsible for the reliability and a lot of these issues, does that concern you? >> well, when we looked at, again, in working with come in discussion with american epa, we look at the mechanisms and felt that there were procedures and mechanisms in place so that the american public, that, you know, should something occur, because it's not taken the aggregate for each particular sector that received electricity, companies would be able to supply electricity in a reliable manner, and so we certainly worked with those agencies to say that there were mechanism in place to respond should something poker. the planning. [inaudible] from the information you have? >> no. of course we have concerned about the reliability. that is one of the very important duties of the department of energy. >> what about this, i am disturbed that i think epa misled the american people on utility mact. because all they ever talk about, and it many of our friends on this side of the aisle

is a mechanism in place developed by industry where if they see something unusual, then they notify nerc and they immediately go to u.s. cert and notifies them about it. homeland security and they're able to provide protection to the grid under voluntary standards that it industry put forth. am i correct? >> yes, but i think, senator, that's slightly different, if i could. because in those notifications you've gone out in realtime to now a, a part where actually we're in the forensics mode. they're telling you something occurred and by the time it gets to you, a cert. what u.s. cert could do not prevent it only help them understand it. >> okay. >> so i think the information sharing part of what you and others have proposed would take that to a more realtime capability or at least allow that where they could say, i see x happening and the industry could tell the government that that is occurring so you could take it from the forensic side to the prevention side, which is, i believe, hugely important for the protection of the country. >> okay. and now coming back to what you just alluded t

these are nerc and the federal energy regulatory commission, the ferc. these are the two regulatory agencies that are in place currently that do provide for that regulation, that cyberregulation. it is mandated that within our -- within our grid that these agencies tend to just this issue. so it does make me question if d.h.s. is even aware that the electric industry is the only industry already subject to mandatory cyberstandards or that the nerc has the ability to issue time-sensitive alerts to electric utilities in the event of emergency situations. it's just kind of hard for me to understand why d.h.s. would proceed with a grid attack situation and not include the existing governmental entities that already have these safeguards in place. and it also begs the question as to whether congress should provide d.h.s. with such significant and expansive new authorities in the cyberarena. before i close, mr. president, i'd like to take a moment to talk about the process behind cybersecurity legislation. well, my colleagues and i have highlighted the substan

nerc has also raised issues on reliability. does that concern you?> again, in working with and in discussions with nerc by japan and epa, we saw that there were procedures and mechanisms in place so that the american public, should something occur -- it is not taken the average aggregate. would companies be able to supply reliable matter? so we certainly work with those agencies to say that there were mechanisms in place to respond should something occur. >> so you do not have concerns about the reliability issue from the information you have. >> of course we have concerns about reliability. that is one of the important duties of the department of energy. >> i am disturbed could i think epa misled the american people. all they ever talked about -- even many of our friends on the side of the aisle, not all of them, but every time there is a public statement, they talk about the reduction of mercury emissions. and all of the data indicates that in significant benefit from mercury reduction. so if epa is selling it based on that benefit, and that benefi

is a mechanism in place developed by industry where if they see something unusual, then they notify nerc and they immediately go to u.s. cert and notifies them about it. homeland security and they're able to provide protection to the grid under voluntary standards that it industry put forth. am i correct? >> yes, but i think, senator, that's slightly different, if i could. because in those notifications you've gone out in realtime to now a, a part where actually we're in the forensics mode. they're telling you something occurred and by the time it gets to you, a cert. what u.s. cert could do not prevent it only help them understand it. >> okay. >> so i think the information sharing part of what you and others have proposed would take that to a more realtime capability or at least allow that where they could say, i see x happening and the industry could tell the government that that is occurring so you could take it from the forensic side to the prevention side, which is, i believe, hugely important for the protection of the country. >> okay. and now coming back to what you just alluded t

is a mechanism in place developed by industry where if they see something unusual, then they notify nerc and they immediately go to u.s. cert and notifies them about it. homeland security and they're able to provide protection to the grid under voluntary standards that it industry put forth. am i correct? >> yes, but i think, senator, that's slightly different, if i could. because in those notifications you've gone out in realtime to now a, a part where actually we're in the forensics mode. they're telling you something occurred and by the time it gets to you, a cert. what u.s. cert could do not prevent it only help them understand it. >> okay. >> so i think the information sharing part of what you and others have proposed would take that to a more realtime capability or at least allow that where they could say, i see x happening and the industry could tell the government that that is occurring so you could take it from the forensic side to the prevention side, which is, i believe, hugely important for the protection of the country. >> okay. and now coming back to what you just alluded t