[Congressional Record: June 9, 2010 (House)]
[Page H4256-H4262]
GRID RELIABILITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEFENSE ACT
Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules
and pass the bill (H.R. 5026) to amend the Federal Power Act to protect
the bulk-power system and electric infrastructure critical to the
defense of the United States from cybersecurity and other threats and
vulnerabilities, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 5026
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Grid Reliability and
Infrastructure Defense Act'' or the ``GRID Act''.
SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO THE FEDERAL POWER ACT.
(a) Critical Electric Infrastructure Security.--Part II of
the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824 et seq.) is amended by
adding after section 215 the following new section:
``SEC. 215A. CRITICAL ELECTRIC INFRASTRUCTURE SECURITY.
``(a) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
``(1) Bulk-power system; electric reliability organization;
regional entity.--The terms `bulk-power system', `Electric
Reliability Organization', and `regional entity' have the
meanings given such terms in paragraphs (1), (2), and (7) of
section 215(a), respectively.
``(2) Defense critical electric infrastructure.--The term
`defense critical electric infrastructure' means any
infrastructure located in the United States (including the
territories) used for the generation, transmission, or
distribution of electric energy that--
``(A) is not part of the bulk-power system; and
``(B) serves a facility designated by the President
pursuant to subsection (d)(1), but is not owned or operated
by the owner or operator of such facility.
``(3) Defense critical electric infrastructure
vulnerability.--The term `defense critical electric
infrastructure vulnerability' means a weakness in defense
critical electric infrastructure that, in the event of a
malicious act using electronic communication or an
electromagnetic pulse, would pose a substantial risk of
disruption of those electronic devices or communications
networks, including hardware, software, and data, that are
essential to the reliability of defense critical electric
infrastructure.
``(4) Electromagnetic pulse.--The term `electromagnetic
pulse' means 1 or more pulses of electromagnetic energy
emitted by a device capable of disabling, disrupting, or
destroying electronic equipment by means of such a pulse.
``(5) Geomagnetic storm.--The term `geomagnetic storm'
means a temporary disturbance of the Earth's magnetic field
resulting from solar activity.
``(6) Grid security threat.--The term `grid security
threat' means a substantial likelihood of--
``(A)(i) a malicious act using electronic communication or
an electromagnetic pulse, or a geomagnetic storm event, that
could disrupt the operation of those electronic devices or
communications networks, including hardware, software, and
data, that are essential to the reliability of the bulk-power
system or of defense critical electric infrastructure; and
``(ii) disruption of the operation of such devices or
networks, with significant adverse effects on the reliability
of the bulk-power system or of defense critical electric
infrastructure, as a result of such act or event; or
``(B)(i) a direct physical attack on the bulk-power system
or on defense critical electric infrastructure; and
``(ii) significant adverse effects on the reliability of
the bulk-power system or of defense critical electric
infrastructure as a result of such physical attack.
``(7) Grid security vulnerability.--The term `grid security
vulnerability' means a weakness that, in the event of a
malicious act using electronic communication or an
electromagnetic pulse, would pose a substantial risk of
disruption to the operation of those electronic devices or
communications networks, including hardware, software, and
data, that are essential to the reliability of the bulk-power
system.
``(8) Large transformer.--The term `large transformer'
means an electric transformer that is part of the bulk-power
system.
``(9) Protected information.--The term `protected
information' means information, other than classified
national security information, designated as protected
information by the Commission under subsection (e)(2)--
``(A) that was developed or submitted in connection with
the implementation of this section;
``(B) that specifically discusses grid security threats,
grid security vulnerabilities, defense critical electric
infrastructure vulnerabilities, or plans, procedures, or
measures to address such threats or vulnerabilities; and
``(C) the unauthorized disclosure of which could be used in
a malicious manner to impair the reliability of the bulk-
power system or of defense critical electric infrastructure.
``(10) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the Secretary
of Energy.
``(11) Security.--The definition of `security' in section
3(16) shall not apply to the provisions in this section.
``(b) Emergency Response Measures.--
``(1) Authority to address grid security threats.--Whenever
the President issues and provides to the Commission (either
directly or through the Secretary) a written directive or
determination identifying an imminent grid security threat,
the Commission may, with or without notice, hearing, or
report, issue such orders for emergency measures as are
necessary in its judgment to protect the reliability of the
bulk-power system or of defense critical electric
infrastructure against such threat. As soon as practicable
but not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of
this section, the Commission shall, after notice and
opportunity for comment, establish rules of procedure that
ensure that such authority can be exercised expeditiously.
``(2) Notification of congress.--Whenever the President
issues and provides to the Commission (either directly or
through the Secretary) a written directive or determination
under paragraph (1), the President (or the Secretary, as the
case may be) shall promptly notify congressional committees
of relevant jurisdiction, including the Committee on Energy
and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate, of
the contents of, and justification for, such directive or
determination.
[[Page H4257]]
``(3) Consultation.--Before issuing an order for emergency
measures under paragraph (1), the Commission shall, to the
extent practicable in light of the nature of the grid
security threat and the urgency of the need for such
emergency measures, consult with appropriate governmental
authorities in Canada and Mexico, entities described in
paragraph (4), the Secretary, and other appropriate Federal
agencies regarding implementation of such emergency measures.
``(4) Application.--An order for emergency measures under
this subsection may apply to--
``(A) the Electric Reliability Organization;
``(B) a regional entity; or
``(C) any owner, user, or operator of the bulk-power system
or of defense critical electric infrastructure within the
United States.
``(5) Discontinuance.--The Commission shall issue an order
discontinuing any emergency measures ordered under this
subsection, effective not later than 30 days after the
earliest of the following:
``(A) The date upon which the President issues and provides
to the Commission (either directly or through the Secretary)
a written directive or determination that the grid security
threat identified under paragraph (1) no longer exists.
``(B) The date upon which the Commission issues a written
determination that the emergency measures are no longer
needed to address the grid security threat identified under
paragraph (1), including by means of Commission approval of a
reliability standard under section 215 that the Commission
determines adequately addresses such threat.
``(C) The date that is 1 year after the issuance of an
order under paragraph (1).
``(6) Cost recovery.--If the Commission determines that
owners, operators, or users of the bulk-power system or of
defense critical electric infrastructure have incurred
substantial costs to comply with an order under this
subsection and that such costs were prudently incurred and
cannot reasonably be recovered through regulated rates or
market prices for the electric energy or services sold by
such owners, operators, or users, the Commission shall, after
notice and an opportunity for comment, establish a mechanism
that permits such owners, operators, or users to recover such
costs.
``(c) Measures to Address Grid Security Vulnerabilities.--
``(1) Commission authority.--If the Commission, in
consultation with appropriate Federal agencies, identifies a
grid security vulnerability that the Commission determines
has not adequately been addressed through a reliability
standard developed and approved under section 215, the
Commission shall, after notice and opportunity for comment
and after consultation with the Secretary, other appropriate
Federal agencies, and appropriate governmental authorities in
Canada and Mexico, promulgate a rule or issue an order
requiring implementation, by any owner, operator, or user of
the bulk-power system in the United States, of measures to
protect the bulk-power system against such vulnerability.
Before promulgating a rule or issuing an order under this
paragraph, the Commission shall, to the extent practicable in
light of the urgency of the need for action to address the
grid security vulnerability, request and consider
recommendations from the Electric Reliability Organization
regarding such rule or order. The Commission may establish an
appropriate deadline for the submission of such
recommendations.
``(2) Certain existing cybersecurity vulnerabilities.--Not
later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this
section, the Commission shall, after notice and opportunity
for comment and after consultation with the Secretary, other
appropriate Federal agencies, and appropriate governmental
authorities in Canada and Mexico, promulgate a rule or issue
an order requiring the implementation, by any owner, user, or
operator of the bulk-power system in the United States, of
such measures as are necessary to protect the bulk-power
system against the vulnerabilities identified in the June 21,
2007, communication to certain `Electricity Sector Owners and
Operators' from the North American Electric Reliability
Corporation, acting in its capacity as the Electricity Sector
Information and Analysis Center.
``(3) Rescission.--The Commission shall approve a
reliability standard developed under section 215 that
addresses a grid security vulnerability that is the subject
of a rule or order under paragraph (1) or (2), unless the
Commission determines that such reliability standard does not
adequately protect against such vulnerability or otherwise
does not satisfy the requirements of section 215. Upon such
approval, the Commission shall rescind the rule promulgated
or order issued under paragraph (1) or (2) addressing such
vulnerability, effective upon the effective date of the newly
approved reliability standard.
``(4) Geomagnetic storms.--Not later than 1 year after the
date of enactment of this section, the Commission shall,
after notice and an opportunity for comment and after
consultation with the Secretary and other appropriate Federal
agencies, issue an order directing the Electric Reliability
Organization to submit to the Commission for approval under
section 215, not later than 1 year after the issuance of such
order, reliability standards adequate to protect the bulk-
power system from any reasonably foreseeable geomagnetic
storm event. The Commission's order shall specify the nature
and magnitude of the reasonably foreseeable events against
which such standards must protect. Such standards shall
appropriately balance the risks to the bulk-power system
associated with such events, including any regional variation
in such risks, and the costs of mitigating such risks.
``(5) Large transformer availability.--Not later than 1
year after the date of enactment of this section, the
Commission shall, after notice and an opportunity for comment
and after consultation with the Secretary and other
appropriate Federal agencies, issue an order directing the
Electric Reliability Organization to submit to the Commission
for approval under section 215, not later than 1 year after
the issuance of such order, reliability standards addressing
availability of large transformers. Such standards shall
require entities that own or operate large transformers to
ensure, individually or jointly, adequate availability of
large transformers to promptly restore the reliable operation
of the bulk-power system in the event that any such
transformer is destroyed or disabled as a result of a
reasonably foreseeable physical or other attack or
geomagnetic storm event. The Commission's order shall specify
the nature and magnitude of the reasonably foreseeable
attacks or events that shall provide the basis for such
standards. Such standards shall--
``(A) provide entities subject to the standards with the
option of meeting such standards individually or jointly; and
``(B) appropriately balance the risks associated with a
reasonably foreseeable attack or event, including any
regional variation in such risks, and the costs of ensuring
adequate availability of spare transformers.
``(d) Critical Defense Facilities.--
``(1) Designation.--Not later than 180 days after the date
of enactment of this section, the President shall designate,
in a written directive or determination provided to the
Commission, facilities located in the United States
(including the territories) that are--
``(A) critical to the defense of the United States; and
``(B) vulnerable to a disruption of the supply of electric
energy provided to such facility by an external provider.
The number of facilities designated by such directive or
determination shall not exceed 100. The President may
periodically revise the list of designated facilities through
a subsequent written directive or determination provided to
the Commission, provided that the total number of designated
facilities at any time shall not exceed 100.
``(2) Commission authority.--If the Commission identifies a
defense critical electric infrastructure vulnerability that
the Commission, in consultation with owners and operators of
any facility or facilities designated by the President
pursuant to paragraph (1), determines has not adequately been
addressed through measures undertaken by owners or operators
of defense critical electric infrastructure, the Commission
shall, after notice and an opportunity for comment and after
consultation with the Secretary and other appropriate Federal
agencies, promulgate a rule or issue an order requiring
implementation, by any owner or operator of defense critical
electric infrastructure, of measures to protect the defense
critical electric infrastructure against such vulnerability.
The Commission shall exempt from any such rule or order any
specific defense critical electric infrastructure that the
Commission determines already has been adequately protected
against the identified vulnerability. The Commission shall
make any such determination in consultation with the owner or
operator of the facility designated by the President pursuant
to paragraph (1) that relies upon such defense critical
electric infrastructure.
``(3) Cost recovery.--An owner or operator of defense
critical electric infrastructure shall be required to take
measures under paragraph (2) only to the extent that the
owners or operators of a facility or facilities designated by
the President pursuant to paragraph (1) that rely upon such
infrastructure agree to bear the full incremental costs of
compliance with a rule promulgated or order issued under
paragraph (2).
``(e) Protection of Information.--
``(1) Prohibition of public disclosure of protected
information.--Protected information--
``(A) shall be exempt from disclosure under section
552(b)(3) of title 5, United States Code; and
``(B) shall not be made available pursuant to any State,
local, or tribal law requiring disclosure of information or
records.
``(2) Information sharing.--
``(A) In general.--Consistent with the Controlled
Unclassified Information framework established by the
President, the Commission shall promulgate such regulations
and issue such orders as necessary to designate protected
information and to prohibit the unauthorized disclosure of
such protected information.
``(B) Sharing of protected information.--The regulations
promulgated and orders issued pursuant to subparagraph (A)
shall provide standards for and facilitate the appropriate
sharing of protected information with, between, and by
Federal, State, local, and tribal authorities, the Electric
Reliability Organization, regional entities, and owners,
operators, and users of the bulk-
[[Page H4258]]
power system in the United States and of defense critical
electric infrastructure. In promulgating such regulations and
issuing such orders, the Commission shall take account of the
role of State commissions in reviewing the prudence and cost
of investments within their respective jurisdictions. The
Commission shall consult with appropriate Canadian and
Mexican authorities to develop protocols for the sharing of
protected information with, between, and by appropriate
Canadian and Mexican authorities and owners, operators, and
users of the bulk-power system outside the United States.
``(3) Submission of information to congress.--Nothing in
this section shall permit or authorize the withholding of
information from Congress, any committee or subcommittee
thereof, or the Comptroller General.
``(4) Disclosure of non-protected information.--In
implementing this section, the Commission shall protect from
disclosure only the minimum amount of information necessary
to protect the reliability of the bulk-power system and of
defense critical electric infrastructure. The Commission
shall segregate protected information within documents and
electronic communications, wherever feasible, to facilitate
disclosure of information that is not designated as protected
information.
``(5) Duration of designation.--Information may not be
designated as protected information for longer than 5 years,
unless specifically redesignated by the Commission.
``(6) Removal of designation.--The Commission may remove
the designation of protected information, in whole or in
part, from a document or electronic communication if the
unauthorized disclosure of such information could no longer
be used to impair the reliability of the bulk-power system or
of defense critical electric infrastructure.
``(7) Judicial review of designations.--Notwithstanding
subsection (f) of this section or section 313, a person or
entity may seek judicial review of a determination by the
Commission concerning the designation of protected
information under this subsection exclusively in the district
court of the United States in the district in which the
complainant resides, or has his principal place of business,
or in the District of Columbia. In such a case the court
shall determine the matter de novo, and may examine the
contents of documents or electronic communications designated
as protected information in camera to determine whether such
documents or any part thereof were improperly designated as
protected information. The burden is on the Commission to
sustain its designation.
``(f) Judicial Review.--The Commission shall act
expeditiously to resolve all applications for rehearing of
orders issued pursuant to this section that are filed under
section 313(a). Any party seeking judicial review pursuant to
section 313 of an order issued under this section may obtain
such review only in the United States Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit.
``(g) Provision of Assistance to Industry in Meeting Grid
Security Protection Needs.--
``(1) Expertise and resources.--The Secretary shall
establish a program, in consultation with other appropriate
Federal agencies, to develop technical expertise in the
protection of systems for the generation, transmission, and
distribution of electric energy against geomagnetic storms or
malicious acts using electronic communications or
electromagnetic pulse that would pose a substantial risk of
disruption to the operation of those electronic devices or
communications networks, including hardware, software, and
data, that are essential to the reliability of such systems.
Such program shall include the identification and development
of appropriate technical and electronic resources, including
hardware, software, and system equipment.
``(2) Sharing expertise.--As appropriate, the Secretary
shall offer to share technical expertise developed under the
program under paragraph (1), through consultation and
assistance, with owners, operators, or users of systems for
the generation, transmission, or distribution of electric
energy located in the United States and with State
commissions. In offering such support, the Secretary shall
assign higher priority to systems serving facilities
designated by the President pursuant to subsection (d)(1) and
other critical-infrastructure facilities, which the Secretary
shall identify in consultation with the Commission and other
appropriate Federal agencies.
``(3) Security clearances and communication.--The Secretary
shall facilitate and, to the extent practicable, expedite the
acquisition of adequate security clearances by key personnel
of any entity subject to the requirements of this section to
enable optimum communication with Federal agencies regarding
grid security threats, grid security vulnerabilities, and
defense critical electric infrastructure vulnerabilities. The
Secretary, the Commission, and other appropriate Federal
agencies shall, to the extent practicable and consistent with
their obligations to protect classified and protected
information, share timely actionable information regarding
grid security threats, grid security vulnerabilities, and
defense critical electric infrastructure vulnerabilities with
appropriate key personnel of owners, operators, and users of
the bulk-power system and of defense critical electric
infrastructure.
``(h) Certain Federal Entities.--For the 11-year period
commencing on the date of enactment of this section, the
Tennessee Valley Authority and the Bonneville Power
Administration shall be exempt from any requirement under
subsection (b) or (c) (except for any requirement addressing
a malicious act using electronic communication).''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Jurisdiction.--Section 201(b)(2) of the Federal Power
Act (16 U.S.C. 824(b)(2)) is amended by inserting ``215A,''
after ``215,'' each place it appears.
(2) Public utility.--Section 201(e) of the Federal Power
Act (16 U.S.C. 824(e)) is amended by inserting ``215A,''
after ``215,''.
SEC. 3. BUDGETARY COMPLIANCE.
The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of
complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, shall
be determined by reference to the latest statement titled
``Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation'' for this Act,
submitted for printing in the Congressional Record by the
Chairman of the House Budget Committee, provided that such
statement has been submitted prior to the vote on passage.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.
General Leave
Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent
that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and
extend their remarks and include extraneous material in the Record.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as
I may consume.
Right now, Mr. Speaker, America's electric grid is vulnerable to
cyber or other attacks by terrorists or hostile countries. Our
adversaries are actively probing these weaknesses and already have the
capacity to exploit them. The consequences of such an attack could be
devastating. The commercially operated grid provides 99 percent of the
power used by our defense facilities. Every one of our Nation's
critical civilian systems--water, communications, health care,
transportation, law enforcement, and financial services--depends on
that grid. Classified Member briefings have underscored the urgency of
this threat.
The GRID Act, which has been produced out of the Energy and
Environment Subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee, working
with Mr. Upton, the ranking member of the subcommittee, passed by a
unanimous 47-0 vote. It is the product of months of bipartisan work led
by Chairman Waxman and Ranking Members Barton and Upton. It reflects
important work by Mr. Barrow and other members of the Energy and
Commerce Committee and by Chairman Thompson, Representative Clarke--
Chairwoman Clarke--and others on the Homeland Security Committee. And
it shows that when it comes to the nexus between national security and
energy, all Americans agree that we must chart a more secure path.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I, too, want to compliment the members on our committee,
both Republican and Democrat, not only in our subcommittee that Mr.
Markey chairs and I'm the ranking member, but also Chairman Waxman and
Ranking Member Barton.
This has been a multiyear effort; it really has. This bill is a
product of that work. We've had a number of classified hearings and
discussions and briefings over the last couple of years with Members
attending for hours at a time. We've had some public hearings as well;
and this bill is a product of that, which is exactly why the bill
passed out of full committee 47-0 on a roll call vote.
The security of our Nation's energy infrastructure from attack is one
of the most important issues that this Congress might address this
year, and it's not an issue that we can take lightly. Energy, as we
know, electricity literally powers our economy in everything that we
do. Even small price spikes and supply disruptions can wreak havoc on
our economy for perhaps who knows how long, and it is imperative that
the security of our Nation's energy infrastructure gets all of the
attention that it deserves. This legislation is a step in the right
direction
[[Page H4259]]
to protect our critical energy and defense infrastructure.
Let me tell you a couple of things that this bill does. As it relates
to cyber- and electromagnetic weapons, it gives FERC the authority to
establish standards to protect the bulk power system against
vulnerabilities to malicious acts using electronic communications or
electromagnetic weapons.
Geomagnetic storms: The bill requires FERC to direct NERC to submit
for approval a reliability standard under section 215 to protect the
bulk power infrastructure. And for large transformers, the bill
requires FERC again to direct NERC to submit for approval a reliability
standard under section 215 to require adequate availability of large
transformers to ensure the reliability of the bulk power infrastructure
in the event of a physical or other attack with a geomagnetic storm.
{time} 1100
I would like to cite just a few words in a letter that was signed by
some real national security experts--James Woolsey, Stephen Hadley,
John Hamre, Rudy de Leon, James Schlesinger, William Perry, and Willy
Schneider, Jr. It's an official-use only letter, so I cannot submit
this letter for the Record or read more than just a few words.
They say together: We strongly endorse the timely passage of this
legislation in recognition that the electricity grid is a critical
national security asset, the backbone of defense capability in modern
civilization and also in recognition that the grid is vulnerable.
The letter goes on: We don't want a vulnerable grid. We, as a
society, cannot live with a vulnerable grid. This bill corrects many of
the flaws in what could otherwise be standard operating procedure.
Again, I applaud and thank Chairmen Waxman and Markey, Ranking Member
Barton, and all of the members of our committee who have spent many
hours to address this situation with this legislation.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may
consume to the chairman of the full Energy and Commerce Committee, the
gentleman from the State of California (Mr. Waxman).
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Grid Reliability
and Infrastructure Defense Act.
When it is signed by the President, this will be a bipartisan law,
and it will be vital in protecting the Nation's electric grid from
cyberattacks, from direct physical attacks, from electromagnetic
pulses, and from solar storms.
Beginning in the last Congress, on a bipartisan basis, a group of
Members worked on this legislation--Ed Markey, Joe Barton, Fred Upton,
and I. John Dingell and Rick Boucher have also played significant roles
in developing the proposal. John Barrow had a very important part in
this legislation as well. I commend all of them for working together
with me in preparing for this legislation that we are presenting to our
colleagues today.
The staffs of both the majority and minority had extensive
discussions with interested stakeholders and agencies. We worked with
many Members to answer their questions, to address their concerns, and
to consider their constructive suggestions. Their input has
strengthened this bill. It has been a cooperative process that has
produced strong bipartisan legislation. In fact, the Energy and
Commerce Committee favorably reported the bill by a unanimous vote of
47-0.
Today, our electric grid simply isn't adequately protected from a
range of potential threats in an emergency situation. Where the grid
faces an imminent threat, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
currently lacks the authority to require the necessary protective
measures. There is also an ever-growing number of grid security
vulnerabilities. These are weaknesses in the grid that could be
exploited by criminals, by terrorists, or by other countries to damage
our electric grid. There are weaknesses that even make the grid
vulnerable to naturally occurring geomagnetic storms.
This bipartisan legislation will provide the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission with the authorities it needs to address these
threats. It also directs the Commission to look at the long-term
threats, not just at the imminent threats, with standards written or
approved by the Commission. In addition, the bill includes provisions
that focus specifically on the portions of the grid that serve
facilities critical to the defense of the United States.
These are important national security and grid reliability issues. We
have heard from the Defense Department, from former Defense
Secretaries, from national security advisers, and from CIA Directors.
They have told us that the changes made by this bill are critical to
our national security, and the Congressional Budget Office confirms
that the final bill is budget neutral.
Today's legislation is an opportunity for all of us to work together,
and I urge my colleagues to seize this opportunity and to support this
important bipartisan legislation.
Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I know that we have one other Member who
wishes to speak, but I do not see him on the floor; so I continue to
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barrow), to whom Chairman Waxman has
already made reference. Mr. Barrow is probably the longest-standing
Member who has been working on this issue.
Mr. BARROW. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I thank him for his
work on this important subject.
Mr. Speaker, the grid that generates and distributes electricity
across our country is one of the engineering wonders of the world, but
it took generations to build, and it grew up in peacetime, safely
removed from any threat of physical attack by our enemies, and it was
long before the Internet. Today, we use the Internet to run this vast
infrastructure, and that leaves us vulnerable to a potentially
devastating cyberattack.
The GRID Act takes the first steps toward protecting our electric
grid from those who want to do us harm. The necessary costs are modest
compared to the cost of doing nothing. We cannot count on our enemies
to wait for us. The threat is real, and the solution is in our hands,
so I encourage my colleagues to support the bill.
Mr. UPTON. In seeing that the Member is not here, I would ask again
for a strong ``yea'' vote, and I would hope that our Senate colleagues
are listening so that they will be able to move this legislation as
quickly as possible.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin), who, in the last Congress,
was the chair of what is now the Emerging Threats Subcommittee on the
Homeland Security Committee. I have worked with him under his
leadership on these issues for years.
(Mr. LANGEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. LANGEVIN. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 5026, legislation
to protect our national electric grid system. I would particularly like
to thank Chairman Markey for his outstanding leadership and dedication
to this important national security issue. I know he has given great
time and effort and thought to this, and I thank him for that.
I would also like to thank Chairman Waxman for his attention to this
issue.
I would also like to recognize and to thank my good friend Mr.
Thompson, chairman of the full Homeland Security Committee, for working
with me in 2008 to hold hearings and to closely examine what actions
our country must absolutely take to prevent attacks on our national
security electric grid.
Two years ago, I testified before Chairman Markey's subcommittee
about the threats to our bulk power system from cyberattack. In the
110th Congress, as chairman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on
Emerging Threats, Cybersecurity, and Science and Technology, I
conducted a detailed and thorough examination of cyberthreats to our
critical infrastructure, and I want to reiterate what I made clear in
my testimony.
I believe that America is still vulnerable to a cyberattack against
the electric grid, which would cause severe damage, not only to our
critical infrastructure, but also to our economy and
[[Page H4260]]
to the welfare of our citizens. The vast majority of our critical
assets is in private hands. In many sectors, private entities are
largely self-regulated and are responsible for developing and for
implementing their own standards according to their own priorities.
This bill will ensure that serious threats to our electric grid are
addressed by giving the Federal Government the ability to require
strong safety measures in our electric power system. It has the
foresight to not only specifically focus on cyberthreats but also to
focus on other potentially devastating issues, such as electromagnetic
interference. These measures will help to ensure that we prepare for
the worst case scenarios and that we protect our citizens in the case
of a devastating attack or accident.
So, again, I really want to thank Chairman Markey for his attention
to this important issue, and I look forward to working with the Energy
and Commerce Committee in continuing to raise awareness about securing
our critical infrastructure and in protecting our citizens from
cyberattack.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 5026, legislation to
protect our national electric grid system. I would like to thank
Chairman Markey for his leadership on this important national security
issue. I would also like to recognize my good friend and Chairman of
the Homeland Security Committee, Mr. Thompson, for working with me in
2008 to hold hearings and closely examine what actions our country must
take to prevent attacks on our national grid.
Two years ago, on September 11, 2008, I testified before Chairman
Markey's Subcommittee about the threats to our bulk power system from
cyber attack. In the 110th Congress, as Chairman of the Homeland
Security Subcommittee on Emerging Threats, Cybersecurity, Science and
Technology, I conducted a detailed and thorough examination of cyber
threats to our critical infrastructure, and I want to reiterate what I
made clear in my testimony. I believe America remains vulnerable to a
cyber attack against the electric grid that would cause severe damage
to not only our critical infrastructure, but also our economy and the
welfare of our citizens.
The vast majority of our critical assets are in private hands. In
many sectors, private entities are largely self-regulated and are
responsible for developing and implementing their own standards
according to their own priorities. This bill will ensure that serious
threats to our grid are addressed by giving relevant government
agencies, such as the Department of Homeland Security, the ability to
require strong safety measures in our electric power system. The bill
also has the foresight to not only specifically focus on cyber threats
but also on other potentially devastating issues such as
electromagnetic interference. The scope of the bill includes the bulk
power system, which should also protect critical distribution systems
in major cities, like New York and Washington, DC from a cyber attack.
Additionally, by empowering the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
FERC, this legislation goes a long way to enabling a faster response by
both government and industry in case of an imminent threat. These
measures will help ensure that we prepare for worst-case scenarios and
protect our citizens in the case of a devastating attack or
catastrophe.
I applaud the attention being focused on this issue by the Congress,
and I want to once again thank Chairman Markey for his attention to
this important issue. I look forward to working with the Energy and
Commerce Committee and to securing our critical infrastructure and
protecting our citizens from cyber attack.
Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to reclaim the
balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Michigan?
There was no objection.
Mr. UPTON. I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from
Maryland (Mr. Bartlett), who is in support of the bill.
Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the bipartisan
bill, H.R. 5026, which has been approved unanimously by a vote of 47-0
by the Energy and Commerce Committee. That doesn't happen very often in
today's Congress.
According to the National Academy of Sciences, this bill is necessary
because there is one event that we will not avoid, and that is solar
geomagnetic interference--a solar storm. If--really, when--we have a
big one like the Carrington event that occurred in 1859, this will shut
down our whole grid. It would cost us only about $100 million to
protect the grid from EMP. This investment won't be made without H.R.
5026. The consequences of inaction are dire. If our grid is destroyed
by EMP or by a Carrington event, which is an electromagnetic storm, the
National Academies warn it will cost us between $1 trillion and $2
trillion in damages, and it will take 4 to 10 years to recover.
With the grid's being down, more or less, for 4 to 10 years, one can
only imagine the consequences to our society. This is a really
important bipartisan bill, and I rise in very strong support.
Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as
I may consume.
The GRID Act has three basic components.
First, it establishes Federal authority to address emergency
situations. If the President identifies an imminent threat to the bulk
power system or to other parts of the grid that serve critical defense
facilities, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission can issue an
emergency order requiring measures to protect against this threat. This
authority covers threats from cyberattacks, from electromagnetic
weapons, from direct physical attacks, or from solar storms.
However, in many cases, we will not know about a cyberattack or other
threat to the grid until it's too late. Accordingly, the GRID Act
establishes measures to protect the grid against key vulnerabilities so
that, if and when an emergency does happen, we are already prepared.
Most importantly, if FERC identifies a vulnerability to a cyber or to
an electromagnetic attack that has not adequately been addressed, it
has the authority to require intrameasures to protect the bulk power
system.
The legislation also requires FERC, within 6 months of enactment, to
establish measures to protect against the Aurora vulnerability to
cyberattack. That vulnerability was identified nearly 3 years ago, but
the current standard-setting process has not addressed it. That is
unacceptable. It must be fixed.
Ranking Member Upton and other members of our committee sat through a
top secret briefing last October with regard to the threat that this
Aurora vulnerability and that other vulnerabilities pose as potential
threats to our country and which could be exploited by other countries
or by subnational groups or by domestic terrorists. This is something
that we must close. I think every Member in that top secret briefing
left, having experienced a sobering moment in their lives, realizing
the great responsibility we have to pass legislation that can deal with
this problem.
The GRID Act also deals with other critical vulnerabilities. Solar
flares cause geomagnetic currents that can destroy large electric
transformers. Experts agree that it is only a matter of time before we
experience a solar storm large enough to bring down a large portion of
the grid, potentially causing trillions of dollars in damage. In
addition, the grid is highly vulnerable to attack because the large
transformers upon which it relies are built overseas and can take years
to replace. The GRID Act addresses these issues by requiring the
development of reliability standards to protect against geomagnetic
storms and to ensure the availability of adequate backup supplies of
large transformers.
Finally, the GRID Act gives FERC the authority to protect portions of
the grid that serve the top 100 critical defense facilities against a
cyber or an electromagnetic weapons attack.
The amended version of the bill now before the House makes one change
to the version reported out of committee. In order to make the bill
deficit neutral, the amended bill exempts the Bonneville Power
Administration and the Tennessee Valley Authority from requirements
other than cyberprotections during the first 11 years after enactment.
With this change, the Congressional Budget Office has determined that
the bill will not affect direct Federal spending. The amended bill does
not score.
Colleagues, the electric grid's vulnerability to cyber and to other
attacks is one of the single greatest threats to our national security.
This bipartisan legislation is critical to empowering the Federal
Government and the private sector with the capacities they
[[Page H4261]]
will need to protect us against that threat.
{time} 1115
There are people plotting right now that, if they could, would
exploit this vulnerability.
I urge all Members to vote ``yes'' on the GRID Act. It is a moment
that we must all come together in order to protect our country.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
ranking member of the full committee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Barton), in support of the bill.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I want to compliment Chairman
Markey for referring to Mr. Upton as ``Chairman Upton.'' That may be a
foreteller of things to come, and we appreciate his prescience in
acknowledging that possibility.
Mr. Speaker, I do rise in support of H.R. 5026, the Grid Reliability
and Infrastructure Defense Act, better known as the GRID Act.
This is an example of legislation that has come to the floor after a
47-0 bipartisan vote in the Energy and Commerce Committee that shows
what the Congress can do when Republicans are allowed into the room to
help draft and put into place legislation. While it is a rare occasion
in this Congress, it certainly is something that both sides of the
aisle can be proud of.
I want to especially commend Subcommittee Chairman Markey, Full
Committee Chairman Waxman, Ranking Member Upton, and others on both
sides of the aisle to make this day possible.
Our electric grid is increasingly vulnerable to cyber attack, and if
a nation-state or a terrorist group were successful in crippling our
electric grid, it would have devastating consequences for our economy
and our national defense. We've read news stories reporting allegations
that spies may have penetrated the mechanisms that control our power
supplies.
Cybersecurity experts report that the ``smart grid'' we are counting
on to improve reliability and enhance consumer choices could also
increase our exposure to hackers in places like China and Russia. Our
defense community is concerned about possible electromagnetic attacks
from terrorist or hostile countries. We must take substantive action to
address the susceptibility of our electric systems to such attacks. The
stakes are just too high for us to do nothing.
The GRID Act, Mr. Speaker, takes care of all these problems.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. UPTON. I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I appreciate the ranking member's yielding
additional time.
The GRID Act would shield both our bulk power system and the
infrastructure serving critical defense facilities. The legislation
authorizes the President to address imminent grid security threats
through the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, better known as FERC.
It would give FERC the authority to issue notice-and-comment rule to
address grid security vulnerabilities.
As Mr. Markey pointed out, this bill is revenue-neutral. It does not
increase the Federal deficit in any shape, form, or fashion. It is
worthy of support.
I want to repeat again, it came out the Energy and Commerce Committee
47-0. I hope the House will unanimously vote for this and send it to
the other body.
Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. I thank the gentleman from Michigan for
working with the majority in such a cooperative fashion. National
defense is an area where we should be trying to cooperate, and this
bill is a preeminent example of that happening in this Congress. And I
want to thank him and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton) for
creating that atmosphere which made it possible.
I think that this is a historic piece of legislation. Mr. Waxman and
I and all of the Members on our side really do believe that this is the
way Congress should work. I congratulate the gentleman for his work on
it.
I have no further requests for time, and I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I just want to say, this is an issue that we sat down together for
the last, actually, couple of years examining the facts. Many of us
that particularly live in areas--for me, the Midwest, coming from
Michigan, we had a devastating tornado come through this weekend, and
for many of us, myself included, our electricity went out for a number
of hours. And then a number of times, particularly during the winter
and even in the summer where these electric storms that come through,
sometimes the electricity may be out for a couple of days.
We look to our friends down in Haiti who, many of them still may not
have electricity after the devastating earthquake that hit there a
number of months ago. Can you imagine if that happened here in this
country, where, because of our grid vulnerabilities, you could be
perhaps out of electricity for a year or 2, trying to get gasoline to
get out of there, trying to get refrigeration for your food, trying to
have a job, take care of your family?
Some of us read the book ``The Road.'' Lots of different scenarios
that are out there. We need to be prepared. This bill moves us down
that road.
And I again want to compliment my friend, Mr. Markey, to make sure
that this legislation did move through. We had a lot of bipartisan
support, a lot of eyes opened and ears too, particularly as we sat
through some of those classified briefings. Let's hope that the Senate
moves quickly, the President signs it swiftly, and, in fact, we can see
legislation move to make sure that those scenarios remain that way and
don't become realities.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of
H.R. 5026, the Grid Reliability and Infrastructure Defense--or GRID--
Act.
As Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, I am well
aware of the need to protect our Nation's critical infrastructure.
Our Committee has held numerous classified briefings and public
hearings on threats to the electric grid. Again and again, we received
testimony from expert witnesses that our Nation's electric grid has
inadequate protections against cyber attacks and against significant
disruptions from electromagnetic threats, EMP, such as solar storms and
radio frequency devices.
Further, the Federal Government does not have the authority to ensure
its security, nor has it partnered effectively with the private sector
to do so.
Protecting our electric grid from EMP will require the best efforts
from both government and industry. To date, the electric sector has had
a difficult time protecting their assets from EMP threats because
although the potential impacts are huge, the frequency of their
occurrence is very low.
This is one of those cases where government intervention seems
necessary to protect our most important national critical
infrastructure.
Last year, I, along with my ranking member Peter King and many other
bipartisan members of our Committee introduced H.R. 2195 to give the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission authority to require protections
to be put in place for high impact, low frequency events.
H.R. 5026 is the product of collaborative work between this Committee
and our colleagues on the Energy and Commerce Committee, most notably
Chairman Waxman and Representatives Markey and Barrow.
Our electric grid is currently strained to capacity.
We saw during the Northeast Blackout of 2003 what can happen when the
strained system finally breaks. That blackout interrupted electricity
delivery to 55 million people in the U.S. and Canada. Luckily, major
outages only lasted a day or so.
But just imagine what would happen if the power did not come back on
for a week, or a month, or several months. What would happen?
An elecromagnetic pulse could make such an incredible scenario a
reality.
The one that most people have heard about is from a high altitude
burst of a nuclear weapon.
Also of concern are smaller radio or microwave devices, usually
termed ``Intentional Electromagnetic Interference'' or ``IEMI''.
Of particular concern are ``geomagnetically induced currents'', GIC,
caused by solar activity.
A 2008 National Academy of Sciences report warned that our Sun will
inevitably inflict a severe geomagnetic storm with the largest
geographic footprint of any natural disaster. The damage caused by this
event could be $1 trillion to $2 trillion, and recovery could take 4 to
10 years.
[[Page H4262]]
The next period of maximum solar activity is only two years away.
From a homeland security perspective, it is important that we take an
``all hazards'' approach to the risk and increase preparedness for both
intentional and naturally occurring events.
While some may argue that the threat of a high-altitude nuclear
weapon burst perpetrated by a rogue state or a terrorist group is
remote, I do not discount it. Given the high-consequence nature of such
an attack, I take it very seriously.
On the other hand, scientists tell us that the likelihood of a severe
naturally occurring geomagnetic event capable of crippling our electric
grid is 100 percent. It will happen; it is just a question of when.
GIC is a natural occurrence just like earthquakes, wildfires,
tornadoes or hurricanes.
Similarly, geomagnetic storms occur from time to time as part of the
natural activity of the Sun. One such storm, in 1989, disrupted power
throughout most of Quebec, and resulted in auroras as far south as
Texas.
With the significant investments we are making in ``Green Energy''
and the ``Smart Grid'', we find ourselves at an opportune moment to
protect our grid from an EMP and cyber attacks.
As we expand and improve our grid, we must also build in physical and
cyber protections from the start, and we must retrofit key elements of
the existing grid in order to protect it.
Federal authority and funding are needed if this effort is to
succeed. H.R. 5026 represents a critical step forward in our efforts to
meet these homeland security challenges and deserves support from this
House.
Therefore, I urge Members to join me and support H.R. 5026.
Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 5026,
the Grid Reliability and Infrastructure Defense Act, and urge my
colleagues to support it. I thank my colleague Chairman Markey for
bringing this important legislation to the floor.
The GRID Act empowers the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, in
the event of a Presidential emergency declaration, to take actions
needed to protect our grid.
I have said this before but it bears repeating: A modern society is
characterized by the presence of three things: clean available water,
properly functioning sewage and sanitation services, and electricity.
I would further assert that the way our present systems function,
electricity is needed to power those other critical systems. So at a
minimum, we rely on electricity to function as a modern society.
It is our very reliance on this infrastructure that makes it an
obvious target for attack. We know that many of our adversaries--from
terrorist groups to nation states--have and continue to develop
capabilities that would allow them to attack and destroy our grid at a
time of their choosing.
There are two significant threats to the electric grid. One is the
threat of cyber attack. Many nation states, like Russia, China, North
Korea, and Iran, have offensive cyber attack capabilities, while
terrorist groups like Hezbollah and al Qaeda continue to work to
develop capabilities to attack and destroy critical infrastructure like
the electric grid through cyber means.
If you believe intelligence sources, our grid is already compromised.
An April 2009 article in the Wall Street Journal cited intelligence
sources who claim that the grid has already been penetrated by cyber
intruders from Russia and China who are positioned to activate
malicious code that could destroy portions of the grid at their
command.
The other significant threat to the grid is the threat of a physical
event that could come in the form of a natural or manmade
Electromagnetic Pulse, known as EMP. The potentially devastating
effects of an EMP to the grid are well documented.
During the Cold War, the U.S. government simulated the effects of EMP
on our infrastructure, because of the threat of nuclear weapons, which
emit an EMP after detonation. Though we may no longer fear a nuclear
attack from Soviet Russia, rogue adversaries (including North Korea and
Iran) possess and test high altitude missiles that could potentially
cause a catastrophic pulse across the grid.
These are but two of the significant emerging threats we face in the
21st century. Our adversaries openly discuss using these capabilities
against the United States. According to its ``Cyber Warfare Doctrine,''
China's military strategy is designed to achieve global ``electronic
dominance'' by 2050, to include the capability to disrupt financial
markets, military and civilian comunications capabilities, and the
electric grid prior to the initiation of traditional military
operations.
Cyber and physical attacks against the grid could both be
catastrophic and incredibly destructive events, but they are not
inevitable. Protections can--and must--be put in place ahead of time to
mitigate the impact of these attacks.
The time for action is now, support the GRID Act and help ensure
America's future.
Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. I yield back the balance of my time with
the urging of an ``aye'' vote by the Members.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) that the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 5026, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
The title was amended so as to read: ``A bill to amend the Federal
Power Act to protect the bulk-power system and electric infrastructure
critical to the defense of the United States against cybersecurity and
other threats and vulnerabilities.''
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
