WEBVTT

00:00:09.377 --> 00:00:11.877
(gavel bangs)

00:00:13.476 --> 00:00:14.309
<v ->Good morning.</v>

00:00:14.309 --> 00:00:15.530
This meeting of the Public
Utility Commission of Texas

00:00:15.530 --> 00:00:17.040
will come to order to consider matters

00:00:17.040 --> 00:00:17.873
that have been duly posted

00:00:17.873 --> 00:00:19.490
with the Secretary of State of Texas

00:00:19.490 --> 00:00:22.050
for October 7th, 2021.

00:00:22.050 --> 00:00:23.982
For the record my
name is Peter Lake

00:00:23.982 --> 00:00:24.815
and with me today are Will McAdams,

00:00:24.815 --> 00:00:27.460
Lori Cobos and Jimmy Glotfelty.

00:00:27.460 --> 00:00:28.293
Mr. Journeay,

00:00:28.293 --> 00:00:32.830
could you please walk us
through today's Consent Agenda?

00:00:32.830 --> 00:00:33.950
<v ->Good morning, Commissioners.</v>

00:00:33.950 --> 00:00:36.030
By individual ballot the following items

00:00:36.030 --> 00:00:37.940
were placed on your Consent Agenda.

00:00:37.940 --> 00:00:42.940
Six, seven, 22, 23, 25, 30, and 31.

00:00:45.130 --> 00:00:46.810
<v ->Is there a motion
to approve the items</v>

00:00:46.810 --> 00:00:48.070
just described by Mr.Journeay?

00:00:48.070 --> 00:00:49.210
<v ->So moved.</v>

00:00:49.210 --> 00:00:50.043
<v ->Second.</v>

00:00:50.043 --> 00:00:50.876
<v ->All in favor, say aye.</v>

00:00:50.876 --> 00:00:51.840
<v Members>Aye.</v>

00:00:51.840 --> 00:00:53.410
<v ->Motion passes.</v>

00:00:53.410 --> 00:00:56.480
This time we'll open the
floor for public comment.

00:00:56.480 --> 00:00:58.790
All comments related
to a specific agenda item

00:00:58.790 --> 00:01:00.830
will be heard when
that item is taken up.

00:01:00.830 --> 00:01:03.580
This public comment period
is for general comments.

00:01:03.580 --> 00:01:05.360
Speakers will be limited
to three minutes each.

00:01:05.360 --> 00:01:09.040
Do we have anyone from
the public signed up to speak?

00:01:09.040 --> 00:01:10.840
<v ->No one signed
up on our list, sir.</v>

00:01:11.750 --> 00:01:12.830
<v ->Thank you, Mr.Journeay.</v>

00:01:12.830 --> 00:01:14.650
Public comment is now closed.

00:01:14.650 --> 00:01:17.463
We will not be taking up item 14 today.

00:01:18.800 --> 00:01:19.960
And with that, we will start

00:01:19.960 --> 00:01:23.840
with agenda item number one, please.

00:01:23.840 --> 00:01:25.340
<v ->Item one is docket 5 1 2 1 5</v>

00:01:26.183 --> 00:01:27.630
it's the application of Entergy

00:01:27.630 --> 00:01:31.493
to amended it's CCN for a
solar facility in Liberty County.

00:01:33.060 --> 00:01:35.910
The Commission considered
a proposal for decision

00:01:35.910 --> 00:01:38.663
at the September 30th open meeting.

00:01:40.170 --> 00:01:41.830
After reading the transcript,

00:01:41.830 --> 00:01:43.490
we decided to bring this back to you

00:01:43.490 --> 00:01:46.605
because we were
unsure exactly what it was

00:01:46.605 --> 00:01:48.740
the Commission wanted to do.

00:01:48.740 --> 00:01:51.786
<v ->Apologies for the lack
of clarity from the dais.</v>

00:01:51.786 --> 00:01:57.704
I know, I think we
have a sense of,

00:01:57.704 --> 00:01:58.930
I suspect we have a sense
of where we want to go,

00:01:58.930 --> 00:02:01.872
but just the logistics
of conveying that.

00:02:01.872 --> 00:02:03.923
No order has been issued yet,

00:02:04.770 --> 00:02:07.523
but let's go ahead
and clear up the issue.

00:02:08.940 --> 00:02:10.610
I know there's a conversation about

00:02:10.610 --> 00:02:15.170
if this was the right
project to serve that load.

00:02:15.170 --> 00:02:19.710
If other mechanisms
have been considered,

00:02:19.710 --> 00:02:23.800
there's an issue of the
structuring of the proposed deal

00:02:23.800 --> 00:02:26.450
and an issue of what's confidential

00:02:26.450 --> 00:02:28.470
and what's not confidential.

00:02:28.470 --> 00:02:29.303
Thoughts, or?

00:02:30.250 --> 00:02:31.083
<v ->I'm recused.</v>

00:02:31.083 --> 00:02:31.916
<v ->Oh.</v>
<v ->Yeah.</v>

00:02:33.062 --> 00:02:34.230
<v ->So, anything</v>
<v ->I think it was</v>

00:02:34.230 --> 00:02:35.393
<v ->Happy to lead off.</v>

00:02:36.340 --> 00:02:40.210
So as I reviewed the,
well put, Mr. Chairman,

00:02:40.210 --> 00:02:41.690
as I reviewed this,

00:02:41.690 --> 00:02:44.653
as you condensed down the issues,

00:02:45.940 --> 00:02:48.970
the heart of it is the benefit test

00:02:48.970 --> 00:02:53.680
for the consumers within
the Entergy service territory.

00:02:53.680 --> 00:02:54.711
And it gets down to

00:02:54.711 --> 00:02:59.711
what benefit metrics are
baked into that evaluation.

00:03:00.260 --> 00:03:03.830
And that's what many of
the arguments were about

00:03:03.830 --> 00:03:05.283
before the ALJ,

00:03:07.660 --> 00:03:11.480
but still it remains
that the net benefit

00:03:11.480 --> 00:03:16.077
as computed by the
ALJ was 24 million under

00:03:17.630 --> 00:03:22.540
the Entergy model that
they're proposing for approval

00:03:22.540 --> 00:03:24.840
versus under a PPA model,

00:03:24.840 --> 00:03:28.460
which would be 72 million benefits,

00:03:28.460 --> 00:03:31.840
dollars in benefit to the consumer base.

00:03:31.840 --> 00:03:34.820
So as I looked at this,

00:03:34.820 --> 00:03:37.160
and that was the posture I was in

00:03:37.160 --> 00:03:40.550
going into the last open meeting was,

00:03:40.550 --> 00:03:42.740
was agreeing with the PFD

00:03:44.361 --> 00:03:48.837
and that we should reject
that and approve the PFD.

00:03:50.540 --> 00:03:52.580
But again, if we
want to drill down

00:03:52.580 --> 00:03:56.533
on the specifics of how
that net benefit is computed,

00:03:57.390 --> 00:03:59.000
is that where you were leaning

00:03:59.000 --> 00:04:01.003
in terms of more information?

00:04:02.140 --> 00:04:04.180
Because it's all about
how you calculate it.

00:04:04.180 --> 00:04:05.013
<v ->Well, first of all,</v>

00:04:05.013 --> 00:04:07.000
I agree with you and your comments,

00:04:07.000 --> 00:04:08.350
both of you that

00:04:10.250 --> 00:04:13.513
I think I was somewhat
confused last meeting also,

00:04:14.510 --> 00:04:18.260
on where we were going
with this and where I,

00:04:18.260 --> 00:04:23.260
where I read the docket to
be and what the PFD was.

00:04:25.010 --> 00:04:29.930
I think that the case has not
been proven, quite frankly.

00:04:29.930 --> 00:04:33.710
I think that we need to be prudent

00:04:33.710 --> 00:04:36.110
and diligent when it
comes to rate payer funds.

00:04:36.110 --> 00:04:39.460
And there are holes in the data

00:04:39.460 --> 00:04:41.580
as the Chairman has highlighted,

00:04:41.580 --> 00:04:42.950
there are confidentiality issues,

00:04:42.950 --> 00:04:45.263
there associated tax issues and such,

00:04:46.212 --> 00:04:51.212
that I find it hard to say
that this is totally prudent.

00:04:51.820 --> 00:04:52.653
And, therefore,

00:04:52.653 --> 00:04:56.630
I would support the order
that denies the application.

00:04:56.630 --> 00:04:58.091
<v ->Agreed.</v>

00:04:58.091 --> 00:05:01.280
And we want to modify

00:05:03.790 --> 00:05:06.810
that order to request more information

00:05:06.810 --> 00:05:09.790
about what's confidential,
what's not confidential.

00:05:09.790 --> 00:05:10.915
<v ->I think that's important.</v>

00:05:10.915 --> 00:05:12.700
Absolutely.
<v ->Yes.</v>

00:05:12.700 --> 00:05:13.760
<v ->All right. So do we,</v>

00:05:13.760 --> 00:05:17.270
we have a motion to adopt
the proposal for decision

00:05:17.270 --> 00:05:19.090
with a modification to the order,

00:05:19.090 --> 00:05:20.570
to order the parties

00:05:20.570 --> 00:05:24.160
to jointly add exhibits, file exhibits,

00:05:24.160 --> 00:05:26.680
indicating which
exhibits are confidential,

00:05:26.680 --> 00:05:29.530
and which are declassified,
is there a motion?

00:05:29.530 --> 00:05:30.363
<v ->So moved.</v>

00:05:31.231 --> 00:05:32.064
<v ->Is there a second?</v>

00:05:32.064 --> 00:05:32.897
<v ->Second.</v>

00:05:32.897 --> 00:05:33.890
<v ->All in favor, say aye.</v>

00:05:33.890 --> 00:05:34.723
<v Members>Aye.</v>

00:05:34.723 --> 00:05:36.290
<v ->Motion passes.</v>

00:05:36.290 --> 00:05:37.961
You have everything you
need on that Mr. Journeay?

00:05:37.961 --> 00:05:40.244
<v ->Yes, sir.</v>

00:05:40.244 --> 00:05:41.560
<v ->Thank you.</v>

00:05:41.560 --> 00:05:43.500
Brings us to item number two.

00:05:43.500 --> 00:05:46.490
<v ->Item two is docket 5 1 4 8 4.</v>

00:05:46.490 --> 00:05:49.380
It's a compliance following of AEP Texas

00:05:49.380 --> 00:05:54.060
for their rider TC to
refund of transition charges.

00:05:54.060 --> 00:05:58.070
A proposed order was
filed on August 27th

00:05:58.070 --> 00:06:00.580
that would approve the
refund transition charges,

00:06:00.580 --> 00:06:03.327
no corrections or exceptions were filed.

00:06:03.327 --> 00:06:06.843
I have a memo with proposed
changes to the proposed order.

00:06:07.947 --> 00:06:09.150
<v ->It seems relatively
straight forward.</v>

00:06:09.150 --> 00:06:11.410
Any thoughts or comments?

00:06:11.410 --> 00:06:14.583
<v ->Yeah, just to
recapture the heart of it.</v>

00:06:15.560 --> 00:06:17.800
You know, the refund
directly to consumers

00:06:17.800 --> 00:06:20.560
is consistent with our rationale

00:06:20.560 --> 00:06:23.337
and the CenterPoint case a docket number

00:06:23.337 --> 00:06:27.377
5 1 5 6 7 that I previously
filed and, you know,

00:06:28.280 --> 00:06:30.543
I agree with the proposed order.

00:06:32.450 --> 00:06:33.661
<v ->I'm supportive of that.</v>

00:06:33.661 --> 00:06:34.494
<v ->All right.</v>

00:06:34.494 --> 00:06:36.770
Is there a motion to approve
the proposed order as modified

00:06:36.770 --> 00:06:38.840
by Commission Council September 30 memo?

00:06:38.840 --> 00:06:39.830
<v ->So moved.</v>

00:06:39.830 --> 00:06:40.663
<v ->Second.</v>

00:06:40.663 --> 00:06:41.743
<v ->All in favor, say aye.</v>

00:06:41.743 --> 00:06:43.760
<v Members>Aye.</v>

00:06:43.760 --> 00:06:44.763
<v ->Motion passes.</v>

00:06:46.150 --> 00:06:47.490
Item number three.

00:06:47.490 --> 00:06:49.750
<v ->Item three is docket 5 1 8 0 6.</v>

00:06:49.750 --> 00:06:52.310
It is a true up compliance
filing of Entergy

00:06:52.310 --> 00:06:54.897
concerning their scheduled TTC.

00:06:54.897 --> 00:06:57.300
The proposed order
was filed on August 4th.

00:06:57.300 --> 00:07:00.040
That would approve revised rates

00:07:00.040 --> 00:07:03.940
for Entergy's transition
to competition tariff.

00:07:03.940 --> 00:07:06.470
No corrections or exceptions were filed.

00:07:06.470 --> 00:07:09.673
I have a memo with
proposed changes to the order.

00:07:10.717 --> 00:07:13.460
<v ->Another pretty
straightforward issue.</v>

00:07:13.460 --> 00:07:15.560
Any questions,
comments, thoughts?

00:07:15.560 --> 00:07:16.610
<v ->I do have comments.</v>

00:07:19.338 --> 00:07:23.020
This, I see this as two issues.

00:07:23.020 --> 00:07:26.510
One of them is the docket is solely

00:07:26.510 --> 00:07:31.063
about truing up
previous orders previous,

00:07:32.380 --> 00:07:35.650
you know, that implement
legislative directive

00:07:35.650 --> 00:07:37.780
on how to move areas of Texas

00:07:37.780 --> 00:07:39.653
that are not in ERCOT to competition.

00:07:42.290 --> 00:07:44.210
And obviously respect, you know,

00:07:44.210 --> 00:07:49.210
previous decisions of the
Commission and think that

00:07:49.470 --> 00:07:54.280
ultimately this order
needs should go forward.

00:07:54.280 --> 00:07:57.660
What troubles me is
that we've spent about,

00:07:57.660 --> 00:07:59.300
and not we, I haven't spent a dime,

00:07:59.300 --> 00:08:02.440
but the rate payers in the Southeast

00:08:02.440 --> 00:08:04.770
have spent a couple
hundred million dollars

00:08:04.770 --> 00:08:06.590
on a transition to competition.

00:08:06.590 --> 00:08:10.880
And there's nothing, I
believe, to show for it.

00:08:10.880 --> 00:08:15.227
And I think originally, you know,

00:08:16.700 --> 00:08:18.950
there were some
preconditions for competition

00:08:21.120 --> 00:08:24.790
such as open access tariffs, you know,

00:08:24.790 --> 00:08:27.850
is there, there's a generation limit.

00:08:27.850 --> 00:08:29.773
Some of these I believe are,

00:08:32.100 --> 00:08:36.540
are sufficed or satisfied
under the construct

00:08:36.540 --> 00:08:40.520
that Entergy Texas is its own utility,

00:08:40.520 --> 00:08:42.520
but it also works under the MISO system.

00:08:44.510 --> 00:08:48.553
You know, there are
other issues out there.

00:08:51.213 --> 00:08:53.300
I haven't been to every
one of the proceedings

00:08:53.300 --> 00:08:55.580
on transition to competition for Entergy

00:08:55.580 --> 00:08:57.440
over the last 25 years, of course.

00:08:57.440 --> 00:09:01.173
But, you know, it seems
to me that there are,

00:09:02.170 --> 00:09:04.870
competition has been
good for the rest of the state

00:09:04.870 --> 00:09:08.850
and that if we are, you know,

00:09:08.850 --> 00:09:12.927
going to finally
reimburse Entergy for the,

00:09:14.360 --> 00:09:15.390
for the rest of this money,

00:09:15.390 --> 00:09:18.200
that some kind of transition
ought to be re-looked at,

00:09:18.200 --> 00:09:19.033
you know,

00:09:19.033 --> 00:09:22.950
is there a process for
stakeholders to give information?

00:09:22.950 --> 00:09:25.240
Should we have them
file here to say, yes,

00:09:25.240 --> 00:09:27.133
we want competition in that area.

00:09:28.160 --> 00:09:29.860
There are, again,

00:09:29.860 --> 00:09:31.940
some of the preconditions of, you know,

00:09:31.940 --> 00:09:36.723
open access being handled by MISO.

00:09:39.501 --> 00:09:41.870
Anyway, I'm not being
too articulate about it,

00:09:41.870 --> 00:09:43.540
but what I want is,

00:09:43.540 --> 00:09:46.860
I hope that if stakeholders
and folks in the Southeast

00:09:46.860 --> 00:09:49.410
and retail electric
providers and, you know,

00:09:49.410 --> 00:09:52.540
consumers want competition in that area

00:09:52.540 --> 00:09:54.610
that they ought to tell us,

00:09:54.610 --> 00:09:57.210
I don't think that a couple
of hundred million dollars

00:09:57.210 --> 00:10:01.589
for nothing is a good deal.

00:10:01.589 --> 00:10:02.422
And if it moves,

00:10:02.422 --> 00:10:06.290
if it moves us towards a
competitive market in that area,

00:10:06.290 --> 00:10:08.530
I think that would be prudent,

00:10:08.530 --> 00:10:12.930
but I'm supportive of the true up,

00:10:12.930 --> 00:10:15.040
but just wanted to make the
comment that I think we need

00:10:15.040 --> 00:10:17.760
to re look at this and
stakeholders need to look at it

00:10:17.760 --> 00:10:20.373
and tell us, yeah.

00:10:21.240 --> 00:10:24.740
Is it time to move forward
with competitive choice in,

00:10:24.740 --> 00:10:25.940
in the Southeast region?

00:10:27.460 --> 00:10:28.983
<v ->Well put, I think</v>

00:10:28.983 --> 00:10:30.111
<v ->So,</v>

00:10:30.111 --> 00:10:32.067
this argument has been,

00:10:32.067 --> 00:10:35.342
I would echo your
comments, Commissioner,

00:10:35.342 --> 00:10:37.760
and I have written down,

00:10:37.760 --> 00:10:41.256
I am so glad this is
the last year (laughter)

00:10:41.256 --> 00:10:42.089
of this true up.

00:10:43.724 --> 00:10:46.277
And it just is a twist of fate

00:10:47.370 --> 00:10:49.520
that I am one of the
Commissioners that has to approve

00:10:49.520 --> 00:10:51.870
the last year of this true up.

00:10:51.870 --> 00:10:56.900
But that, that fact on
taking ERCOT to the Sabine

00:10:56.900 --> 00:11:01.419
has been heavily debated for decades.

00:11:01.419 --> 00:11:04.280
And, and within the last two years,

00:11:04.280 --> 00:11:08.800
10 years at the Legislature,
they've discussed it.

00:11:08.800 --> 00:11:11.153
The residents go back and forth.

00:11:14.070 --> 00:11:15.730
It's a dynamic part
of the state of Texas,

00:11:15.730 --> 00:11:16.790
Southeast Texas.

00:11:16.790 --> 00:11:19.820
It's a heavily industrialized
area of the state of Texas.

00:11:19.820 --> 00:11:21.293
It's growing fast.

00:11:22.720 --> 00:11:26.140
URI has made people evaluate, again,

00:11:26.140 --> 00:11:27.240
it swings back and forth,

00:11:27.240 --> 00:11:28.880
that maybe it's not such a good thing.

00:11:28.880 --> 00:11:31.420
You hear that from their
Legislative representatives,

00:11:31.420 --> 00:11:34.990
Senator Nichols, Senator Creighton,

00:11:34.990 --> 00:11:37.350
that they're glad that
they have Entergy.

00:11:37.350 --> 00:11:38.980
So it does swing back and forth.

00:11:38.980 --> 00:11:39.813
But I agree with you,

00:11:39.813 --> 00:11:42.280
it seems like there should
be a mechanism or a voice

00:11:43.150 --> 00:11:47.390
to where if the consumers and
those rate payers want to see

00:11:47.390 --> 00:11:49.874
any type of competitive
benefit in the future,

00:11:49.874 --> 00:11:53.110
that we should provide
them a venue at the PUC.

00:11:54.743 --> 00:11:59.030
In the interludes between
the legislative sessions,

00:11:59.030 --> 00:12:00.230
where they can speak in front of

00:12:00.230 --> 00:12:03.080
their elected representatives,

00:12:03.080 --> 00:12:04.970
but at the end of the day,

00:12:04.970 --> 00:12:07.160
for the purposes of
this case, this is it.

00:12:07.160 --> 00:12:09.570
This is the last,
this is the last one.

00:12:09.570 --> 00:12:10.403
I'm glad.

00:12:12.106 --> 00:12:13.590
<v ->Well, yes,</v>

00:12:13.590 --> 00:12:15.290
that certainly does seem like, I mean,

00:12:15.290 --> 00:12:17.210
it's a lot of money, 200 million,

00:12:17.210 --> 00:12:21.120
and you all have raised
some very important issues

00:12:21.120 --> 00:12:23.810
that I think merit a lot
of deep consideration

00:12:23.810 --> 00:12:25.160
by the Commission that, I mean,

00:12:25.160 --> 00:12:26.883
that's a significant change.

00:12:28.140 --> 00:12:30.110
And so, you know,

00:12:30.110 --> 00:12:32.770
I think my experience
has been with Entergy

00:12:33.780 --> 00:12:35.840
looking to join different ISO and RTOs,

00:12:37.515 --> 00:12:41.120
ERCOT, SPP, MISO,
currently in MISO.

00:12:41.120 --> 00:12:43.450
And, you know,

00:12:43.450 --> 00:12:46.730
I think one of the reasons
they wanted to join MISO

00:12:46.730 --> 00:12:49.450
was to try to garner
some of the benefits

00:12:49.450 --> 00:12:52.320
of being in an actual ISO and RTO.

00:12:52.320 --> 00:12:55.740
And I think as a Commission,
we should continue to,

00:12:55.740 --> 00:12:58.561
to review whether that
is producing the benefits

00:12:58.561 --> 00:13:03.561
that were proffered
to us by joining MISO.

00:13:04.210 --> 00:13:06.660
And I think there's, you
know, ongoing review of that.

00:13:06.660 --> 00:13:09.273
And so from my perspective,

00:13:12.540 --> 00:13:14.830
I'm open to hearing
what you have to say.

00:13:14.830 --> 00:13:17.980
I think that merits a lot
deeper consideration,

00:13:17.980 --> 00:13:22.980
but that is a lot of money to
look into joining competition.

00:13:23.350 --> 00:13:24.712
200 million.

00:13:24.712 --> 00:13:27.020
And I'm happy like you
Commissioner McAdams,

00:13:27.020 --> 00:13:32.020
if this is the last
round of these charges.

00:13:32.060 --> 00:13:34.040
So I'm happy to see these going back

00:13:34.040 --> 00:13:36.240
and I'm comfortable
with the proposed order.

00:13:37.810 --> 00:13:38.643
<v ->Thank you.</v>

00:13:38.643 --> 00:13:42.360
I think it's fair to say
that this Commission

00:13:42.360 --> 00:13:46.430
has been robust in
welcoming stakeholder input

00:13:47.880 --> 00:13:49.070
since we've been seated.

00:13:49.070 --> 00:13:53.230
And so the bottom line is if
the folks in Southeast Texas

00:13:54.150 --> 00:13:56.980
want to have that conversation,
they should let us know.

00:13:56.980 --> 00:13:57.850
Fair?

00:13:57.850 --> 00:13:59.360
<v ->Fair.</v>
<v ->Fair.</v>

00:13:59.360 --> 00:14:00.193
<v ->All right.</v>

00:14:00.193 --> 00:14:01.040
In the meantime,

00:14:01.040 --> 00:14:04.551
we'll need to conclude
this piece of business.

00:14:04.551 --> 00:14:08.020
Is there a motion to
approve the proposed order

00:14:08.020 --> 00:14:11.790
as modified by Commission
Counsel's September 30 memo?

00:14:11.790 --> 00:14:12.990
<v ->So moved.</v>

00:14:12.990 --> 00:14:13.823
<v ->Second.</v>

00:14:13.823 --> 00:14:15.040
<v ->All in favor, say aye.</v>

00:14:15.040 --> 00:14:15.920
<v Members>Aye.</v>

00:14:15.920 --> 00:14:16.943
<v ->Motion passes.</v>

00:14:19.360 --> 00:14:21.790
Item number four, please Mr. Journeay.

00:14:21.790 --> 00:14:24.880
<v ->Item four is docket 5 2 0 3 4.</v>

00:14:24.880 --> 00:14:29.880
It's an agreed NOV
concerning AEPs reliability

00:14:30.220 --> 00:14:32.510
and continuity of service.

00:14:32.510 --> 00:14:35.100
Commission previously
considered a proposed order.

00:14:35.100 --> 00:14:37.443
Sent it back for further information.

00:14:38.420 --> 00:14:40.860
That was provided and the ALJ filed

00:14:40.860 --> 00:14:44.703
a revised proposed order on August 25th,

00:14:45.840 --> 00:14:49.430
that would approve the
administrative penalties of 56,000

00:14:49.430 --> 00:14:50.830
and the agreement.

00:14:50.830 --> 00:14:53.890
No corrections or exceptions
have been filed to that.

00:14:53.890 --> 00:14:54.723
<v ->Thank you, sir.</v>

00:14:54.723 --> 00:14:56.110
I know this is an issue, Will,

00:14:56.110 --> 00:14:59.940
that you've led on, filed
a memo back in May.

00:14:59.940 --> 00:15:02.027
And so I'll defer to you.

00:15:02.027 --> 00:15:02.860
And of course,

00:15:02.860 --> 00:15:05.020
I know Jimmy's got a lot of
background in this space too.

00:15:05.020 --> 00:15:06.279
<v ->Yes, sir.</v>

00:15:06.279 --> 00:15:07.680
I mean, just for me as a layman,

00:15:07.680 --> 00:15:11.460
I'm trying to figure out
what right looks like.

00:15:11.460 --> 00:15:13.860
I think this is what right looks like

00:15:13.860 --> 00:15:16.010
in terms of a file template

00:15:16.010 --> 00:15:17.400
that could be used in the future.

00:15:17.400 --> 00:15:20.410
It addresses everything
that, Mr. Chairman,

00:15:20.410 --> 00:15:22.780
you and I discussed in our
early days in the Commission.

00:15:22.780 --> 00:15:24.220
It's hard to believe it's
already been five months,

00:15:24.220 --> 00:15:25.930
almost six months since we

00:15:25.930 --> 00:15:28.490
first landed here.
<v ->Hell of a year.</v>

00:15:28.490 --> 00:15:31.340
<v ->but it addresses
timelines, amounts,</v>

00:15:31.340 --> 00:15:33.290
feeder by feeder analysis

00:15:33.290 --> 00:15:35.660
on when corrective
action could be taken.

00:15:35.660 --> 00:15:39.570
So as a policy, I
believe, on the whole,

00:15:39.570 --> 00:15:41.980
it drives us toward a goal

00:15:41.980 --> 00:15:44.550
of improving system-wide reliability.

00:15:44.550 --> 00:15:47.010
If you address these in
the timeframes established

00:15:47.010 --> 00:15:48.512
that we can see,

00:15:48.512 --> 00:15:50.210
that the Commission can
monitor moving forward,

00:15:50.210 --> 00:15:52.170
theoretically, on a
law of averages basis,

00:15:52.170 --> 00:15:53.330
we're actually gonna make a dent

00:15:53.330 --> 00:15:55.030
toward the better for reliability.

00:15:55.970 --> 00:15:58.085
And that's very important in
these hurricane prone areas.

00:15:58.085 --> 00:16:01.493
And I was glad to see this.

00:16:02.530 --> 00:16:03.363
<v ->Well put.</v>

00:16:04.690 --> 00:16:07.420
<v ->I would, I am not an
expert on saiety and safety.</v>

00:16:07.420 --> 00:16:10.600
I assure you that, but I agree with

00:16:11.670 --> 00:16:13.570
Commissioner McAdams thoughts on this,

00:16:13.570 --> 00:16:16.870
I hope that, you know,

00:16:16.870 --> 00:16:19.390
since we are in hurricane, well,

00:16:19.390 --> 00:16:20.520
let me go back and just say,

00:16:20.520 --> 00:16:22.300
satiety and safety are obviously

00:16:22.300 --> 00:16:26.453
very staple base components
of a reliable system.

00:16:27.870 --> 00:16:29.960
Many of y'all know, that my background,

00:16:29.960 --> 00:16:32.750
I helped lead the investigation
of the 2003 blackout,

00:16:32.750 --> 00:16:34.150
which was caused by one tree

00:16:35.270 --> 00:16:38.490
and then a bunch of issues after that.

00:16:38.490 --> 00:16:41.020
But, you know,

00:16:41.020 --> 00:16:44.660
satiety and safety is truly important

00:16:44.660 --> 00:16:47.270
and it's critical to reliability
for every consumer.

00:16:47.270 --> 00:16:50.860
And I hope that there's a time that we,

00:16:50.860 --> 00:16:51.850
over the next,

00:16:51.850 --> 00:16:54.200
after we get market designed
done in some, you know,

00:16:54.200 --> 00:16:55.960
we can actually look
into this a little bit more

00:16:55.960 --> 00:16:57.240
and understand it.

00:16:57.240 --> 00:16:59.920
There are a lot of issues
that deal with segmentation

00:16:59.920 --> 00:17:03.060
and other things of critical loads

00:17:03.060 --> 00:17:07.110
kind of down at that level
that this is interconnected with.

00:17:07.110 --> 00:17:10.373
And I just, this is so
important in my opinion,

00:17:11.440 --> 00:17:13.790
that it should take some
Commission focus, but.

00:17:14.820 --> 00:17:15.702
<v ->Absolutely</v>

00:17:15.702 --> 00:17:17.170
<v ->Yeah.</v>

00:17:17.170 --> 00:17:18.450
Well, based on the expectations

00:17:18.450 --> 00:17:22.160
that have been set forth
by Commissioner McAdams,

00:17:22.160 --> 00:17:25.300
and you, Chairman
Lake, in prior NOV cases,

00:17:25.300 --> 00:17:29.250
I think that the company
provided the necessary information

00:17:29.250 --> 00:17:31.780
to be able to prove up
their corrective action

00:17:31.780 --> 00:17:32.830
and provide the information

00:17:32.830 --> 00:17:35.850
that you both were expecting

00:17:35.850 --> 00:17:38.020
in your direction prior to open meeting.

00:17:38.020 --> 00:17:39.890
So I'm comfortable with

00:17:39.890 --> 00:17:40.970
the question.
<v ->Formally,</v>

00:17:40.970 --> 00:17:42.100
could I just take the opportunity

00:17:42.100 --> 00:17:43.770
to formally thank AP and

00:17:43.770 --> 00:17:47.460
the other TDSPs out
there NOEs, everybody,

00:17:47.460 --> 00:17:52.460
I mean, if you take the
time to file these plans,

00:17:53.790 --> 00:17:55.530
remediation plans,

00:17:55.530 --> 00:17:57.850
it's a great help to
the system as a whole.

00:17:57.850 --> 00:17:58.740
And I think right now,

00:17:58.740 --> 00:18:00.860
as we're going through redesign

00:18:00.860 --> 00:18:02.500
and trying to stabilize ERCOT

00:18:02.500 --> 00:18:07.500
and also maintain a reliable
service throughout Texas,

00:18:07.750 --> 00:18:10.080
these efforts, we shouldn't
take them for granted.

00:18:10.080 --> 00:18:11.770
We should thank you for that.

00:18:11.770 --> 00:18:14.440
That's, you're
doing the right thing.

00:18:14.440 --> 00:18:15.840
<v ->Absolutely, job well done.</v>

00:18:17.830 --> 00:18:21.230
Is there a motion to
approve the proposed order?

00:18:21.230 --> 00:18:22.080
<v ->So moved.</v>

00:18:22.080 --> 00:18:23.030
<v ->Second.</v>

00:18:23.030 --> 00:18:23.863
<v ->All in favor, say aye.</v>

00:18:23.863 --> 00:18:25.070
<v Members>Aye.</v>

00:18:25.070 --> 00:18:26.023
<v ->Motion passes.</v>

00:18:28.680 --> 00:18:30.383
Item number five, please, sir.

00:18:31.350 --> 00:18:34.430
<v ->Item five is docket 5 2 0 7 2.</v>

00:18:34.430 --> 00:18:37.570
It's the application of SPS

00:18:37.570 --> 00:18:41.093
to adjust it's energy
efficiency cost recovery factor.

00:18:44.078 --> 00:18:46.070
A proposed order was filed on the 16th.

00:18:46.070 --> 00:18:49.650
Some changes and
corrections were made thereafter,

00:18:49.650 --> 00:18:51.860
and the LJ followed a revise,

00:18:51.860 --> 00:18:56.580
a memo revising the proposed
order on September 28th.

00:18:56.580 --> 00:19:00.323
And I have a memo with
proposed changes to the proposal.

00:19:01.190 --> 00:19:02.520
<v ->Thank you, sir.</v>

00:19:02.520 --> 00:19:04.330
Seems relatively straightforward.

00:19:04.330 --> 00:19:06.053
Any comments or questions?

00:19:09.240 --> 00:19:10.073
<v ->Straight, straight</v>

00:19:10.073 --> 00:19:11.040
forward as it stands now.
<v ->There we go.</v>

00:19:11.040 --> 00:19:12.825
<v ->Look forward to looking
at these in the future.</v>

00:19:12.825 --> 00:19:13.747
(laughter)

00:19:13.747 --> 00:19:17.030
<v ->Is there a motion to
approve the proposed order</v>

00:19:17.030 --> 00:19:19.730
as modified by Commission
counsel in September 30 memo?

00:19:19.730 --> 00:19:21.000
<v ->So moved.</v>

00:19:21.000 --> 00:19:21.833
<v ->Second.</v>

00:19:21.833 --> 00:19:22.666
<v ->All in favor, say aye.</v>

00:19:22.666 --> 00:19:23.780
<v Members>Aye.</v>

00:19:23.780 --> 00:19:24.823
<v ->Motion passes.</v>

00:19:26.320 --> 00:19:27.745
The

00:19:27.745 --> 00:19:32.745
next item will be item
number eight, nine and 10.

00:19:32.915 --> 00:19:34.970
If ya'll are going to take
those up I'll step aside.

00:19:34.970 --> 00:19:35.803
<v ->Yes, sir.</v>

00:19:40.520 --> 00:19:41.770
<v ->Mr.Journeay</v>

00:19:41.770 --> 00:19:43.900
can you walk us through item number,

00:19:43.900 --> 00:19:45.090
we can bring these up together.

00:19:45.090 --> 00:19:46.756
Eight, nine, and
10. <v ->Sure</v>

00:19:48.460 --> 00:19:50.250
<v ->I think we only
need to bring up nine.</v>

00:19:50.250 --> 00:19:51.083
<v ->Okay, great.</v>

00:19:51.083 --> 00:19:52.320
I'll bring up number nine.

00:19:52.320 --> 00:19:54.040
Docket number 5 2 3 2 2.

00:19:54.040 --> 00:19:56.850
Application of the Electrical
Reliability Council of Texas

00:19:56.850 --> 00:19:57.920
for a debt obligation order

00:19:57.920 --> 00:20:00.028
under PURA Chapter 39 sub-Chapter N

00:20:00.028 --> 00:20:02.643
and a request for good cause exception.

00:20:05.920 --> 00:20:10.400
Let me know issue that you
would like further clarity on

00:20:10.400 --> 00:20:12.950
regarding our discussions last week.

00:20:12.950 --> 00:20:14.263
Can you frame that for us?

00:20:15.230 --> 00:20:16.063
<v ->Yeah, so,</v>

00:20:16.063 --> 00:20:17.660
so the issue we didn't address

00:20:17.660 --> 00:20:21.313
was the one that around
when an entity opts out.

00:20:23.840 --> 00:20:26.430
Can it maintain that
opt-out status or forever,

00:20:26.430 --> 00:20:27.263
or are there,

00:20:27.263 --> 00:20:31.323
would there be restrictions
placed on that entity?

00:20:32.261 --> 00:20:35.070
And if it undertook certain actions,

00:20:35.070 --> 00:20:37.370
it would lose it's opt-out status.

00:20:37.370 --> 00:20:42.370
<v ->So this goes to the
issue of coming in and out.</v>

00:20:42.420 --> 00:20:43.453
So once you,

00:20:45.250 --> 00:20:46.123
once you,

00:20:48.760 --> 00:20:49.593
you know,

00:20:50.540 --> 00:20:53.840
fall into the category of not opting out

00:20:53.840 --> 00:20:56.733
and so you will avail
yourself of securitization,

00:20:58.650 --> 00:21:00.610
how hard and fast is that status?

00:21:00.610 --> 00:21:03.510
Does that follow you through time?

00:21:03.510 --> 00:21:07.790
And my position is, in my belief,

00:21:07.790 --> 00:21:09.130
and I welcome.
<v ->Excuse me, committee,</v>

00:21:09.130 --> 00:21:12.270
it's really focused on
the ones that do opt out

00:21:12.270 --> 00:21:14.250
and do not take.

00:21:14.250 --> 00:21:15.352
<v ->Okay, correct</v>

00:21:15.352 --> 00:21:17.140
one way or another,

00:21:17.140 --> 00:21:20.660
as it applies to the
obligation order for entities

00:21:20.660 --> 00:21:23.913
and affiliates that opt out,
it is my belief you're out.

00:21:24.870 --> 00:21:26.920
If you decide to stay in,

00:21:26.920 --> 00:21:28.510
then I believe that you should be able

00:21:28.510 --> 00:21:31.720
to change your rep classification.

00:21:31.720 --> 00:21:34.950
You shouldn't be able to
change your rep classification.

00:21:34.950 --> 00:21:37.680
So that entity is in,

00:21:37.680 --> 00:21:42.480
and that obligation as a part
of securitization stays there

00:21:42.480 --> 00:21:47.480
and is housed with that
entity uplift charges stays there.

00:21:47.635 --> 00:21:49.370
Now you can, of course,

00:21:49.370 --> 00:21:51.780
in my view, form a new entity

00:21:51.780 --> 00:21:53.690
and in the instance where you want to

00:21:53.690 --> 00:21:56.640
serve non-affiliated customers,
you should be able to,

00:21:56.640 --> 00:21:58.110
but again, you form a new entity.

00:21:58.110 --> 00:21:59.900
So for the purposes of the entity,

00:21:59.900 --> 00:22:03.747
securitization stays with the entity.

00:22:03.747 --> 00:22:04.763
What do you think.

00:22:06.330 --> 00:22:07.260
<v ->Similar.</v>

00:22:07.260 --> 00:22:11.713
I think if you are a rep option
two, and you have opted out,

00:22:12.968 --> 00:22:14.350
you remain opted out.

00:22:14.350 --> 00:22:17.690
However, if you change
your rep certification

00:22:17.690 --> 00:22:20.092
to another option of a rep, then,

00:22:20.092 --> 00:22:24.240
and start serving
unaffiliated customers,

00:22:24.240 --> 00:22:28.670
then you should be
charged the default charges.

00:22:28.670 --> 00:22:31.507
You can't opt out and then turn around

00:22:31.507 --> 00:22:34.490
and then change your rep
certification and start, you know,

00:22:34.490 --> 00:22:37.020
you're opted out and you're
providing a different service.

00:22:37.020 --> 00:22:39.910
So that's my position.

00:22:39.910 --> 00:22:40.743
<v ->Go ahead, sir.</v>

00:22:40.743 --> 00:22:41.576
<v ->I was just going to say,</v>

00:22:41.576 --> 00:22:43.223
I hope this doesn't become an issue,

00:22:44.560 --> 00:22:46.430
but I agree with both of you.

00:22:46.430 --> 00:22:49.297
I mean, you can't use,

00:22:49.297 --> 00:22:52.880
we shouldn't allow entities to get out

00:22:52.880 --> 00:22:57.340
And then opt back in just
to avoid a system issue

00:22:57.340 --> 00:22:58.950
that everybody has born, you know,

00:22:58.950 --> 00:23:00.720
in ERCOT and, you know,

00:23:00.720 --> 00:23:02.782
believe again hopefully, people,

00:23:02.782 --> 00:23:05.860
entities will not do this.

00:23:05.860 --> 00:23:07.760
It's the obligation of
everybody to work together,

00:23:07.760 --> 00:23:08.960
to make the system work.

00:23:10.480 --> 00:23:12.530
<v ->It's a matter of
competitive equity I think.</v>

00:23:12.530 --> 00:23:15.110
And ERCOT's already
looking at, you know,

00:23:15.110 --> 00:23:16.500
sort of a broader issue of,

00:23:16.500 --> 00:23:19.770
of a company that exits
and then comes back in

00:23:19.770 --> 00:23:22.270
that they have to be
charged default charges.

00:23:22.270 --> 00:23:24.660
So I would sort of,

00:23:24.660 --> 00:23:28.100
kind of view the issue from that lens of

00:23:28.100 --> 00:23:30.652
if you're going to opt
out as a rep option two,

00:23:30.652 --> 00:23:33.510
you can't later go change
your rep certification

00:23:33.510 --> 00:23:35.350
and still be considered opt out

00:23:35.350 --> 00:23:38.020
and start providing a
different business model.

00:23:38.020 --> 00:23:40.650
And then that gives you
a competitive advantage

00:23:40.650 --> 00:23:45.650
over the other reps
that are having to assess

00:23:46.150 --> 00:23:47.840
these default charges
to their customers.

00:23:47.840 --> 00:23:50.130
So that's my position.

00:23:50.130 --> 00:23:51.720
I think if we move in that direction,

00:23:51.720 --> 00:23:53.740
that ERCOT should address this issue

00:23:53.740 --> 00:23:56.030
in their protocols as well.

00:23:56.030 --> 00:23:58.117
<v ->So thank you for
bringing that up,</v>

00:23:58.117 --> 00:24:00.410
because that was going to be
my kind of second leg to this,

00:24:00.410 --> 00:24:04.472
this discussion NPR 10 67.

00:24:04.472 --> 00:24:07.610
I urge us to consider,
and I think we're there,

00:24:07.610 --> 00:24:09.020
given the conversation,

00:24:09.020 --> 00:24:11.660
to be consistent with
what we do in this order,

00:24:11.660 --> 00:24:15.923
with what 10 67 reflects
and just for clarity,

00:24:17.010 --> 00:24:21.350
it is my view that we would
have an interest in ordering

00:24:21.350 --> 00:24:24.060
ERCOT to adopt NPR 10 67.

00:24:24.060 --> 00:24:27.170
I mean, just clear up the ambiguity.

00:24:27.170 --> 00:24:28.003
Move forward with it,

00:24:28.003 --> 00:24:31.023
and consistent with the
discussion in this order.

00:24:32.750 --> 00:24:34.560
You may not be ready
to do that right now,

00:24:34.560 --> 00:24:37.460
but I believe for the purposes
of consistency and clarity

00:24:37.460 --> 00:24:39.200
to the folks out in the audience,

00:24:39.200 --> 00:24:42.300
to the market participants,
I think it would help.

00:24:43.280 --> 00:24:44.193
<v ->Absolutely.</v>

00:24:44.193 --> 00:24:47.323
As we look to stabilize
the ERCOT market,

00:24:48.590 --> 00:24:50.020
we need to close loopholes

00:24:51.560 --> 00:24:54.823
for the future and prevent, you know,

00:24:55.860 --> 00:24:58.280
entities from taking
advantage of the system

00:24:58.280 --> 00:25:00.350
and we need to maintain equity.

00:25:00.350 --> 00:25:03.120
And so I am supportive of moving forward

00:25:03.120 --> 00:25:06.070
in the position for
option two in this case,

00:25:06.070 --> 00:25:09.970
and continue to support
ERCOT in their efforts

00:25:09.970 --> 00:25:13.770
to ensure that companies
that leave the market

00:25:13.770 --> 00:25:16.793
don't come back in and not
be subject to default charges.

00:25:18.620 --> 00:25:19.453
<v ->Okay.</v>

00:25:19.453 --> 00:25:22.480
Now I'm going to ask
you for the sake of clarity.

00:25:22.480 --> 00:25:24.617
Repeat to me what you think you heard.

00:25:24.617 --> 00:25:26.867
(laughter)

00:25:30.880 --> 00:25:32.362
<v ->Thank you, sir.</v>

00:25:32.362 --> 00:25:34.612
(laughter)

00:25:37.010 --> 00:25:40.910
If you are an option
two rep, and you opt out

00:25:41.960 --> 00:25:44.610
and you want to change
your service method

00:25:44.610 --> 00:25:47.540
so that you're serving
additional customers,

00:25:47.540 --> 00:25:50.010
you have to form a new entity,

00:25:50.010 --> 00:25:52.220
come back into the
market as a new entity

00:25:52.220 --> 00:25:53.140
and as a new entity,

00:25:53.140 --> 00:25:55.423
you will be assessed uplift charges.

00:25:56.470 --> 00:25:58.360
<v ->I agree with that.</v>

00:25:58.360 --> 00:25:59.530
<v ->I do, too.</v>

00:25:59.530 --> 00:26:00.363
<v ->Ditto.</v>

00:26:00.363 --> 00:26:01.196
<v ->Okay.</v>

00:26:02.860 --> 00:26:04.349
Do we need to cover anything else?

00:26:04.349 --> 00:26:06.250
Do we need to make
a formal vote on this?

00:26:06.250 --> 00:26:07.737
Do you have your
instructions consistent with the

00:26:07.737 --> 00:26:09.380
conversation that just happened?

00:26:09.380 --> 00:26:10.213
<v ->I do,</v>

00:26:10.213 --> 00:26:14.910
and then we'll add
language into the order

00:26:16.110 --> 00:26:20.750
that we're working on daily.

00:26:20.750 --> 00:26:25.733
I hope that we can get something out.

00:26:27.600 --> 00:26:30.200
My hope is by tomorrow

00:26:31.060 --> 00:26:34.350
so that the parties have
an opportunity to look at it,

00:26:34.350 --> 00:26:36.500
and see what I screwed up

00:26:38.620 --> 00:26:41.197
so we can get it fixed for next week.

00:26:41.197 --> 00:26:42.030
<v ->Okay.</v>

00:26:44.040 --> 00:26:46.650
The order for the ERCOT little

00:26:47.540 --> 00:26:49.420
is likely not to come out tomorrow

00:26:49.420 --> 00:26:52.320
because of personnel issues.

00:26:52.320 --> 00:26:54.803
Hopefully, first thing Monday,

00:26:55.900 --> 00:26:59.715
it will come out and let
the parties look at that.

00:26:59.715 --> 00:27:00.548
<v ->That works for me.</v>

00:27:00.548 --> 00:27:01.381
All right. Great.

00:27:01.381 --> 00:27:02.214
Thank you, Steven.

00:27:02.214 --> 00:27:07.214
<v ->So do you think we
need to order to the NPRR?</v>

00:27:07.360 --> 00:27:10.350
So the question of procedure,

00:27:10.350 --> 00:27:12.100
the Chair has not recused himself

00:27:12.100 --> 00:27:13.820
from consideration of that.

00:27:13.820 --> 00:27:17.857
Would we welcome him back on
any type of consideration NPRR?

00:27:17.857 --> 00:27:20.630
And should we do that
at the next open meeting

00:27:20.630 --> 00:27:22.163
as a formal order?

00:27:24.850 --> 00:27:26.810
<v ->I think it's a directive.</v>

00:27:26.810 --> 00:27:29.371
<v ->I mean, it's ERCOTs heard you</v>

00:27:29.371 --> 00:27:30.900
that they like what you're doing.

00:27:30.900 --> 00:27:35.260
It's seems a little off kilter to me

00:27:35.260 --> 00:27:38.810
to order ERCOT to adopt a protocol

00:27:38.810 --> 00:27:43.220
that's in the process and
may have revisions to it.

00:27:43.220 --> 00:27:45.010
It ultimately will be presented

00:27:45.010 --> 00:27:46.740
to the Commission for approval.

00:27:46.740 --> 00:27:47.870
<v ->True.</v>

00:27:47.870 --> 00:27:49.860
<v ->after the board acts on it.</v>

00:27:49.860 --> 00:27:52.198
<v ->So I'm looking at ERCOT
and they have heard us.</v>

00:27:52.198 --> 00:27:56.650
Our high level policy is understandable,

00:27:56.650 --> 00:27:59.930
and the objective is consistency

00:27:59.930 --> 00:28:03.200
with the securitization financing order.

00:28:03.200 --> 00:28:05.290
So I'm willing to let it stand at that

00:28:06.190 --> 00:28:09.450
and let that NPRR proceed at pace.

00:28:09.450 --> 00:28:12.160
But I think you've got three out of four

00:28:12.160 --> 00:28:13.760
and we're saying it's important.

00:28:17.200 --> 00:28:18.960
<v ->You'd think that I would
know the order better</v>

00:28:18.960 --> 00:28:21.460
having been (chuckle)

00:28:21.460 --> 00:28:24.420
reading it for so many days.

00:28:24.420 --> 00:28:26.380
I know there's a provision
about ordering them

00:28:26.380 --> 00:28:27.530
to adopt protocols.

00:28:27.530 --> 00:28:29.760
I know one of those is related

00:28:29.760 --> 00:28:32.500
to the uplift charge mechanism.

00:28:32.500 --> 00:28:33.340
<v ->Right.</v>

00:28:33.340 --> 00:28:35.330
<v ->It's not clear in
my head right now,</v>

00:28:35.330 --> 00:28:37.300
whether there's other languages in there

00:28:37.300 --> 00:28:38.810
to deal with protocol,

00:28:38.810 --> 00:28:42.517
to adopt protocols related to entities

00:28:42.517 --> 00:28:44.133
leaving the market,

00:28:45.270 --> 00:28:48.650
a general statement that
they should adopt a protocol.

00:28:48.650 --> 00:28:50.710
And certainly if that's not in there,

00:28:50.710 --> 00:28:53.806
we could add that language.

00:28:53.806 --> 00:28:55.470
<v ->I think that's a good idea.</v>

00:28:55.470 --> 00:28:57.710
And we might've touched
on it in our prior open meeting

00:28:57.710 --> 00:29:01.330
when we discussed this
case to just include, you know,

00:29:01.330 --> 00:29:06.100
in that order instructions to
ERCOT to address that issue

00:29:06.100 --> 00:29:08.850
and create new protocols,

00:29:08.850 --> 00:29:11.070
which they're already
in the process of doing,

00:29:11.070 --> 00:29:14.583
just to solidify that we are
giving direction on that issue.

00:29:14.583 --> 00:29:17.170
As I think I also provided feedback

00:29:17.170 --> 00:29:21.103
on the terminated competitive
wholesale market participants

00:29:23.550 --> 00:29:25.780
that they would still owe ERCOT.

00:29:25.780 --> 00:29:28.230
I think this just maintains a
consistency with the order

00:29:28.230 --> 00:29:29.720
as to what our expectations are

00:29:29.720 --> 00:29:32.402
for terminated competitive
wholesale market participants,

00:29:32.402 --> 00:29:37.402
and also for competitive
wholesale market participants

00:29:37.800 --> 00:29:40.370
that leave the market and come back in

00:29:40.370 --> 00:29:42.470
and what the expectations are.

00:29:42.470 --> 00:29:44.293
So I think that just creates
consistency in the order

00:29:44.293 --> 00:29:46.490
for you to insert that
language in there.

00:29:46.490 --> 00:29:47.790
<v ->As currently drafted the,</v>

00:29:47.790 --> 00:29:50.040
that language is actually much broader

00:29:50.040 --> 00:29:53.600
and just applies to
all market participants

00:29:53.600 --> 00:29:55.773
that owe money to
ERCOT, <v ->Sure.</v>

00:29:55.773 --> 00:29:58.040
<v ->whether they're in or out,
or leave and come back,</v>

00:29:58.040 --> 00:29:58.873
or whatever.

00:29:58.873 --> 00:29:59.810
You owe money, you owe money.

00:29:59.810 --> 00:30:00.643
<v ->Okay.</v>

00:30:00.643 --> 00:30:01.597
<v ->I like that.</v>

00:30:01.597 --> 00:30:03.272
I like it broad.
<v ->Yes</v>

00:30:03.272 --> 00:30:05.730
Yes I, yes.

00:30:05.730 --> 00:30:06.563
We'll review your order,

00:30:06.563 --> 00:30:09.230
but I think that's the right approach.

00:30:09.230 --> 00:30:10.063
<v ->Okay.</v>

00:30:10.063 --> 00:30:13.061
Before we mess anything
up, I'm going to leave it there.

00:30:13.061 --> 00:30:14.380
(laughter)

00:30:14.380 --> 00:30:17.155
All right, Mr. Chairman,
we're out of this.

00:30:29.597 --> 00:30:31.128
<v ->Did I miss something?</v>

00:30:31.128 --> 00:30:32.240
(laughter)

00:30:32.240 --> 00:30:33.489
<v ->We missed your leadership.</v>

00:30:33.489 --> 00:30:34.383
(laughter)

00:30:34.383 --> 00:30:35.920
We tried to get you back
into this thing somehow.

00:30:36.928 --> 00:30:38.511
<v ->We like you, too.</v>

00:30:40.740 --> 00:30:42.340
<v ->All right.</v>

00:30:42.340 --> 00:30:47.203
I don't have anything on item 11 or 12.

00:30:47.203 --> 00:30:48.239
Do ya'll?

00:30:48.239 --> 00:30:49.200
<v ->No, sir.</v>

00:30:49.200 --> 00:30:50.033
<v ->All right.</v>

00:30:50.033 --> 00:30:52.993
That'll bring us to item number 13.

00:30:54.440 --> 00:30:55.940
<v ->Item 13 is project 52 3 0 7.</v>

00:30:57.410 --> 00:31:01.470
It's a project to review the
rules adopted by ERCOT.

00:31:01.470 --> 00:31:03.380
Commission staff filed a memorandum

00:31:03.380 --> 00:31:06.000
and a proposed order
recommending approval

00:31:06.000 --> 00:31:08.870
of two notable operating
guide revision requests

00:31:08.870 --> 00:31:11.120
and one retail market
guide revision request.

00:31:13.590 --> 00:31:14.423
<v ->All right.</v>

00:31:14.423 --> 00:31:16.980
Any comments or questions
for staff, or are we ready,

00:31:16.980 --> 00:31:18.993
happy to approve the proposed order?

00:31:20.010 --> 00:31:21.348
<v ->I would approve, yes sir.</v>

00:31:21.348 --> 00:31:22.181
<v ->Approve.</v>

00:31:22.181 --> 00:31:23.014
<v ->All right.</v>

00:31:23.014 --> 00:31:24.240
Is there a motion to
approve the proposed order?

00:31:24.240 --> 00:31:25.400
<v ->So moved.</v>

00:31:25.400 --> 00:31:26.233
<v ->Second.</v>

00:31:26.233 --> 00:31:27.066
<v ->All in favor, say aye.</v>

00:31:27.066 --> 00:31:27.899
<v Members>Aye.</v>

00:31:27.899 --> 00:31:29.470
<v ->Motion passes.</v>

00:31:29.470 --> 00:31:32.110
Not taking up item 14 today.

00:31:32.110 --> 00:31:35.089
I don't have anything for 15.

00:31:35.089 --> 00:31:35.922
You all?

00:31:35.922 --> 00:31:36.755
<v ->No.</v>

00:31:36.755 --> 00:31:37.588
<v ->No.</v>

00:31:37.588 --> 00:31:38.860
<v ->All right.</v>

00:31:38.860 --> 00:31:40.910
Item number 16.

00:31:40.910 --> 00:31:43.199
Staff has filed a
proposal for publication

00:31:43.199 --> 00:31:47.253
related to our scarcity pricing rule.

00:31:48.830 --> 00:31:50.895
At this point, we'll
call up Mr. Smelter

00:31:50.895 --> 00:31:53.540
to provide some background and we'll,

00:31:53.540 --> 00:31:56.120
you've taken a lead on this.

00:31:56.120 --> 00:31:59.583
So we'll look forward to your

00:31:59.583 --> 00:32:01.800
thoughts and comments
<v ->Hello, Commissioners.</v>

00:32:01.800 --> 00:32:03.650
<v ->David Smelter for
Commission staff.</v>

00:32:03.650 --> 00:32:04.600
I think our instructions

00:32:04.600 --> 00:32:05.890
from last meeting were pretty clear.

00:32:05.890 --> 00:32:07.810
You wanted us to strike through a nine

00:32:07.810 --> 00:32:10.720
and put in a 4.5 and that's what we did.

00:32:10.720 --> 00:32:12.448
And that's with regard

00:32:12.448 --> 00:32:14.960
to the price of the high
system-wide offer cap,

00:32:14.960 --> 00:32:16.210
which is the system-wide offer cap

00:32:16.210 --> 00:32:18.180
that is in effect most of the time,

00:32:18.180 --> 00:32:19.620
it's not been in effect since URI,

00:32:19.620 --> 00:32:22.610
but will come back into
effect starting January.

00:32:22.610 --> 00:32:25.100
We also filed some briefing questions

00:32:25.100 --> 00:32:26.890
that were due on the 30th

00:32:26.890 --> 00:32:29.060
that provided a little bit of context

00:32:29.060 --> 00:32:31.630
on what parties thought about that.

00:32:31.630 --> 00:32:34.040
I know that some of you
had a chance to look at that.

00:32:34.040 --> 00:32:37.621
So the proposal publication
is ready to be published,

00:32:37.621 --> 00:32:40.071
if that is the will of the Commission.

00:32:40.071 --> 00:32:42.013
<v ->Thank you, sir.</v>

00:32:42.013 --> 00:32:43.680
Comments, questions?

00:32:44.600 --> 00:32:47.068
<v ->He accurately
captured my request</v>

00:32:47.068 --> 00:32:47.901
(laughter)

00:32:47.901 --> 00:32:49.913
and I try to be simple
about those things.

00:32:50.750 --> 00:32:52.220
So I look forward to comments

00:32:52.220 --> 00:32:54.770
coming back from
stakeholders on this one.

00:32:54.770 --> 00:32:56.180
<v ->Likewise.</v>

00:32:56.180 --> 00:32:57.730
I will say,

00:32:57.730 --> 00:33:00.670
or I will remind our
stakeholders that this is an action

00:33:00.670 --> 00:33:05.490
driven by the January 1
reset from low cap to high cap.

00:33:05.490 --> 00:33:10.490
And this by no means is the
only action that we will take

00:33:11.140 --> 00:33:13.790
regarding the ERCOT
market design or structure.

00:33:13.790 --> 00:33:16.110
This is not happening in a vacuum.

00:33:16.110 --> 00:33:17.150
We will be considering,

00:33:17.150 --> 00:33:19.220
as we have discussed all summer

00:33:19.220 --> 00:33:21.840
throughout multiple work
sessions and comments,

00:33:21.840 --> 00:33:26.840
we will be considering changes
to ORDCE the MCL, et cetera.

00:33:27.090 --> 00:33:29.130
So I just want to
remind our stakeholders.

00:33:29.130 --> 00:33:30.970
This is not the only adjustment.

00:33:30.970 --> 00:33:32.733
This is a timeline driven change.

00:33:33.960 --> 00:33:36.700
Is there a motion to approve
the proposal for publication

00:33:36.700 --> 00:33:37.533
for comment?

00:33:37.533 --> 00:33:38.366
<v ->So moved.</v>

00:33:38.366 --> 00:33:39.199
<v ->Second.</v>

00:33:39.199 --> 00:33:40.250
<v ->All in favor, say aye.</v>

00:33:40.250 --> 00:33:41.083
<v Members>Aye.</v>

00:33:41.083 --> 00:33:41.916
<v ->Motion passes.</v>

00:33:41.916 --> 00:33:42.976
Thank you, Commissioners.

00:33:42.976 --> 00:33:44.126
Thank you, Mr. Smelter.

00:33:45.550 --> 00:33:48.240
I don't have anything for 17, 18 or 19.

00:33:48.240 --> 00:33:49.287
You all?

00:33:49.287 --> 00:33:50.120
<v ->No, sir.</v>

00:33:52.200 --> 00:33:56.240
<v ->Item 20 is our
update from ERCOT.</v>

00:33:56.240 --> 00:33:58.240
Got several topics to cover here,

00:33:58.240 --> 00:34:03.060
but we'll start with
summer update from Kenan,

00:34:03.060 --> 00:34:06.024
and a maintenance update from Dan.

00:34:06.024 --> 00:34:08.093
Gentlemen, please come on up.

00:34:11.425 --> 00:34:12.890
And if you will state your names,

00:34:12.890 --> 00:34:14.713
and who you're with for the record.

00:34:19.870 --> 00:34:21.067
<v ->Okay.</v>

00:34:21.067 --> 00:34:21.900
I think I'll start.

00:34:21.900 --> 00:34:23.694
I'm an Dan Whitman within ERCOT.

00:34:23.694 --> 00:34:26.210
I think you can summarize
Summer operations

00:34:26.210 --> 00:34:29.975
this summer as being cooler than normal,

00:34:29.975 --> 00:34:31.490
wetter than normal,

00:34:31.490 --> 00:34:33.080
less windy than normal,
and more conservative.

00:34:33.080 --> 00:34:34.791
And so I'll go through
a few slides with you

00:34:34.791 --> 00:34:38.927
with more detail than that.
<v ->Well put.</v>

00:34:40.260 --> 00:34:43.283
The weather the summer, like I said,

00:34:43.283 --> 00:34:45.593
was mild across most of the state,

00:34:46.583 --> 00:34:48.830
generally cooler, rainier,

00:34:48.830 --> 00:34:51.470
particularly in the first
three months of the summer,

00:34:51.470 --> 00:34:54.560
the average daily temperatures
were one to two degrees

00:34:54.560 --> 00:34:55.393
over the kind of,

00:34:55.393 --> 00:34:58.463
on the average cooler
than normal conditions.

00:34:59.530 --> 00:35:01.980
In the graph on the top
of the slide one, there,

00:35:01.980 --> 00:35:04.090
you can see that there were no periods

00:35:04.090 --> 00:35:07.190
with widespread temperatures
well above a hundred degrees,

00:35:07.190 --> 00:35:08.658
which is what we typically have,

00:35:08.658 --> 00:35:10.480
a few of those during the summer.

00:35:10.480 --> 00:35:12.380
We did not this summer,

00:35:12.380 --> 00:35:14.430
in spite of this lack
of typical hot periods,

00:35:14.430 --> 00:35:16.900
we did set new monthly peak records

00:35:16.900 --> 00:35:19.560
for both June and September.

00:35:19.560 --> 00:35:23.638
The annual peak for the
year 73,475 megawatts

00:35:23.638 --> 00:35:27.180
was well below the
forecasted peak for the summer

00:35:27.180 --> 00:35:31.820
of 77,000 some odd megawatts
because of that lack of,

00:35:31.820 --> 00:35:33.483
kind of really hot weather.

00:35:35.450 --> 00:35:38.890
On slide two you can see

00:35:38.890 --> 00:35:41.920
that it was generally
less windy this summer

00:35:41.920 --> 00:35:43.600
than any of the last several years.

00:35:43.600 --> 00:35:48.348
The graph shows,
kind of your wind output

00:35:48.348 --> 00:35:51.050
and it's normalized for
the amount of capacity.

00:35:51.050 --> 00:35:52.710
Cause the amount of
capacity has been going up.

00:35:52.710 --> 00:35:56.260
As you can see that this
year, over most hours,

00:35:56.260 --> 00:35:58.690
the wind was actually
less than what it had been

00:35:58.690 --> 00:35:59.963
the last several years.

00:36:01.130 --> 00:36:02.560
Solar generation was higher.

00:36:02.560 --> 00:36:03.660
<v ->Can I ask you a
question about that?</v>

00:36:03.660 --> 00:36:04.493
<v ->Yes, sir.</v>

00:36:04.493 --> 00:36:05.440
<v ->Was that in all regions,</v>

00:36:05.440 --> 00:36:07.710
or was that specifically driven

00:36:07.710 --> 00:36:12.568
by a panhandle, West
Texas, or a coastal issue?

00:36:12.568 --> 00:36:14.430
<v ->I don't have
that in front of me.</v>

00:36:14.430 --> 00:36:17.010
My recollection is it
was kind of widespread.

00:36:17.010 --> 00:36:18.900
We didn't see on some lot of days,

00:36:18.900 --> 00:36:21.010
we didn't see the kind
of coastal going up

00:36:21.010 --> 00:36:23.180
the way we have in previous summers.

00:36:23.180 --> 00:36:24.260
And then it was also low

00:36:24.260 --> 00:36:26.573
in kind of the more westward regions.

00:36:29.370 --> 00:36:32.060
Solar generation was higher
across the whole summer

00:36:32.060 --> 00:36:33.550
because pretty much every day,

00:36:33.550 --> 00:36:35.070
because we had significantly more

00:36:35.070 --> 00:36:36.370
installed capacity upsell.

00:36:37.730 --> 00:36:42.320
We did see new wind and
solar instantaneous output

00:36:42.320 --> 00:36:44.910
records during the course of the summer

00:36:44.910 --> 00:36:49.910
with over 23,500 megawatts
of wind back in June.

00:36:50.520 --> 00:36:53.670
And then solar got up about
7,000 megawatts several times,

00:36:53.670 --> 00:36:58.113
but the peak was 7,036
megawatts in first part of August.

00:37:00.720 --> 00:37:02.710
Moving to slide three.

00:37:02.710 --> 00:37:06.150
Thermal generation
outages were generally lower

00:37:06.150 --> 00:37:09.500
during the summer when we
got up to the highest net load.

00:37:09.500 --> 00:37:13.120
So when you had high load and low wind,

00:37:13.120 --> 00:37:15.470
the thermal outages
were significantly lower,

00:37:15.470 --> 00:37:17.510
less than six megawatts.

00:37:17.510 --> 00:37:19.310
There were days that
they got up higher than that,

00:37:19.310 --> 00:37:20.560
but it was usually on a,

00:37:20.560 --> 00:37:22.830
either cooler day or
a day with more wind.

00:37:22.830 --> 00:37:25.033
And so it didn't cause any problems.

00:37:26.040 --> 00:37:27.921
<v ->Can I say something
here as well?</v>

00:37:27.921 --> 00:37:28.754
<v ->Sure.</v>

00:37:28.754 --> 00:37:29.587
<v ->I'm sorry to interrupt,</v>

00:37:29.587 --> 00:37:32.640
but this was an area that I
had spoken with Brad about

00:37:32.640 --> 00:37:34.783
the other day, and Christie.

00:37:36.120 --> 00:37:38.430
When I was reviewing
the thermal generation

00:37:38.430 --> 00:37:40.460
unplanned outages,

00:37:40.460 --> 00:37:44.260
it seemed like an inordinate
number of those outages,

00:37:44.260 --> 00:37:47.763
the cause was either unknown or other.

00:37:49.490 --> 00:37:52.080
And to me that doesn't give us

00:37:52.080 --> 00:37:57.040
a good understanding of
what the issue is, you know.

00:37:57.040 --> 00:37:58.480
Are there more systemic issues

00:37:58.480 --> 00:38:00.110
where certain types of plants?

00:38:00.110 --> 00:38:01.575
Are they, and it doesn't,

00:38:01.575 --> 00:38:03.680
it doesn't matter what the issue is.

00:38:03.680 --> 00:38:05.950
It's just trying to have
a better understanding

00:38:05.950 --> 00:38:07.987
of what those outages are
and why they are happening.

00:38:07.987 --> 00:38:10.660
Might give us a better
indication of duration

00:38:10.660 --> 00:38:11.493
and other things.

00:38:11.493 --> 00:38:13.960
So I'd love to have the
discussion with you all

00:38:13.960 --> 00:38:16.310
in the future about how we re-categorize

00:38:16.310 --> 00:38:18.040
or expand the categories

00:38:18.040 --> 00:38:21.490
from unknown and other
to things that are a bit more

00:38:22.660 --> 00:38:24.205
informative to the Commission
and to the consumers

00:38:24.205 --> 00:38:26.620
and to the market as a whole.

00:38:26.620 --> 00:38:27.840
<v ->Makes sense.</v>

00:38:27.840 --> 00:38:30.310
We actually haven't notable
protocol revision requests.

00:38:30.310 --> 00:38:33.770
That's going to be going in
sometime in the next few weeks,

00:38:33.770 --> 00:38:37.580
that will among things, allow us to,

00:38:37.580 --> 00:38:39.470
There's this particular
field that the generators,

00:38:39.470 --> 00:38:40.303
when they have an outage,

00:38:40.303 --> 00:38:43.110
they enter that data
into, it's a dropdown box.

00:38:43.110 --> 00:38:44.560
Gonna expand that dropdown box

00:38:44.560 --> 00:38:45.880
where there are more options.

00:38:45.880 --> 00:38:50.140
And also that dropdown,
that data can't be updated

00:38:50.140 --> 00:38:52.110
after the original entry of the outages.

00:38:52.110 --> 00:38:53.520
There are other fields that

00:38:53.520 --> 00:38:54.770
where they can tell us what's going on

00:38:54.770 --> 00:38:56.370
in kind of nauseous detail,

00:38:56.370 --> 00:38:59.000
but that particular
one, you can't update it.

00:38:59.000 --> 00:39:01.860
And so, part of that
will be doing a project

00:39:01.860 --> 00:39:03.370
so that it can be updated

00:39:03.370 --> 00:39:05.820
so they can enter the outages early.

00:39:05.820 --> 00:39:07.040
And if they don't know what's going on,

00:39:07.040 --> 00:39:08.120
they can say that.

00:39:08.120 --> 00:39:09.190
But then later,

00:39:09.190 --> 00:39:10.880
once they have done more evaluation

00:39:10.880 --> 00:39:11.810
and know what's going on,

00:39:11.810 --> 00:39:13.630
they can update that field to let us

00:39:13.630 --> 00:39:15.602
know the
<v ->I think that's a good thing.</v>

00:39:15.602 --> 00:39:16.435
<v ->and then we can post for
public purposes, the right,</v>

00:39:16.435 --> 00:39:17.980
the correct reasons.

00:39:17.980 --> 00:39:19.053
<v ->Thank you.</v>

00:39:19.053 --> 00:39:21.210
<v ->Yeah. Just for the layman
and the general public,</v>

00:39:21.210 --> 00:39:24.030
but the moment it breaks,
we don't always know

00:39:24.030 --> 00:39:25.460
what broke.
<v ->Correct.</v>

00:39:25.460 --> 00:39:29.550
<v ->And, but you're making the
ERCOT is making the adjustment.</v>

00:39:29.550 --> 00:39:33.660
And that's why it says
unknown at first, later on,

00:39:33.660 --> 00:39:34.630
you're making the adjustments.

00:39:34.630 --> 00:39:36.520
So once they've gotten under the hood

00:39:36.520 --> 00:39:37.550
and figure out what broke,

00:39:37.550 --> 00:39:38.620
then they can record it.

00:39:38.620 --> 00:39:39.453
<v ->Absolutely.</v>

00:39:39.453 --> 00:39:42.093
And they would be required
to come back and do so.

00:39:42.093 --> 00:39:44.450
<v ->Yes, they would be
required to report what broke.</v>

00:39:44.450 --> 00:39:45.283
Thank you.

00:39:47.660 --> 00:39:52.500
<v ->We've included the graph
on the lower left hand corner</v>

00:39:52.500 --> 00:39:54.650
of slide three there for
the last several years.

00:39:54.650 --> 00:39:57.530
And what it does is look
at certain key variables,

00:39:57.530 --> 00:39:59.280
the load, the wind,

00:39:59.280 --> 00:40:02.170
the solar, and the thermal unit outages

00:40:02.170 --> 00:40:04.440
at different days of the year,

00:40:04.440 --> 00:40:07.410
particularly at the time
of the new June peak

00:40:07.410 --> 00:40:09.040
at the time of the new September peak

00:40:09.040 --> 00:40:10.690
at the time of the annual peak.

00:40:10.690 --> 00:40:13.450
And then also kind of that
tight day in June that we had,

00:40:13.450 --> 00:40:15.053
and you can kind of see the,

00:40:15.053 --> 00:40:18.090
how those different variables varied

00:40:18.090 --> 00:40:19.410
across those different days

00:40:19.410 --> 00:40:22.660
and compare them to the
peak peak time last year.

00:40:22.660 --> 00:40:24.240
And so I don't really have anything

00:40:24.240 --> 00:40:26.150
I specifically want to
point out on that graph,

00:40:26.150 --> 00:40:28.430
but we're providing it
because we have it each year

00:40:28.430 --> 00:40:29.330
and it's,

00:40:29.330 --> 00:40:31.680
there's some continuity
there that's important.

00:40:33.156 --> 00:40:34.900
The final thing I want to note this,

00:40:34.900 --> 00:40:38.160
for this summer is that we did
operate more conservatively,

00:40:38.160 --> 00:40:42.200
keeping more resources
available in reserve online

00:40:42.200 --> 00:40:44.540
and also in making those available

00:40:44.540 --> 00:40:47.250
either through additional
ancillary service quantities

00:40:47.250 --> 00:40:50.670
that we bought or through
reliability unit commitments,

00:40:50.670 --> 00:40:53.516
basically telling
additional units to start up.

00:40:53.516 --> 00:40:56.460
You can see from the
graph on the upper right,

00:40:56.460 --> 00:40:58.930
that we bought a higher amount

00:40:58.930 --> 00:41:00.540
of ancillary services in July,

00:41:00.540 --> 00:41:03.670
and then incrementally
stepped that up in August

00:41:03.670 --> 00:41:07.270
to kind of adjust more
of that additional capacity

00:41:07.270 --> 00:41:08.980
over into the ancillary services

00:41:08.980 --> 00:41:12.213
rather than having to do
this reliability in commitments.

00:41:13.901 --> 00:41:15.150
And the other thing I guess
I should note in that graph,

00:41:15.150 --> 00:41:17.210
is that those numbers seem very high,

00:41:17.210 --> 00:41:18.890
but what that is is kind of the addition

00:41:18.890 --> 00:41:22.890
of all the extra megawatts
over the course of a typical day.

00:41:22.890 --> 00:41:23.730
So the way to think about it

00:41:23.730 --> 00:41:28.220
is if we were buying 5,000
extra megawatts each hour,

00:41:28.220 --> 00:41:31.950
over 24 hours, that would
sum up to about 220,000.

00:41:31.950 --> 00:41:34.093
So that's the way to think about that.

00:41:34.982 --> 00:41:35.840
<v ->Point.</v>

00:41:35.840 --> 00:41:37.080
You finished on that?

00:41:37.080 --> 00:41:37.913
<v ->Yes, sir.</v>

00:41:37.913 --> 00:41:40.060
<v ->One other quick comment
on the thermal outages graph</v>

00:41:40.060 --> 00:41:41.573
on the left of that slide.

00:41:42.570 --> 00:41:45.743
When you noted the thermal
unit, unplanned outages.

00:41:47.140 --> 00:41:49.880
Unplanned outages
being, it broke, we weren't,

00:41:49.880 --> 00:41:51.250
machinery broken in process

00:41:51.250 --> 00:41:54.571
that were below 6,000 megawatts

00:41:54.571 --> 00:41:57.923
on dates with high net peak demand.

00:41:58.820 --> 00:42:05.500
Just for context,
6,000 megawatts is like,

00:42:05.500 --> 00:42:06.333
check my math here,

00:42:06.333 --> 00:42:09.170
but I think that's less than
10% of the total thermal fleet.

00:42:09.170 --> 00:42:10.355
<v ->Correct.Correct.</v>

00:42:10.355 --> 00:42:13.650
<v ->So on those high
net peak demand days</v>

00:42:13.650 --> 00:42:18.040
when demand was high, 90%
of the fleet was still operating.

00:42:18.040 --> 00:42:18.873
<v ->Correct.</v>

00:42:18.873 --> 00:42:19.706
<v ->Okay.</v>

00:42:19.706 --> 00:42:21.353
Just want to make sure we
got some context around that.

00:42:23.710 --> 00:42:24.788
<v ->Okay.</v>

00:42:24.788 --> 00:42:26.810
And that's all I have on from
an operational perspective,

00:42:26.810 --> 00:42:28.710
turn it over to Kenan.

00:42:28.710 --> 00:42:32.480
<v ->Good morning on a
Kenan Ogelman with ERCOT.</v>

00:42:32.480 --> 00:42:36.740
So I have four key things
that I wanted to share with you.

00:42:36.740 --> 00:42:40.730
First one is that we had
a relatively cool summer

00:42:40.730 --> 00:42:43.580
and the low cap was in effect.

00:42:43.580 --> 00:42:46.700
So on just generally speaking,

00:42:46.700 --> 00:42:51.700
prices were relatively low or normal.

00:42:52.760 --> 00:42:56.600
There wasn't a lot of
spikes in the market.

00:42:56.600 --> 00:43:00.060
We also did not have
any mass transitions

00:43:00.060 --> 00:43:02.750
or anything where customers are moving

00:43:02.750 --> 00:43:04.930
to a provider of last resort

00:43:04.930 --> 00:43:06.930
or anything like that during the summer,

00:43:08.536 --> 00:43:11.590
ERCOT did commit, as Dan pointed out,

00:43:11.590 --> 00:43:15.100
more resources through
reliability unit commitment

00:43:15.100 --> 00:43:17.510
than we have in previous summers

00:43:17.510 --> 00:43:22.220
and non-spend, reserve
service priced out a lot higher

00:43:22.220 --> 00:43:25.350
than we had seen in previous summers.

00:43:25.350 --> 00:43:30.040
So as I go through
each of those, the first,

00:43:30.040 --> 00:43:35.650
the next slide,
which is slide six,

00:43:35.650 --> 00:43:38.390
it just shows the increase in RUC.

00:43:38.390 --> 00:43:43.360
And it also shows you how
much of that RUC commitment

00:43:43.360 --> 00:43:46.560
was bought back by the resource,

00:43:46.560 --> 00:43:50.420
which is in this for this
summer, relatively small,

00:43:50.420 --> 00:43:53.040
and that's driven by the
market clearing prices.

00:43:53.040 --> 00:43:57.810
So if there was a opportunity
to make better profits

00:43:57.810 --> 00:44:01.238
by buying the unit back
and letting it be a market unit

00:44:01.238 --> 00:44:03.140
entities would do that.

00:44:03.140 --> 00:44:04.830
But when they're low prices,

00:44:04.830 --> 00:44:09.830
they would rather take the
make whole and cover their costs.

00:44:10.210 --> 00:44:12.270
So we RUC-ed a lot.

00:44:12.270 --> 00:44:15.330
And very few of those
reliability unit commitments

00:44:15.330 --> 00:44:19.130
were bought back by
the market participants.

00:44:19.130 --> 00:44:20.880
<v ->Just to paint the
picture, Kenan,</v>

00:44:22.080 --> 00:44:23.223
what was,

00:44:23.223 --> 00:44:25.110
and you may know
off the top of your head,

00:44:25.110 --> 00:44:26.100
I won't use 2020,

00:44:26.100 --> 00:44:29.400
but 2019 was a hot
year, high prices too.

00:44:29.400 --> 00:44:30.980
$9,000 was cap.

00:44:30.980 --> 00:44:32.420
It was achieved.

00:44:32.420 --> 00:44:35.637
What were your RUC
hours in June and August

00:44:35.637 --> 00:44:37.573
compared to this?

00:44:39.670 --> 00:44:44.600
<v ->In 2019, they were very
small in June and August,</v>

00:44:44.600 --> 00:44:47.230
much smaller than even 2020.

00:44:47.230 --> 00:44:49.770
I don't have a exact number for you,

00:44:49.770 --> 00:44:50.990
but in this graph

00:44:50.990 --> 00:44:53.018
you can see through
<v ->Less than 100?</v>

00:44:53.018 --> 00:44:53.851
<v ->I'm sorry?</v>

00:44:53.851 --> 00:44:54.684
<v ->Was it less than 100?</v>

00:44:54.684 --> 00:44:55.520
<v ->That sounds correct.</v>

00:44:55.520 --> 00:44:56.807
<v ->Okay.</v>

00:44:56.807 --> 00:44:58.981
Go ahead.

00:44:58.981 --> 00:45:02.593
<v ->So would the
higher prices in 2019?</v>

00:45:04.650 --> 00:45:07.410
It sounds like to me,
the higher prices in 2019

00:45:07.410 --> 00:45:10.110
would have incented more
generation to be available.

00:45:10.110 --> 00:45:13.490
So therefore ERCOT wouldn't
have had to have RUC-ed as much.

00:45:13.490 --> 00:45:14.323
<v ->That that's correct.</v>

00:45:14.323 --> 00:45:16.320
So I think there's two things going on.

00:45:16.320 --> 00:45:17.153
First,

00:45:17.153 --> 00:45:20.830
is that there's market
incentives to commit.

00:45:20.830 --> 00:45:21.880
And then secondly,

00:45:21.880 --> 00:45:24.810
if even if you did not
commit and were RUC-ed,

00:45:24.810 --> 00:45:28.010
there's an incentive to buy
yourself out of that RUC.

00:45:28.010 --> 00:45:30.300
<v ->Versus this year
when prices were lower</v>

00:45:30.300 --> 00:45:33.150
and we had the L cap 2,500 in place,

00:45:33.150 --> 00:45:35.530
it might've made more economic sense

00:45:35.530 --> 00:45:39.253
to be part of the RUC process
to at least get made whole.

00:45:40.260 --> 00:45:41.130
<v ->Yes.</v>

00:45:41.130 --> 00:45:43.820
And because we're
operating more conservatively,

00:45:43.820 --> 00:45:46.480
there's more capacity on the system

00:45:46.480 --> 00:45:49.690
and less likely to be high
adders and things like that

00:45:49.690 --> 00:45:51.333
as you get near the peak.

00:45:55.290 --> 00:45:57.440
The next slide I was going
to spend a little bit more time,

00:45:57.440 --> 00:46:00.980
is the real time hub price.

00:46:00.980 --> 00:46:02.730
And we tried to show this in two ways

00:46:02.730 --> 00:46:06.210
because we traditionally
show kind of the whole year

00:46:06.210 --> 00:46:10.880
and February really
dwarfs the summer months.

00:46:10.880 --> 00:46:13.320
So we kinda took that out.

00:46:13.320 --> 00:46:16.700
You can see that with
the exception of August,

00:46:16.700 --> 00:46:21.090
prices were slightly
higher in 20, I'm sorry,

00:46:21.090 --> 00:46:24.510
in 2021, then 2020,

00:46:24.510 --> 00:46:29.510
but 2020 was also a
relatively mild summer.

00:46:31.240 --> 00:46:34.723
If I were to compare that to 2019,

00:46:36.340 --> 00:46:41.163
you would see that those
average prices were much higher.

00:46:43.490 --> 00:46:44.797
<v ->Much higher than 2021?</v>

00:46:44.797 --> 00:46:45.630
And
<v ->Correct.</v>

00:46:45.630 --> 00:46:46.463
<v ->Okay.</v>

00:46:48.587 --> 00:46:51.020
<v ->And then the
next slide is kind of</v>

00:46:51.020 --> 00:46:56.020
a reality check that we do for ourselves

00:46:56.070 --> 00:46:57.500
in terms of convergence

00:46:57.500 --> 00:47:00.890
between the real time and the day ahead.

00:47:00.890 --> 00:47:01.723
So,

00:47:02.920 --> 00:47:05.750
the market's never going
to always get something

00:47:05.750 --> 00:47:09.160
that is very different in
real time right day ahead,

00:47:09.160 --> 00:47:11.950
or they might expect something to happen

00:47:11.950 --> 00:47:15.460
day ahead that does
not happen in real time.

00:47:15.460 --> 00:47:17.580
So there can be daily differences,

00:47:17.580 --> 00:47:21.320
but ultimately you do want
those markets to converge.

00:47:21.320 --> 00:47:24.130
There's usually a
premium for the day ahead,

00:47:24.130 --> 00:47:27.630
but with kind of daily exceptions,

00:47:27.630 --> 00:47:30.100
you want those markets to converge.

00:47:30.100 --> 00:47:33.418
And the slide shows that on average,

00:47:33.418 --> 00:47:37.570
those markets do converge
with some exceptions

00:47:38.470 --> 00:47:40.640
that the market wasn't able to foresee

00:47:40.640 --> 00:47:42.033
either in real time,

00:47:42.890 --> 00:47:47.150
either something
happened like a unit went out

00:47:47.150 --> 00:47:51.123
or the wind forecast was off.

00:47:52.229 --> 00:47:54.610
So that could drive expectations

00:47:54.610 --> 00:47:57.690
either for the prices
to be higher or lower

00:47:57.690 --> 00:48:00.410
than they really turn
out to be in real time.

00:48:00.410 --> 00:48:05.410
<v ->So what happened on the
range of August 29th through 31st?</v>

00:48:05.810 --> 00:48:07.660
Cause that's a real divergence there.

00:48:08.550 --> 00:48:11.820
I mean that there is nothing
comparable on your chart

00:48:15.523 --> 00:48:16.356
to that period.

00:48:17.391 --> 00:48:18.713
<v ->So.</v>

00:48:20.470 --> 00:48:22.070
<v ->Saying day ahead
was higher than</v>

00:48:22.070 --> 00:48:23.222
real time?
<v ->Yes, sir.</v>

00:48:23.222 --> 00:48:24.055
<v ->At the end of August,</v>

00:48:24.055 --> 00:48:25.650
you could also look at early July

00:48:26.711 --> 00:48:28.970
where real time was way
ahead. <v ->Yeah, so</v>

00:48:28.970 --> 00:48:30.570
<v ->Yeah, that's true.</v>

00:48:30.570 --> 00:48:34.070
<v ->But as you can
see at one point one</v>

00:48:34.070 --> 00:48:36.510
goes above the other
and then they come back.

00:48:36.510 --> 00:48:39.283
So on those days,

00:48:40.170 --> 00:48:45.000
I believe both the
load forecast was off,

00:48:45.855 --> 00:48:48.220
as well as the net load forecast.

00:48:48.220 --> 00:48:51.150
So day ahead,

00:48:51.150 --> 00:48:53.660
expectations could
have been very different

00:48:53.660 --> 00:48:55.840
than what we actually
needed in real time.

00:48:55.840 --> 00:48:56.673
<v ->Okay.</v>

00:49:00.740 --> 00:49:04.683
The next slide I have for
you is about the non-spend.

00:49:05.670 --> 00:49:09.090
And so when you think
about ancillary services,

00:49:09.090 --> 00:49:12.630
I think there's two
things that drive the price

00:49:12.630 --> 00:49:13.750
that it will clear out.

00:49:13.750 --> 00:49:14.833
First is,

00:49:17.249 --> 00:49:20.250
the sale of energy is your alternative

00:49:20.250 --> 00:49:21.890
or your opportunity costs.

00:49:21.890 --> 00:49:24.994
So if you go back to the
previous year in August,

00:49:24.994 --> 00:49:27.590
when the energy prices were high,

00:49:27.590 --> 00:49:31.270
you see all the ancillary
services being high as well.

00:49:31.270 --> 00:49:33.320
So that's one sense of reference,

00:49:33.320 --> 00:49:38.320
But what this graph shows is
also when you procure more,

00:49:38.320 --> 00:49:41.630
it takes both the market
some time to adjust

00:49:41.630 --> 00:49:45.880
and it moves up the
merit order of that stack

00:49:45.880 --> 00:49:49.090
and the price goes up.

00:49:49.090 --> 00:49:51.890
So you see in the summer months,

00:49:51.890 --> 00:49:54.030
ancillary service prices going up

00:49:54.030 --> 00:49:57.030
and particularly the price of non-spend

00:49:57.030 --> 00:49:59.449
increasing relative to other months,

00:49:59.449 --> 00:50:03.110
this is driven by our
additional procurement

00:50:03.110 --> 00:50:05.483
of the non spin reserve service.

00:50:07.430 --> 00:50:09.470
<v ->Important note about
the market responding</v>

00:50:09.470 --> 00:50:13.640
to essentially increased
demand for non spend reserves

00:50:13.640 --> 00:50:16.020
or it's additional margin of safety,

00:50:16.020 --> 00:50:19.293
increased demand from ERCOT
on the same amount of supply.

00:50:20.750 --> 00:50:24.960
I also note for fellow
Commissioners and the general public

00:50:24.960 --> 00:50:28.360
that the market responds,

00:50:28.360 --> 00:50:30.210
and sometimes it responds slowly,

00:50:30.210 --> 00:50:32.390
but sometimes it can respond quickly.

00:50:32.390 --> 00:50:35.993
I think the, by way of
example, the first night,

00:50:35.993 --> 00:50:39.220
I think July 12th was the first night

00:50:39.220 --> 00:50:42.590
that the new non-spend
procurement was formalized.

00:50:42.590 --> 00:50:43.643
I think the,

00:50:45.040 --> 00:50:47.792
our ending 10:00 PM, 11:00 PM,

00:50:47.792 --> 00:50:49.830
something like that,

00:50:49.830 --> 00:50:53.430
the first time the additional
non-spend was bought

00:50:53.430 --> 00:50:56.550
it cleared at like $1,100 a megawatt,

00:50:56.550 --> 00:50:58.850
which should never happen
in the middle of the night

00:50:58.850 --> 00:51:02.096
because all the gas
turbines were throttling down

00:51:02.096 --> 00:51:04.040
to go overnight.

00:51:04.040 --> 00:51:06.750
And we don't want
consumers paying that price

00:51:06.750 --> 00:51:08.750
in the middle of the night, obviously.

00:51:08.750 --> 00:51:11.373
The next night it cleared at $17,

00:51:12.440 --> 00:51:14.030
which is exactly what we want

00:51:14.030 --> 00:51:16.363
the markets to respond.

00:51:17.410 --> 00:51:20.060
People kept the generators
onto another couple hours

00:51:20.060 --> 00:51:21.260
because they knew
there was a market there.

00:51:21.260 --> 00:51:23.580
And so I think that's
a great example of,

00:51:23.580 --> 00:51:25.130
as we go through this redesign process,

00:51:25.130 --> 00:51:28.080
exactly how we want to,

00:51:28.080 --> 00:51:30.050
we want to put out the results we want

00:51:30.050 --> 00:51:32.721
and let the market respond
to the most efficiently possible.

00:51:32.721 --> 00:51:33.750
<v ->Right.</v>

00:51:33.750 --> 00:51:35.377
<v ->Glad to see it
working that way.</v>

00:51:35.377 --> 00:51:38.530
<v ->And there is one additional
step that we're taking</v>

00:51:38.530 --> 00:51:42.960
to provide additional liquidity
in the non-spend space,

00:51:42.960 --> 00:51:47.550
which is to allow
additional load participation

00:51:47.550 --> 00:51:49.970
that doesn't currently exist.

00:51:49.970 --> 00:51:54.670
So that is notable
protocol revision request

00:51:54.670 --> 00:51:57.930
passed the technical advisory committee

00:51:57.930 --> 00:51:59.140
at their last meeting.

00:51:59.140 --> 00:52:00.950
And we'll go before the board

00:52:00.950 --> 00:52:03.690
and come before the
Public Utility Commission.

00:52:03.690 --> 00:52:05.520
<v ->What's the MPRR number on that?</v>

00:52:05.520 --> 00:52:06.520
<v ->It is</v>

00:52:06.520 --> 00:52:07.873
<v ->2 93.</v>

00:52:07.873 --> 00:52:08.967
2 93.

00:52:08.967 --> 00:52:09.800
(laughter)

00:52:09.800 --> 00:52:11.330
I've heard a lot about it.

00:52:11.330 --> 00:52:12.750
So Kenan, can you,

00:52:12.750 --> 00:52:16.343
I know it's past tack and
it's on its way to the board.

00:52:16.343 --> 00:52:18.190
Can you explain a little bit more

00:52:18.190 --> 00:52:19.290
what the benefits are

00:52:19.290 --> 00:52:22.510
of including that additional
load to non spend?

00:52:22.510 --> 00:52:24.160
I know ERCOT really wants us in place

00:52:24.160 --> 00:52:26.650
by the summer of 2022.

00:52:26.650 --> 00:52:28.460
And I would just like to
understand a little bit more,

00:52:28.460 --> 00:52:30.050
just you don't have to
get down into the detail,

00:52:30.050 --> 00:52:32.470
but just really what is the goal?

00:52:32.470 --> 00:52:34.113
What is the benefit?

00:52:35.269 --> 00:52:36.102
<v ->Well,</v>

00:52:36.102 --> 00:52:37.850
I think I'm at a very high level

00:52:37.850 --> 00:52:41.350
there's no good reason not
to allow load to participate.

00:52:41.350 --> 00:52:42.720
So from a

00:52:44.670 --> 00:52:47.440
economic efficiency
you want all the resources

00:52:47.440 --> 00:52:50.670
that can provide value in that space

00:52:50.670 --> 00:52:52.950
to provide value in that space.

00:52:52.950 --> 00:52:57.100
So I think that is a primary goal,

00:52:57.100 --> 00:53:00.710
but secondarily, in terms
of a market response,

00:53:00.710 --> 00:53:03.350
it adds more liquidity to that market

00:53:03.350 --> 00:53:07.130
where it will clear at a value

00:53:07.130 --> 00:53:10.410
that reflects both the
supply, the load side,

00:53:10.410 --> 00:53:14.300
and the generation side in that market.

00:53:14.300 --> 00:53:17.590
So those are the two key reasons

00:53:17.590 --> 00:53:20.573
why we really wanted
to move forward with that.

00:53:21.786 --> 00:53:23.220
<v ->Well, non spend,</v>

00:53:23.220 --> 00:53:25.830
as we've seen, is a very valuable tool

00:53:25.830 --> 00:53:27.550
to maintain reliability,

00:53:27.550 --> 00:53:28.650
I think it's very important

00:53:28.650 --> 00:53:31.107
as we move forward with this MPRR,

00:53:31.107 --> 00:53:33.119
And I know that there's
going to be a workshop

00:53:33.119 --> 00:53:36.562
that will address other
issues related to this MPRR,

00:53:36.562 --> 00:53:40.470
that we delicately, well,

00:53:40.470 --> 00:53:43.240
deliberately and
thoughtfully look at this issue

00:53:43.240 --> 00:53:45.790
because what we don't want
are unintended consequences

00:53:45.790 --> 00:53:48.690
to our non spend product.

00:53:48.690 --> 00:53:50.640
And so we have to
be very mindful of that

00:53:50.640 --> 00:53:52.480
as we've relied heavily on non spend

00:53:52.480 --> 00:53:55.220
this summer in our
conservative operations,

00:53:55.220 --> 00:53:58.050
that somehow in the middle
of tweaking this around

00:53:58.050 --> 00:54:00.766
to bring in more load, which I think is,

00:54:00.766 --> 00:54:02.995
you know, pragmatic and,

00:54:02.995 --> 00:54:04.990
and something that we should look at,

00:54:04.990 --> 00:54:06.440
we don't want to end up in a position

00:54:06.440 --> 00:54:08.120
where we have unintended consequences

00:54:08.120 --> 00:54:10.450
on a very valuable non spend product

00:54:12.270 --> 00:54:13.720
as we move forward to, you know,

00:54:13.720 --> 00:54:16.924
especially into the winter

00:54:16.924 --> 00:54:19.180
and this fall really where I think

00:54:19.180 --> 00:54:23.510
we will hear from ERCOT
that ERCOT will continue

00:54:23.510 --> 00:54:26.360
to use their conservative
operations through this Fall

00:54:26.360 --> 00:54:28.510
as a result of the
maintenance shoulder season.

00:54:28.510 --> 00:54:31.410
And so non spend will
continue to be very important

00:54:31.410 --> 00:54:33.400
in those conservative
operations in the winter

00:54:33.400 --> 00:54:35.750
and year-round or
liability, quite frankly,

00:54:35.750 --> 00:54:37.890
especially with conservative operations.

00:54:37.890 --> 00:54:38.820
So want to make sure

00:54:38.820 --> 00:54:42.305
that whatever is
happening with that MPRR,

00:54:42.305 --> 00:54:43.942
that there's not any
unintended consequences

00:54:43.942 --> 00:54:45.840
on that valuable product

00:54:45.840 --> 00:54:49.653
and the participants that have
been providing that product.

00:54:51.738 --> 00:54:53.630
<v ->They're actually,</v>

00:54:53.630 --> 00:54:55.850
some of these items
were discussed at TAC

00:54:55.850 --> 00:54:58.502
and there is going to
be a workshop scheduled

00:54:58.502 --> 00:55:02.710
to work through some of
those issues, for example,

00:55:02.710 --> 00:55:04.750
the deployment order.

00:55:04.750 --> 00:55:09.333
And some of those types of
things were raised as issues.

00:55:10.863 --> 00:55:14.830
And the only thing I would
share with you, additionally,

00:55:14.830 --> 00:55:18.390
is some of those changes
are going to be complex.

00:55:18.390 --> 00:55:20.810
So we will have to
make trade-off decisions

00:55:20.810 --> 00:55:23.110
between getting something in this summer

00:55:23.110 --> 00:55:26.690
and letting those other
features come in later

00:55:26.690 --> 00:55:29.517
versus trying to do it all at once.

00:55:29.517 --> 00:55:30.723
<v ->On that,</v>

00:55:31.800 --> 00:55:34.580
what's the no later than
to effect the Summer

00:55:34.580 --> 00:55:36.370
that we need to have this in place

00:55:37.220 --> 00:55:39.210
as an MPRR modification?

00:55:39.210 --> 00:55:41.223
Is it before the May auctions for?

00:55:42.430 --> 00:55:43.810
<v ->So non spend is auctioned</v>

00:55:43.810 --> 00:55:45.394
on a daily basis.
<v ->That's right</v>

00:55:45.394 --> 00:55:46.257
it's on a daily basis.

00:55:46.257 --> 00:55:47.090
Yeah.

00:55:47.090 --> 00:55:48.070
<v ->So there isn't</v>

00:55:48.070 --> 00:55:51.310
<v ->What's the optimal
market absorption.</v>

00:55:51.310 --> 00:55:55.010
I mean, when do participants
nominally like to have this?

00:55:55.010 --> 00:55:58.770
<v ->It would probably be nice
to have it in place and in May,</v>

00:55:58.770 --> 00:56:01.400
but what I would caution you is that

00:56:01.400 --> 00:56:05.020
the very resources that would
be implementing securitization

00:56:05.020 --> 00:56:06.983
on the settlement side,
<v ->Yeah.</v>

00:56:08.039 --> 00:56:10.030
<v ->We'll have to
work on that as well.</v>

00:56:10.030 --> 00:56:13.210
So, my expectation is,

00:56:13.210 --> 00:56:15.360
and I'm sorry to bring bad news,

00:56:15.360 --> 00:56:18.420
but I would expect something
more like the middle of summer

00:56:18.420 --> 00:56:21.713
where we actually are
able to get this in play.

00:56:23.218 --> 00:56:24.051
<v ->Okay.</v>

00:56:25.990 --> 00:56:28.003
<v ->We can, we can work on that.</v>

00:56:29.294 --> 00:56:30.160
(laughter)

00:56:30.160 --> 00:56:31.460
<v ->And then I have</v>
<v ->What did you say there?</v>

00:56:31.460 --> 00:56:32.840
<v ->We can work on that.</v>

00:56:32.840 --> 00:56:33.673
<v ->Agreed.</v>

00:56:33.673 --> 00:56:35.570
<v ->I do have one last slide,</v>

00:56:35.570 --> 00:56:37.980
and this is just to kind of summary

00:56:37.980 --> 00:56:42.133
of the credit collateral activity.

00:56:43.950 --> 00:56:46.470
In truth, the summer
was relatively calm.

00:56:46.470 --> 00:56:50.590
You do see one
spike in collateral calls.

00:56:50.590 --> 00:56:55.590
That is actually a
result of true up invoices

00:56:56.350 --> 00:57:00.240
that we sent out that had to
do with the February storm

00:57:00.240 --> 00:57:03.610
and not anything that
happened during the summer.

00:57:03.610 --> 00:57:06.718
So as we got better meter data

00:57:06.718 --> 00:57:11.493
and were able to
assign those costs better,

00:57:11.493 --> 00:57:14.099
there was a true up that
happened in the Summer

00:57:14.099 --> 00:57:17.520
that triggered collateral calls

00:57:17.520 --> 00:57:19.860
that were what I would
describe as a somewhat,

00:57:19.860 --> 00:57:22.320
a little bit of a surprise
to the stakeholders.

00:57:22.320 --> 00:57:24.060
So it took them a little bit of time

00:57:24.060 --> 00:57:26.433
to post the collateral
associated with that.

00:57:28.500 --> 00:57:29.333
<v ->All right,</v>

00:57:29.333 --> 00:57:30.417
thank you, sir.

00:57:30.417 --> 00:57:31.250
Yeah, Dan.

00:57:31.250 --> 00:57:33.750
<v ->So I have one more issue I
wanted to discuss with you.</v>

00:57:35.380 --> 00:57:38.300
In the Fall, in September
October timeframe,

00:57:38.300 --> 00:57:41.350
typically the demand
on the system is lower

00:57:41.350 --> 00:57:44.090
because people are neither
running their air conditioners

00:57:44.090 --> 00:57:45.650
nor their heaters.

00:57:45.650 --> 00:57:47.440
And so that's really the time of year

00:57:47.440 --> 00:57:51.000
when we see a lot of generating units

00:57:51.000 --> 00:57:54.373
that are taking planned
outages to get ready for winter.

00:57:55.380 --> 00:57:56.980
And this year, we're seeing

00:57:56.980 --> 00:57:59.710
a significantly higher
number of these plan

00:57:59.710 --> 00:58:02.080
generation outages
to get ready for winter

00:58:02.080 --> 00:58:04.260
that are scheduled
during this fall season,

00:58:04.260 --> 00:58:06.960
compared to what we saw
at the same time last year

00:58:06.960 --> 00:58:09.081
And for previous years.

00:58:09.081 --> 00:58:11.666
In fact, to the
tune of, you know,

00:58:11.666 --> 00:58:14.450
I think they were about
10 gigawatts last year,

00:58:14.450 --> 00:58:16.680
and it's up to about 18 gigawatts

00:58:16.680 --> 00:58:19.793
at the highest time during
the course of this Fall.

00:58:21.140 --> 00:58:23.460
So although the demand on
the system is generally lower

00:58:23.460 --> 00:58:24.430
in the Fall,

00:58:24.430 --> 00:58:27.440
if we do have days
with unseasonably warm

00:58:27.440 --> 00:58:30.960
or toward the end of the
Fall, cold temperatures,

00:58:30.960 --> 00:58:32.600
and we also have low wind

00:58:32.600 --> 00:58:36.020
and higher than expected
unplanned generation outages

00:58:36.020 --> 00:58:37.130
for some reason,

00:58:37.130 --> 00:58:40.530
we could also have some
tight conditions in the Fall.

00:58:40.530 --> 00:58:42.000
As Commissioner Cobos mentioned earlier,

00:58:42.000 --> 00:58:44.020
it's kind of a year round problem

00:58:44.020 --> 00:58:46.510
because people have to fix their plans.

00:58:46.510 --> 00:58:50.160
ERCOT will soon be
filing this revision request

00:58:50.160 --> 00:58:51.430
that I mentioned earlier to implement

00:58:51.430 --> 00:58:54.720
the provisions of SB 3
that provide for ERCOT

00:58:54.720 --> 00:58:57.970
to approve or deny
all generation outages.

00:58:57.970 --> 00:58:58.803
For now,

00:58:58.803 --> 00:59:02.510
when we see these tight
conditions developing a few days out

00:59:02.510 --> 00:59:05.420
we'll issue what's called
an advance action notice.

00:59:05.420 --> 00:59:07.640
Basically, a notification
out to the market

00:59:07.640 --> 00:59:09.240
to let the generators
have the opportunity

00:59:09.240 --> 00:59:11.020
to move those outages around

00:59:11.020 --> 00:59:13.070
so that we have enough capacity.

00:59:13.070 --> 00:59:14.190
And if that doesn't work,

00:59:14.190 --> 00:59:16.410
then we'll use our existing

00:59:16.410 --> 00:59:19.140
outage schedule adjustment process

00:59:19.140 --> 00:59:23.310
to either delay or cancel some
of those generation outages

00:59:23.310 --> 00:59:24.143
to make sure that

00:59:24.143 --> 00:59:26.876
we've got enough
capacity available each day.

00:59:26.876 --> 00:59:29.570
But this process also
allows those generators

00:59:29.570 --> 00:59:31.250
to continue to take the outages.

00:59:31.250 --> 00:59:33.440
When we do have milder conditions

00:59:33.440 --> 00:59:35.544
in order to get ready for Winter.

00:59:35.544 --> 00:59:38.070
In addition, as was mentioned,

00:59:38.070 --> 00:59:39.130
we're planning to continue

00:59:39.130 --> 00:59:40.900
more conservative operations approach

00:59:40.900 --> 00:59:43.160
that was implemented this summer

00:59:43.160 --> 00:59:44.820
throughout the Fall and going forward,

00:59:44.820 --> 00:59:47.110
so that we'll have enough
sufficient generation

00:59:47.110 --> 00:59:48.273
available to do that.

00:59:49.560 --> 00:59:50.393
Just wanted to add that.

00:59:50.393 --> 00:59:51.226
<v ->Yeah. Important update.</v>

00:59:51.226 --> 00:59:52.350
And the bottom line for the public

00:59:52.350 --> 00:59:54.600
is one reliability is paramount

00:59:54.600 --> 00:59:56.971
and will continue to be paramount.

00:59:56.971 --> 00:59:59.140
Second, we need to prepare for winter.

00:59:59.140 --> 01:00:02.442
These generators need to
do oil changes, tire rotations,

01:00:02.442 --> 01:00:06.123
et cetera, just like any
other piece of machinery,

01:00:07.156 --> 01:00:09.610
which means that it's,

01:00:09.610 --> 01:00:11.360
we don't get a free pass this Fall.

01:00:11.360 --> 01:00:13.522
It's still going to be tight,

01:00:13.522 --> 01:00:17.620
but ERCOT has mechanisms in place

01:00:17.620 --> 01:00:21.043
and the authority to cancel an outage,

01:00:21.043 --> 01:00:24.450
adjust that maintenance schedule.

01:00:24.450 --> 01:00:25.520
If conditions look tight,

01:00:25.520 --> 01:00:27.650
they can make sure
those thermal generators

01:00:27.650 --> 01:00:30.353
will be there if we need them

01:00:30.353 --> 01:00:33.820
and they can move
maintenance to a later date.

01:00:33.820 --> 01:00:34.950
<v ->Correct.</v>

01:00:34.950 --> 01:00:35.783
<v ->Thank you, sir.</v>

01:00:35.783 --> 01:00:36.810
Very important point.

01:00:37.842 --> 01:00:38.675
<v ->And ERCOT will continue</v>

01:00:38.675 --> 01:00:41.770
to use their conservative
operations tools.

01:00:41.770 --> 01:00:42.603
<v ->Absolutely.</v>

01:00:42.603 --> 01:00:43.436
<v ->Right.</v>

01:00:43.436 --> 01:00:44.269
<v ->In fact,</v>

01:00:44.269 --> 01:00:45.102
we're incorporating the need to do that

01:00:45.957 --> 01:00:46.790
into this process of making sure

01:00:46.790 --> 01:00:49.260
we've got enough
generation not on outage.

01:00:49.260 --> 01:00:50.410
<v ->Excellent.</v>

01:00:50.410 --> 01:00:51.450
Thank you very much.

01:00:51.450 --> 01:00:54.550
Any other comments or
questions for the ERCOT team?

01:00:54.550 --> 01:00:56.140
All right. Thank you, gentlemen.

01:00:56.140 --> 01:00:57.300
<v ->Thank you.</v>

01:00:57.300 --> 01:01:00.210
<v ->We also have a memo filed
from Commissioner Cobos</v>

01:01:00.210 --> 01:01:01.800
on this item.

01:01:01.800 --> 01:01:05.320
So I will turn it over to
her to lay out her memo.

01:01:05.320 --> 01:01:06.350
<v ->All right.</v>

01:01:06.350 --> 01:01:07.183
Well,

01:01:07.183 --> 01:01:09.890
in a follow-up discussion
to our open meeting

01:01:09.890 --> 01:01:13.380
on September 23rd and our order

01:01:13.380 --> 01:01:17.187
to stack AP slash ATT and Sharyland

01:01:17.187 --> 01:01:21.130
to build the second circuit
loop of second circuit.

01:01:21.130 --> 01:01:25.050
New second circuit
line and loop facilities

01:01:25.050 --> 01:01:26.750
wanted to file this memo.

01:01:26.750 --> 01:01:28.700
I think as a matter of due diligence,

01:01:28.700 --> 01:01:29.648
we need to ensure that we

01:01:29.648 --> 01:01:32.733
are getting progress
reports from the utilities,

01:01:33.597 --> 01:01:36.190
with regard to their
construction of the second circuit

01:01:36.190 --> 01:01:37.950
and the loop facilities.

01:01:37.950 --> 01:01:40.573
We, as we discussed last open meeting,

01:01:41.480 --> 01:01:46.480
these facilities are intended
to serve as a interim measure

01:01:49.250 --> 01:01:51.020
while we await a more long-term solution

01:01:51.020 --> 01:01:51.930
for the Rio Grande Valley.

01:01:51.930 --> 01:01:54.900
And I just don't want
this to slip, you know,

01:01:54.900 --> 01:01:57.730
behind schedule and
not remain a priority

01:01:57.730 --> 01:02:01.330
for the companies that
are building these facilities.

01:02:01.330 --> 01:02:04.444
So I have filed this memo
for your consideration

01:02:04.444 --> 01:02:08.370
to require at my request,

01:02:08.370 --> 01:02:10.830
quarterly progress
reports from the utilities

01:02:10.830 --> 01:02:13.480
that are responsible
for these facilities

01:02:13.480 --> 01:02:15.880
to provide us with information

01:02:15.880 --> 01:02:19.080
on how things are progressing
with those second circuit

01:02:19.080 --> 01:02:21.000
and loop facilities being built out

01:02:21.000 --> 01:02:21.940
in the Rio Grande Valley.

01:02:21.940 --> 01:02:23.620
It's important for liability.

01:02:23.620 --> 01:02:25.500
And I just want to make
sure that we stay on top of it

01:02:25.500 --> 01:02:28.353
since we ordered the
construction of these facilities.

01:02:29.370 --> 01:02:30.377
<v ->Absolutely.</v>

01:02:30.377 --> 01:02:33.990
Agree with both the spirit

01:02:33.990 --> 01:02:37.400
and the technical elements of your memo.

01:02:37.400 --> 01:02:40.250
This is a project that
is critical for the state,

01:02:40.250 --> 01:02:41.410
and it's not something this Commission

01:02:41.410 --> 01:02:45.493
is just going to forget
about and hope it works out.

01:02:46.963 --> 01:02:51.393
And so thank you for ensuring
that we'll keep an ongoing,

01:02:55.040 --> 01:02:56.630
we will continue to monitor the progress

01:02:56.630 --> 01:02:59.080
and do everything we can

01:02:59.080 --> 01:03:01.600
to support the relevant stakeholders

01:03:01.600 --> 01:03:04.900
while also holding them accountable.

01:03:04.900 --> 01:03:05.770
<v ->Great.</v>

01:03:05.770 --> 01:03:08.570
And so, Steve and I asked for staff

01:03:08.570 --> 01:03:10.510
to open a new project

01:03:10.510 --> 01:03:12.800
for these transmission related matters

01:03:12.800 --> 01:03:15.004
that I believe staff has opened.

01:03:15.004 --> 01:03:16.126
And that's where I would like

01:03:16.126 --> 01:03:18.205
the quarterly progress
reports to be filed.

01:03:18.205 --> 01:03:19.310
<v ->Yes, we have filed open</v>

01:03:19.310 --> 01:03:21.333
that is Project 5 2 6 8 2.

01:03:24.865 --> 01:03:25.832
And I would just ask

01:03:25.832 --> 01:03:28.650
because the order directing the building

01:03:28.650 --> 01:03:30.910
of those transmission
lines has not completed it

01:03:30.910 --> 01:03:32.760
through the signing process and whatnot.

01:03:32.760 --> 01:03:37.760
Would you like to amend that to include

01:03:38.450 --> 01:03:43.300
these progress reports
requirements in that order?

01:03:43.300 --> 01:03:46.597
Maybe we can pull it
back in, add that into it and.

01:03:47.520 --> 01:03:48.550
<v ->Yes.</v>

01:03:48.550 --> 01:03:49.724
<v ->Makes sense.</v>

01:03:49.724 --> 01:03:50.557
<v ->Yes.</v>

01:03:50.557 --> 01:03:51.950
And in that order,

01:03:51.950 --> 01:03:54.270
that requires those
quarterly progress reports

01:03:54.270 --> 01:03:56.770
to make the first one
being due November 1st.

01:03:56.770 --> 01:03:58.060
<v ->November 1st</v>

01:03:58.060 --> 01:04:00.760
<v ->Did you say 5 2 6 0 2?</v>

01:04:02.219 --> 01:04:03.480
<v ->5 2 6 8 2.</v>

01:04:03.480 --> 01:04:04.313
<v ->8 2.</v>

01:04:06.420 --> 01:04:08.240
And then we will, now we have this open,

01:04:08.240 --> 01:04:11.530
we will transfer all the
previous documents.

01:04:11.530 --> 01:04:13.890
You'd requested us to put in there.

01:04:13.890 --> 01:04:16.090
If we haven't already
done it, I'm not sure,

01:04:17.480 --> 01:04:18.640
but they will be there.

01:04:18.640 --> 01:04:20.050
<v ->Okay.</v>

01:04:20.050 --> 01:04:23.210
And as a second item to this discussion,

01:04:23.210 --> 01:04:27.757
I requested that stack ATT slash AEP

01:04:28.627 --> 01:04:31.790
and Sharyland also file,

01:04:31.790 --> 01:04:36.400
make a filing in with
respect to the CCN activities

01:04:36.400 --> 01:04:40.080
that would be required
as a result of building

01:04:40.080 --> 01:04:42.380
the second circuit
and the loop facilities.

01:04:42.380 --> 01:04:46.780
And I had sort of raised the
issue at the last open meeting

01:04:46.780 --> 01:04:47.690
about, you know,

01:04:47.690 --> 01:04:49.735
whether whether a CCN
amendment would be required.

01:04:49.735 --> 01:04:54.370
And if it was how quickly
the companies can,

01:04:54.370 --> 01:04:56.300
would be able to file a CCN amendment

01:04:56.300 --> 01:04:58.550
or a CCN application at the Commission.

01:04:58.550 --> 01:05:02.990
And at my request,
the parties have filed,

01:05:02.990 --> 01:05:04.730
made filings in 5 1 6 1 7,

01:05:04.730 --> 01:05:06.490
which will be transferred
to the new project.

01:05:06.490 --> 01:05:11.490
And with respect to
stack and ETTs letter,

01:05:12.240 --> 01:05:15.223
they have stated that they
don't need a CCN amendment.

01:05:16.100 --> 01:05:18.320
I just want to put a placeholder here

01:05:18.320 --> 01:05:21.730
and I appreciate the
company's filing that information

01:05:21.730 --> 01:05:24.950
and the facts surrounding
their determination.

01:05:24.950 --> 01:05:26.810
They don't need a CCN application,

01:05:26.810 --> 01:05:30.300
that is because the
prior CCN application

01:05:30.300 --> 01:05:32.030
that was approved for the Commission

01:05:32.030 --> 01:05:34.360
will allow them to not
have the CCN amendment

01:05:34.360 --> 01:05:36.780
or be required to file one with this.

01:05:36.780 --> 01:05:38.446
However, I do want
to put a placeholder

01:05:38.446 --> 01:05:41.970
because there is a tangential docket

01:05:41.970 --> 01:05:44.357
that Commission staff
is looking at right now.

01:05:44.357 --> 01:05:47.700
It is a docket number 5 26 10.

01:05:47.700 --> 01:05:52.700
And in that case stack has
requested a determination as to

01:05:53.060 --> 01:05:55.990
when a CCN amendment would be required.

01:05:55.990 --> 01:05:58.620
And I think to make
sure that we are moving

01:05:58.620 --> 01:06:00.340
all in a consistent direction

01:06:00.340 --> 01:06:03.033
and to, you know, level-set,

01:06:03.910 --> 01:06:06.900
I want for Steven to
provide us an update

01:06:06.900 --> 01:06:08.770
on what's going on with that case,

01:06:08.770 --> 01:06:10.780
with respect to requesting briefing

01:06:10.780 --> 01:06:13.500
and ultimately getting a
Commission determination

01:06:13.500 --> 01:06:17.100
when a CCN amendment is required

01:06:17.100 --> 01:06:19.280
with regard to a second circuit

01:06:19.280 --> 01:06:22.503
on a double circuit capable
3 45 transmission line.

01:06:24.010 --> 01:06:25.320
<v ->Yes ma'am.</v>

01:06:25.320 --> 01:06:28.500
We discussed this case
early this week, I guess,

01:06:28.500 --> 01:06:30.820
Monday and looking at the issue

01:06:30.820 --> 01:06:33.316
and also knowing the
issue has been discussed

01:06:33.316 --> 01:06:38.130
in this arena, decided
that this was an issue that

01:06:38.130 --> 01:06:39.730
the Commission needed to speak to

01:06:39.730 --> 01:06:42.300
and decided to issue a briefing order

01:06:42.300 --> 01:06:44.510
to request a threshold brief,

01:06:44.510 --> 01:06:47.400
a briefing on threshold
issue in this case,

01:06:47.400 --> 01:06:50.683
which will have much
broader implications, no doubt.

01:06:52.220 --> 01:06:54.720
I think the, the orders about done,

01:06:54.720 --> 01:06:55.720
we should get it out,

01:06:55.720 --> 01:06:57.730
I think given the timeline where we are,

01:06:57.730 --> 01:07:00.940
we would be looking at
having that issue brought to you

01:07:00.940 --> 01:07:04.450
on the November 18th
open meeting for resolution

01:07:04.450 --> 01:07:09.290
so that we can have the
Commission definitively address

01:07:09.290 --> 01:07:13.320
when if a CCN is required
in these circumstances or not.

01:07:13.320 --> 01:07:14.190
<v ->Okay.</v>

01:07:14.190 --> 01:07:16.990
And with respect to Sharyland's filing,

01:07:16.990 --> 01:07:18.210
they have reiterated

01:07:18.210 --> 01:07:20.760
that their best time
estimate is eight months.

01:07:20.760 --> 01:07:25.260
And so with respect to that timeline,

01:07:25.260 --> 01:07:27.373
I would like to include in the order,

01:07:28.650 --> 01:07:30.510
that order's construction,

01:07:30.510 --> 01:07:32.490
a directive that Sharyland file

01:07:32.490 --> 01:07:35.350
a CCN application in June of 2022.

01:07:35.350 --> 01:07:38.273
And if there's any delays
in that process to notify us.

01:07:42.750 --> 01:07:43.670
<v ->Makes sense to me.</v>

01:07:43.670 --> 01:07:45.325
Y'all?

01:07:45.325 --> 01:07:46.158
<v ->Yup</v>

01:07:46.158 --> 01:07:48.445
<v ->Okay, we'll have
that into that order too.</v>

01:07:48.445 --> 01:07:49.603
<v ->All right.</v>

01:07:52.150 --> 01:07:56.083
<v ->Do you want to say
June 1st or June 30th?</v>

01:07:58.106 --> 01:08:00.480
<v ->Well, we are at the
beginning of October.</v>

01:08:00.480 --> 01:08:03.803
And so I'd say by June 30th,

01:08:04.840 --> 01:08:05.673
just sometime

01:08:05.673 --> 01:08:07.130
within the month of June.
<v ->Sure</v>

01:08:07.130 --> 01:08:08.555
<v ->No later</v>
<v ->June 30th</v>

01:08:08.555 --> 01:08:09.388
<v ->No later.</v>
<v ->No</v>

01:08:09.388 --> 01:08:10.221
<v ->Yes.</v>
<v ->No later than.</v>

01:08:10.221 --> 01:08:11.940
<v ->And certainly
we'd accept it earlier.</v>

01:08:11.940 --> 01:08:12.800
<v ->Absolutely.</v>

01:08:12.800 --> 01:08:15.330
But, and if there's any
delays to please notify us

01:08:15.330 --> 01:08:19.260
of that delay
<v ->Absolutely</v>

01:08:19.260 --> 01:08:20.923
<v ->All right.</v>

01:08:20.923 --> 01:08:21.756
<v ->Okay</v>

01:08:21.756 --> 01:08:22.660
<v ->Work for ya'll?</v>

01:08:22.660 --> 01:08:23.702
<v ->Yes, sir.</v>
<v ->Mm hmm.</v>

01:08:23.702 --> 01:08:24.535
<v ->All right.</v>

01:08:24.535 --> 01:08:25.908
<v ->That is all I
have on this item.</v>

01:08:25.908 --> 01:08:26.840
<v ->Thank you for your
leadership on this.</v>

01:08:26.840 --> 01:08:27.673
It's tremendous.

01:08:28.630 --> 01:08:32.470
That concludes our business on Item 20.

01:08:32.470 --> 01:08:35.180
I don't have anything on Item 21.

01:08:35.180 --> 01:08:36.749
Anybody else?

01:08:36.749 --> 01:08:37.582
<v ->No, sir.</v>

01:08:37.582 --> 01:08:38.415
<v ->All right.</v>

01:08:38.415 --> 01:08:41.887
Next item will be Item 24,

01:08:41.887 --> 01:08:43.683
Mr. Journeay, could
you play that out for us?

01:08:44.560 --> 01:08:46.713
<v ->Item 24 is docket 5 1 5 7 2.</v>

01:08:48.044 --> 01:08:51.553
It's the appeal of John
McGuffey and McFarland farms.

01:08:52.780 --> 01:08:54.140
The cost of obtaining service

01:08:54.140 --> 01:08:57.880
from the Virginia Hill
Water Supply Corporation.

01:08:57.880 --> 01:09:00.790
Proposal for decision
was filed on August 31st.

01:09:00.790 --> 01:09:03.619
It recommends that the
Commission deny the appeal.

01:09:03.619 --> 01:09:06.963
No party filed
corrections or exceptions.

01:09:08.068 --> 01:09:09.320
<v ->Thank you, sir.</v>

01:09:09.320 --> 01:09:10.645
Seems straightforward to me,

01:09:10.645 --> 01:09:11.700
but would love to hear from y'all.

01:09:11.700 --> 01:09:13.090
The tariff is clear.

01:09:13.090 --> 01:09:14.943
Any comments, questions?

01:09:14.943 --> 01:09:15.776
<v ->Yeah.</v>

01:09:17.800 --> 01:09:19.760
The classification of
their tariff that they're in

01:09:19.760 --> 01:09:22.110
sort of dictates the outcome here.

01:09:22.110 --> 01:09:24.421
So I agree with you Mr. Chairman.

01:09:24.421 --> 01:09:25.600
<v ->All right.</v>

01:09:25.600 --> 01:09:28.210
Is there a motion to adopt
the proposal for decision?

01:09:28.210 --> 01:09:29.120
<v ->So moved.</v>

01:09:29.120 --> 01:09:29.960
<v ->Second.</v>

01:09:29.960 --> 01:09:31.010
<v ->All in favor, say aye.</v>

01:09:31.010 --> 01:09:31.910
<v Committee>Aye.</v>

01:09:31.910 --> 01:09:32.883
<v ->Motion passes.</v>

01:09:35.220 --> 01:09:36.890
Item 25 was consented.

01:09:36.890 --> 01:09:40.570
I don't have anything
for Items 26 through 29.

01:09:40.570 --> 01:09:41.776
<v ->Y'all?</v>

01:09:41.776 --> 01:09:42.609
<v ->No, sir.</v>

01:09:45.355 --> 01:09:48.440
<v ->That will bring us to 32</v>

01:09:49.663 --> 01:09:51.773
with comments on that from staff.

01:09:54.260 --> 01:09:55.093
<v ->Yes, sir.</v>

01:09:55.093 --> 01:09:56.090
Thank you, Mr. Chairman,

01:09:56.090 --> 01:09:57.710
just a couple items this morning.

01:09:57.710 --> 01:10:01.210
First in regards to the
Turks selection process,

01:10:01.210 --> 01:10:03.220
where you're finalizing that process.

01:10:03.220 --> 01:10:05.870
I hope to notify the applicants

01:10:05.870 --> 01:10:08.041
who have been selected tomorrow,

01:10:08.041 --> 01:10:10.370
and then we'll file a memo

01:10:10.370 --> 01:10:13.260
in the docket that we
opened for the applications,

01:10:13.260 --> 01:10:15.960
letting the public know
who we've selected

01:10:15.960 --> 01:10:18.940
and also notifying Tetum and Chief Kid

01:10:18.940 --> 01:10:20.880
of who we've selected
so they can contact them

01:10:20.880 --> 01:10:22.093
about future meetings.

01:10:22.990 --> 01:10:23.823
<v ->Excellent.</v>

01:10:23.823 --> 01:10:24.855
<v ->Thank you.</v>

01:10:24.855 --> 01:10:25.688
<v ->Second,</v>

01:10:25.688 --> 01:10:27.062
I've given you updates

01:10:27.062 --> 01:10:28.583
on our mapping
committee work in the past.

01:10:29.470 --> 01:10:30.850
One of the things we've talked about

01:10:30.850 --> 01:10:34.420
is how to engage the public
and stakeholders in that.

01:10:34.420 --> 01:10:35.830
We have another meeting tomorrow.

01:10:35.830 --> 01:10:38.530
I'm going to discuss,

01:10:38.530 --> 01:10:41.830
and I discussed yesterday
with executive director Wei Wang

01:10:41.830 --> 01:10:42.710
of the Railroad Commission.

01:10:42.710 --> 01:10:44.240
Who's the Vice Chair of that committee,

01:10:44.240 --> 01:10:46.980
ways that we can engage
the public and stakeholders

01:10:46.980 --> 01:10:49.490
to give them more
information on what's going on.

01:10:49.490 --> 01:10:51.338
So I'm going to put a
couple ideas out there

01:10:51.338 --> 01:10:53.960
tomorrow at our meeting
and hope to report back

01:10:53.960 --> 01:10:55.110
on our progress on that

01:10:55.110 --> 01:10:57.550
at our next open meeting for you all.

01:10:57.550 --> 01:11:00.450
And then finally, something
that is very important

01:11:00.450 --> 01:11:03.280
I think specifically to
Commissioner Glotfelty,

01:11:03.280 --> 01:11:06.390
I want to thank the Facilities
Commission and Mike Novak,

01:11:06.390 --> 01:11:08.750
their Executive Director,
for working with us

01:11:08.750 --> 01:11:10.766
to move up the timeline for constructing

01:11:10.766 --> 01:11:14.050
our two new Commissioner suites.

01:11:14.050 --> 01:11:15.680
So that Commissioner Glotfelty

01:11:15.680 --> 01:11:18.960
and his staff can move
into Commissioner's offices.

01:11:18.960 --> 01:11:22.950
We are going to start that
construction on the 14th,

01:11:22.950 --> 01:11:25.640
and we hope, they
hope to have it done by

01:11:25.640 --> 01:11:26.770
the beginning of the new year,

01:11:26.770 --> 01:11:28.370
which is about the same timeline

01:11:29.355 --> 01:11:30.188
that we'll get our new dais

01:11:30.188 --> 01:11:31.870
to accommodate up to five Commissioners,

01:11:31.870 --> 01:11:34.187
to make you all a little
more comfortable up there.

01:11:34.187 --> 01:11:36.080
(chuckle)

01:11:36.080 --> 01:11:36.913
<v ->Outstanding.</v>

01:11:36.913 --> 01:11:39.280
And I will also, in all seriousness,

01:11:39.280 --> 01:11:40.550
commend Commissioner Glotfelty

01:11:40.550 --> 01:11:43.850
for being such a
good sport (chuckle)

01:11:43.850 --> 01:11:47.420
and joining this Commission
with the lack of space

01:11:47.420 --> 01:11:49.052
and resources we've had.

01:11:49.052 --> 01:11:50.190
We appreciate you.
<v ->I would</v>

01:11:50.190 --> 01:11:51.490
invite you all to come down my hallway,

01:11:51.490 --> 01:11:53.718
it's very open and very quiet and very,

01:11:53.718 --> 01:11:56.302
it's a joyful place to be so.

01:11:56.302 --> 01:11:57.437
(laughter)

01:11:57.437 --> 01:11:59.931
<v ->It gets a little tight
in your cubicle, but</v>

01:11:59.931 --> 01:12:00.764
(laughter)

01:12:00.764 --> 01:12:03.541
<v ->He may not feel that way
once the construction starts,</v>

01:12:03.541 --> 01:12:04.535
(laughter)

01:12:04.535 --> 01:12:06.840
but that's all I have this morning.

01:12:06.840 --> 01:12:08.650
<v ->In fact, in ya'll need
an address for me</v>

01:12:08.650 --> 01:12:10.959
to tell you where
I am, (laughter)

01:12:10.959 --> 01:12:12.710
so y'all can come see
me I'll let you know.

01:12:12.710 --> 01:12:14.238
(laughter)

01:12:14.238 --> 01:12:15.238
<v ->All right.</v>

01:12:16.088 --> 01:12:18.943
I don't have anything on 33 or 34,

01:12:20.140 --> 01:12:21.360
unless you all have anything else,

01:12:21.360 --> 01:12:24.283
that will bring us to item 35,

01:12:25.810 --> 01:12:27.300
Mr. Journeay,

01:12:27.300 --> 01:12:31.540
you've circulated a statement
regarding our Consent Agenda.

01:12:31.540 --> 01:12:33.550
Could you give us a
brief summary of that?

01:12:33.550 --> 01:12:34.430
<v ->Yes, sir.</v>

01:12:34.430 --> 01:12:37.940
This statement is trying
to reflect discussions

01:12:37.940 --> 01:12:39.410
that I've had with all of y'all

01:12:39.410 --> 01:12:42.680
over the past period of time

01:12:42.680 --> 01:12:47.050
to basically expand our
use of the Consent Agenda

01:12:48.710 --> 01:12:51.140
beyond what we have historically done.

01:12:51.140 --> 01:12:56.140
So that if items only
have correction memos

01:12:58.940 --> 01:13:03.330
from the judges or staff,
myself included on that,

01:13:03.330 --> 01:13:05.870
those items will be consent able.

01:13:05.870 --> 01:13:08.950
There were three proposed orders today

01:13:08.950 --> 01:13:12.220
that only had a memo for me on it ,

01:13:12.220 --> 01:13:14.180
that in the past we have not consented,

01:13:14.180 --> 01:13:16.900
that would be one that
would be consented.

01:13:16.900 --> 01:13:20.380
And we had a PFD with
no correction, memos or all.

01:13:20.380 --> 01:13:25.050
And that would be, also
now, put on the consent,

01:13:25.050 --> 01:13:27.680
be able to be put on the consent list.

01:13:27.680 --> 01:13:31.810
It also lays out what it means

01:13:31.810 --> 01:13:34.020
when the Commission
approves the Consent Agenda,

01:13:34.020 --> 01:13:37.160
and that is it approves
the latest filed order.

01:13:37.160 --> 01:13:38.810
Plus the correction memos

01:13:38.810 --> 01:13:40.823
that have been filed prior to that time,

01:13:42.760 --> 01:13:47.760
it does not include memos
from parties outside staff,

01:13:48.360 --> 01:13:51.750
or the judges within that.

01:13:51.750 --> 01:13:54.920
And then finally it talks about

01:13:54.920 --> 01:13:57.010
how we prepare our Consent Agenda,

01:13:57.010 --> 01:13:59.150
which is how we have
done it in the past,

01:13:59.150 --> 01:14:01.150
but it lays it out and it makes it clear

01:14:02.370 --> 01:14:05.693
that if Commissioners are
recusing themselves from a matter,

01:14:06.600 --> 01:14:10.580
they do not need to be included

01:14:10.580 --> 01:14:12.800
on the unanimity of the Commissioners

01:14:12.800 --> 01:14:15.070
to put it on the list, to
have it put on the list.

01:14:16.016 --> 01:14:18.470
So that will resolve some
issues we've had recently too,

01:14:18.470 --> 01:14:20.020
where things weren't consented.

01:14:20.860 --> 01:14:23.265
It will give us a little bit more,

01:14:23.265 --> 01:14:27.748
probably save us five
minutes on our openings,

01:14:27.748 --> 01:14:29.998
(laughter)

01:14:30.940 --> 01:14:33.027
Maybe a little bit more.
<v ->I imagine</v>

01:14:34.309 --> 01:14:35.360
<v ->It's always
welcome opportunities</v>

01:14:35.360 --> 01:14:38.050
to streamline operations
here at the PUC.

01:14:40.764 --> 01:14:42.380
Thank you for laying that out.

01:14:42.380 --> 01:14:44.540
And so just so the public knows

01:14:45.520 --> 01:14:47.670
that we will continue to be transparent

01:14:47.670 --> 01:14:49.830
in all of our actions here.

01:14:49.830 --> 01:14:52.420
The changes you're talking
about that now can be consented,

01:14:52.420 --> 01:14:57.420
are non-substantive
grammatical technical corrections,

01:14:57.860 --> 01:15:01.270
any substantive changes of policy

01:15:01.270 --> 01:15:05.370
would be still for discussion
with the Commission.

01:15:05.370 --> 01:15:06.203
<v ->Well,</v>

01:15:06.203 --> 01:15:07.920
I think that's true, with
maybe two exceptions,

01:15:07.920 --> 01:15:10.950
in that were so a
judge that writes a PFD

01:15:10.950 --> 01:15:13.900
occasionally could make
a substantive correction

01:15:13.900 --> 01:15:15.013
in their memos.

01:15:15.850 --> 01:15:18.100
And we have dealt with
those in the past, always.

01:15:18.100 --> 01:15:23.100
And perhaps also in
proposed orders to adopt rules

01:15:23.970 --> 01:15:25.720
where there's changes to the rules

01:15:25.720 --> 01:15:28.190
that could be substantive
changes to the rules.

01:15:28.190 --> 01:15:30.830
Those would also be
included in this process.

01:15:30.830 --> 01:15:31.663
Of course,

01:15:31.663 --> 01:15:33.910
if the Commissioner
wants to discuss them,

01:15:33.910 --> 01:15:36.190
they just don't put it on
their consent list then.

01:15:36.190 --> 01:15:37.023
<v ->Yeah.</v>

01:15:37.023 --> 01:15:38.920
If it's some substantive policy,

01:15:38.920 --> 01:15:41.672
if you think we would

01:15:41.672 --> 01:15:44.750
would flag that for discussion.

01:15:44.750 --> 01:15:45.930
<v ->Right.</v>

01:15:45.930 --> 01:15:46.763
<v ->All right.</v>

01:15:46.763 --> 01:15:49.036
Any comments, questions?

01:15:49.036 --> 01:15:50.130
<v ->I think this strategy,</v>

01:15:50.130 --> 01:15:51.810
given the workload that we have,

01:15:51.810 --> 01:15:54.930
given the panacea of topics

01:15:54.930 --> 01:15:57.536
that we have to take
up over the next year,

01:15:57.536 --> 01:16:01.707
help provide focus for
the public as well as us

01:16:01.707 --> 01:16:05.760
and the stakeholders who
are active participants here.

01:16:05.760 --> 01:16:08.330
So I think the policy is consistent

01:16:08.330 --> 01:16:10.640
with both the degree of transparency,

01:16:10.640 --> 01:16:12.904
which the PUC has been accustomed to

01:16:12.904 --> 01:16:15.530
and the work that staff
does behind the scenes.

01:16:15.530 --> 01:16:18.181
So again, I agree with that.

01:16:18.181 --> 01:16:19.512
<v ->Well put.</v>

01:16:19.512 --> 01:16:22.450
<v ->So we would take a
ask for your approval of</v>

01:16:22.450 --> 01:16:25.010
this statement, as it's your policy.

01:16:25.010 --> 01:16:26.550
<v ->Is there a motion to approve</v>

01:16:26.550 --> 01:16:27.570
the statement regarding use of

01:16:27.570 --> 01:16:29.108
the Commission's Consent Agenda?

01:16:29.108 --> 01:16:29.990
<v ->So moved.</v>

01:16:29.990 --> 01:16:30.823
<v ->Second.</v>

01:16:30.823 --> 01:16:31.656
<v ->All in favor, say aye.</v>

01:16:31.656 --> 01:16:32.530
<v Committee>Aye.</v>

01:16:32.530 --> 01:16:33.423
<v ->Motion passes.</v>

01:16:35.620 --> 01:16:39.503
That concludes our agenda for today.

01:16:41.269 --> 01:16:43.900
Having convened in a
duly noticed open meeting,

01:16:43.900 --> 01:16:47.780
the Commission will at
10:47 AM on October 7th,

01:16:47.780 --> 01:16:49.760
hold a closed session
pursuant to Chapter 501

01:16:49.760 --> 01:16:50.593
in Texas government

01:16:50.593 --> 01:16:55.530
code sections 5 0 1.0 7 1 5
5 1 0.0 7 4 and 5 1 1 .0 7 6.

01:16:57.126 --> 01:16:59.373
We'll be back in a bit.

01:17:15.300 --> 01:17:17.690
Closed session is hereby concluded

01:17:17.690 --> 01:17:21.233
at 11:44 AM on October 7th, 2021.

01:17:21.233 --> 01:17:23.610
And the Commission will
resume its public meeting.

01:17:23.610 --> 01:17:25.320
No action will be taken
by the Commission

01:17:25.320 --> 01:17:29.467
regarding matters discussed
during closed session.

01:17:29.467 --> 01:17:31.930
So there being no further business

01:17:31.930 --> 01:17:33.980
to come before the Commission,

01:17:33.980 --> 01:17:36.090
this meeting of the Public
Utility Commission of Texas is

01:17:36.090 --> 01:17:37.433
hereby adjourned.

01:17:37.433 --> 01:17:39.475
(gavel bang)