-: This meeting of the public utility Commission
of Texas will come to order to consider matters
that have been duly posted
with the secretary of state for Friday, March 5th, 2021.
I'd like to open the phone lines
for public comment at this time.
Colin, could you please instruct the callers how to get on?
And Steven, could you please let's limit everyone
to two minutes to be respectful of everyone's time please?
-: Yes, sir.
-: Thank you, sir.
-: And ladies and gentlemen
if you would like to ask a question or give a comment
you may press one, then zero on your phone.
You may remove yourself from queue
at any time by pressing one zero again
and if you are using a speakerphone
please pick up the handset before pressing the numbers.
Once again, for a comment, it is one than zero at this time.
One moment please.
[Silence]
-: Mr. Brightchrist.
Could you please press one followed by zero?
And Mr. Bright, Kreitz your line is open.
-: Are they ready for my question?
-: Yes, sir.
-: Hello, my name is Billy Brightchrist.
I'm an electrical engineer.
I have a master's thesis in generation control
of the engineered several power plants.
And I have a couple of questions concerning
I guess your agenda item 18.
The first question I see back in 2014
the Brattle group provided a study
for the T.U.C. in which they considered
ERCOT's current energy only versus the capacity market
They come in the report it was stated
specifically implementing a capacity
market would reduce the risk associated
with potential low reliability
and high costs events providing that benefits overall
Will the PUC consider changing the ERCOT market
to a capacity market?
And my second question that I have, during the winter event
did any generating company charge higher prices than normal
or some generators while they had other generators offline?
If so, that would be quite unethical. I think.
So that's all I have. Thank you.
-: Thank you, sir. For your questions.
This is Arthur D'Andrea
I'll give Shelly a chance to address them too
if she wants to, let me take them in opposite order.
-: We should just take comments, Sir.
-: Well, I think, I agree with you, Steven,
typically it's comments, but I think depending
on if it gets out of hand, we can, we can shut it down.
But I do think we owe other public explanations
in some of this stuff. It's extraordinary.
So I, I agree with you ordinarily we should do it that way,
but I'm going to run with it.
So in opposite order,
the second thing you described, it would be unethical.
And in, in our little corner of the world,
we call it withholding, and it's an abusive market power.
And we're still looking at that, obviously, sir, but we
you know, if it gives you comfort, we have kind of,
we have something called an independent market monitor,
which are a bunch of PhD economists
that we have on contract and their job is to look for this.
Their job is to make sure generators don't do
what you've just described.
And if they do do that
the independent market monitor brings us that stuff.
And we bring enforcement actions against them.
So we don't know yet but if it happened,
it's gonna get fixed.
The capacity market question is more complicated.
It's, you know, that has been a debate
in these halls and in the legislature for a long time.
Capacity markets are expensive and there are other ways,
if you're going to spend a lot of money,
there are other ways to make sure
that things like what happened two weeks ago, didn't happen.
We could pay for, you know, we can make gas plants
go to duel fuel and keep storage on site, for instance,
And that's also expensive,
but cheaper than the capacity market
So it is one way that might've might fix this.
My personal view right now, anyway,
and this is subject to change,
is that a capacity market would not have helped us here.
And I'll leave you with this,
We've got, you know, our reserve margins
our winter reserve margins going into this storm
were 43%, which means we had 43% more generation
than we thought we would need, which is, a capacity
market would have seen that and said,
you don't need any more.
So our problem wasn't capacity.
Our problem is that our capacity went poof all at once
and we lost half of it.
And if we'd had a capacity market, we would have
maybe we'd have one or two more plants,
but those plants also would've gone offline.
So I think our problem was more physical than market-based
but again, we're still investigating what
went wrong and I'm open to change my mind.
-: Yeah. I don't really have anything to add.
I appreciate the public willing to participate
and give us comments
And so thank you for calling in this morning, Sir.
-: Yep, thank you very much.
Anybody else Colin?
-: Yes, sir.
We'll go to the line of Gary Cunningham.
Your line is open.
-: Thank you.
And thank you for hearing my comments this morning.
So there are hundreds of thousands, if not millions
of meters within Texas, which do not measure interval data
they are called scalar meters within the industry
and they might have been interrupted during the outage.
And yet the billing process that's in place by most
of the utilities would still allocate some usage to them
across the entire month and across the entire billing period
Had the P.U.C. considered instructing the utilities
to zero out the usage during the interruptions,
the known interruption period for each meter?
To avoid customers, unduly
seeing charges for consumption during periods
which they had no electricity service?
-: I don't know the answer to that
but I will look into this issue that you've just raised
and we'll have staff take a look.
So thank you for bringing it to our attention.
-: Thank you for your time.
-: And once again, if there are any comments
it is one than zero.
And to Mr. Chairman, there are no comments at this time.
Please continue.
-: Thank you very much, Colin.
Steven, could you please take us through the Consent Agenda?
-: Good morning, Commissioners by individual ballot
following the items were placed
on your Consent Agenda items one, 10 and 12.
-: Thank you.
I move to approve the Consent Agenda.
-: Second.
-: Okay.
Item one was consented, item two
docket four nine two six three, I filed a memo.
-: I am fine with your memo.
-: Okay. I move to prove an order consistent with my memo.
-: Second
-: Item three, docket four nine eight seven one,
I filed a memo in this.
-: I'm fine with your memo.
Then I moved through proven order
consistent with the PFD and my memo.
-: Second.
-: Okay.
Item four, docket four nine nine two three,
I filed a memo in this.
-: I'm also fine with this memo.
-: Okay I move
We approve an order consistent with my memo.
-: Second
-: I feel bad for taking credit for these memos.
I did not actually drop them in there.
Item five, docket five one one six three,
I, I caused a memo to be filed in this.
-: I'm fine with the memo.
-: I move that
we approve an order consistent with my memo.
-: Second.
-: Okay.
Item six, stuck at five one one six six
I granted rehearing in this upon further reflection,
and reading the record.
I'm ready to deny the motion.
-: Okay. I'm fine with that.
-: Okay. Then I move we deny rehearing.
-: Second
-: Okay. Item seven, five one four nine two,
I filed a memo.
-: I'm with the memo.
-: I move we approve an order consistent with my memo.
-: Second
-: Item 8 is not taken up,
Item nine, docket five one two one four,
I'm okay with the PFD.
-: I am too.
-: Okay. Then I move that we adopt an order
consistent with the PFD.
-: Second
-: Item 10 was consented, Item 11 is not taken up,
Item 12 was consented, 13 and 14 are not taken up.
Item 15, Shelly, I hear
that you have something to say and announce on this.
-: We were going to announce that
to the S.U.P. community that
I'll be taking over those duties
And so I look forward to, to working
with them and keeping you all informed as to
about what I've learned and what I, what I hear there.
-: Great. Thank you so much for doing that.
It's it's important work for the Commission.
Okay. Item 16, project five one eight two five,
I have a handful of things in item 22,
but I don't have anything for this project.
Do you know Shelly?
-: No.
-: Okay. I don't have anything for 17, do you?
-: No.
-: Okay. Item 18? El Paso electric is in the progress
of joining the Western energy imbalance market
And so I think it's appropriate
at this time for us to instruct staff
to open a project on the Western energy imbalance market
the same way we have for SBP, N E R S,
and Miso that way we can file things in there and okay.
I don't think they're scheduled to join until 2022 or 23
So we don't have to, you know,
there's quite a bit of runway, but it's still
probably the right time to have that project open.
-: Yeah.
-: Okay. 19 is not taken up,
Item 20, Alright we have, so we have,
So we have minutes from our emergency open meetings held
on February 15th and 16th of 2021.
I don't have any corrections, do you?
-: I do not.
-: No? Okay. Then I move that we adopt the minutes
from the February 15th and 16th emergency open meetings.
-: Agreed.
-: Okay. Item 21 is not taken up.
Item 22 docket five one eight one two,
Okay. We have a lot of things to talk about here.
So first I want to,
First, I want to do some cleanup from, from two days ago.
I, I think last time we talked about allowing, you know
we're still going to,
well it's my view that we still keep the disconnect,
no disconnect order in place, but we were going to
but because the reps can get charged late fees
we were going to start allowing them to pass
on the late fees and also charge them.
So do you agree to do, right?
-: Yes
-: And so I think we, I think we agreed last time
but now we need an order
So I moved to adopt an order that rescinds our
order suspending late fees on delinquent bills
charged by retail electric providers to their residential
and small business customers effective today.
-: Agreed.
-: Is that in this problem?
-: Yes.
-: Okay. We have a similar thing with water, late fees.
Their wholesalers also charged them late fees.
And so I think it's probably time to,
while no one can get disconnected,
it's probably time to allow that, those to pass through.
So if you agree, I moved to adopt an order
that rescinds our order suspending late fees
on delinquent bills, charged by retail, water,
and sewer utilities to their residential
and small business customers effective today.
-: Agreed.
-: Thank you, Shelly.
The ELCAP project, have you,
I was thinking we were talking
about opening up a project to move
to have a discussion and invite discussion on this.
Are you still open to that?
-: You've probably heard the same feedback I have
that you know, about a lot of these topics about, you know
do we take some time to deliberate and get feedback
or do we need to give people certainty right now?
And so I'm open to it
and I'm not saying we have to say today
what we think our opinions are, but I
I am sympathetic a little bit to the argument of like
people just want to know what to expect
And so that that's, that's all I came with today.
-: Yeah. I agree with you.
I think that one thing we can do here while we move
through this is provide some calm and steadiness and
and I think also importantly, it's kind of be
be very straightforward about what's on our mind
and why we're making the decisions we're making
because I know, I mean, we, we usually try to do that
but sometimes it's, it's easier to kind of say less
but I think for something like this, it's worth saying more
and I agree with you, the market needs certainty.
I'm not sure we can provide that entirely
since our right now we're discussing all sorts
of market changes in
in a very public way in the legislature.
And so, you know, we can
we can only do so much and there may be some changes.
So I, I am a little torn, but I, I
I would like to have it open just to discuss for now.
And if, if, if we need to shut it down, we can like you, I
I shouldn't say like you, I'm not inclined to mess with it.
I think I'd like to let it run
as our rule was said and let it be 2000 over the summer
but I don't want to have regrets later because I don't know,
I've heard advocacy against doing that,
but I haven't really heard the other side.
And we've made a lot of decisions in the last couple
of weeks that had to be made kind of under the gun
at the last second and where it's possible to get back
to a more deliberative mode I'd like to do that
-: Agreed. Me too.
-: Because our standard style is, you know,
people actually file their comments officially
before the Commission, and we read them and decide,
not you know, whoever has my cell phone number
can call me hours before a meeting.
And, you know,
that's not the ideal way to, to make decisions.
So if you, if you agree
I'd like to open a project to discuss, you know,
what to do with the LCAP.
Should we leave it as written?
Eliminate the link to the fuel index price?
Eliminate the hard dollar cap or raise the cap?
And I think that, you know, if
if we were going to act, it would have to be quickly.
And so I think we should ask for comments by March 26.
Please.
-: Actually, that's a good point, but the fuel price thing
I heard some testimony and some questions
from senators yesterday about, you know, at minimum
we probably need to do something different there.
-: Mhmm.
So, so to the extent we're going to do something
in this project, that
for sure seems like something we need to look at
-: I agree with that.
Yeah. That needs to be fixed.
And so, you know, we can
it's a small fix, that this disaster exposed a lot
of small things we need to fix with our market's big
and small, and we might as well get this one done.
-: Yeah.
-: Okay.
-: T.D.U. cold load pick-up I assume, you know
as much about this as I do.
-: Yep.
-: Okay. So I think it's worth doing
I think it's a good proposal by the TDU.
So this is for people who aren't
who didn't get the memo out there.
This is in some TTU tariffs
there's a provision which has adjusted their demand charges
or rate class
of commercial consumers based on their highest, their
their peak demand on any given month.
And during that, during the cold weather, two weeks ago
a lot of commercial customers had big spikes in demand
because of the cold load pickup issue, which is, you know
there's a huge spike, right?
When the, when the load comes on and that's caused spikes
in their bills and the TDU has pointed this out to us
and I think it's worth fixing.
So if you agree, I I'd like to issue an order
for the periods of February 15th to February 19th
directing TDU's to adjust downward billing demands.
And bills sent
to retail electric providers, eliminate the demand reading
for demand ratchet calculations,
removed demand readings from re-classifications,
and reverse actions related to invoicing ratchets
or reclassification.
-: Agreed
-: Okay.
-: Just to point out that a, we had prepared a draft order to
grant these requests in circulated with y'all
just before this meeting
and that's the one we will bring you for signature
-: I reviewed it and I like it.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
-: Okay. The next thing I want to discuss is
something we brought up last time, Shelly, and that's
I've had an opportunity to talk a little bit about it.
I think it makes a lot of sense to think
about extending the invoice and settlement invoice
dispute timelines at ERCOT.
-: I never circled back with them
So I don't know if they have a proposal.
Or if you do? I mean, whatever.
-: They're still working on, you know,
I talked to Chad and he definitely thinks
it's added some uncertainty and people are, you know
this is not a good time for uncertainty
but he's still trying to figure
out exactly what the right timelines are
So I think we can just ask staff to work with ERCOT
on the issue and develop an order that, develop some kind
of order and bring it to us at our March 11 open meeting.
But, but just a flag to market participants
that this is addressing the problem of
of settling invoices, ADR timelines,
And we'd like to know, there was some uncertainty
as to whether the deadline is really short or long
And I think we want the longer one.
I'm forgetting the numbers now, but I think we
want to give you more time to, to get this done.
-: Yeah
-: Okay. Let's see.
We have from the IMM this morning
a request for clarification on our, our order
our clawback order that we issued two days ago
the clarification makes sense to me.
-: I'm fine with it also. Yeah.
-: Okay. So then in that case, I,
Steven, do we need a motion,
or can we just direct you to add this to our order?
How does that work?
-: Sir, I think you should.
I think you should move to adopt a new order that
that reflects this order in paragraph to super
and to rescind our previous and supersede it with this one.
-: Okay. I move, we supersede our previous order
with an order that includes this clarifying paragraph
from the IMM.
-: Second.
-: Thank you.
Okay. I think I just have one last thing here
and I kind of saved it for last because it's, for me
at least, the biggest, and that's, you know,
we've got a bunch of repricing requests from the IMM
and I, you know, I, I think these are difficult decisions
and they always have been, you know
back in the good old days when our repricing disputes for
for tens of millions of dollars, I didn't like
repricing then because it, it upset settled expectations,
And because we have no idea,
what's, we just see the tip of the iceberg.
We don't see all the hedges and stuff beneath the surface.
And so you don't know who you're hurting and you, you
you know, you think you're protecting the consumer
and it turns out you're, you know
you're bankrupting a co-op or a city.
And so it's, it's dangerous to do
after something is run to go around and redo it.
So that's sort of my baseline, but you know
the IMM raised some good points,
and I think they're very interesting,
And so we definitely should consider them, but at least on
putting aside the ancillary service repricing
request that, I think we don't have to act on
The IMM's one about repricing that last day,
repricing the energy market,
I mean, it's my understanding that ice needs an answer
unless we want it to really disrupt the ice markets.
They need a deadline.
Their deadline is today at four.
And so we would have to decide that now
if we wanted to reprice that
and I'm not inclined to do it today
because for the reasons I said, I think that, you know
there were these prices decisions were made
about these prices in real time
based on information that was available to everybody,
to all market participants, And they did all sorts
of things that they wouldn't have done
if the prices were different,
And it's just nearly impossible to unscramble this sort
of egg, and the results
of going down this path are unknowable.
I know on the surface, it looks like, oh no
it's just money that the generators got,
And if you reverse it, it won't go to the consumers,
but that is very simplistic, and it's not how it works,
And if you pay attention, who's advocating
for and against this, you'll see that because there are,
there are people representing consumers
on both sides of these questions.
There are people looking out
for consumers who don't want us to reprice
and there are a lot
of consumers that could be hurt by repricing.
And the reason for that is very complicated
but it's mostly got to do
with a bunch of private arrangements
and transactions that happen outside of the market.
And those, there are a lot more of those
than there are transactions in the market.
And so, because of that, I'm reluctant to go down this path
we've already set a path.
We know who could, who, who it looks like,
who is hurt by that,
And we can focus on helping the people that were
hurt instead of focusing, instead of throwing everything up
in the air again, creating another huge mess.
And then, you know, a month from now, we'll have
a different set of people that are hurt
and we have to focus on helping them.
So that's sort of where I'm at,
but I acknowledge it's a very difficult call.
-: Agreed, completely agree.
Yeah. I know we've had a lot of filings,
you know, supporting this or that action,
And I know that every time we don't act
on something that, that is, you know, it causes uncertainty.
Right? And so I would not want to say
that I would never, well, you know
I think repricing the energy, I'm probably more inclined
to just, let's just say, well, we're not going to do that.
The ancillary services one I, you know, I, I can get there
but on the other hand, kind of
for the same reasons, you know, like you could argue, well
if you're okay with repricing, then just do all of it.
Or if you're against it, then you know, don't do any of it.
So anyway, I do think we should acknowledge that
we got, I mean, obviously there's a lot of feedback
and the Senate testimony yesterday and the state of affairs
but do you want to mention the letter?
-: Yes, absolutely. I was definitely going to do that.
We did, we did get a letter
from Senator Springer addressing this issue.
And I'm so grateful for legislative feedback
on these questions because I don't, you know, I
as I know you said to them a bunch
and I've said to them over and over again, you know
on this question right now, you know, I, I, we need to
be more just standing shoulder to shoulder with them.
There cannot be any daylight between us and
and that's communication.
That's me calling them until they're sick of
hearing from me.
And then them sending letters like this and it, because
you know, we just have to, you know, and, and in fact
I don't really intend to, you know, on my part.
I don't intend to make any huge decisions without
talking to all of them first.
And so, and that's kind of where I stand.
So I appreciate this comment
and I hope what I have, what I've said today
sort of addresses why I'm reluctant to reprice.
I don't think it, it
I totally get how it looks like you're protecting consumers
but I promise you you're not.
And if you don't believe me, you know
call around and you'll, you'll see.
-: Mhmm. Mhmm. Okay.
-: Okay. I think that's all I have,
but so just to clarify, I'm with you, let's
let's, the ancillary service thing is different.
There's no deadline for that.
We don't have to, we can kind of put that on hold
but the energy only thing is the one that the
energy market is the one that has the deadline today.
And I say we don't act.
-: Mhmm.
-: Okay. Perfect.
Do you have anything else, Shelly?
-: I do not.
Okay. Steven, are we good?
Oh boy.
You're scowling at me.
-: I'm trying to be deliberate here, sir.
And not open my mouth to say,
I, I, don't think I have anything else to bring to you.
-: Okay. Do, should we adjourn or should we recess?
-: The only reason I had talked
to you about that was the, the filing, getting the filing.
So we got it. We've done. We've acted on that.
So I think we're good to adjourn if that's what you want.
-: Okay. If y'all need a minute to think about it
we can recess for 10, 15 minutes. Up to you.
-: No, no, no, the recess was simply the IMM filing company
getting it filed this morning.
And so it's here.
-: Okay. Well with that, this meeting
of the public utility Commission of Texas is adjourned.