WEBVTT

00:00:04.693 --> 00:00:07.370
(gavel bangs)

00:00:07.370 --> 00:00:09.400
<v ->This meeting of the Public
Utility Commission of Texas</v>

00:00:09.400 --> 00:00:10.800
will come to order and consider matters

00:00:10.800 --> 00:00:14.130
have been duly posted with
the Secretary of State of Texas

00:00:14.130 --> 00:00:16.550
for November 18th, 2021.

00:00:16.550 --> 00:00:17.990
For the record, my name is Peter Lake

00:00:17.990 --> 00:00:19.640
and with me today are Will McAdams,

00:00:19.640 --> 00:00:22.000
Lori Cobos, and Jimmy Glotfelty.

00:00:22.000 --> 00:00:23.587
Mr Jeanette, could you please walk us

00:00:23.587 --> 00:00:26.803
through the consent
items on today's agenda?

00:00:28.400 --> 00:00:30.810
<v ->Good morning, Commissioners
by individual bow falling</v>

00:00:30.810 --> 00:00:33.160
items were placed on your Consent Agenda

00:00:34.260 --> 00:00:37.700
one, six, seven, nine, 10, 11, and 32.

00:00:37.700 --> 00:00:39.880
And I need to announce
that Commissioner Cobos

00:00:39.880 --> 00:00:43.460
has recused herself
from items one and six.

00:00:43.460 --> 00:00:44.293
<v ->Thank you, sir.</v>

00:00:44.293 --> 00:00:45.250
Is there a motion to approve

00:00:45.250 --> 00:00:47.300
the items just described
by Mr. Drew Nay?

00:00:48.280 --> 00:00:50.270
<v ->So moved.</v>
<v ->Second.</v>

00:00:50.270 --> 00:00:51.560
<v ->All in favor, say, aye.</v>

00:00:51.560 --> 00:00:52.720
<v Both>Aye.</v>

00:00:52.720 --> 00:00:54.333
<v ->None opposed, motion passes.</v>

00:00:56.260 --> 00:01:00.410
At this time, we will move
forward to public comment.

00:01:00.410 --> 00:01:03.960
All comments related
to a specific agenda item

00:01:03.960 --> 00:01:06.380
will be heard when the item is taken up.

00:01:06.380 --> 00:01:08.820
This is for general comments only

00:01:08.820 --> 00:01:11.653
speakers will be limited
to three minutes each.

00:01:12.966 --> 00:01:17.170
We do have some folks
signed up to speak today.

00:01:17.170 --> 00:01:20.770
Mr. Jeanette, if you'll please keep time

00:01:20.770 --> 00:01:23.160
for us so we can stay on track

00:01:23.160 --> 00:01:24.840
with the very long agenda we have today.

00:01:24.840 --> 00:01:29.753
First up we'd ask Emma Paps to approach.

00:01:36.520 --> 00:01:38.240
She may be in the overflow room,

00:01:38.240 --> 00:01:39.720
so she's making her way here.

00:01:39.720 --> 00:01:42.433
We'll accommodate
her when she gets here.

00:01:44.580 --> 00:01:47.103
Next up we have Misty Quinn.

00:01:52.060 --> 00:01:53.110
Did I get that right?

00:01:57.720 --> 00:01:58.553
All right.

00:02:03.460 --> 00:02:07.100
If either Mr. Image shows up

00:02:07.100 --> 00:02:08.713
will of course accommodate them.

00:02:09.870 --> 00:02:12.803
In the meantime, we'll
move on to Draula Taylor.

00:02:17.080 --> 00:02:18.743
Hi, welcome.

00:02:20.060 --> 00:02:22.393
Sorry, Emma, come on up, thank you.

00:02:32.790 --> 00:02:33.623
<v ->Thank you.</v>

00:02:36.647 --> 00:02:37.480
Good morning.

00:02:37.480 --> 00:02:38.770
<v All>Good morning.</v>

00:02:38.770 --> 00:02:41.700
Welcome, I don't know if
you heard the speakers,

00:02:41.700 --> 00:02:44.523
we limit three minutes
each and general comments

00:02:44.523 --> 00:02:46.193
only if a testimony on specific items

00:02:46.193 --> 00:02:48.460
will be heard at that time.

00:02:48.460 --> 00:02:49.880
<v ->Okay, perfect, thank you.</v>

00:02:49.880 --> 00:02:51.150
<v Peter>Sure.</v>

00:02:51.150 --> 00:02:52.150
<v ->Good morning everybody.</v>

00:02:52.150 --> 00:02:54.370
And thank you for having me today.

00:02:54.370 --> 00:02:55.520
My name is Emma Paps

00:02:55.520 --> 00:02:58.050
and I am a lifetime resident of Texas

00:02:58.050 --> 00:03:00.773
and a campaign representative
with the Sierra Club.

00:03:01.690 --> 00:03:03.430
At the Sierra club, I
worked to represent

00:03:03.430 --> 00:03:07.040
the interests of thousands
of Texans across the state

00:03:07.040 --> 00:03:11.170
to be exact, nearly 30,000
dues paying members.

00:03:11.170 --> 00:03:13.200
And today I'm here
to speak with all of you

00:03:13.200 --> 00:03:15.000
about our electric grid,

00:03:15.000 --> 00:03:17.610
because while we all know
that what happened in February

00:03:17.610 --> 00:03:18.713
was certainly horrible,

00:03:18.713 --> 00:03:22.980
I want to ensure that those
of us sitting in this room today

00:03:22.980 --> 00:03:25.623
know what the people
of Texas really need.

00:03:27.150 --> 00:03:29.680
Well, I was fortunate
enough not to lose power

00:03:29.680 --> 00:03:32.070
for a 16 duration that week.

00:03:32.070 --> 00:03:34.130
Other people like my good friend, Anna,

00:03:34.130 --> 00:03:36.793
who lives in Austin, were
not as fortunate as me.

00:03:37.840 --> 00:03:41.490
In Anna's house, as soon as
temperatures started to drop,

00:03:41.490 --> 00:03:44.900
her interior temperature
started dropping as well.

00:03:44.900 --> 00:03:49.510
Anna lived in a complex of
condos in downtown Austin

00:03:49.510 --> 00:03:51.394
and like many buildings here in Texas,

00:03:51.394 --> 00:03:53.513
her building lacked installation.

00:03:54.760 --> 00:03:55.950
It probably had a little bit of it,

00:03:55.950 --> 00:03:59.290
but not enough to keep the
temperatures high up there.

00:03:59.290 --> 00:04:01.680
Within a day or two
of the freest happening,

00:04:01.680 --> 00:04:04.118
the temperature inside of her apartment

00:04:04.118 --> 00:04:07.840
was just above 20 degrees.

00:04:07.840 --> 00:04:10.729
Her kitchen sink had ice on it

00:04:10.729 --> 00:04:13.980
when she went to go
and try to wash her dishes.

00:04:13.980 --> 00:04:17.108
Her and her roommate
had to sit in a tense together

00:04:17.108 --> 00:04:21.313
that she uses for backpacking
in order to conserve warmth.

00:04:22.290 --> 00:04:24.680
Now, I tell the story
not to bring us all back

00:04:24.680 --> 00:04:27.040
to the reality that
was this horrible week,

00:04:27.040 --> 00:04:29.600
but to make clear that here in Texas,

00:04:29.600 --> 00:04:32.400
in order to really
make our electric grid

00:04:32.400 --> 00:04:34.500
and our electric system work,

00:04:34.500 --> 00:04:36.980
we need changes across the board.

00:04:36.980 --> 00:04:40.590
If we keep building
homes, that lack insulation,

00:04:40.590 --> 00:04:42.050
then the next time, if something

00:04:42.050 --> 00:04:43.672
like this ever happens again,

00:04:43.672 --> 00:04:45.530
which we know it has happened

00:04:45.530 --> 00:04:48.350
even before what happened in February,

00:04:48.350 --> 00:04:50.100
those people will still be left

00:04:50.100 --> 00:04:52.860
stuck in their homes in
temperatures below freezing

00:04:52.860 --> 00:04:55.420
with ice, sitting on
their kitchen sinks.

00:04:55.420 --> 00:04:58.770
We need comprehensive
solutions to fix the energy grid,

00:04:58.770 --> 00:05:00.477
which include things
like energy efficiency,

00:05:00.477 --> 00:05:04.870
better insulated homes,
better windows in our homes.

00:05:04.870 --> 00:05:07.670
We need things like
solar on our rooftops.

00:05:07.670 --> 00:05:09.610
We need wind energy
to keep our air clean.

00:05:09.610 --> 00:05:10.823
<v Peter>You have one minute.</v>

00:05:11.830 --> 00:05:15.238
<v ->We need better
programs from our utilities</v>

00:05:15.238 --> 00:05:18.460
that encourage us to
reduce our power usage

00:05:18.460 --> 00:05:20.173
when we're near to peak.

00:05:21.380 --> 00:05:24.320
We need utilities to say,
hey, turn down your thermostat

00:05:24.320 --> 00:05:25.710
it'll help you save money,

00:05:25.710 --> 00:05:27.380
we'll take 15 bucks off your bill

00:05:27.380 --> 00:05:29.450
and it'll help us conserve.

00:05:29.450 --> 00:05:32.487
We need programs that
start with the people of Texas

00:05:32.487 --> 00:05:35.530
that help us improve our lives

00:05:35.530 --> 00:05:37.685
and anticipation of
events like this happening

00:05:37.685 --> 00:05:39.420
in the future.

00:05:39.420 --> 00:05:41.755
But most of all, we
need public participation.

00:05:41.755 --> 00:05:44.994
When I talk to the
normal people in my life,

00:05:44.994 --> 00:05:48.150
they do not know what's
going on with our electric grid.

00:05:48.150 --> 00:05:49.530
And that is because things here

00:05:49.530 --> 00:05:50.980
at the Public Utility Commission

00:05:50.980 --> 00:05:52.525
have not been transparent enough.

00:05:52.525 --> 00:05:53.358
(bell chimes)

00:05:53.358 --> 00:05:54.410
They don't hear enough about it

00:05:54.410 --> 00:05:56.500
in a public meeting in order to inform

00:05:56.500 --> 00:05:57.830
the public about what's going on

00:05:57.830 --> 00:05:59.761
and how we can move forward

00:05:59.761 --> 00:06:03.263
and let them say their piece
would be very appreciated.

00:06:03.263 --> 00:06:04.178
Thank you.

00:06:04.178 --> 00:06:05.079
<v Peter>Thank you, Emma.</v>

00:06:05.079 --> 00:06:06.560
<v ->Thank you.</v>

00:06:06.560 --> 00:06:09.313
<v ->As Missy make her
way, and there's Missy.</v>

00:06:19.080 --> 00:06:20.740
<v ->I'm gonna apologize
that my voice is shaking</v>

00:06:20.740 --> 00:06:22.485
I feel like I'm in a fishbowl.

00:06:22.485 --> 00:06:24.080
(all laughing)

00:06:24.080 --> 00:06:26.053
Yes, my name is Missy O'Quinn.

00:06:27.740 --> 00:06:31.760
I'm an organizer and a mom
here to give my experience

00:06:31.760 --> 00:06:33.830
during Winter Storm Uri,

00:06:33.830 --> 00:06:35.251
with the hope that a
little encourage you

00:06:35.251 --> 00:06:36.620
to adopt grid changes,

00:06:36.620 --> 00:06:39.600
that'll ensure that I
can cut my lights on

00:06:39.600 --> 00:06:41.593
and cook despite severe weather.

00:06:43.009 --> 00:06:45.470
Like I said, I'm a
mom, I have three kids,

00:06:45.470 --> 00:06:48.303
two of which are severely asthmatic.

00:06:49.250 --> 00:06:51.820
During that week we spent,

00:06:51.820 --> 00:06:54.880
I would say, about 17 to 18 hours

00:06:54.880 --> 00:06:59.880
of every day in the
cold, with no electricity.

00:07:01.870 --> 00:07:06.870
Bundled up, just trying to stay
warm house about 45 degrees.

00:07:07.140 --> 00:07:08.970
Thankfully, we didn't
have ice in our sink,

00:07:08.970 --> 00:07:11.833
but we felt like we
had ice on our estates.

00:07:14.090 --> 00:07:16.559
I want to say about the third day

00:07:16.559 --> 00:07:21.559
and my daughter Trinity,
then 14 had an asthma attack.

00:07:22.410 --> 00:07:23.665
It's usually controlled,

00:07:23.665 --> 00:07:28.460
but I couldn't plug her machine
in and give her a treatment.

00:07:28.460 --> 00:07:32.730
Couldn't call 911 because they
couldn't send anybody for us.

00:07:32.730 --> 00:07:34.750
Thankfully, my partner
is from the Midwest,

00:07:34.750 --> 00:07:37.497
so we decided we were
going to take our chances

00:07:37.497 --> 00:07:40.360
and slide to the emergency room.

00:07:40.360 --> 00:07:42.390
We spent four hours
in the emergency room

00:07:42.390 --> 00:07:45.070
trying to get a breathing
treatment for her,

00:07:45.070 --> 00:07:46.480
but it still wasn't any better

00:07:46.480 --> 00:07:49.150
because they were
running on generator power.

00:07:49.150 --> 00:07:51.230
So even though the lights were on,

00:07:51.230 --> 00:07:55.071
so their machines could
run, there was no heat.

00:07:55.071 --> 00:08:00.071
And so this shouldn't happen.

00:08:01.470 --> 00:08:04.150
This shouldn't happen,
there is renewables,

00:08:04.150 --> 00:08:05.390
there's battery storage,

00:08:05.390 --> 00:08:08.760
there are so many ways to ensure

00:08:08.760 --> 00:08:11.215
that this doesn't happen again.

00:08:11.215 --> 00:08:14.381
Despite my own personal experience,

00:08:14.381 --> 00:08:16.910
once the lights did come back on

00:08:16.910 --> 00:08:18.960
and once I could get
back on the streets,

00:08:18.960 --> 00:08:21.298
we spent weeks doing
mutual aid for people

00:08:21.298 --> 00:08:25.825
that had busted pipes
that didn't bounce right back

00:08:25.825 --> 00:08:27.368
when the lights came back on.

00:08:27.368 --> 00:08:31.080
So I would like to encourage
y'all to not just think about

00:08:31.080 --> 00:08:33.570
the bottom line of all the
people that are in this room,

00:08:33.570 --> 00:08:34.882
but think about my child's lungs.

00:08:34.882 --> 00:08:38.875
Think about us being
able to just function

00:08:38.875 --> 00:08:43.170
and not spend an ungodly
amount once it's over on our bills.

00:08:43.170 --> 00:08:45.753
So that's all I got, thanks.

00:08:45.753 --> 00:08:46.586
<v ->Thanks mom.</v>

00:08:48.889 --> 00:08:51.093
And Draula Taylor, come on up.

00:08:55.713 --> 00:08:57.620
<v ->All right, it's Indiana.</v>

00:08:57.620 --> 00:08:59.680
<v ->Oh, okay.</v>
<v ->It's all right, all right.</v>

00:08:59.680 --> 00:09:00.638
So I'm here.

00:09:00.638 --> 00:09:03.512
I am an organizer and also

00:09:03.512 --> 00:09:05.460
at the time of the Winter Storm,

00:09:05.460 --> 00:09:06.890
I was with the Harvest Project,

00:09:06.890 --> 00:09:08.620
helping out with the Harvest Project

00:09:08.620 --> 00:09:10.750
and we were doing some mutual aid.

00:09:10.750 --> 00:09:15.160
I am also here to amplify the
word for public transparency,

00:09:15.160 --> 00:09:16.560
because I think it's telling

00:09:18.160 --> 00:09:19.930
public transparency in this process,

00:09:19.930 --> 00:09:20.800
because I think it's telling

00:09:20.800 --> 00:09:23.050
that there's more suits in this room

00:09:23.050 --> 00:09:24.430
than regular people who were affected

00:09:24.430 --> 00:09:27.403
and who basically their families died.

00:09:28.670 --> 00:09:30.560
I see some of you shaking in agreement

00:09:30.560 --> 00:09:34.030
because some of us
were affected by this,

00:09:34.030 --> 00:09:36.210
but there needs to be
more people in this room

00:09:36.210 --> 00:09:39.460
and it's very uncomfortable
for me to walk in this room

00:09:39.460 --> 00:09:43.925
and see reserved seats and
the people that I was helping,

00:09:43.925 --> 00:09:45.943
some of those people didn't make it.

00:09:47.410 --> 00:09:51.700
At the time, there were people downtown,

00:09:51.700 --> 00:09:54.343
our skyline in Dallas was still lit up.

00:09:55.470 --> 00:09:56.860
People were dying.

00:09:56.860 --> 00:09:58.270
People were still dying.

00:09:58.270 --> 00:10:01.404
So for those suits who
kept those lights on,

00:10:01.404 --> 00:10:05.270
I know we could have
kept our lights on as well.

00:10:05.270 --> 00:10:07.750
For those people who died in their car

00:10:07.750 --> 00:10:10.173
having their stuff on,

00:10:11.430 --> 00:10:14.040
our city set up warming stations,

00:10:14.040 --> 00:10:15.756
stationary warming stations

00:10:15.756 --> 00:10:20.250
with buses that didn't move
while the community went out

00:10:20.250 --> 00:10:21.150
and fed the homeless,

00:10:21.150 --> 00:10:23.457
the Harvest Project went
out in effect the house list.

00:10:23.457 --> 00:10:27.680
We had warming stations
and things like that,

00:10:27.680 --> 00:10:29.076
but that's not our responsibility.

00:10:29.076 --> 00:10:31.104
It shouldn't have been all to us

00:10:31.104 --> 00:10:35.960
'cause we had to fight to
feed thousands of people.

00:10:35.960 --> 00:10:39.973
And still the same
week during that time,

00:10:39.973 --> 00:10:41.905
when we were feeding everyone we could,

00:10:41.905 --> 00:10:44.133
we were trying to get everybody warm.

00:10:45.200 --> 00:10:50.023
A block away, a man died, a block away.

00:10:51.140 --> 00:10:52.330
And that's gonna haunt us.

00:10:52.330 --> 00:10:56.236
It hurts me that I
couldn't reach him in time.

00:10:56.236 --> 00:10:59.070
And we took the bus out ourselves,

00:10:59.070 --> 00:11:01.740
that's not for us to
do, it's for you all,

00:11:01.740 --> 00:11:03.170
not to allow this to happen.

00:11:03.170 --> 00:11:08.170
It's for this room
to be a public utility.

00:11:09.400 --> 00:11:10.901
This is not about your interests,

00:11:10.901 --> 00:11:12.900
It's about the people

00:11:12.900 --> 00:11:14.690
it's about everybody's interest.

00:11:14.690 --> 00:11:16.280
And again, I know
some of you are shaking,

00:11:16.280 --> 00:11:17.790
oh, my lights were out for a week.

00:11:17.790 --> 00:11:20.020
My lights were out
for this amount of time.

00:11:20.020 --> 00:11:22.460
People died in their cars.

00:11:22.460 --> 00:11:24.375
Some people died in their houses.

00:11:24.375 --> 00:11:27.011
<v ->You have one minute.</v>

00:11:27.011 --> 00:11:28.440
<v ->And I had a
lot of stuff to say,</v>

00:11:28.440 --> 00:11:32.370
but it's just walking in here
and seeing reserved seats

00:11:34.190 --> 00:11:37.896
and to come here and
find out that the public

00:11:37.896 --> 00:11:41.980
have been cut off from this,

00:11:41.980 --> 00:11:43.120
that there has to be a reserved,

00:11:43.120 --> 00:11:47.100
you have to get an
invite to a certain process

00:11:47.100 --> 00:11:47.950
of this thing.

00:11:47.950 --> 00:11:49.943
We didn't have to get an invite to die,

00:11:51.110 --> 00:11:52.370
dying on the streets.

00:11:52.370 --> 00:11:55.720
So, I some of you have the
best intentions in this room.

00:11:55.720 --> 00:11:57.973
Maybe, I don't know, I
don't know any of you,

00:11:58.920 --> 00:12:01.450
but this is unacceptable.

00:12:01.450 --> 00:12:04.590
And that's all I have to say

00:12:04.590 --> 00:12:07.123
'cause I can't remember
half this stuff I had to say.

00:12:08.990 --> 00:12:10.360
It's not our responsibility.

00:12:10.360 --> 00:12:13.200
If you are paid to do this,

00:12:13.200 --> 00:12:16.250
it's your responsibility to
ask us what the solution is

00:12:16.250 --> 00:12:18.200
and for us to be a part of the process.

00:12:20.740 --> 00:12:21.954
<v ->Thank you, Miss Taylor</v>

00:12:21.954 --> 00:12:24.030
(bell chimes)

00:12:24.030 --> 00:12:25.873
Next up is Cyrus Reed.

00:12:30.820 --> 00:12:31.653
<v ->Thank you for the record,</v>

00:12:31.653 --> 00:12:33.230
Cyrus Reed with the Sierra Club.

00:12:33.230 --> 00:12:34.560
Commissioners, I'll be very brief,

00:12:34.560 --> 00:12:35.930
I've spoken to you before.

00:12:35.930 --> 00:12:38.430
I think you heard from
some members of the public.

00:12:40.057 --> 00:12:41.657
And I have my own personal story

00:12:41.657 --> 00:12:43.730
of being without electricity,

00:12:43.730 --> 00:12:47.800
but also our church
helped a lot of elderly folks

00:12:47.800 --> 00:12:50.780
that were in an apartment in East Austin

00:12:50.780 --> 00:12:53.820
that literally could see
the lights on in downtown.

00:12:53.820 --> 00:12:54.980
They had medical conditions

00:12:54.980 --> 00:12:56.060
so our church took them in

00:12:56.060 --> 00:12:58.250
'cause we happen to
have power in our church.

00:12:58.250 --> 00:12:59.954
So I have my own story,

00:12:59.954 --> 00:13:03.520
but I think that the
really the three asks are...

00:13:03.520 --> 00:13:06.010
Well, first of all, thank
you for what you've done.

00:13:06.010 --> 00:13:08.230
I think the weatherization requirements

00:13:08.230 --> 00:13:10.970
we saw their cut yesterday
that they're moving forward.

00:13:10.970 --> 00:13:12.230
That's very important to make sure

00:13:12.230 --> 00:13:13.258
this doesn't happen again.

00:13:13.258 --> 00:13:16.170
So thank you for what
you've already done.

00:13:16.170 --> 00:13:17.439
I think the two big asks are,

00:13:17.439 --> 00:13:21.545
on any huge changes
that you're contemplating

00:13:21.545 --> 00:13:23.850
let's have a public hearing

00:13:23.850 --> 00:13:27.240
where any member of the
public can make comments.

00:13:27.240 --> 00:13:29.230
So I'm not talking
about ERS or little stuff.

00:13:29.230 --> 00:13:30.360
I'm talking about the big stuff

00:13:30.360 --> 00:13:31.840
and that you do some sort

00:13:31.840 --> 00:13:35.290
of a cost benefit analysis
before you go forward.

00:13:35.290 --> 00:13:38.170
And I've said it before and
whenever it's appropriate,

00:13:38.170 --> 00:13:39.380
don't forget the demand side.

00:13:39.380 --> 00:13:41.730
At the end of the day,
people live in homes

00:13:41.730 --> 00:13:44.040
and a lot of our homes are leaking

00:13:44.890 --> 00:13:46.988
and are not probably
appropriate to live in.

00:13:46.988 --> 00:13:48.686
So anything the Commission can do

00:13:48.686 --> 00:13:53.030
and I know it's not just PUC
is TDHCA, it's federal money.

00:13:53.030 --> 00:13:57.810
Anything you can do to
help boost the solutions

00:13:57.810 --> 00:14:01.430
that people actually
can employ in their home

00:14:01.430 --> 00:14:04.160
or in their small business,

00:14:04.160 --> 00:14:06.970
I think would be of
great benefit to the state

00:14:06.970 --> 00:14:08.340
and make our system more reliable.

00:14:08.340 --> 00:14:09.420
So I'll end it there,

00:14:09.420 --> 00:14:11.850
but I don't want to leave the impression

00:14:11.850 --> 00:14:13.460
that you guys have done nothing

00:14:13.460 --> 00:14:15.450
'cause you've already done quite a bit,

00:14:15.450 --> 00:14:17.610
but I think we're asking
to include the public more

00:14:17.610 --> 00:14:20.360
in the final decision-making
and with that I'll end it.

00:14:20.360 --> 00:14:21.500
Thank you so much.

00:14:21.500 --> 00:14:22.333
<v ->Thank you, Mr. Reed.</v>

00:14:22.333 --> 00:14:23.166
<v ->Yes sir.</v>

00:14:26.770 --> 00:14:31.560
<v ->We have no other
speakers signed up</v>

00:14:31.560 --> 00:14:33.030
to address the Commission today.

00:14:33.030 --> 00:14:35.890
So at this point, public
comment is now closed.

00:14:35.890 --> 00:14:40.890
We will not be taking up
items 13, 18, 19, 21, 24 and 33.

00:14:44.168 --> 00:14:48.330
And before we dive into our agenda,

00:14:48.330 --> 00:14:53.330
I know we've got a very
full, full program today.

00:14:54.350 --> 00:14:56.310
Would it work with y'all,

00:14:56.310 --> 00:15:01.310
if we save the item number three,

00:15:01.860 --> 00:15:04.880
the SWEPCO right case until the end

00:15:04.880 --> 00:15:06.300
so we can get through the rest of it

00:15:06.300 --> 00:15:08.660
and these good folks can go home?

00:15:08.660 --> 00:15:10.053
<v ->Yes, sir.</v>
<v ->All right.</v>

00:15:11.420 --> 00:15:13.560
Let's start off with Lori.

00:15:13.560 --> 00:15:15.393
<v ->Yes sir, thank you.</v>

00:15:15.393 --> 00:15:18.933
<v ->Let's start off with item
number two, Mr. Jeanette.</v>

00:15:20.947 --> 00:15:23.470
<v ->Item two is docket 51023.</v>

00:15:23.470 --> 00:15:25.650
It's the application
of city of San Antonio

00:15:25.650 --> 00:15:29.360
to amended its CCN
for a transmission line.

00:15:29.360 --> 00:15:31.013
PFT was filed on July 26

00:15:31.013 --> 00:15:32.735
after exceptions were revised,

00:15:32.735 --> 00:15:35.155
ALJs filed memos with corrections,

00:15:35.155 --> 00:15:38.440
Commission had oral
argument on this matter

00:15:38.440 --> 00:15:40.490
at the October 28th open meeting

00:15:40.490 --> 00:15:44.933
and remanded it to allow
requested information to be filed.

00:15:45.800 --> 00:15:46.650
<v ->Thank you, sir.</v>

00:15:47.560 --> 00:15:49.609
Anytime this Commission considers

00:15:49.609 --> 00:15:52.840
a CCN regarding new
transmission, that's a big decision.

00:15:52.840 --> 00:15:55.513
We heard a lot about
that at our last meeting.

00:15:56.690 --> 00:16:00.140
However, we also asked CPS to provide

00:16:00.140 --> 00:16:01.840
underlying information on the need

00:16:03.091 --> 00:16:07.311
to support the need for this line.

00:16:07.311 --> 00:16:09.970
And I don't know about y'all,

00:16:09.970 --> 00:16:13.670
but I certainly don't consider
refiling the same data table

00:16:13.670 --> 00:16:15.682
without showing the underlying analysis,

00:16:15.682 --> 00:16:17.330
providing information.

00:16:17.330 --> 00:16:20.833
I certainly don't consider
weblinks updated information.

00:16:23.057 --> 00:16:24.810
And most importantly,

00:16:24.810 --> 00:16:27.110
we still don't have
the underlying calculus

00:16:28.120 --> 00:16:30.136
that establishes the need for this line.

00:16:30.136 --> 00:16:31.454
So until we get that,

00:16:31.454 --> 00:16:33.637
I'm not sure we have much to discuss,

00:16:33.637 --> 00:16:36.363
but happy to hear y'all thoughts.

00:16:39.410 --> 00:16:41.050
<v ->Go ahead.</v>

00:16:41.050 --> 00:16:44.680
<v ->So with that, I agree
with you, Mr. Chairman.</v>

00:16:44.680 --> 00:16:49.680
I believe that the resubmission
on requested information

00:16:50.930 --> 00:16:53.990
was somewhat rehashed, reorganized

00:16:53.990 --> 00:16:56.720
from what we had seen before.

00:16:56.720 --> 00:17:00.180
So I'm comfortable with
continuing to press for this

00:17:00.180 --> 00:17:02.060
because I believe
ultimately we're trying

00:17:02.060 --> 00:17:03.450
to establish a template,

00:17:03.450 --> 00:17:06.300
a precedent for what
we expect in these filings.

00:17:06.300 --> 00:17:09.510
And so we've got to make
one filing look like the rest,

00:17:09.510 --> 00:17:11.130
and if we're not satisfied,

00:17:11.130 --> 00:17:14.027
we've just got to keep
plugging away at this.

00:17:14.027 --> 00:17:16.471
And I know time is burning,
but ultimately the utility,

00:17:16.471 --> 00:17:17.990
it will be in their interest

00:17:17.990 --> 00:17:21.213
to eventually get you
the data that we need.

00:17:21.213 --> 00:17:23.611
<v ->Yeah, we need to see
the calculus that justifies-</v>

00:17:23.611 --> 00:17:24.952
<v ->The need.</v>
<v ->The need</v>

00:17:24.952 --> 00:17:27.570
not just the high-level number

00:17:27.570 --> 00:17:32.243
that promises that it's
there, it needs there.

00:17:33.080 --> 00:17:33.913
<v ->Erie as well.</v>

00:17:33.913 --> 00:17:35.104
The company did not comply

00:17:35.104 --> 00:17:36.849
with the Commission's remand order.

00:17:36.849 --> 00:17:41.610
And in order to remain
consistent with the standards

00:17:41.610 --> 00:17:43.040
that we have said in prior cases,

00:17:43.040 --> 00:17:45.629
I think it's important that
we have the company file

00:17:45.629 --> 00:17:48.650
the underlying information
for the calculations

00:17:48.650 --> 00:17:51.600
of those tables and the actual reports

00:17:53.280 --> 00:17:54.780
instead of including weblinks.

00:17:55.973 --> 00:17:59.563
<v ->I'd echo that very quickly.</v>

00:18:00.440 --> 00:18:03.980
I defer to your thoughts,
Mr. Chairman on this

00:18:03.980 --> 00:18:06.830
and the other Commissioners
on what we need.

00:18:06.830 --> 00:18:09.420
I think in the end we need this.

00:18:09.420 --> 00:18:10.820
I think this line is needed.

00:18:11.757 --> 00:18:16.215
I grew up in San Antonio,
this area has massive growth.

00:18:16.215 --> 00:18:20.370
It is something that
is going to be needed,

00:18:20.370 --> 00:18:23.373
whether we decide today or
whether we decide in 30 days,

00:18:24.650 --> 00:18:25.845
something's going to have to happen.

00:18:25.845 --> 00:18:28.970
I'm prepared to announce
my decision today,

00:18:28.970 --> 00:18:30.800
but I'm happy to defer to the chairman

00:18:30.800 --> 00:18:35.620
until we get additional
filings from the applicant.

00:18:35.620 --> 00:18:37.237
<v ->I don't think anybody's
disputing the rapid growth</v>

00:18:37.237 --> 00:18:38.760
and the need for transmission.

00:18:38.760 --> 00:18:40.100
This Commission has been very aggressive

00:18:40.100 --> 00:18:41.768
on building out transmission.

00:18:41.768 --> 00:18:44.220
We just need to make sure
we go through the process

00:18:44.220 --> 00:18:48.710
and go through the process properly,

00:18:48.710 --> 00:18:52.120
validate thoroughly
the need before we start

00:18:53.692 --> 00:18:57.953
putting towers up and
affecting people's lives.

00:18:59.400 --> 00:19:03.683
Any questions for us on what's needed?

00:19:04.733 --> 00:19:07.470
<v ->Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman.</v>

00:19:07.470 --> 00:19:09.823
Kirk Rasmussen representing CPS energy.

00:19:11.100 --> 00:19:13.790
And I apologize that we
didn't bring the Commission,

00:19:13.790 --> 00:19:14.977
what you were looking for.

00:19:14.977 --> 00:19:19.977
We did bring our load studies forward.

00:19:20.260 --> 00:19:23.496
So in response to the
request and your order,

00:19:23.496 --> 00:19:27.958
we did provide the
actual data for 2019, 2020,

00:19:27.958 --> 00:19:32.150
which we did know was an abnormal year

00:19:32.150 --> 00:19:34.290
because of the COVID shutdown

00:19:34.290 --> 00:19:37.760
and then the data year-to-date for 2021.

00:19:37.760 --> 00:19:39.239
So we did bring that data forward

00:19:39.239 --> 00:19:42.280
demonstrating that our load forecast

00:19:42.280 --> 00:19:45.540
and our application had
trended actually lower.

00:19:45.540 --> 00:19:49.221
Our forecasts were lower
than what actuals had shown.

00:19:49.221 --> 00:19:52.810
And so we did provide
that updated information

00:19:52.810 --> 00:19:56.140
with the affidavit of
our planner, Mr. Tamez.

00:19:56.140 --> 00:20:01.140
So we didn't understand we
were rehashing the same data.

00:20:02.040 --> 00:20:04.030
We thought we had brought that forward.

00:20:04.030 --> 00:20:05.200
<v Peter>We appreciate the update.</v>

00:20:05.200 --> 00:20:07.031
The request is for the
underlying calculations,

00:20:07.031 --> 00:20:09.893
that gets the data,
the results in the data

00:20:09.893 --> 00:20:13.200
and the deeper dive into the study.

00:20:13.200 --> 00:20:16.740
And the math that
gets you to the forecast.

00:20:16.740 --> 00:20:18.032
<v ->My apology.</v>

00:20:18.032 --> 00:20:22.270
And I apologize that we
did not bring the Commission

00:20:22.270 --> 00:20:24.010
what you were looking for.

00:20:24.010 --> 00:20:26.320
So we will bring the...

00:20:26.320 --> 00:20:27.660
You're looking for the calculations

00:20:27.660 --> 00:20:29.763
of how we got to the-

00:20:31.040 --> 00:20:31.873
<v Peter>The knowledge and analysis</v>

00:20:31.873 --> 00:20:33.987
of how you got to
those forecast, yes, sir.

00:20:33.987 --> 00:20:35.720
<v McAdams>How do we it's real?</v>

00:20:35.720 --> 00:20:40.720
<v ->Okay so, we will
endeavor to do a better job.</v>

00:20:41.810 --> 00:20:43.100
I apologize that we didn't bring

00:20:43.100 --> 00:20:45.163
what you all were looking for.

00:20:46.979 --> 00:20:50.232
We do believe this was a
necessary project for the area,

00:20:50.232 --> 00:20:54.960
and we'll make filing,
bringing the Commission

00:20:54.960 --> 00:20:56.975
what you're looking for,
showing the calculations

00:20:56.975 --> 00:20:59.330
for that forecast in
a little more detail.

00:20:59.330 --> 00:21:01.580
<v ->I appreciate that,
and in the future,</v>

00:21:01.580 --> 00:21:03.117
feel free to actually
submit actual documents

00:21:03.117 --> 00:21:04.988
instead of weblinks.

00:21:04.988 --> 00:21:06.113
<v ->We were trying,</v>

00:21:07.354 --> 00:21:08.352
there's some voluminous documents

00:21:08.352 --> 00:21:11.080
and so weren't trying
to burden the record,

00:21:11.080 --> 00:21:12.380
but we'll be happy to present

00:21:12.380 --> 00:21:14.433
the underlying documents and-

00:21:16.240 --> 00:21:17.073
<v Peter>Appreciate that.</v>

00:21:17.073 --> 00:21:18.513
<v ->Yeah.</v>
<v ->Thank you.</v>

00:21:22.990 --> 00:21:24.419
Would entertain a motion
to remand this case back

00:21:24.419 --> 00:21:28.761
to docket management to allow
CPS to provide the evidence

00:21:28.761 --> 00:21:31.000
that was originally requested.

00:21:31.000 --> 00:21:32.660
<v ->So moved.</v>
<v ->Second.</v>

00:21:32.660 --> 00:21:34.043
<v ->All in favor, say, aye.</v>

00:21:34.043 --> 00:21:34.906
<v All>Aye.</v>

00:21:34.906 --> 00:21:36.980
<v ->Motion passes.</v>

00:21:36.980 --> 00:21:37.813
Thank you, sir.

00:21:40.450 --> 00:21:42.370
We're going to table item three

00:21:42.370 --> 00:21:45.760
until the end of our programming today.

00:21:45.760 --> 00:21:48.090
Item number four, please, Mr. Jeanette.

00:21:48.090 --> 00:21:50.147
<v ->I'm four is docket 52610,</v>

00:21:50.147 --> 00:21:52.910
is the application has
stuck to them in their CCN

00:21:52.910 --> 00:21:54.543
to build a transmission line.

00:21:56.882 --> 00:21:59.750
To Commission, we issued a order request

00:21:59.750 --> 00:22:03.104
and briefs on a threshold
issue in this case,

00:22:03.104 --> 00:22:08.104
focused upon interpreting
what the Commission's actions

00:22:09.240 --> 00:22:12.370
in its orders where it
approved a single circuit,

00:22:12.370 --> 00:22:15.160
double circuit capable facilities.

00:22:15.160 --> 00:22:17.490
What that meant in
regards to the second circuit?

00:22:17.490 --> 00:22:20.490
We've gotten briefs
back in the matters now

00:22:20.490 --> 00:22:21.940
in front of you for decision.

00:22:23.138 --> 00:22:25.470
<v ->Thank you very
much, Mr. Jeanette,</v>

00:22:25.470 --> 00:22:27.910
this is something that
have been discussed before.

00:22:27.910 --> 00:22:29.512
It is an important issue.

00:22:29.512 --> 00:22:32.750
I have some thoughts, but of course,

00:22:32.750 --> 00:22:35.317
want to hear from y'all.

00:22:35.317 --> 00:22:38.970
I think it's fairly straight forward

00:22:38.970 --> 00:22:39.968
to say that the
Commission did not approve

00:22:39.968 --> 00:22:43.403
a second circuit in the original CCN,

00:22:44.832 --> 00:22:47.190
a big part of that is establishing need.

00:22:47.190 --> 00:22:48.480
That was not done at that time.

00:22:48.480 --> 00:22:49.800
And we certainly aren't gonna,

00:22:49.800 --> 00:22:52.660
I'm certainly not
comfortable just assuming

00:22:52.660 --> 00:22:54.020
that every single circuit,

00:22:54.020 --> 00:22:56.279
CCN approval out there in the state

00:22:56.279 --> 00:23:01.279
is valid for a double circuit
without further consideration.

00:23:04.782 --> 00:23:07.260
Pure requires that we evaluate that need

00:23:07.260 --> 00:23:09.722
before authorizing additional capacity.

00:23:09.722 --> 00:23:13.900
That being said, one of the
benefits of these structures

00:23:13.900 --> 00:23:16.043
is that it's an existing right-of-way,

00:23:16.043 --> 00:23:17.390
it's an existing structure,

00:23:17.390 --> 00:23:19.850
and we of course have been adamant

00:23:19.850 --> 00:23:23.193
in advancing transmission projects

00:23:23.193 --> 00:23:26.723
to address well articulated need.

00:23:30.176 --> 00:23:33.670
I think we should have a
second CCN application

00:23:33.670 --> 00:23:34.733
for the second circuit,

00:23:34.733 --> 00:23:38.500
but it should be in many ways expedited.

00:23:38.500 --> 00:23:40.160
We don't need to go through
the whole process again,

00:23:40.160 --> 00:23:42.610
we certainly need to look at need.

00:23:42.610 --> 00:23:44.540
We'd certainly need to look at costs

00:23:44.540 --> 00:23:47.680
and the impacts of any
additional infrastructure

00:23:47.680 --> 00:23:49.840
that that's not accommodated
within existing structures

00:23:49.840 --> 00:23:51.860
and existing right-of-ways.

00:23:51.860 --> 00:23:54.840
But I don't think we need to do

00:23:54.840 --> 00:23:57.210
the full environmental assessment

00:23:57.210 --> 00:24:00.806
that's already been done
on the same piece of turf.

00:24:00.806 --> 00:24:05.380
And we certainly don't
want to unnecessarily delay

00:24:05.380 --> 00:24:06.683
new transmission projects.

00:24:08.070 --> 00:24:08.903
Thoughts?

00:24:09.810 --> 00:24:10.819
<v ->Thank you, Mr. Chairman.</v>

00:24:10.819 --> 00:24:13.300
I believe that you're
on the right track here.

00:24:13.300 --> 00:24:17.630
I think CCN is required
for a new circuit,

00:24:17.630 --> 00:24:20.101
but I do think that
there are a few things

00:24:20.101 --> 00:24:22.400
you've mentioned them that might make

00:24:22.400 --> 00:24:25.803
a process for the second
circuit much easier.

00:24:26.690 --> 00:24:28.304
And as you said, scope,

00:24:28.304 --> 00:24:30.800
there's not a routing component to it.

00:24:30.800 --> 00:24:33.516
We know where it would be.

00:24:33.516 --> 00:24:36.616
If we do choose to require
an environmental assessment,

00:24:36.616 --> 00:24:41.370
I might suggest that we consider
that that assessment begin

00:24:43.782 --> 00:24:46.654
when the first circuit was approved

00:24:46.654 --> 00:24:49.830
because we don't need to
go any further back than that

00:24:49.830 --> 00:24:51.849
because the original
environmental assessment

00:24:51.849 --> 00:24:54.827
went from that date backwards.

00:24:54.827 --> 00:24:56.720
So we would have an entire record

00:24:56.720 --> 00:24:59.489
of the environmental
impacts of that line.

00:24:59.489 --> 00:25:03.240
That would be if we required
an environmental assessment

00:25:03.240 --> 00:25:05.108
on just hanging a second circuit.

00:25:05.108 --> 00:25:07.653
I think the need issue,

00:25:11.610 --> 00:25:14.830
it's kind of the cornerstone
of what our authority is

00:25:14.830 --> 00:25:17.680
to protect right payer,
so agree with that.

00:25:17.680 --> 00:25:21.406
And I want to be able to give

00:25:21.406 --> 00:25:24.850
the transmission owners this ability,

00:25:24.850 --> 00:25:27.190
but I just think it's too
much discretion at this time

00:25:27.190 --> 00:25:29.030
within the framework
of the law that we have.

00:25:29.030 --> 00:25:34.030
So the last thing that I
would say is, I think some

00:25:35.160 --> 00:25:40.160
of what they file will
determine the scope

00:25:41.139 --> 00:25:46.080
of what the CCN will be,
since it doesn't include route,

00:25:46.080 --> 00:25:47.870
it may not include environmental work,

00:25:47.870 --> 00:25:50.580
or it may include a short
amount of environmental work.

00:25:50.580 --> 00:25:53.180
So, I think we need to be diligent

00:25:53.180 --> 00:25:58.180
in how we accept what those
CCN applications look like

00:25:58.610 --> 00:26:02.371
and ensure that they
are narrowly focused

00:26:02.371 --> 00:26:04.310
on what that second circuit is

00:26:04.310 --> 00:26:07.003
and what the need for that
second circuit is, thank you.

00:26:08.950 --> 00:26:10.190
<v ->Thank you, chairman, Lake</v>

00:26:10.190 --> 00:26:11.690
and Commissioner Glotfelty.

00:26:11.690 --> 00:26:16.690
I generally agree with your
comments on this issue.

00:26:17.070 --> 00:26:19.470
I think with respect to the stack case,

00:26:19.470 --> 00:26:21.440
the facts of the case,

00:26:21.440 --> 00:26:23.870
the Commission's order would require

00:26:23.870 --> 00:26:26.690
a CCN application to be filed.

00:26:26.690 --> 00:26:31.346
As we move forward if a
utility files a CCN application

00:26:31.346 --> 00:26:32.728
for a single circuit,

00:26:32.728 --> 00:26:34.710
and there is a Commission order

00:26:34.710 --> 00:26:36.160
approving the single circuit,

00:26:36.160 --> 00:26:37.970
the CCN is for the single circuit,

00:26:37.970 --> 00:26:40.427
and you must come
back for this second circuit.

00:26:40.427 --> 00:26:43.010
If a utility files a CCN application

00:26:43.010 --> 00:26:46.300
for a double circuit transmission line,

00:26:46.300 --> 00:26:48.543
the utility should
provide the information

00:26:48.543 --> 00:26:50.400
related to load growth

00:26:50.400 --> 00:26:52.050
the need for the second circuit

00:26:52.050 --> 00:26:54.300
as you all have well articulated

00:26:54.300 --> 00:26:57.453
is important from a
consumer cost standpoint.

00:26:58.710 --> 00:27:00.750
Costs associated with the infrastructure

00:27:00.750 --> 00:27:01.933
for the second circuit.

00:27:03.780 --> 00:27:07.596
I agree that we need to look

00:27:07.596 --> 00:27:10.620
at what we can sort of streamline

00:27:10.620 --> 00:27:12.920
and make more efficient with that.

00:27:12.920 --> 00:27:15.333
If they do have to come back ultimately

00:27:15.333 --> 00:27:17.440
to add the second circuit later,

00:27:17.440 --> 00:27:19.550
I think one thing we got to keep in mind

00:27:20.387 --> 00:27:23.570
if a utility files a CCN
application for two circuits,

00:27:23.570 --> 00:27:27.471
but only installs one circuit,

00:27:27.471 --> 00:27:31.440
and we'll come back and
install the second circuit later,

00:27:31.440 --> 00:27:36.226
that based on the
specific facts of that case,

00:27:36.226 --> 00:27:39.660
we need to determine whether we want

00:27:39.660 --> 00:27:41.740
to give them some kind of
a timeframe to come back.

00:27:41.740 --> 00:27:42.910
Because what I have noticed,

00:27:42.910 --> 00:27:47.910
especially in my review of
the Rio Grande Valley project,

00:27:48.850 --> 00:27:53.847
the San Miguel to
Palmetto line is that the utility

00:27:53.847 --> 00:27:57.573
that was responsible for
the majority of that line,

00:27:59.020 --> 00:28:00.880
they hadn't come back
for the second circuit

00:28:00.880 --> 00:28:05.550
and a lot of activities
happen in the interim.

00:28:05.550 --> 00:28:06.643
There were wind farms built

00:28:06.643 --> 00:28:09.930
and radial lines build out to them

00:28:09.930 --> 00:28:13.760
and so adding the
second circuit ultimately

00:28:13.760 --> 00:28:16.120
is going to be a little more complicated

00:28:16.120 --> 00:28:17.820
because of all the
activity that has occurred

00:28:17.820 --> 00:28:19.120
in the interim.

00:28:19.120 --> 00:28:20.920
And so that makes that more costly

00:28:21.846 --> 00:28:24.680
for the installation
of the second circuit,

00:28:24.680 --> 00:28:28.310
and it requires a little bit
more of a routing jiggering.

00:28:28.310 --> 00:28:33.310
So I think as we look
forward to utilities,

00:28:33.910 --> 00:28:35.557
that file CCN application
for two circuits,

00:28:35.557 --> 00:28:39.240
but don't install both
circuits at the same time,

00:28:39.240 --> 00:28:42.981
we've gotta be cognizant of
making sure we understand

00:28:42.981 --> 00:28:46.010
when they're projecting that the need

00:28:46.010 --> 00:28:47.310
for the second line's gonna come in

00:28:47.310 --> 00:28:49.990
and maybe I think
Commission staff has noted

00:28:49.990 --> 00:28:51.350
that in the past, in some orders,

00:28:51.350 --> 00:28:54.740
we've used seven years as a
deadline for them to come in

00:28:54.740 --> 00:28:56.542
and if they don't come
in within that seven years,

00:28:56.542 --> 00:28:59.650
for the second circuit,
then they have to come back

00:28:59.650 --> 00:29:01.220
and follow the CCN application.

00:29:01.220 --> 00:29:05.180
I would venture to say that
maybe we need to move that up.

00:29:05.180 --> 00:29:07.559
I mean, we're growing five years, maybe

00:29:07.559 --> 00:29:12.559
so that we're not stuck with
having to wait seven years

00:29:13.970 --> 00:29:15.910
and then play catch up and then end up

00:29:16.835 --> 00:29:20.053
approving the second circuit
that ends up being more costly

00:29:20.053 --> 00:29:22.460
because of all the
activities that went on.

00:29:22.460 --> 00:29:25.413
So just want to put that
out there for consideration.

00:29:26.340 --> 00:29:27.418
<v ->Let me throw this in there,</v>

00:29:27.418 --> 00:29:30.870
the concept right now
we have is the seven years

00:29:30.870 --> 00:29:33.120
really going to building
the transmission line at all.

00:29:33.120 --> 00:29:34.760
So really the first circuit,

00:29:34.760 --> 00:29:38.010
would you want to have,
start thinking about this,

00:29:38.010 --> 00:29:39.694
would you want to
have different timelines?

00:29:39.694 --> 00:29:41.240
I'm putting the first circuit in,

00:29:41.240 --> 00:29:43.620
then you do them putting
the second circuit in.

00:29:43.620 --> 00:29:44.453
So.

00:29:47.536 --> 00:29:48.369
<v ->I mean, I defer to Jimmy</v>

00:29:48.369 --> 00:29:49.202
and then you've got a lot
of experience in this world.

00:29:49.202 --> 00:29:50.333
What are your thoughts?

00:29:53.290 --> 00:29:55.820
<v ->The way that we certificate
these, you have to show need.</v>

00:29:55.820 --> 00:29:58.410
So I think the seven
years on building a project

00:29:58.410 --> 00:30:00.850
is probably too long if
Oncor has shown need

00:30:00.850 --> 00:30:02.980
and that the Commissioner
has ruled that we need it.

00:30:02.980 --> 00:30:04.238
We need it before seven years.

00:30:04.238 --> 00:30:05.801
So I can't imagine that a utility

00:30:05.801 --> 00:30:08.130
is going to want to wait seven years

00:30:08.130 --> 00:30:09.744
to put a transmission line in.

00:30:09.744 --> 00:30:11.401
For a second circuit,

00:30:11.401 --> 00:30:15.360
if we are giving an exemption for them,

00:30:15.360 --> 00:30:19.000
or some kind of an
expedited process for them

00:30:19.000 --> 00:30:21.482
to come in for the second
circuit within seven years,

00:30:21.482 --> 00:30:24.053
that probably makes sense.

00:30:24.910 --> 00:30:26.904
The one challenge that I have in my mind

00:30:26.904 --> 00:30:28.163
around all of this is,

00:30:28.163 --> 00:30:30.190
I don't even know what the universe

00:30:30.190 --> 00:30:33.780
of double circuit capable of,

00:30:33.780 --> 00:30:35.637
single circuit lines
there are out there,

00:30:35.637 --> 00:30:39.262
and they may be maybe 10,000 miles.

00:30:39.262 --> 00:30:41.486
And if everybody just gets to go build,

00:30:41.486 --> 00:30:44.766
I fear what would happen
to our transmission rates

00:30:44.766 --> 00:30:49.420
without having our
check and balance on that.

00:30:49.420 --> 00:30:50.782
So the second circuit,

00:30:50.782 --> 00:30:52.340
maybe we could look at that,

00:30:52.340 --> 00:30:57.340
but I think they've got to
build the first project quickly.

00:30:58.700 --> 00:31:02.747
<v ->So would you favor a
shot clock on the first circuit</v>

00:31:02.747 --> 00:31:05.060
and a longer shot clock on the second,

00:31:05.060 --> 00:31:06.410
since, you know-

00:31:06.410 --> 00:31:09.240
<v ->So I think the
question would be</v>

00:31:09.240 --> 00:31:10.564
how we would phrase it

00:31:10.564 --> 00:31:13.320
because I don't know if it's in service.

00:31:13.320 --> 00:31:15.072
Sometimes these
projects take a long time.

00:31:15.072 --> 00:31:18.940
Sometimes they're dependent
upon the supply chain,

00:31:18.940 --> 00:31:21.270
which obviously we
know is an issue right now.

00:31:21.270 --> 00:31:25.006
And really transformers many
times are the big challenge.

00:31:25.006 --> 00:31:28.360
So that would be fine with me.

00:31:28.360 --> 00:31:30.177
<v ->I would just point out to y'all</v>

00:31:30.177 --> 00:31:32.490
because this happened
before any of you got here,

00:31:32.490 --> 00:31:34.020
but when we came up
with the seven years,

00:31:34.020 --> 00:31:36.011
we had gone out and
asked to input from utilities.

00:31:36.011 --> 00:31:38.350
I've asked my people to go pull

00:31:38.350 --> 00:31:42.849
those filings up and sort
of put that together again

00:31:42.849 --> 00:31:44.631
and bring that forward to y'all

00:31:44.631 --> 00:31:47.610
so you can see what we have.

00:31:47.610 --> 00:31:49.067
Now, we may want to go out again,

00:31:49.067 --> 00:31:51.333
because this is becoming
a little more complicated

00:31:51.333 --> 00:31:52.980
when we're talking about two circuits,

00:31:52.980 --> 00:31:55.031
and whether we want to
go through that routine again,

00:31:55.031 --> 00:31:57.410
to figure out these
kinds of timelines or stuff.

00:31:57.410 --> 00:32:01.110
So I don't have a timeline for you yet

00:32:01.110 --> 00:32:02.700
on when we're going to
have that pulled together,

00:32:02.700 --> 00:32:07.435
but we're starting to
work on that to help y'all.

00:32:07.435 --> 00:32:08.736
<v ->It would seem to
make sense to see</v>

00:32:08.736 --> 00:32:12.870
let's confirm the details of
our current default setting.

00:32:12.870 --> 00:32:14.780
But in principle, I certainly agree

00:32:14.780 --> 00:32:17.470
with Commissioner Cobos that the need

00:32:17.470 --> 00:32:20.683
and Mr. Glotfelty, the need means need,

00:32:21.710 --> 00:32:24.670
and of course, with accommodation,

00:32:24.670 --> 00:32:26.400
for supply chain issues, library issues,

00:32:26.400 --> 00:32:28.430
and then the other externalities,

00:32:28.430 --> 00:32:30.563
but if the needs there, we need it.

00:32:34.920 --> 00:32:38.753
With the consideration
to the information

00:32:38.753 --> 00:32:41.460
will get from your office, Mr. Jeanette,

00:32:41.460 --> 00:32:43.350
we'll take a look at
that when it's ready

00:32:43.350 --> 00:32:45.600
to see what our
current default setting is,

00:32:45.600 --> 00:32:46.780
and then move from there.

00:32:46.780 --> 00:32:49.220
Otherwise, do you need
any other information

00:32:49.220 --> 00:32:50.960
or direction from us?

00:32:50.960 --> 00:32:52.240
<v ->The only thing I
would throw out,</v>

00:32:52.240 --> 00:32:53.470
and I'm sure we're
going to talk about it

00:32:53.470 --> 00:32:54.330
in the next docket,

00:32:54.330 --> 00:32:56.210
is that because we've talked about this

00:32:56.210 --> 00:32:58.485
in this briefing, also,

00:32:58.485 --> 00:33:02.566
we need to get our orders
a little sharper on this point

00:33:02.566 --> 00:33:05.474
to make it clear what
we're certificating

00:33:05.474 --> 00:33:07.210
and what we are not certificating.

00:33:07.210 --> 00:33:10.160
And we have plans to do that.

00:33:10.160 --> 00:33:11.876
<v ->And I will also add
that at some point,</v>

00:33:11.876 --> 00:33:16.460
when we opened up the
CCN rule or CC and criteria role

00:33:16.460 --> 00:33:18.332
that we may want to consider

00:33:18.332 --> 00:33:21.473
sort of setting different
standards for that second circuit,

00:33:21.473 --> 00:33:23.133
consistent with our discussion

00:33:23.133 --> 00:33:28.070
to expedite those CCN amendments,

00:33:28.070 --> 00:33:32.230
if already is an established
route and assessment.

00:33:32.230 --> 00:33:34.530
So just as a place holder.

00:33:34.530 --> 00:33:35.363
<v ->Absolutely.</v>

00:33:36.855 --> 00:33:38.700
<v ->I'd agree with Lori.</v>

00:33:38.700 --> 00:33:39.533
<v ->Excellent.</v>

00:33:40.520 --> 00:33:41.353
Do you agree, Mr Jeanette?

00:33:41.353 --> 00:33:42.530
<v ->So what we need for you now,</v>

00:33:42.530 --> 00:33:43.990
as I answer to the briefing question,

00:33:43.990 --> 00:33:46.610
which I think I heard you say
that the Commission orders

00:33:46.610 --> 00:33:48.270
single circuit, double circuit capable

00:33:48.270 --> 00:33:50.720
mean we only
certificated the one circuit.

00:33:50.720 --> 00:33:51.570
<v ->That's correct.</v>

00:33:53.300 --> 00:33:54.133
<v ->Yes sir.</v>

00:33:54.133 --> 00:33:54.966
<v ->Agreed.</v>
<v ->Agreed.</v>

00:33:56.860 --> 00:33:59.043
<v ->Do we need a motion on this?</v>

00:33:59.043 --> 00:34:00.610
<v ->Yes.</v>

00:34:00.610 --> 00:34:01.690
<v ->So moved.</v>

00:34:01.690 --> 00:34:02.523
<v ->Second.</v>

00:34:02.523 --> 00:34:03.520
<v ->All in favor, say aye.</v>

00:34:03.520 --> 00:34:04.353
<v All>Aye.</v>

00:34:04.353 --> 00:34:05.186
<v ->Motion passes.</v>

00:34:07.270 --> 00:34:10.163
That'll bring us to item number five.

00:34:11.600 --> 00:34:13.773
<v ->Item five is docket 51568.</v>

00:34:13.773 --> 00:34:16.010
It's the application of the CenterPoint

00:34:16.010 --> 00:34:19.880
to amend at CCN for a
transmission line in Wharton County,

00:34:19.880 --> 00:34:21.830
PFD was issued September 1st,

00:34:21.830 --> 00:34:23.527
exceptions and replies were filed.

00:34:23.527 --> 00:34:26.250
The ALJ filed a memo on November 3rd

00:34:26.250 --> 00:34:28.663
with proposed changes and corrections.

00:34:29.880 --> 00:34:31.883
After your discussions, I
have one more comment

00:34:31.883 --> 00:34:35.483
on the PFT that unlocked the night.

00:34:37.240 --> 00:34:40.427
<v ->All right, I think
PFT got this right.</v>

00:34:40.427 --> 00:34:45.427
We just established
that approval of this CCN

00:34:47.035 --> 00:34:51.178
would mean that it is
for only that single circuit,

00:34:51.178 --> 00:34:54.710
despite the use of lattice structures

00:34:54.710 --> 00:34:57.441
and other some consideration
in modern poles here.

00:34:57.441 --> 00:35:00.140
But I think that the cost benefit

00:35:00.140 --> 00:35:02.440
and the future value of
a double circuit capable

00:35:02.440 --> 00:35:06.283
of structure outweighs the
implications of monopoles,

00:35:06.283 --> 00:35:08.093
but I'd happy to hear your thoughts.

00:35:09.240 --> 00:35:10.881
<v ->Okay, so you would
stick with the lattice,</v>

00:35:10.881 --> 00:35:12.580
the PFD lattice?

00:35:12.580 --> 00:35:14.021
<v ->Yeah.</v>
<v ->Okay. All right.</v>

00:35:14.021 --> 00:35:16.400
I wouldn't heavy one way or another,

00:35:16.400 --> 00:35:17.233
I was trying to,

00:35:17.233 --> 00:35:21.120
frankly, having watched
the Commission for awhile

00:35:21.120 --> 00:35:23.280
they always used to default setting

00:35:23.280 --> 00:35:25.713
if somebody asked for
monopoles they granted monopoles.

00:35:25.713 --> 00:35:29.943
But now I hear you.

00:35:32.610 --> 00:35:33.610
What do you think?

00:35:33.610 --> 00:35:36.820
<v ->I agree with the PFD,
I would adopt the PFD.</v>

00:35:36.820 --> 00:35:40.240
I think its monopoles
are more expensive.

00:35:40.240 --> 00:35:41.443
<v ->I know.</v>

00:35:41.443 --> 00:35:42.276
<v ->And we're gonna-</v>

00:35:42.276 --> 00:35:43.170
<v ->There was one mile</v>

00:35:43.170 --> 00:35:45.500
and so I was kinda
trying to balance that.

00:35:45.500 --> 00:35:46.553
<v ->Right, right.</v>

00:35:47.870 --> 00:35:49.576
I'm comfortable with the PFD.

00:35:49.576 --> 00:35:50.580
<v ->Okay.</v>

00:35:50.580 --> 00:35:53.913
<v ->I guess if we're
looking to the future</v>

00:35:53.913 --> 00:35:56.070
and look into growth, we're paying,

00:35:56.070 --> 00:35:59.268
if we go with the monopoles
there downsides to that,

00:35:59.268 --> 00:36:00.950
but in the big picture,

00:36:00.950 --> 00:36:02.977
we'd be paying more
money for less capability

00:36:02.977 --> 00:36:06.180
for double circuit down the road, which.

00:36:06.180 --> 00:36:08.760
<v ->Mr. Chairman, I guess I
have a little different view</v>

00:36:08.760 --> 00:36:11.034
and that is that if we're
impacting a resource

00:36:11.034 --> 00:36:14.100
that can potentially be adding
megawatts to the system

00:36:16.350 --> 00:36:21.244
and I've read this record, quite a bit

00:36:21.244 --> 00:36:23.720
to try to see the nuances.

00:36:23.720 --> 00:36:26.250
I mean, I know the
original tax abatement

00:36:26.250 --> 00:36:28.140
was for 300 megawatts for this farm

00:36:28.140 --> 00:36:29.140
and then it's grown.

00:36:32.497 --> 00:36:34.092
I think that the right thing to do

00:36:34.092 --> 00:36:36.730
is to approve the
order with a modification

00:36:36.730 --> 00:36:39.600
to allow monopoles across the section.

00:36:39.600 --> 00:36:44.600
Only that last section of
where the solar farm would be.

00:36:46.290 --> 00:36:48.655
Monopoles can be
double circuited as well.

00:36:48.655 --> 00:36:51.480
They don't just have
to be lattice structures.

00:36:51.480 --> 00:36:54.990
So if that does need to be a
double circuit at a later date,

00:36:54.990 --> 00:36:58.235
they may need to change
out a monopole structure,

00:36:58.235 --> 00:37:01.040
but it still can be double circuited.

00:37:01.040 --> 00:37:04.835
And I just think in this time,
when we need resources,

00:37:04.835 --> 00:37:07.058
the delta between a monopole cost

00:37:07.058 --> 00:37:09.888
and a lattice structure is not huge

00:37:09.888 --> 00:37:12.230
when you're talking about a mile,

00:37:12.230 --> 00:37:15.960
if you're talking about tens
of miles or hundreds of miles,

00:37:15.960 --> 00:37:17.730
it can become substantial.

00:37:17.730 --> 00:37:20.800
But the cost, if it's a mile

00:37:23.270 --> 00:37:26.150
there may be six or eight
structures across this solar farm

00:37:26.150 --> 00:37:26.983
and that's it.

00:37:29.140 --> 00:37:31.710
I would suggest that
we approved the order

00:37:31.710 --> 00:37:32.730
with a modification

00:37:32.730 --> 00:37:36.420
that CenterPoint look
at monopoles across

00:37:36.420 --> 00:37:41.420
that last area where the solar farm is,

00:37:42.453 --> 00:37:45.976
and then approve it
with that modification.

00:37:45.976 --> 00:37:48.390
<v ->Certainly some valid points,</v>

00:37:48.390 --> 00:37:51.735
and I know we're
scrambling for resources

00:37:51.735 --> 00:37:56.735
in all ways, but I
also wasn't quite sure

00:37:57.350 --> 00:37:58.852
just how much on thousands of acres,

00:37:58.852 --> 00:38:02.758
how much did a few
extra feet really cost

00:38:02.758 --> 00:38:04.823
in terms of megawatts?

00:38:06.310 --> 00:38:07.440
<v ->That's a fair question.</v>

00:38:07.440 --> 00:38:11.344
I think, what was in the record said

00:38:11.344 --> 00:38:14.650
that you got about another
10 feet of right-of-way

00:38:14.650 --> 00:38:17.680
and that's a very
legitimate question that-

00:38:17.680 --> 00:38:18.681
<v ->Thousands of acres?</v>

00:38:18.681 --> 00:38:19.680
<v ->Yeah.</v>

00:38:19.680 --> 00:38:22.199
There are obviously
thousands of acres out there.

00:38:22.199 --> 00:38:23.490
We don't know what the universe

00:38:23.490 --> 00:38:28.420
of what's under a
lease for the solar farm

00:38:28.420 --> 00:38:32.892
but anyway, that's a good question.

00:38:32.892 --> 00:38:36.575
<v ->And I guess my question
is how much more of a cost</v>

00:38:36.575 --> 00:38:41.575
would it be to put monopoles
in the mile long stretch,

00:38:44.150 --> 00:38:45.633
the extra right-of-way

00:38:46.960 --> 00:38:48.220
and also to understand
a little bit better,

00:38:48.220 --> 00:38:51.653
what stage in the development
this solar facility is in.

00:38:52.775 --> 00:38:54.169
That was a little unclear,

00:38:54.169 --> 00:38:56.670
and maybe you can clarify, Megan,

00:38:56.670 --> 00:38:59.750
where this solar facility,

00:38:59.750 --> 00:39:04.750
in terms of placing it into service,

00:39:05.240 --> 00:39:06.726
we're going to make a change for it.

00:39:06.726 --> 00:39:09.586
That we're going to
be sure that it's gonna

00:39:09.586 --> 00:39:11.886
actually be placed into service

00:39:11.886 --> 00:39:15.390
'cause it sounded like
there was still some,

00:39:15.390 --> 00:39:16.630
at least the ALJ thought

00:39:16.630 --> 00:39:19.920
it was sort of a speculative
project at this point.

00:39:19.920 --> 00:39:21.900
<v ->Sure, Commissioners,
Megan Griffiths</v>

00:39:21.900 --> 00:39:24.038
on behalf of Danish Fields Solar.

00:39:24.038 --> 00:39:27.681
To answer the first question
with respect to the monopoles

00:39:27.681 --> 00:39:30.996
by decreasing and using monopoles

00:39:30.996 --> 00:39:33.457
that saves an estimated
five to 20 megawatts

00:39:33.457 --> 00:39:34.438
for the project.

00:39:34.438 --> 00:39:37.530
The reason that that
route four was better

00:39:37.530 --> 00:39:40.638
was because that
basically it's on an area

00:39:40.638 --> 00:39:43.700
that was constrained by pipelines.

00:39:43.700 --> 00:39:46.030
So the route that the ALJ chose was good

00:39:46.030 --> 00:39:48.370
because that was not
buildable land already for them

00:39:48.370 --> 00:39:49.328
and they were aware of that,

00:39:49.328 --> 00:39:52.420
but so that it does save an
extra 10 feet of right-of-way

00:39:52.420 --> 00:39:53.764
to use the monopoles.

00:39:53.764 --> 00:39:56.430
And so that's the estimate.

00:39:56.430 --> 00:39:58.790
And then with respect to your questions

00:39:58.790 --> 00:40:00.820
regarding the stage of the project,

00:40:00.820 --> 00:40:02.929
the ALJ did roll that it
was ongoing development.

00:40:02.929 --> 00:40:06.630
It's in the advanced
stages of development,

00:40:06.630 --> 00:40:09.940
they have entered into
the IAA with CenterPoint.

00:40:09.940 --> 00:40:13.240
There are $6.6 million of
security that was put down.

00:40:13.240 --> 00:40:14.810
We had a highly sensitive number

00:40:14.810 --> 00:40:17.820
of how much investment
was put on the project already

00:40:17.820 --> 00:40:21.650
at the time of the hearing
that has increased significantly.

00:40:21.650 --> 00:40:24.349
Since then we submitted
that number in our exceptions

00:40:24.349 --> 00:40:26.930
they've closed on the construction loan.

00:40:26.930 --> 00:40:30.070
They've already procured the panels.

00:40:30.070 --> 00:40:31.692
There was testimony
on that in the record

00:40:31.692 --> 00:40:35.020
that said basically the
month following the hearing,

00:40:35.020 --> 00:40:39.910
they had to stay on project,
to meet their COD date,

00:40:39.910 --> 00:40:41.220
go ahead and procure.

00:40:41.220 --> 00:40:42.550
They have done that

00:40:42.550 --> 00:40:46.380
and then onsite construction
is slated to begin in December.

00:40:46.380 --> 00:40:49.353
So it's in the significant
advanced stages of development.

00:40:50.380 --> 00:40:51.213
<v ->Thank you.</v>

00:40:51.213 --> 00:40:55.250
You said that the difference
of that 10 feet of right-of-way

00:40:55.250 --> 00:40:57.700
between the monopole
and lattice structure

00:40:57.700 --> 00:41:00.650
would reduce total
capacity, install capacity

00:41:00.650 --> 00:41:01.950
about five to 20 megawatts.

00:41:01.950 --> 00:41:02.810
<v Megan>Correct.</v>

00:41:02.810 --> 00:41:05.603
<v ->Okay, so there's no, I guess,</v>

00:41:06.808 --> 00:41:11.020
regulatory or procedural
reset by making that change,

00:41:11.020 --> 00:41:12.510
that would in some way,

00:41:12.510 --> 00:41:15.430
force the project back to the beginning

00:41:15.430 --> 00:41:18.280
or another way impeded in
the time to implementation

00:41:18.280 --> 00:41:20.750
is just a reduction of
five to 20 megawatts?

00:41:20.750 --> 00:41:22.430
<v ->It would reduce
the size of the project.</v>

00:41:22.430 --> 00:41:23.980
<v ->Okay, but it's not a reset.</v>

00:41:23.980 --> 00:41:25.684
It's not going to delay the construction

00:41:25.684 --> 00:41:28.430
or other implementation of the project?

00:41:28.430 --> 00:41:29.263
<v ->That's correct.</v>

00:41:29.263 --> 00:41:33.068
<v ->Okay, and what is the total
expected installed capacity?</v>

00:41:33.068 --> 00:41:33.901
<v ->The total expected
install capacity is 600.</v>

00:41:37.387 --> 00:41:39.000
Not sure it's correct or not.

00:41:39.000 --> 00:41:41.000
<v Glotfelty>That's a big fall.</v>

00:41:41.000 --> 00:41:43.096
<v ->Yeah, we liked that.</v>

00:41:43.096 --> 00:41:48.096
Now let's hope 10 feet is
a 1% impact on capacity.

00:41:55.380 --> 00:41:56.566
<v ->I guess what I would say is,</v>

00:41:56.566 --> 00:42:01.343
going through this
process as a developer

00:42:01.343 --> 00:42:04.623
and as a transmission line citing,

00:42:04.623 --> 00:42:06.630
they're both, they're hard.

00:42:06.630 --> 00:42:08.930
They're very hard and they
have to play off of each other,

00:42:08.930 --> 00:42:11.400
but you also have additional
landowners out there.

00:42:11.400 --> 00:42:13.330
You have other parts of the community

00:42:13.330 --> 00:42:14.409
that you have to think about,

00:42:14.409 --> 00:42:17.763
this processes is long.

00:42:20.140 --> 00:42:21.420
I think what you want to do is you want

00:42:21.420 --> 00:42:23.360
to try to accommodate both.

00:42:23.360 --> 00:42:24.193
<v ->Sure.</v>

00:42:24.193 --> 00:42:25.040
<v ->And if you can accommodate both</v>

00:42:25.040 --> 00:42:27.600
within the agreement
of the right-of-way,

00:42:27.600 --> 00:42:30.178
and then you're modifying the structures

00:42:30.178 --> 00:42:33.080
I think what we're showing

00:42:33.080 --> 00:42:35.060
is that, look, let's accommodate this.

00:42:35.060 --> 00:42:39.418
We want the excess
megawatts, we need the line.

00:42:39.418 --> 00:42:41.770
The solar facility needs the line

00:42:42.750 --> 00:42:46.353
and we can modify it and
let both projects go forward.

00:42:47.896 --> 00:42:49.129
<v ->Quick, McAdams.</v>

00:42:49.129 --> 00:42:50.000
<v ->Commissioners, Andrea Stover</v>

00:42:50.000 --> 00:42:51.110
on behalf of CenterPoint.

00:42:51.110 --> 00:42:54.360
CenterPoint is ready to do whatever

00:42:54.360 --> 00:42:57.150
the Commission tells us
to do and to construct it

00:42:57.150 --> 00:42:58.360
as you direct.

00:42:58.360 --> 00:43:02.030
I would just note that to the
extent that we are required

00:43:02.030 --> 00:43:03.130
to narrow the right-of-way

00:43:03.130 --> 00:43:05.440
across the Danish Fields property.

00:43:05.440 --> 00:43:08.500
There may be certain areas
where it's going to be necessary

00:43:08.500 --> 00:43:09.949
to have it wider than 90 feet

00:43:09.949 --> 00:43:13.230
there's areas where
there's turning structures

00:43:13.230 --> 00:43:16.793
and that requires wider
than 90 feet of right-of-way.

00:43:16.793 --> 00:43:21.373
And because at the sort of
Southern end of that property,

00:43:21.373 --> 00:43:25.292
there are marsh areas and
other places in which they'll have

00:43:25.292 --> 00:43:29.025
to have a longer sort of
distance between the structures

00:43:29.025 --> 00:43:34.025
as you do that, it requires
the right-of-way to be wider.

00:43:35.720 --> 00:43:38.800
Yeah, so to the extent
that that the Commission

00:43:38.800 --> 00:43:41.560
can allow us some
flexibility in those areas

00:43:41.560 --> 00:43:44.332
so that we can be sure that
we're constructing it safely,

00:43:44.332 --> 00:43:48.460
we're happy to do it and
narrow that right-of-way

00:43:48.460 --> 00:43:49.743
with using monopoles.

00:43:51.130 --> 00:43:53.600
<v ->Yeah, I would never
suggest that we do anything</v>

00:43:53.600 --> 00:43:55.606
to violate national
electrical safety code.

00:43:55.606 --> 00:43:58.172
We need heights and we need towers

00:43:58.172 --> 00:44:01.360
within the code to make
sure that they're safe.

00:44:01.360 --> 00:44:02.480
<v ->You're not trying to
work around that one?</v>

00:44:02.480 --> 00:44:05.280
<v ->Not trying to work
around that one (chuckles).</v>

00:44:05.280 --> 00:44:09.430
<v ->Okay, if you feel
that that's where to go</v>

00:44:09.430 --> 00:44:11.310
and I have to defer to
your expertise on that

00:44:11.310 --> 00:44:13.553
in one way or the other.

00:44:14.690 --> 00:44:19.690
<v ->Yeah, so look, cost is
certainly a perspective resource.</v>

00:44:22.490 --> 00:44:24.960
I agreed with, and
initially coming into this,

00:44:24.960 --> 00:44:28.037
I was on the side of, grant
the one mile monopole,

00:44:28.037 --> 00:44:33.037
but I think the important thing

00:44:33.755 --> 00:44:36.450
is we don't take monopoles off the table

00:44:36.450 --> 00:44:37.620
for costs every time,

00:44:37.620 --> 00:44:40.180
because they have been
a valuable tool in the past.

00:44:40.180 --> 00:44:41.708
I mean, in terms of these projects,

00:44:41.708 --> 00:44:44.470
it has been a time honored
tradition of this Commission

00:44:44.470 --> 00:44:48.020
to grant monopoles to ease
the impacts to landowners.

00:44:48.020 --> 00:44:50.410
I mean, it's an easement thing.

00:44:50.410 --> 00:44:52.950
And if I don't have to
provide 10 more feet

00:44:52.950 --> 00:44:56.373
of easement on my land,
I'm a happy camper, generally.

00:45:01.290 --> 00:45:02.710
What do you think, Commissioner?

00:45:02.710 --> 00:45:03.830
<v ->I was waiting
for you to finish.</v>

00:45:03.830 --> 00:45:04.663
<v ->Yeah, I know.</v>

00:45:04.663 --> 00:45:07.030
I was after that but, well-

00:45:07.030 --> 00:45:08.390
<v ->Sometimes we require,</v>

00:45:08.390 --> 00:45:10.510
we asked that the
landowner who's getting

00:45:10.510 --> 00:45:11.997
this beneficial monopoles

00:45:11.997 --> 00:45:13.930
to grant the right-of-away is reduced

00:45:13.930 --> 00:45:14.763
cost of the transition line.

00:45:14.763 --> 00:45:16.953
<v ->Happy to do, if the
conditions are right.</v>

00:45:19.117 --> 00:45:20.119
<v ->And Commissioner,
just to clarify</v>

00:45:20.119 --> 00:45:24.660
in the record, we've indicated
that it's a 50% increase

00:45:26.190 --> 00:45:28.370
because it will require
farther distances.

00:45:28.370 --> 00:45:31.957
Well, I'm sorry, shorter
distances and more structures.

00:45:31.957 --> 00:45:35.710
So for that, we don't
actually have in the record

00:45:35.710 --> 00:45:39.193
what it would cost to
just monopole that area.

00:45:40.140 --> 00:45:42.310
<v Glotfelty>It was the
entire length of the line.</v>

00:45:42.310 --> 00:45:43.143
<v ->That's correct.</v>

00:45:43.143 --> 00:45:44.820
<v ->And that is certainly 50%.</v>

00:45:44.820 --> 00:45:45.653
<v ->Yes. Yes.</v>

00:45:45.653 --> 00:45:46.872
And for that distance,

00:45:46.872 --> 00:45:51.650
the cost would be 50% for
whatever it is for that one mile.

00:45:51.650 --> 00:45:53.152
So it would be a 50% increase.

00:45:53.152 --> 00:45:56.188
<v ->One comment though, is
that it would also decrease</v>

00:45:56.188 --> 00:46:01.188
the condemnation award
too, with the decrease in feet.

00:46:01.330 --> 00:46:03.950
So it's a give and take on both sides.

00:46:03.950 --> 00:46:05.930
In the record, we did have an estimate

00:46:05.930 --> 00:46:07.630
that it's about a million dollars,

00:46:07.630 --> 00:46:08.878
a megawatt of impact.

00:46:08.878 --> 00:46:11.680
And so I think that
you don't always take

00:46:11.680 --> 00:46:15.040
the condemnation side of
the proceedings in effect,

00:46:15.040 --> 00:46:17.660
but this is a very
close call on this one

00:46:17.660 --> 00:46:21.777
and I think that decreasing
it to use the monopoles

00:46:25.236 --> 00:46:27.970
would effectively be a wash.

00:46:27.970 --> 00:46:29.130
<v ->I think the record shows</v>

00:46:29.130 --> 00:46:31.240
that there's a difference of opinion

00:46:31.240 --> 00:46:33.090
about whether or not it would be a wash

00:46:33.090 --> 00:46:35.120
in terms of the cost
of the right-of-way.

00:46:35.120 --> 00:46:37.896
<v ->If it's a four mile long
so one mile is 25%.</v>

00:46:37.896 --> 00:46:39.139
<v ->Right.</v>

00:46:39.139 --> 00:46:43.010
<v ->Good point, it's a good point.</v>

00:46:43.010 --> 00:46:44.870
<v ->The other thing that I would
just say about monopoles</v>

00:46:44.870 --> 00:46:48.180
is we naturally just think about
a steel monopole structure.

00:46:48.180 --> 00:46:50.370
There are other monopole
structures out there.

00:46:50.370 --> 00:46:55.288
This is in an area where
they're prone to hurricanes.

00:46:55.288 --> 00:46:58.410
I mean, we have spawn concrete towers,

00:46:58.410 --> 00:47:00.430
we got half steel, half concrete.

00:47:00.430 --> 00:47:01.750
We've got lots of issues there

00:47:01.750 --> 00:47:05.000
that may reduce the
cost or have some delta

00:47:05.000 --> 00:47:09.020
and the cost that provides a lower rate.

00:47:09.020 --> 00:47:12.010
Lattice structures, especially
if they're turning structures

00:47:12.010 --> 00:47:13.817
are big, heavy, expensive ones,

00:47:13.817 --> 00:47:16.780
the same thing with monopoles.

00:47:16.780 --> 00:47:19.583
But it had been my experience

00:47:19.583 --> 00:47:23.337
that the difference isn't
that big in terms of cost,

00:47:23.337 --> 00:47:26.270
if you can get the benefit
of having both the facilities

00:47:26.270 --> 00:47:30.140
and the generation, all the generation,

00:47:30.140 --> 00:47:31.610
again, that's where I would fall down

00:47:31.610 --> 00:47:33.253
to try to accommodate both.

00:47:34.240 --> 00:47:35.290
<v ->Commissioner Cobos.</v>

00:47:36.560 --> 00:47:39.460
<v ->Well, I think it makes sense
to try to accommodate both.</v>

00:47:40.310 --> 00:47:43.700
I'm trying to really
understand the additional costs.

00:47:43.700 --> 00:47:48.540
I know that the impact on
the flip side is less megawatts,

00:47:48.540 --> 00:47:50.490
and we need more megawatts

00:47:50.490 --> 00:47:54.130
and one megawatt is 200 homes, right?

00:47:54.130 --> 00:47:55.504
In this hot summer.

00:47:55.504 --> 00:47:56.337
<v ->Right.</v>

00:47:56.337 --> 00:47:59.200
<v ->And so we're looking at
range of five to 20 megawatts</v>

00:47:59.200 --> 00:48:00.148
of a reduction.

00:48:00.148 --> 00:48:04.283
So those are significant megawatts.

00:48:06.200 --> 00:48:10.110
But I said, I know it's a shorter line.

00:48:10.110 --> 00:48:11.042
It's about a mile.

00:48:11.042 --> 00:48:16.042
I think it's just really just
balancing out both if we can,

00:48:16.262 --> 00:48:19.640
but I would really like to
understand the cost impact

00:48:21.230 --> 00:48:25.590
of adding, is it one monopole,
is it a few monopoles

00:48:25.590 --> 00:48:26.540
on one mile?

00:48:26.540 --> 00:48:28.230
<v ->It would be a few monopoles.</v>

00:48:28.230 --> 00:48:30.010
I don't have the exact
number of structures

00:48:30.010 --> 00:48:31.363
that it would require.

00:48:32.660 --> 00:48:34.460
That's something that we can get you.

00:48:34.460 --> 00:48:38.443
I will say that the longer
that this process goes,

00:48:38.443 --> 00:48:41.530
the more, it may create issues

00:48:41.530 --> 00:48:43.940
for the generator we're
trying to interconnect

00:48:43.940 --> 00:48:46.500
because they are on a timeline as well.

00:48:46.500 --> 00:48:49.500
And so if this process is slowed down,

00:48:49.500 --> 00:48:51.446
it may impact our ability
to get them interconnected

00:48:51.446 --> 00:48:53.683
and get their megawatts online.

00:48:54.620 --> 00:48:57.506
But we can go back and get
you cost information specifically

00:48:57.506 --> 00:49:01.423
for changing that one mile.

00:49:02.338 --> 00:49:04.043
<v ->And their is assigned
interconnection agreement?</v>

00:49:04.043 --> 00:49:05.830
<v ->Yes.</v>
<v ->Yes.</v>

00:49:05.830 --> 00:49:07.910
<v ->Yes, and CenterPoint
has actually completed</v>

00:49:07.910 --> 00:49:10.513
their facilities to
interconnect Danish Fields.

00:49:12.570 --> 00:49:14.320
<v ->Sure, so I made
this is a 30% increase</v>

00:49:14.320 --> 00:49:16.250
on 25% of the project.

00:49:16.250 --> 00:49:18.117
So it would give you,

00:49:18.117 --> 00:49:22.620
what's the quick and dirty math?

00:49:22.620 --> 00:49:23.743
<v ->12 and a half.</v>

00:49:23.743 --> 00:49:26.011
<v ->12.5% increase in
the total project costs</v>

00:49:26.011 --> 00:49:29.488
to accommodate both
the increased transmission

00:49:29.488 --> 00:49:34.488
and to ensure those additional megawatts

00:49:36.110 --> 00:49:41.110
are brought online and
that project is not disrupted.

00:49:44.040 --> 00:49:45.690
<v ->Overall, I'll tell everybody</v>

00:49:45.690 --> 00:49:47.130
kind of where I'm defaulting right now.

00:49:47.130 --> 00:49:49.160
I think non bypassable
transmission costs

00:49:49.160 --> 00:49:51.090
are going to be an issue in the future

00:49:51.090 --> 00:49:51.923
'cause we're going to be building

00:49:51.923 --> 00:49:53.497
a lot of transmission
'cause we're going to need it.

00:49:53.497 --> 00:49:56.340
And there's going to be
more solar resources out there.

00:49:56.340 --> 00:49:58.560
I think we'll get our
megawatts on solar.

00:49:58.560 --> 00:50:01.483
I think it's coming,
so that articulated it.

00:50:02.984 --> 00:50:06.850
In this case, if we want
to expeditiously move,

00:50:06.850 --> 00:50:09.430
I'm like you curious
about these overall costs

00:50:09.430 --> 00:50:14.073
associated with this
short line, but ballpark,

00:50:14.073 --> 00:50:17.080
if you're taking 25% of the project

00:50:17.080 --> 00:50:18.435
and you're increasing those costs,

00:50:18.435 --> 00:50:21.350
I think it's gonna fall
somewhere in there.

00:50:21.350 --> 00:50:23.710
So I would go with the lattice work

00:50:23.710 --> 00:50:25.760
and just move with the PFD.

00:50:25.760 --> 00:50:27.540
Get this thing moving along,

00:50:27.540 --> 00:50:29.859
make your interconnection date, energize

00:50:29.859 --> 00:50:31.483
let's get the megawatts going.

00:50:33.880 --> 00:50:34.713
<v ->Okay.</v>

00:50:35.600 --> 00:50:36.843
<v ->So where's the votes?</v>

00:50:38.220 --> 00:50:40.227
<v ->Yeah. I mean,
that's where I started.</v>

00:50:41.590 --> 00:50:42.536
<v ->So you picked me up?</v>

00:50:42.536 --> 00:50:45.430
(Commissioners laughing)

00:50:45.430 --> 00:50:46.980
Fair enough.

00:50:46.980 --> 00:50:49.360
I'm perfectly content to move forward

00:50:49.360 --> 00:50:50.193
with lattice structure.

00:50:50.193 --> 00:50:51.362
No need to-

00:50:51.362 --> 00:50:52.363
<v ->Okay.</v>

00:50:52.363 --> 00:50:56.823
<v ->I mean, it's a 1% difference
in this project at most 3%.</v>

00:50:58.010 --> 00:50:59.030
I know it's not ideal,

00:50:59.030 --> 00:51:02.873
but I'm certainly happy
to move forward with that,

00:51:03.885 --> 00:51:05.985
that we got a good
sense of where you are.

00:51:07.728 --> 00:51:11.570
<v ->In balance, I think I
would lean towards</v>

00:51:11.570 --> 00:51:12.730
the lattice towers only

00:51:12.730 --> 00:51:14.180
because I think Commissioner McAdams,

00:51:14.180 --> 00:51:15.100
you made a strong point.

00:51:15.100 --> 00:51:19.800
We are gonna have a lot of
solar come into our market.

00:51:19.800 --> 00:51:22.697
This is a very large solar facility

00:51:22.697 --> 00:51:24.800
and I think it will go a long way

00:51:24.800 --> 00:51:26.843
to providing cost efficient,

00:51:26.843 --> 00:51:31.843
much needed solar
generation for our Texans.

00:51:33.205 --> 00:51:36.130
But I think just cutting
the sliver off of it,

00:51:36.130 --> 00:51:39.350
ultimately it's a wide
range, five to 20 megawatts.

00:51:39.350 --> 00:51:40.984
I mean, it could ultimately be-

00:51:40.984 --> 00:51:43.230
<v ->Could be on the short side.</v>

00:51:43.230 --> 00:51:44.321
<v ->Could be on the short side</v>

00:51:44.321 --> 00:51:47.580
but we got to weigh that
with the additional costs

00:51:47.580 --> 00:51:51.710
that we are going to be
placing on rate payers

00:51:51.710 --> 00:51:54.027
through transmission cost of service.

00:51:54.027 --> 00:51:59.027
And so that's my basis for
landing with the lattice towers.

00:51:59.640 --> 00:52:01.441
<v ->So can I ask you a
question of CenterPoint</v>

00:52:01.441 --> 00:52:04.780
and that is in this process,

00:52:04.780 --> 00:52:06.827
I think I read in the
record that you all

00:52:06.827 --> 00:52:09.320
had not had a whole lot of communication

00:52:09.320 --> 00:52:12.540
with the solar farm
early in the process,

00:52:12.540 --> 00:52:14.063
is that correct or?

00:52:15.360 --> 00:52:16.238
What I'm trying to get at is

00:52:16.238 --> 00:52:18.560
if you had had these
discussions early on,

00:52:18.560 --> 00:52:20.459
would a monopole structure
had been considered

00:52:20.459 --> 00:52:23.880
earlier in the process rather than just

00:52:23.880 --> 00:52:25.230
to total lack of structure.

00:52:25.230 --> 00:52:28.060
<v ->Sure, and when you
referenced the solar farm,</v>

00:52:28.060 --> 00:52:29.334
you're referring to Danish Fields

00:52:29.334 --> 00:52:32.057
'cause we're interconnecting
a different solar farm.

00:52:32.057 --> 00:52:35.513
<v ->We did actually have
conversations with them.</v>

00:52:36.973 --> 00:52:39.520
In the hearing, one of
our witnesses discussed

00:52:39.520 --> 00:52:42.050
the fact that we talked to Danish Fields

00:52:42.050 --> 00:52:44.989
about the need to interconnect
another solar facility

00:52:44.989 --> 00:52:48.170
to hill G and it would require crossing

00:52:48.170 --> 00:52:52.971
the land that they had
under option at the time.

00:52:52.971 --> 00:52:57.400
I think ultimately the
issue is lattice structures

00:52:57.400 --> 00:53:00.330
are considerably less
expensive for CenterPoint

00:53:00.330 --> 00:53:03.450
and the difference in right-of-way

00:53:03.450 --> 00:53:05.320
with is not very significant

00:53:09.330 --> 00:53:11.900
because of they're in
a hurricane prone area

00:53:11.900 --> 00:53:13.712
so that sort of increases the costs

00:53:13.712 --> 00:53:15.670
that are associated with making sure

00:53:15.670 --> 00:53:20.053
that monopoles in
particular are hurricane proof.

00:53:21.820 --> 00:53:23.480
CenterPoint's analysis was

00:53:23.480 --> 00:53:25.300
that it ultimately made the most sense

00:53:25.300 --> 00:53:28.633
to stick with the lattice structures.

00:53:30.490 --> 00:53:32.300
<v ->Good point, I think,
as we're looking</v>

00:53:32.300 --> 00:53:33.670
at this transmission infrastructure,

00:53:33.670 --> 00:53:36.770
we also, especially in
certain point service territory,

00:53:36.770 --> 00:53:37.895
you need to be thinking about

00:53:37.895 --> 00:53:41.040
not only reliability, but resiliency.

00:53:41.040 --> 00:53:45.270
And so thank you for
that additional information.

00:53:45.270 --> 00:53:46.193
<v Commissioner>Absolutely.</v>

00:53:47.380 --> 00:53:48.800
<v ->Any other questions?</v>
<v ->No.</v>

00:53:48.800 --> 00:53:51.350
<v ->I know Mr. Jeanette has
some additional comments.</v>

00:53:51.350 --> 00:53:52.183
<v ->Yes, sir.</v>

00:53:53.240 --> 00:53:55.950
Ordinarily we would have
done this through a memo,

00:53:55.950 --> 00:54:00.183
but we missed it and it was
brought to me yesterday, late.

00:54:01.969 --> 00:54:04.580
I've talked to each of
your offices this morning,

00:54:04.580 --> 00:54:05.990
but I want this on the record

00:54:05.990 --> 00:54:08.779
or in paragraphs 11 and 12

00:54:08.779 --> 00:54:11.890
one dealing with
deviation more than minor

00:54:11.890 --> 00:54:13.380
and the other dealing with deviations

00:54:13.380 --> 00:54:14.978
for engineering constraints

00:54:14.978 --> 00:54:18.170
or ordering paragraphs
that used to be in our orders.

00:54:18.170 --> 00:54:19.800
Previous Commissioners have taken

00:54:19.800 --> 00:54:21.690
these ordering paragraphs out,

00:54:21.690 --> 00:54:23.181
they really should not be in our orders.

00:54:23.181 --> 00:54:28.181
And so as our current
orders don't have these,

00:54:28.790 --> 00:54:31.160
it's my intent to pull these
ordering paragraphs out

00:54:31.160 --> 00:54:34.310
before we bring this
back to you for signature.

00:54:34.310 --> 00:54:36.743
<v ->That works just fine,
any opposition to that?</v>

00:54:37.990 --> 00:54:38.975
<v ->I don't think so.</v>

00:54:38.975 --> 00:54:41.321
<v ->All right, at this point,</v>

00:54:41.321 --> 00:54:43.677
I think we've got a sense of direction

00:54:43.677 --> 00:54:47.090
everybody wants to go.

00:54:47.090 --> 00:54:49.910
Is there a motion to adopt the proposal

00:54:49.910 --> 00:54:51.961
for the decision with a modification

00:54:51.961 --> 00:54:54.410
incorporating Mr. Jeanette's comments

00:54:54.410 --> 00:54:57.160
as he just articulated and clarifying

00:54:57.160 --> 00:54:59.870
that this would in fact be

00:54:59.870 --> 00:55:02.000
only approving a single circuit?

00:55:02.000 --> 00:55:03.344
<v ->So moved.</v>

00:55:03.344 --> 00:55:04.806
<v ->Second.</v>

00:55:04.806 --> 00:55:05.960
<v ->Thank you, Ma'am.</v>

00:55:05.960 --> 00:55:07.140
All in favor say, aye.

00:55:07.140 --> 00:55:08.460
<v Commissioners>Aye.</v>

00:55:08.460 --> 00:55:09.710
<v ->All opposed, nay.</v>

00:55:09.710 --> 00:55:11.040
<v ->Nay.</v>

00:55:11.040 --> 00:55:14.189
<v ->Motion passes, thank you all.</v>

00:55:14.189 --> 00:55:15.189
<v ->Thank you.</v>

00:55:16.691 --> 00:55:20.853
<v ->That brings us to
item number eight.</v>

00:55:22.087 --> 00:55:24.117
<v ->Item eight is docket 52178.</v>

00:55:24.117 --> 00:55:27.473
I's the application the
Oncor to adjust this ECRF.

00:55:28.410 --> 00:55:32.375
Proposed order was filed on October 29th

00:55:32.375 --> 00:55:36.280
and the ALJ filed a correction
memo on November 3rd.

00:55:36.280 --> 00:55:40.140
I also filed a memo
with a change yesterday

00:55:40.140 --> 00:55:41.063
or the day before.

00:55:42.660 --> 00:55:44.200
<v ->Proposal wouldn't
make sense to me.</v>

00:55:44.200 --> 00:55:45.603
Any other thoughts?

00:55:49.480 --> 00:55:50.450
<v ->No.</v>
<v ->All right.</v>

00:55:50.450 --> 00:55:51.283
<v ->I just-</v>

00:55:52.790 --> 00:55:54.787
<v ->Looked down there Jimmy?</v>

00:55:54.787 --> 00:55:56.883
<v ->$30 Million bonuses,
a lot of money.</v>

00:55:58.570 --> 00:56:01.481
For a $47 million or $48 million,

00:56:01.481 --> 00:56:04.300
$49 million in energy
efficiency improvements

00:56:04.300 --> 00:56:06.416
and a $30 million bonus.

00:56:06.416 --> 00:56:08.580
This isn't the right place
to have this discussion

00:56:08.580 --> 00:56:11.005
but I look forward to when we discussed

00:56:11.005 --> 00:56:13.840
the entire energy efficiency program

00:56:13.840 --> 00:56:16.440
to figure out how we right-size this

00:56:16.440 --> 00:56:21.440
and make it the best energy
efficiency program in the US.

00:56:22.040 --> 00:56:22.873
<v ->Well said.</v>

00:56:24.776 --> 00:56:28.130
<v ->I think there's been,
just agree on all points.</v>

00:56:28.130 --> 00:56:32.290
And I know there's been
conversation by this Commission

00:56:32.290 --> 00:56:35.320
and the discussion by this
Commission about improving

00:56:35.320 --> 00:56:39.040
the return on invested
capital for our rate payers

00:56:39.040 --> 00:56:40.550
and the energy efficiency program,

00:56:40.550 --> 00:56:43.020
get the best bang for
our buck that we can get.

00:56:43.020 --> 00:56:46.700
And I think there's a meeting
tomorrow where that could be

00:56:46.700 --> 00:56:48.880
an excellent topic of discussion.

00:56:48.880 --> 00:56:51.280
To the extent we have
ideas on how to do that.

00:56:51.280 --> 00:56:52.113
<v ->Correct.</v>

00:56:54.310 --> 00:56:56.780
<v ->Are you comfortable
with the proposed order?</v>

00:56:56.780 --> 00:56:58.180
<v ->I am.</v>
<v ->All right.</v>

00:56:58.180 --> 00:57:00.966
Is there a motion to
adopt the proposed order

00:57:00.966 --> 00:57:04.180
as modified by Commission
council November 17th memo?

00:57:04.180 --> 00:57:05.220
<v ->So moved.</v>

00:57:05.220 --> 00:57:06.120
<v ->Second.</v>

00:57:06.120 --> 00:57:07.330
<v ->All in favor, say aye.</v>

00:57:07.330 --> 00:57:08.380
<v All>Aye.</v>

00:57:08.380 --> 00:57:10.543
<v ->None opposed,
the motion passes.</v>

00:57:12.170 --> 00:57:15.943
Will bring us to item number 12.

00:57:19.212 --> 00:57:20.640
<v ->Item 12 is docket 52689</v>

00:57:20.640 --> 00:57:23.403
is the application of CenterPoint.

00:57:26.602 --> 00:57:29.121
AEP and TNMP for a
load management programs

00:57:29.121 --> 00:57:32.398
and agreement was filed on November 9th.

00:57:32.398 --> 00:57:34.886
I'd filed a memo requesting
attendance of the parties

00:57:34.886 --> 00:57:38.080
at the request of office.

00:57:38.080 --> 00:57:39.660
So I understand that currently

00:57:39.660 --> 00:57:41.360
this is an None opposed agreement.

00:57:42.589 --> 00:57:43.581
<v ->Thank you, sir.</v>

00:57:43.581 --> 00:57:47.720
I'm glad that request was
made for the parties to be here.

00:57:47.720 --> 00:57:50.623
I certainly have some
questions at this point,

00:57:51.510 --> 00:57:55.220
but certainly want
Commission staff to approach.

00:57:55.220 --> 00:57:57.948
Is there any particular
party we want to call it first

00:57:57.948 --> 00:58:00.170
or we can just call all of them?

00:58:01.260 --> 00:58:02.093
<v ->You gotta think there's enough</v>

00:58:02.093 --> 00:58:03.576
for all of them, Mr. Chairman.

00:58:03.576 --> 00:58:05.243
<v ->Oh yeah, all right, come on up.</v>

00:58:12.430 --> 00:58:13.951
<v ->Maybe I overshot.</v>

00:58:13.951 --> 00:58:16.951
(Chairman laughing)

00:58:21.780 --> 00:58:22.980
<v ->We can work in shifts.</v>

00:58:26.109 --> 00:58:28.192
<v ->We only have one shift.</v>

00:58:30.071 --> 00:58:31.071
<v ->Thank you.</v>

00:58:46.110 --> 00:58:47.491
<v ->While everybody gets settled</v>

00:58:47.491 --> 00:58:49.630
we can also rotate in and out.

00:58:49.630 --> 00:58:53.020
We don't absolutely have to
have everybody at the same time.

00:58:53.020 --> 00:58:54.220
I know we've got a long day ahead of us

00:58:54.220 --> 00:58:55.570
while everyone gets settled

00:58:56.506 --> 00:59:00.320
and consideration of programming today

00:59:00.320 --> 00:59:02.700
does it make sense for you
all we're at the one hour mark,

00:59:02.700 --> 00:59:07.128
do another hour and then
break for lunch at 11:30?

00:59:07.128 --> 00:59:08.133
Does that work?

00:59:08.133 --> 00:59:09.125
<v ->Sure.</v>

00:59:09.125 --> 00:59:11.763
<v ->All right, good deal.</v>

00:59:12.670 --> 00:59:15.170
All right, they're like over being here.

00:59:15.170 --> 00:59:16.930
I know we have a lot of questions.

00:59:16.930 --> 00:59:21.930
I suspect we can start to
my right with the questions.

00:59:25.025 --> 00:59:27.403
<v ->Well, I'll defer.</v>

00:59:28.660 --> 00:59:29.570
<v ->Thank you, Mr. Chairman.</v>

00:59:29.570 --> 00:59:30.963
Thank you all for coming.

00:59:30.963 --> 00:59:33.883
I'm trying to understand just

00:59:33.883 --> 00:59:38.410
the kind of the initial basic
premise behind the program.

00:59:38.410 --> 00:59:41.406
And I know you can say
it's to reduce demand,

00:59:41.406 --> 00:59:45.770
but it didn't go through
kind of a normal process.

00:59:45.770 --> 00:59:47.950
It didn't go through any
of the existing programs.

00:59:47.950 --> 00:59:49.210
It went through the legislature

00:59:49.210 --> 00:59:50.868
and I'm just trying to
get an understanding

00:59:50.868 --> 00:59:54.040
of what didn't we have
that you all required

00:59:54.040 --> 00:59:56.640
to go to the legislature
to get a program like this?

00:59:58.251 --> 00:59:59.640
<v ->CenterPoint.</v>

00:59:59.640 --> 01:00:00.620
<v ->Good morning Commissioners,</v>

01:00:00.620 --> 01:00:02.010
Sam Chang with CenterPoint Energy.

01:00:02.010 --> 01:00:05.910
To the extent that you have
technical related questions

01:00:05.910 --> 01:00:08.410
I do have with me my
Energy Efficiency Manager,

01:00:08.410 --> 01:00:09.494
Shea Richardson.

01:00:09.494 --> 01:00:12.390
But with regard to this interim program

01:00:12.390 --> 01:00:14.990
that we'd like to operate
for the next 90 days or so,

01:00:14.990 --> 01:00:16.860
there is a little bit of a difference

01:00:16.860 --> 01:00:18.060
in terms of why it's outside

01:00:18.060 --> 01:00:20.440
of our current energy
efficiency portfolio.

01:00:20.440 --> 01:00:24.870
Some of those reasons have
to do with budget caps, right?

01:00:24.870 --> 01:00:26.670
In the current energy efficiency rule,

01:00:26.670 --> 01:00:28.060
there are certain budget caps,

01:00:28.060 --> 01:00:30.564
and that impacts how we could deploy

01:00:30.564 --> 01:00:32.850
load management programs.

01:00:32.850 --> 01:00:36.160
Another aspect is for the energy

01:00:36.160 --> 01:00:38.170
efficiency load management programs,

01:00:38.170 --> 01:00:41.100
transmission level customers
are not eligible participants,

01:00:41.100 --> 01:00:43.083
whereas in the interim programs

01:00:43.083 --> 01:00:44.660
that we're seeking approval of,

01:00:44.660 --> 01:00:46.160
they would be eligible participants.

01:00:46.160 --> 01:00:47.630
And so there's a
little bit more flexibility

01:00:47.630 --> 01:00:50.510
as far as casting a wide net

01:00:50.510 --> 01:00:53.343
for participation and deployment.

01:00:54.537 --> 01:00:58.014
<v ->Can you all, all
of you, I guess,</v>

01:00:58.014 --> 01:01:00.174
give me an understanding

01:01:00.174 --> 01:01:02.710
of why the discrepancy in the program,

01:01:02.710 --> 01:01:05.123
not the discrepancy, but the
discrepancy in the amounts.

01:01:05.123 --> 01:01:07.845
One utility wants 1.5 megawatts,

01:01:07.845 --> 01:01:09.827
one wants 10 megawatts,

01:01:09.827 --> 01:01:12.530
and the next one wants
100 to 300 megawatts.

01:01:12.530 --> 01:01:15.849
It seems like 100 to 300, not
necessarily a pilot program,

01:01:15.849 --> 01:01:17.342
the others might be.

01:01:17.342 --> 01:01:19.630
How do you all come to those numbers

01:01:19.630 --> 01:01:24.630
and defend the discrepancy
in that wide range?

01:01:24.990 --> 01:01:27.530
<v ->Sure, at a high level,
there are differences</v>

01:01:27.530 --> 01:01:29.750
with regard to our
customer load profile,

01:01:29.750 --> 01:01:30.924
as well as our service area.

01:01:30.924 --> 01:01:34.060
I'll defer to Mr. Richardson

01:01:34.060 --> 01:01:35.960
in terms of how we got to our numbers.

01:01:39.080 --> 01:01:40.880
<v ->Morning Commissioners,
Shea Richardson</v>

01:01:40.880 --> 01:01:42.002
with CenterPoint Energy.

01:01:42.002 --> 01:01:45.570
As Sam mentioned, I'm Energy
Efficiency Compliance Manager

01:01:45.570 --> 01:01:48.746
for use of electric energy
efficiency programs.

01:01:48.746 --> 01:01:51.747
In terms of the scale of our program,

01:01:51.747 --> 01:01:55.750
we have historically implemented

01:01:55.750 --> 01:01:57.640
a commercial load management program

01:01:57.640 --> 01:02:00.700
through our energy efficiency portfolio

01:02:00.700 --> 01:02:03.480
that's in the 100 megawatt range.

01:02:03.480 --> 01:02:04.930
That's about the scale of the program.

01:02:04.930 --> 01:02:07.246
So we look to design and implement

01:02:07.246 --> 01:02:10.330
this winter load management program,

01:02:10.330 --> 01:02:12.710
this interim program, which
was something new for us,

01:02:12.710 --> 01:02:14.510
we really kind of use that as a base

01:02:14.510 --> 01:02:17.561
on what have we done
historically in the summer peak

01:02:17.561 --> 01:02:19.900
and kind of take
that as a starting point

01:02:19.900 --> 01:02:22.879
in terms of our goal
for that 100 megawatts,

01:02:22.879 --> 01:02:27.879
with the idea that we
would look to expand that

01:02:27.980 --> 01:02:29.720
and increase that number possible

01:02:29.720 --> 01:02:32.504
so that we had as much
curtailment available

01:02:32.504 --> 01:02:34.733
for this winter, as we possibly could.

01:02:37.600 --> 01:02:40.230
<v ->For the record, Stacy
Whitehurst on behalf of the TNMP.</v>

01:02:40.230 --> 01:02:42.800
So obviously we're one
of the smallest utilities,

01:02:42.800 --> 01:02:45.958
and we have the 1.5 megawatt goal

01:02:45.958 --> 01:02:48.959
in the summer peak period.

01:02:48.959 --> 01:02:51.970
For our load management,
it's about five megawatts.

01:02:51.970 --> 01:02:53.800
And so we are treating
this as a pilot program.

01:02:53.800 --> 01:02:58.110
It's not that we don't have
that much available load

01:02:58.110 --> 01:02:59.396
to go out there and procure

01:02:59.396 --> 01:03:01.923
so that's why ours is so low.

01:03:07.770 --> 01:03:11.910
<v ->I appreciate the way
that it was put together,</v>

01:03:11.910 --> 01:03:16.270
where we're obviously
looking for a demand reduction.

01:03:16.270 --> 01:03:19.540
It's key as we continue to
move through this market reform.

01:03:19.540 --> 01:03:23.723
To me the demand response
is a key component of it.

01:03:26.810 --> 01:03:30.730
The way that you all have suggested

01:03:30.730 --> 01:03:33.843
or outlined the program
with no critical loads

01:03:33.843 --> 01:03:37.900
that, 24/7 availability to procure

01:03:37.900 --> 01:03:40.728
the numbers of schedule
outages and the hours per each,

01:03:40.728 --> 01:03:42.185
they're fairly common.

01:03:42.185 --> 01:03:47.185
And I think that the only
thing that troubles me on this,

01:03:47.760 --> 01:03:50.779
I like the direction of it,

01:03:50.779 --> 01:03:53.270
it's just that it was
filed expeditiously

01:03:53.270 --> 01:03:54.720
and we don't know anything about it.

01:03:54.720 --> 01:03:59.720
And this program is
supposed to start in 12 days

01:04:00.726 --> 01:04:05.250
and be for three months as a pilot and-

01:04:05.250 --> 01:04:06.100
<v ->With no budget caps?</v>

01:04:06.100 --> 01:04:08.030
<v ->We had no budget caps,</v>

01:04:08.030 --> 01:04:13.030
but it's hard for me to
get my head around.

01:04:13.688 --> 01:04:16.840
I know the legislature has spoken on it,

01:04:16.840 --> 01:04:21.566
but it's just hard for me as
a Commissioner to sit here

01:04:21.566 --> 01:04:24.150
and just say, well, we're
going to approve a program

01:04:24.150 --> 01:04:25.308
that starts in 12 days

01:04:25.308 --> 01:04:28.510
and not know much beyond that.

01:04:28.510 --> 01:04:30.723
<v ->I don't think the
legislature approves anything</v>

01:04:30.723 --> 01:04:32.928
with the division that it's unlimited

01:04:32.928 --> 01:04:37.661
in its impact to consumers,
that's called a tax.

01:04:37.661 --> 01:04:41.126
And this is not that.

01:04:41.126 --> 01:04:44.860
So I think they have always allowed

01:04:44.860 --> 01:04:47.960
the Commission discretion
to set reasonable parameters

01:04:47.960 --> 01:04:49.500
around the pilot project.

01:04:49.500 --> 01:04:50.800
Would you agree with that?

01:04:52.810 --> 01:04:55.610
<v ->I wanna add to that
point, Mr. McAdams.</v>

01:04:55.610 --> 01:04:58.582
I think SB 3 allows for this program.

01:04:58.582 --> 01:05:01.010
It is our duty and our responsibility

01:05:01.010 --> 01:05:04.260
to the back end to
ensure that we look at it

01:05:04.260 --> 01:05:06.110
from a rate payer standpoint as well.

01:05:07.460 --> 01:05:10.620
I don't mean to interrupt your flow,

01:05:10.620 --> 01:05:12.320
but I did have a question for AEP.

01:05:15.010 --> 01:05:16.329
For comparative purposes,

01:05:16.329 --> 01:05:20.200
Commissioner Glotfelty, just
sort of noted the wide spectrum

01:05:20.200 --> 01:05:24.920
of megawatts that the
different utilities proposed

01:05:26.220 --> 01:05:27.973
in their program.

01:05:29.560 --> 01:05:33.060
AEP's goal would be to achieve

01:05:33.060 --> 01:05:34.627
10 megawatts in load reduction

01:05:34.627 --> 01:05:39.203
for an estimated budget
of, I believe, 350,000.

01:05:40.070 --> 01:05:42.510
So when you compare that to CenterPoint,

01:05:42.510 --> 01:05:46.700
which is 100, between
103 hundred megawatts,

01:05:46.700 --> 01:05:51.700
and they're at 650,000
for the estimated budget.

01:05:53.110 --> 01:05:54.250
Is that what I'm reading correctly

01:05:54.250 --> 01:05:56.820
from your proposed program?

01:05:56.820 --> 01:06:00.563
100-300 megawatts with what
kind of an estimated budget?

01:06:01.520 --> 01:06:03.996
<v ->Commissioner, we're
seeking 100-300 megawatts</v>

01:06:03.996 --> 01:06:07.970
and we're pricing it
out at $30 a kilowatt.

01:06:07.970 --> 01:06:10.700
So on the high end,
it would be 9 million

01:06:10.700 --> 01:06:12.640
with regard to the estimated
budget on the low end,

01:06:12.640 --> 01:06:14.040
it would be 3 million.

01:06:14.040 --> 01:06:16.300
Commissioner McAdams, we
do agree with you in the sense

01:06:16.300 --> 01:06:18.716
that the Commission certainly
has the regulatory oversight

01:06:18.716 --> 01:06:22.670
and review of what it thinks
should be the reasonable

01:06:22.670 --> 01:06:23.770
and necessary costs.

01:06:23.770 --> 01:06:25.350
That's why we made the commitment

01:06:25.350 --> 01:06:27.019
with regard to the regulatory asset

01:06:27.019 --> 01:06:30.150
that recovery and the reasonableness

01:06:30.150 --> 01:06:32.300
and the review of that
will happen subsequently.

01:06:32.300 --> 01:06:34.450
And so, we are not intending

01:06:34.450 --> 01:06:36.500
to have an unlimited amount of money

01:06:36.500 --> 01:06:39.410
to use for our load management program.

01:06:39.410 --> 01:06:42.120
<v ->Are the time constraints
articulating these plans</v>

01:06:42.120 --> 01:06:46.873
in essence, a cap on the amount
of money that can be spent?

01:06:49.090 --> 01:06:50.609
<v ->We do appreciate
the urgency at which</v>

01:06:50.609 --> 01:06:52.820
the Commission has taken up this matter.

01:06:52.820 --> 01:06:55.940
And we do apologize for the time crunch

01:06:55.940 --> 01:06:57.100
and we don't think it's optimal.

01:06:57.100 --> 01:07:00.340
<v ->No, no, I mean, the
time of demand response.</v>

01:07:00.340 --> 01:07:01.435
<v ->I will defer to my tech.</v>

01:07:01.435 --> 01:07:04.130
<v ->Okay, I mean, it
varies by program,</v>

01:07:04.130 --> 01:07:06.420
but four hours, no more
than four hours at a time

01:07:06.420 --> 01:07:09.900
and no more than four incidents
of request was one of them,

01:07:09.900 --> 01:07:11.580
is that in effect they can strain

01:07:11.580 --> 01:07:13.240
on total amount of
money that can be spent?

01:07:13.240 --> 01:07:14.751
I don't know, I'm asking.

01:07:14.751 --> 01:07:18.560
<v ->Commissioner, I would
say in terms of the constraint</v>

01:07:18.560 --> 01:07:20.803
on the total amount of dollars spent,

01:07:21.670 --> 01:07:26.670
one of the features of our
program is that we're having,

01:07:27.730 --> 01:07:30.570
obviously we're going to have
customers and participants

01:07:30.570 --> 01:07:33.474
as we sit in our plan, enroll
and apply to this program

01:07:33.474 --> 01:07:38.390
and effectively what
will keep cap spinning

01:07:38.390 --> 01:07:40.119
is that we will approve

01:07:40.119 --> 01:07:45.119
and our commitment will
be to pay up to their qualified,

01:07:45.163 --> 01:07:47.433
agreed to curtailment amount

01:07:47.433 --> 01:07:49.788
that they provided on that application.

01:07:49.788 --> 01:07:50.621
<v ->So there's a cap per customer,</v>

01:07:50.621 --> 01:07:51.930
but not a cap on how many customers?

01:07:53.003 --> 01:07:56.463
<v ->There's not a cap on
the number of customers,</v>

01:07:56.463 --> 01:07:59.270
but essentially there was a
cap on what we commit to pay.

01:07:59.270 --> 01:08:02.740
So we will approve at the
meter level for every participant,

01:08:02.740 --> 01:08:05.460
a certain amount of load
that they expect to share.

01:08:05.460 --> 01:08:07.680
And in the aggregate, that could be 100,

01:08:07.680 --> 01:08:09.090
or it could be 300 megawatts,

01:08:09.090 --> 01:08:11.960
but we won't pay based on performance,

01:08:11.960 --> 01:08:13.490
anything more than that.

01:08:13.490 --> 01:08:17.140
So if we know that we have 100 megawatts

01:08:17.140 --> 01:08:19.566
worth of curtailment
enrolled in the program,

01:08:19.566 --> 01:08:22.390
that's our commitment to
pay at that incentive rate.

01:08:22.390 --> 01:08:23.620
That's what we would
commit to the customer.

01:08:23.620 --> 01:08:25.349
But if we over-performed based on that,

01:08:25.349 --> 01:08:28.530
we're not going to pay
based on that performance.

01:08:28.530 --> 01:08:32.857
So that's basically one of the ways

01:08:34.500 --> 01:08:37.325
in which the program
essentially allows us to go

01:08:37.325 --> 01:08:39.763
into any of these curtailment events,

01:08:39.763 --> 01:08:41.563
regardless of number of events,

01:08:41.563 --> 01:08:44.610
knowing the absolute
maximum that we would expect

01:08:44.610 --> 01:08:46.280
to pay through the program.

01:08:46.280 --> 01:08:47.600
<v ->Sure, but let me
ask hypothetical,</v>

01:08:47.600 --> 01:08:51.327
if you expect 100 to 300 megawatts

01:08:51.327 --> 01:08:56.327
worth of customers,
demand response to enroll

01:08:56.510 --> 01:08:58.136
what if you have 800 megawatts

01:08:58.136 --> 01:09:01.063
worth of customers enroll?

01:09:02.720 --> 01:09:03.950
<v ->If we did have eight,</v>

01:09:03.950 --> 01:09:05.470
again, that would be
on the very high end.

01:09:05.470 --> 01:09:09.830
I think, and I guess I prefer to say,

01:09:09.830 --> 01:09:14.283
I think our expectation the
highest, and it would be 300.

01:09:18.280 --> 01:09:20.950
I think if we exceed that

01:09:20.950 --> 01:09:24.740
and certainly we are constrained on time

01:09:24.740 --> 01:09:28.380
so we'd like to push
for as much as we could.

01:09:28.380 --> 01:09:31.690
If we look like we were
going to have more demand

01:09:31.690 --> 01:09:34.399
for the program to exceed
that 300 megawatts,

01:09:34.399 --> 01:09:37.850
I think that's just something
that we would communicate

01:09:37.850 --> 01:09:41.380
and if there was any budget
adjustments need to be made.

01:09:44.460 --> 01:09:47.734
<v ->What has been the customer
interest in your programs?</v>

01:09:47.734 --> 01:09:50.370
We're in a very expedited timeline here.

01:09:50.370 --> 01:09:53.607
I mean, are you hearing
from your customers

01:09:53.607 --> 01:09:55.080
and your service territories

01:09:55.080 --> 01:09:58.330
that they're interested in
participating in this program?

01:09:58.330 --> 01:10:01.947
<v ->Yes, we have had
many, many customers</v>

01:10:01.947 --> 01:10:03.030
and many participants

01:10:05.680 --> 01:10:06.807
some that have participated

01:10:06.807 --> 01:10:10.112
and some that in our historical
program, some that haven't.

01:10:10.112 --> 01:10:12.620
So we have had a lot of interests.

01:10:12.620 --> 01:10:14.280
We also have had a lot of questions

01:10:14.280 --> 01:10:16.780
and certainly due to the timing,

01:10:16.780 --> 01:10:20.811
because we are trying
to gather this information

01:10:20.811 --> 01:10:24.250
and have this set up for
December authentication.

01:10:24.250 --> 01:10:25.770
So it's a very quick roll out.

01:10:25.770 --> 01:10:28.190
So we have had some
questions and concerns

01:10:28.190 --> 01:10:30.840
on just the timing of it
being something new

01:10:30.840 --> 01:10:35.840
and what's needed to participate

01:10:36.417 --> 01:10:37.710
and is this really gonna happen?

01:10:37.710 --> 01:10:40.188
So we've got a lot of good feedback,

01:10:40.188 --> 01:10:44.260
but we certainly, haven't
got a lot of questions.

01:10:44.260 --> 01:10:46.057
It's something new for us

01:10:46.057 --> 01:10:47.790
and it's been such kind
of a quick turnaround,

01:10:47.790 --> 01:10:48.823
quick rollout.

01:10:48.823 --> 01:10:50.740
<v ->'Cause that's what
I'm kind of wondering,</v>

01:10:50.740 --> 01:10:51.573
at the end of the day,

01:10:51.573 --> 01:10:53.409
how many customers are
we gonna really have sign up

01:10:53.409 --> 01:10:55.930
for these programs?

01:10:55.930 --> 01:10:58.730
I mean, y'all are asking us
to approve this very quickly

01:10:59.980 --> 01:11:01.350
at the very beginning of the winter

01:11:01.350 --> 01:11:06.350
when really the true tread on the winter

01:11:06.547 --> 01:11:08.603
is January and February.

01:11:10.690 --> 01:11:13.610
I guess the other question I have,

01:11:13.610 --> 01:11:15.900
and it seems like with
respect to the CenterPoint

01:11:15.900 --> 01:11:17.480
and I'd have to flip
around and make sure,

01:11:17.480 --> 01:11:19.010
but on the other companies,

01:11:19.010 --> 01:11:22.370
but the targeted program participants

01:11:22.370 --> 01:11:23.716
would be commercial customers,

01:11:23.716 --> 01:11:26.400
aggregation groups and reps.

01:11:26.400 --> 01:11:28.911
With respect to the
commercial customers,

01:11:28.911 --> 01:11:32.010
are these larger commercial customers?

01:11:32.010 --> 01:11:34.769
Are we going to have
some kind of cannibalization

01:11:34.769 --> 01:11:38.224
between this pilot program and ERS?

01:11:38.224 --> 01:11:41.800
And to some extent,

01:11:41.800 --> 01:11:44.090
is there any overlap,
I guess is a question.

01:11:44.090 --> 01:11:45.385
<v ->Commissioner,
one clarification,</v>

01:11:45.385 --> 01:11:48.820
currently reps are not
eligible participants,

01:11:48.820 --> 01:11:51.610
but we are fine with having reps

01:11:51.610 --> 01:11:54.400
as being eligible participants
if that's what you want.

01:11:54.400 --> 01:11:56.293
I'll defer to Shea with regard to-

01:11:57.410 --> 01:11:59.430
<v Cobos>It's actually
in your filing.</v>

01:11:59.430 --> 01:12:01.303
So that's where I'm
getting all this information,

01:12:02.686 --> 01:12:04.386
unless I'm missing something here.

01:12:05.290 --> 01:12:06.800
It says-

01:12:06.800 --> 01:12:07.633
<v ->Arms.</v>

01:12:07.633 --> 01:12:08.830
<v Cobos>Arms, okay, all right.</v>

01:12:08.830 --> 01:12:11.150
No wonder we got a
lot of paper on this case.

01:12:11.150 --> 01:12:13.230
Thank you, Kelly, okay.

01:12:13.230 --> 01:12:15.100
Thank you for the clarification,

01:12:15.100 --> 01:12:17.530
but we'll, we'll get to
you in a bit (chuckles).

01:12:20.620 --> 01:12:21.650
<v ->Commissioner, I
believe your question</v>

01:12:21.650 --> 01:12:23.806
was around just the size
and type of customers

01:12:23.806 --> 01:12:25.826
we expect in our program.

01:12:25.826 --> 01:12:30.740
It's certainly early in that process,

01:12:30.740 --> 01:12:35.740
but, I would expect
we would have a range

01:12:35.860 --> 01:12:39.863
of larger and smaller
commercial customers.

01:12:40.900 --> 01:12:43.420
We really haven't limited the scope

01:12:43.420 --> 01:12:45.070
of the customers we're targeting.

01:12:45.070 --> 01:12:48.610
So I don't know that I have
a lot of good information

01:12:48.610 --> 01:12:51.861
for you right now and
exactly what that range is

01:12:51.861 --> 01:12:56.600
in terms of the feedback we
have or what size customers.

01:12:56.600 --> 01:13:01.600
But I do know that it is a broad range

01:13:01.660 --> 01:13:02.970
of both larger and smaller.

01:13:02.970 --> 01:13:06.580
<v ->Okay, well, I think depending
on how this program goes,</v>

01:13:06.580 --> 01:13:08.603
if we continue to have
these programs in the future,

01:13:08.603 --> 01:13:10.210
that'll be something to consider

01:13:10.210 --> 01:13:13.642
in terms of, whether there's any overlap

01:13:13.642 --> 01:13:16.180
or crossover cannibalization
between the programs.

01:13:16.180 --> 01:13:18.280
I think with respect to this winter,

01:13:18.280 --> 01:13:20.460
I mean, ERCOT has
already issued out their RFP

01:13:20.460 --> 01:13:23.270
for the winter procurement for ERS.

01:13:23.270 --> 01:13:28.270
So I don't think this would
affect any participants

01:13:28.320 --> 01:13:31.730
on that end, is kind of
what I'm sort of observing

01:13:31.730 --> 01:13:32.563
at this time.

01:13:32.563 --> 01:13:34.020
But I was just kind of curious

01:13:34.020 --> 01:13:35.950
to learn a little bit more about that

01:13:35.950 --> 01:13:37.100
especially with CenterPoint,

01:13:37.100 --> 01:13:41.453
having a large industrial
load that you have out there.

01:13:42.450 --> 01:13:43.283
<v ->And Mr. Chairman,</v>

01:13:43.283 --> 01:13:44.792
with regard to your question

01:13:44.792 --> 01:13:46.171
about the control
over enrollment issues,

01:13:46.171 --> 01:13:49.830
we would view that as a
question that's really decided

01:13:49.830 --> 01:13:51.060
when it comes to cost recovery.

01:13:51.060 --> 01:13:52.620
If you think we over enrolled,

01:13:52.620 --> 01:13:54.470
or maybe we went past our sweet spot

01:13:54.470 --> 01:13:56.372
as to what is cost-effective,

01:13:56.372 --> 01:13:58.257
certainly parties and
the Commission itself

01:13:58.257 --> 01:13:59.773
can raise that question.

01:14:00.930 --> 01:14:02.930
<v ->Thank you, so here's the deal.</v>

01:14:02.930 --> 01:14:04.680
This Commission is
moving heaven and earth

01:14:04.680 --> 01:14:07.418
so that we never have
to use your program.

01:14:07.418 --> 01:14:08.436
(all laughing)

01:14:08.436 --> 01:14:12.593
And so that reasonable
test, when we get to it,

01:14:13.953 --> 01:14:16.720
we better not have to use your program.

01:14:16.720 --> 01:14:18.877
And so the larger it is,

01:14:18.877 --> 01:14:21.150
and the framework that it fits in,

01:14:21.150 --> 01:14:26.150
is important, especially
in the short fuse timeline

01:14:26.150 --> 01:14:27.705
that we have to work with here.

01:14:27.705 --> 01:14:32.705
Oncor, Oncor, anybody from Oncor?

01:14:32.800 --> 01:14:33.670
<v man>Good morning. Yes.</v>

01:14:33.670 --> 01:14:34.503
<v ->Good morning.</v>

01:14:35.400 --> 01:14:38.620
EECRF, can you describe the mechanics

01:14:38.620 --> 01:14:40.810
of how this would fit into EECRF

01:14:40.810 --> 01:14:43.020
or at least the framework of EECRF?

01:14:43.020 --> 01:14:44.172
Should we go down that road?

01:14:44.172 --> 01:14:45.263
<v ->Certainly.</v>

01:14:46.210 --> 01:14:49.010
Yes, I am Garry Jones.

01:14:49.010 --> 01:14:52.143
I'm the Director of Energy
Efficiency for Oncor.

01:14:53.719 --> 01:14:55.590
(clears throat) Excuse me.

01:14:55.590 --> 01:14:57.790
This program is treated

01:14:57.790 --> 01:14:59.400
just like any other program

01:14:59.400 --> 01:15:01.373
in the energy efficiency portfolio.

01:15:03.310 --> 01:15:05.620
Our intent will manage this

01:15:05.620 --> 01:15:08.970
under our current commercial
load management program

01:15:08.970 --> 01:15:11.934
that we run in the summertime.

01:15:11.934 --> 01:15:14.750
So we'll recover it through EECR

01:15:14.750 --> 01:15:17.232
just like we would do
with any other program.

01:15:17.232 --> 01:15:18.065
<v ->[Jimmy Glotfelty
] So the overlay</v>

01:15:18.065 --> 01:15:20.230
is simply to apply it for winter?

01:15:20.230 --> 01:15:21.063
<v ->That's correct.</v>

01:15:21.063 --> 01:15:21.896
<v ->[Jimmy Glotfelty ] Yeah.</v>

01:15:21.896 --> 01:15:23.930
And so ERCOT is
accustomed to how to account

01:15:23.930 --> 01:15:25.930
for that as well, is that accurate?

01:15:25.930 --> 01:15:27.534
<v Garry>That is.</v>

01:15:27.534 --> 01:15:29.572
<v ->And so for the purposes of
ERCOT load management,</v>

01:15:29.572 --> 01:15:34.480
we have a framework from an
operational control perspective

01:15:34.480 --> 01:15:35.493
to use it.

01:15:35.493 --> 01:15:38.837
<v ->That's correct, we have a
memorandum of understanding</v>

01:15:38.837 --> 01:15:43.310
with ERCOT and we do need to modify that

01:15:43.310 --> 01:15:44.880
to accommodate for the winter,

01:15:44.880 --> 01:15:48.320
but we'll make adjustments to it.

01:15:48.320 --> 01:15:49.698
<v Glotfelt>Okay.</v>

01:15:49.698 --> 01:15:54.632
<v ->Can I ask how you all
envision retail providers</v>

01:15:54.632 --> 01:15:55.580
being a part of this,

01:15:55.580 --> 01:15:56.950
or are they not part of this?

01:15:56.950 --> 01:15:58.270
Are you all going directly

01:15:58.270 --> 01:16:03.180
to these entities that
are in your business

01:16:03.180 --> 01:16:05.290
that you don't actually sell electricity

01:16:05.290 --> 01:16:06.672
but you provide transmission service

01:16:06.672 --> 01:16:08.373
or distribution service to,

01:16:08.373 --> 01:16:11.243
and trying to get them to curtail load?

01:16:12.410 --> 01:16:13.810
I'm just trying to figure out

01:16:13.810 --> 01:16:18.530
because the retail market,
we want this to happen

01:16:18.530 --> 01:16:20.880
and I would like to see
it in the retail market

01:16:21.740 --> 01:16:25.460
as a demand function that
impacts wholesale rates

01:16:25.460 --> 01:16:26.760
across the entire board.

01:16:26.760 --> 01:16:31.070
So I get a little fearful
when I don't understand

01:16:31.070 --> 01:16:33.250
the program, if it's just the
transmission owner going,

01:16:33.250 --> 01:16:35.720
and again, this is a
bigger issue in EECRF

01:16:35.720 --> 01:16:37.040
when we talk about that,

01:16:37.040 --> 01:16:38.840
but can you all give me an understanding

01:16:38.840 --> 01:16:42.640
of how you all envision going

01:16:42.640 --> 01:16:46.803
to get this load that you
seek to pay to reduce?

01:16:48.350 --> 01:16:49.720
<v ->Stacy Whitehurst for TNMP.</v>

01:16:49.720 --> 01:16:53.110
So we do contact the end-use customer

01:16:53.110 --> 01:16:55.610
if we have the contact information,

01:16:55.610 --> 01:16:58.250
but a lot of it does
come from aggregators

01:16:58.250 --> 01:17:00.250
that maybe go and have customers

01:17:00.250 --> 01:17:02.327
in our service territory,
CenterPoints territory,

01:17:02.327 --> 01:17:03.570
and AEP surcharge.

01:17:03.570 --> 01:17:07.045
So there's a combination
of certain customer classes

01:17:07.045 --> 01:17:08.903
that we'd be enrolling.

01:17:08.903 --> 01:17:13.450
So it's a combination of
both outreach of customers

01:17:13.450 --> 01:17:15.030
that have participated in our program,

01:17:15.030 --> 01:17:16.680
in the past and then aggregators.

01:17:18.460 --> 01:17:21.440
<v ->Build on that, Jimmy,
and the interaction</v>

01:17:21.440 --> 01:17:22.880
with the wholesale market.

01:17:22.880 --> 01:17:27.880
How did y'all decide on the
prices you set per kilowatt?

01:17:34.090 --> 01:17:36.193
<v ->Commissioner, for
CenterPoint energy,</v>

01:17:38.302 --> 01:17:40.110
and just to answer your question

01:17:40.110 --> 01:17:43.280
much of our this winter
intermodal management program

01:17:43.280 --> 01:17:45.204
is based on what has
been historically successful

01:17:45.204 --> 01:17:49.064
for our summer energy
efficiency program.

01:17:49.064 --> 01:17:52.600
So everything from the program design

01:17:52.600 --> 01:17:54.640
was somebody wants to even the pricing,

01:17:54.640 --> 01:17:57.109
which for us is $30 a KW.

01:17:57.109 --> 01:18:00.894
We use that same model.

01:18:00.894 --> 01:18:04.929
It's been effective for us
in that summer program

01:18:04.929 --> 01:18:07.866
in garnering participation
in to hit our goals

01:18:07.866 --> 01:18:10.700
while at the same time
being cost-effective.

01:18:10.700 --> 01:18:12.231
So we really just use the same.

01:18:12.231 --> 01:18:17.043
<v ->Historic pricing
wasn't just correct</v>

01:18:17.043 --> 01:18:18.489
not new analysis.

01:18:18.489 --> 01:18:22.920
<v ->We did not modify that for
more where we had been recently</v>

01:18:24.170 --> 01:18:26.413
with our existing load
management activity.

01:18:28.183 --> 01:18:29.182
<v ->Are any of you extrapolated,</v>

01:18:29.182 --> 01:18:31.730
I guess, depending on the program,

01:18:31.730 --> 01:18:34.630
each of you have different
time constraints, is that fair?

01:18:34.630 --> 01:18:36.827
Like each customer can
only be cartel so many times

01:18:36.827 --> 01:18:39.510
for no more than a
certain number of hours.

01:18:39.510 --> 01:18:42.870
Is that generally accurate?

01:18:42.870 --> 01:18:44.542
Have you all looked at the,

01:18:44.542 --> 01:18:49.542
or extrapolated the equivalent
megawatt per hour price,

01:18:50.360 --> 01:18:52.162
if all of those hours were utilized

01:18:52.162 --> 01:18:56.471
and essentially to manage load shed,

01:18:56.471 --> 01:18:59.050
or demand response by taking load off

01:18:59.050 --> 01:19:02.433
of the reducing that demand?

01:19:08.308 --> 01:19:11.260
<v ->Yeah, Commissioner, I don't
have that information for you.</v>

01:19:11.260 --> 01:19:13.320
So no, we have not.

01:19:13.320 --> 01:19:16.560
<v ->Okay, per Jimmy's point about</v>

01:19:16.560 --> 01:19:18.180
how this interacts with
the wholesale market

01:19:18.180 --> 01:19:19.013
and that impact.

01:19:19.013 --> 01:19:21.583
I'm curious what the
equivalent megawatt-

01:19:26.280 --> 01:19:27.150
<v ->Value.</v>

01:19:27.150 --> 01:19:29.680
<v ->Value versus somebody
who's just participating</v>

01:19:29.680 --> 01:19:32.633
in normal demand response
in the real-time market.

01:19:34.330 --> 01:19:36.610
<v ->It started at EEA2, correct?</v>

01:19:36.610 --> 01:19:38.690
Still, I mean, this is
an EEA2 threshold,

01:19:38.690 --> 01:19:40.223
so we are at high cap,

01:19:41.850 --> 01:19:44.463
no matter what at the threshold.

01:19:45.330 --> 01:19:49.593
<v ->Okay, I mean, so what y'all
were doing $30 a kilowatt?</v>

01:19:50.778 --> 01:19:52.257
<v ->At $40.</v>

01:19:52.257 --> 01:19:54.813
<v ->$40, so how many
dollars per megawatt?</v>

01:19:58.835 --> 01:20:01.520
(Commissioners laughing)

01:20:01.520 --> 01:20:02.430
<v ->As he rose.</v>

01:20:02.430 --> 01:20:05.903
<v ->Yeah, someone
do that math for me?</v>

01:20:07.620 --> 01:20:09.475
<v ->Regulatory, guys, come on.</v>

01:20:09.475 --> 01:20:12.012
<v ->It'd be $3,000 a
megawatt for us,</v>

01:20:12.012 --> 01:20:13.360
I think that's 4,000.

01:20:13.360 --> 01:20:18.083
<v ->Okay, $4,000 a
megawatt, 30 times.</v>

01:20:20.810 --> 01:20:21.643
Okay.

01:20:22.873 --> 01:20:24.153
<v ->We have 300 times for.</v>

01:20:26.490 --> 01:20:27.330
<v ->300?</v>

01:20:27.330 --> 01:20:28.762
<v ->Right.</v>

01:20:28.762 --> 01:20:29.595
I mean, cause isn't that
what they're proposing

01:20:29.595 --> 01:20:31.373
a 300 megawatt, correct Kayla?

01:20:33.868 --> 01:20:35.190
<v ->All right.</v>
<v ->So, okay.</v>

01:20:35.190 --> 01:20:39.763
So those are expensive
megawatts, but at high cap.

01:20:42.490 --> 01:20:44.333
Okay, and how many hours?

01:20:46.550 --> 01:20:50.180
<v ->So for our program, we
committed to a six curtailments,</v>

01:20:50.180 --> 01:20:51.804
two tests curtailments ranging

01:20:51.804 --> 01:20:53.098
between one to three hours

01:20:53.098 --> 01:20:54.457
and four unscheduled curtailments

01:20:54.457 --> 01:20:57.273
ranging between one to four hours.

01:20:59.440 --> 01:21:00.273
<v ->Thank you.</v>

01:21:01.220 --> 01:21:02.584
<v ->So I have a question</v>

01:21:02.584 --> 01:21:07.060
'cause I've been curious
about these programs

01:21:07.060 --> 01:21:09.846
as they are enshrined in SB 3 ,

01:21:09.846 --> 01:21:14.846
when the legislature
added this provision to SB 3

01:21:14.960 --> 01:21:19.238
and I'm assuming they had
conversations with the utilities

01:21:19.238 --> 01:21:23.790
and I'm wondering why EEA2 was selected.

01:21:23.790 --> 01:21:27.850
'Cause we are trying
to move all of our tools

01:21:27.850 --> 01:21:32.182
out of the emergency
toolkit like we have for ERS

01:21:32.182 --> 01:21:37.182
and the TDU distribution
voltage reduction program.

01:21:37.974 --> 01:21:41.970
And this is a conversation
for later forum,

01:21:41.970 --> 01:21:43.450
but if we were to open up

01:21:43.450 --> 01:21:45.857
the TDU energy efficiency
load manager program rule

01:21:45.857 --> 01:21:49.792
25181, which I have supported doing so

01:21:49.792 --> 01:21:52.210
either we'll have the opportunity

01:21:52.210 --> 01:21:55.062
to move some of these
programs outside of emergency.

01:21:55.062 --> 01:21:57.279
But this particular program,

01:21:57.279 --> 01:22:02.279
this particular winter program
is statutorily tied to EEA2

01:22:03.398 --> 01:22:07.810
can someone elaborate
for me how we got here?

01:22:07.810 --> 01:22:09.540
Or just give me a
little bit of background

01:22:09.540 --> 01:22:14.210
as to why ultimately, I
mean, you didn't pass this bill,

01:22:14.210 --> 01:22:17.210
but I'm assuming you had
conversations with the legislature.

01:22:19.330 --> 01:22:21.450
<v ->Commissioner, I, myself
didn't have conversations</v>

01:22:21.450 --> 01:22:22.540
with the legislature.

01:22:22.540 --> 01:22:23.681
I don't have much visibility

01:22:23.681 --> 01:22:26.710
into the SB 3 sausage making on that.

01:22:26.710 --> 01:22:28.350
<v ->Right, and I wouldn't
suspect you would</v>

01:22:28.350 --> 01:22:30.060
'cause you're an attorney,
you're not a lobbyist,

01:22:30.060 --> 01:22:32.266
but I guess I'm trying to understand,

01:22:32.266 --> 01:22:37.266
the value of having it at EEA2.

01:22:38.282 --> 01:22:40.690
And we're trying to move
everything out, obviously.

01:22:40.690 --> 01:22:42.363
<v ->I think that's some statue.</v>

01:22:42.363 --> 01:22:43.470
<v ->Yeah, it's a statue.</v>

01:22:43.470 --> 01:22:47.499
<v ->Is it possible that our TDSP
load management program</v>

01:22:47.499 --> 01:22:52.499
in substantive rule is
that EEA2 right now?

01:22:52.680 --> 01:22:55.430
So was it designed to
be consistent with that

01:22:55.430 --> 01:22:56.670
in terms of the mechanics?

01:22:56.670 --> 01:22:59.130
<v ->I think the current summer
load management program</v>

01:22:59.130 --> 01:23:01.250
is called by our current EEA2

01:23:01.250 --> 01:23:03.218
and so I think that's probably why,

01:23:03.218 --> 01:23:04.950
'cause we were trying to keep them

01:23:04.950 --> 01:23:06.470
consistent between the two.

01:23:06.470 --> 01:23:09.683
<v Glotfelty>So big rocks of load
management on your part?</v>

01:23:10.890 --> 01:23:11.723
<v ->Makes sense.</v>

01:23:11.723 --> 01:23:13.360
So we'll have the ability
to adjust that in our role,

01:23:13.360 --> 01:23:15.240
but this is obviously
statutorily and shrine.

01:23:15.240 --> 01:23:16.610
I'm just trying to
understand it a little bit more

01:23:16.610 --> 01:23:20.453
when I saw it in SB 3, I
honestly thought it might be

01:23:20.453 --> 01:23:22.640
a good positive movement
in the right direction

01:23:22.640 --> 01:23:24.017
to try to get some winter activity

01:23:24.017 --> 01:23:25.490
on the load management program.

01:23:25.490 --> 01:23:28.963
But I'm just trying to
understand the background on it.

01:23:31.286 --> 01:23:33.190
<v ->Can I ask staff a question?</v>

01:23:33.190 --> 01:23:34.452
<v ->Absolutely.</v>

01:23:34.452 --> 01:23:35.452
<v ->And the question would be,</v>

01:23:35.452 --> 01:23:39.748
did you all look into how
this played with the EECRF

01:23:39.748 --> 01:23:42.650
or did you look at it as
just a standalone program

01:23:42.650 --> 01:23:45.220
that while authorized by the legislature

01:23:45.220 --> 01:23:48.073
it met the statutory
construction of that?

01:23:50.030 --> 01:23:53.600
<v ->Okay, well, Oncors
is different from the rest</v>

01:23:53.600 --> 01:23:56.423
because they're trying
to do it within the EECRF.

01:23:59.334 --> 01:24:01.077
Tarrus ERS PEC.

01:24:02.620 --> 01:24:04.130
So Oncor is different.

01:24:04.130 --> 01:24:05.557
It will operate within,

01:24:05.557 --> 01:24:08.510
and it will also address
some of the issues

01:24:08.510 --> 01:24:13.200
that have been raised regarding
participation by the reps.

01:24:13.200 --> 01:24:15.001
So they're required by the rule,

01:24:15.001 --> 01:24:20.001
by the EECRF rule to include
reps as far as participants.

01:24:20.370 --> 01:24:23.270
So Oncor we'll do that
and we'll address that.

01:24:23.270 --> 01:24:25.190
We did look at Oncor's program

01:24:25.190 --> 01:24:26.500
because it's part of the energy

01:24:26.500 --> 01:24:29.360
efficiency cost recovery overall program

01:24:29.360 --> 01:24:33.170
and it did fit within a pilot.

01:24:33.170 --> 01:24:37.237
And what we did is we
sent it out to our EIP listserv

01:24:37.237 --> 01:24:41.890
and we also filed it in a
project for stakeholder comment.

01:24:41.890 --> 01:24:45.870
So we followed the process
for an existing program

01:24:45.870 --> 01:24:49.030
that is now offering a pilot program.

01:24:49.030 --> 01:24:52.185
So the other programs
were offered outside

01:24:52.185 --> 01:24:55.710
of the utilities load
management program.

01:24:55.710 --> 01:25:00.710
And they're not doing it
according to the EECRF rule,

01:25:02.205 --> 01:25:05.933
but it's very similar,
is what I would say.

01:25:07.810 --> 01:25:08.643
<v ->Thank you.</v>

01:25:12.706 --> 01:25:14.539
<v ->Questions, comments?</v>

01:25:17.020 --> 01:25:19.340
So just a perspective
that I'm coming from this.

01:25:19.340 --> 01:25:23.210
And I know this,
Mr. Chairman, you shared

01:25:23.210 --> 01:25:27.680
this viewpoint that whatever
we do before this winter,

01:25:27.680 --> 01:25:29.424
we want it to be useful

01:25:29.424 --> 01:25:33.145
to that command and control capability

01:25:33.145 --> 01:25:36.340
of the ERCOT control room

01:25:36.340 --> 01:25:38.210
and to know how it's going to interact

01:25:38.210 --> 01:25:40.123
and to know what
they're going to expect.

01:25:40.123 --> 01:25:45.123
And so for your purposes,
managing all this,

01:25:45.222 --> 01:25:48.920
we don't want the
procedures to be necessarily

01:25:48.920 --> 01:25:50.247
shoot from the hip.

01:25:50.247 --> 01:25:52.739
This needs to be kind of tried and true

01:25:52.739 --> 01:25:57.642
performance measures and EECRF is that.

01:25:57.642 --> 01:26:00.388
so it's a kin to it.

01:26:00.388 --> 01:26:04.023
It seems to be designed
very much like it.

01:26:05.810 --> 01:26:10.810
So as I view this, I see it
as an augmentation to that.

01:26:13.742 --> 01:26:18.742
<v ->Yes, we certainly want
more resources this winter.</v>

01:26:19.070 --> 01:26:20.390
The big question I've got remaining

01:26:20.390 --> 01:26:25.160
is if approval is granted,

01:26:25.160 --> 01:26:28.360
what is the time to
implementation for staff

01:26:28.360 --> 01:26:30.670
because there are a
lot of questions today.

01:26:30.670 --> 01:26:33.538
And I would certainly
default on the side of caution

01:26:33.538 --> 01:26:37.880
on something, as you pointed
out, Jimmy, that is moving

01:26:37.880 --> 01:26:40.743
so, so quickly with big sums of money.

01:26:41.930 --> 01:26:43.010
I'd certainly want to default

01:26:43.010 --> 01:26:48.010
on the side of caution
before we dive in head first,

01:26:49.765 --> 01:26:52.380
but we've got to balance that
with the need for the winter.

01:26:52.380 --> 01:26:53.670
So for all of you,

01:26:53.670 --> 01:26:57.203
what is time to implementation
if approval is granted?

01:27:02.690 --> 01:27:04.406
<v ->Robert Cavazos with AEP, Texas.</v>

01:27:04.406 --> 01:27:07.230
The timeline is still December 1st

01:27:07.230 --> 01:27:09.647
through the end of February 28th.

01:27:09.647 --> 01:27:12.464
<v ->So how long, if we tabled this</v>

01:27:12.464 --> 01:27:17.464
to get more information and be able

01:27:17.490 --> 01:27:19.132
to crunch the numbers a little bit more

01:27:19.132 --> 01:27:21.987
until, say, our December 2nd meeting,

01:27:21.987 --> 01:27:25.153
would you still be able
to implement it and say-

01:27:26.964 --> 01:27:27.797
<v ->A month.</v>

01:27:27.797 --> 01:27:29.683
<v ->15 days after
that, or the 12 days?</v>

01:27:30.950 --> 01:27:32.587
<v ->Would certainly think we could.</v>

01:27:32.587 --> 01:27:34.010
<v ->Okay, so-</v>

01:27:34.010 --> 01:27:37.100
<v ->Well, I mean the
thing that, again,</v>

01:27:37.100 --> 01:27:39.804
that kind of gets to me
is the range of megawatts

01:27:39.804 --> 01:27:40.800
we're talking about.

01:27:40.800 --> 01:27:43.990
I mean, if this was a one
and a half megawatt program

01:27:43.990 --> 01:27:48.243
for TNMP, 10 for AEP
and 20 for CenterPoint,

01:27:49.240 --> 01:27:51.419
it seems like it's pretty reasonable.

01:27:51.419 --> 01:27:54.380
It's 100 to 300 megawatts.

01:27:54.380 --> 01:27:56.499
That's where I struggle.

01:27:56.499 --> 01:27:58.170
Are they going to be able to get it?

01:27:58.170 --> 01:27:59.710
I know that they're in an area

01:27:59.710 --> 01:28:03.310
that has a lot of large
commercial and industrial.

01:28:03.310 --> 01:28:06.560
I feel like the cost could be exorbitant

01:28:06.560 --> 01:28:10.612
and I what you said is
maybe we should defer

01:28:10.612 --> 01:28:13.936
this until the December 2nd rule,

01:28:13.936 --> 01:28:18.620
we've only given them 12 days now.

01:28:18.620 --> 01:28:21.850
So they started at the 15th of December.

01:28:21.850 --> 01:28:25.330
They may be able to get those megawatts,

01:28:25.330 --> 01:28:26.730
but we would get more information

01:28:26.730 --> 01:28:30.359
about how it would
impact the EECRF program,

01:28:30.359 --> 01:28:33.290
how it would impact the
wholesale market and ERCOT,

01:28:33.290 --> 01:28:35.483
how the reps might
play into this and such.

01:28:37.010 --> 01:28:37.843
<v ->No, I agree.</v>

01:28:37.843 --> 01:28:38.940
And I would almost add

01:28:38.940 --> 01:28:42.955
that waiting until December
2nd seems prudent

01:28:42.955 --> 01:28:44.880
or matter of due diligence,

01:28:44.880 --> 01:28:47.370
just so we can further examine
this, get more information,

01:28:47.370 --> 01:28:49.161
but I mean, as long as this
program is up and running

01:28:49.161 --> 01:28:52.870
and we ultimately decided to
move forward by January 1st,

01:28:52.870 --> 01:28:54.090
I think we're going to be okay

01:28:54.090 --> 01:28:56.550
because, I mean, the true winter

01:28:56.550 --> 01:29:00.620
typically this in January and February.

01:29:00.620 --> 01:29:02.990
So I don't want to feel rushed

01:29:02.990 --> 01:29:05.060
to get something in place December one,

01:29:05.060 --> 01:29:09.042
because that's the first day of winter,

01:29:09.042 --> 01:29:10.662
I think we got to do our due diligence

01:29:10.662 --> 01:29:13.340
and get the information
to feel comfortable.

01:29:13.340 --> 01:29:16.183
And I would think January
1, would be just fine.

01:29:16.183 --> 01:29:18.300
<v ->Commissioners, to the extent</v>

01:29:18.300 --> 01:29:20.165
that you need additional
information or analysis,

01:29:20.165 --> 01:29:21.668
we'd be happy to provide it.

01:29:21.668 --> 01:29:24.020
And to the extent that
you want to push this

01:29:24.020 --> 01:29:26.063
to December 2nd, we can make that work.

01:29:26.063 --> 01:29:27.601
<v ->I appreciate that.</v>

01:29:27.601 --> 01:29:32.524
I'll build on my previous
statement, their question,

01:29:32.524 --> 01:29:35.660
we would love from
each of y'all analysis

01:29:35.660 --> 01:29:38.223
on the megawatt hour equivalent.

01:29:39.687 --> 01:29:43.010
So we can see what just
normal demand response

01:29:43.010 --> 01:29:47.344
in the real-time market
that we usually see would be,

01:29:47.344 --> 01:29:50.880
and also compare it to other premium

01:29:50.880 --> 01:29:53.640
other price points in ERS, or example.

01:29:53.640 --> 01:29:55.850
I know we don't have those bids back in,

01:29:55.850 --> 01:29:58.286
but that'd be good to be
able to see apples to apples

01:29:58.286 --> 01:30:03.286
and how it would both on
quantity and a price point

01:30:04.417 --> 01:30:05.550
and how it would interact

01:30:05.550 --> 01:30:07.819
with other demand response programs

01:30:07.819 --> 01:30:09.385
and also the real-time market

01:30:09.385 --> 01:30:11.742
under these kinds of circumstances.

01:30:11.742 --> 01:30:16.240
Any other specific requests
for either staff or the parties.

01:30:16.240 --> 01:30:17.534
<v ->Chairman, just
briefly, a rusting table</v>

01:30:17.534 --> 01:30:18.885
on our behalf staff.

01:30:18.885 --> 01:30:22.510
We're happy to go back and
try to put some more guardrails

01:30:22.510 --> 01:30:24.200
on this and answer those questions

01:30:24.200 --> 01:30:25.880
that you all you all raised today.

01:30:25.880 --> 01:30:28.030
In the meantime, in that period,

01:30:28.030 --> 01:30:30.830
we would like authorization
from you all to go ahead

01:30:30.830 --> 01:30:32.170
and start working with ERCOT

01:30:32.170 --> 01:30:33.781
on how these programs will be dispatched

01:30:33.781 --> 01:30:37.390
so that when they are
ultimately approved,

01:30:37.390 --> 01:30:40.780
if they are, we're
ready to go on that day.

01:30:40.780 --> 01:30:41.999
<v Peter>That certainly
makes sense to me.</v>

01:30:41.999 --> 01:30:42.832
<v ->Yes, sir.</v>

01:30:42.832 --> 01:30:44.304
<v ->Rebecca is our law
square Commission staff.</v>

01:30:44.304 --> 01:30:46.680
I think they're not
a party to this case,

01:30:46.680 --> 01:30:48.880
but ERCOT may have some
information on that calculation

01:30:48.880 --> 01:30:51.060
comparing these programs

01:30:51.060 --> 01:30:53.340
and historic budget they're requesting

01:30:53.340 --> 01:30:58.040
to the ERS project and per
megawatt per hour calculation,

01:30:58.040 --> 01:30:59.870
which I think would be the equivalent,

01:30:59.870 --> 01:31:02.230
which varies highly with ERS depending

01:31:02.230 --> 01:31:05.516
on the time of day those
hours are, and this is more flat.

01:31:05.516 --> 01:31:07.440
So they might be able to provide

01:31:07.440 --> 01:31:09.475
more information in filing on that.

01:31:09.475 --> 01:31:10.308
<v ->'Cause at the end of the day,</v>

01:31:10.308 --> 01:31:11.778
we do not want ERS cannibalized.

01:31:11.778 --> 01:31:14.790
We want people signing up for ERS

01:31:14.790 --> 01:31:16.337
'cause we can use that.

01:31:16.337 --> 01:31:18.238
<v ->And that's more
valuable to our reliability</v>

01:31:18.238 --> 01:31:23.238
with thorough actions
we've taken recently earlier.

01:31:23.300 --> 01:31:24.718
<v ->And the economics
would have changed</v>

01:31:24.718 --> 01:31:25.799
with the changes in the ERS.

01:31:25.799 --> 01:31:26.632
<v ->Exactly.</v>

01:31:27.899 --> 01:31:30.779
<v ->So I think with that,
can we ask ERCOT</v>

01:31:30.779 --> 01:31:35.115
to file some analysis
on that in this docket,

01:31:35.115 --> 01:31:39.330
as soon as they're
able to do that kind of

01:31:39.330 --> 01:31:40.853
quick and dirty math.

01:31:41.740 --> 01:31:45.650
And like everybody's
comfortable with granting authority

01:31:45.650 --> 01:31:48.902
to engage with ERCOT
on dispatch mechanics,

01:31:48.902 --> 01:31:52.541
any other requests for our parties

01:31:52.541 --> 01:31:56.477
or to use for information when to ask

01:31:56.477 --> 01:31:59.304
for a proposal for a hard cap

01:31:59.304 --> 01:32:04.304
or some sort of way to
make sure we have upper end.

01:32:04.940 --> 01:32:06.322
<v ->Yes, sir.</v>

01:32:06.322 --> 01:32:08.525
I'd like some side of a
type of engage with parties,

01:32:08.525 --> 01:32:10.590
you've already been in the discussions,

01:32:10.590 --> 01:32:14.430
but what a budget
would look like on this,

01:32:14.430 --> 01:32:15.360
for our perspective,

01:32:15.360 --> 01:32:17.124
as we calculate what this pilot program

01:32:17.124 --> 01:32:20.450
is going to look like system wise.

01:32:20.450 --> 01:32:22.830
<v ->Good point, and I think
I'm engaging with parties.</v>

01:32:22.830 --> 01:32:25.790
I think at least some of the filings

01:32:25.790 --> 01:32:27.940
I was thumbing through
a while ago, I know Arm

01:32:27.940 --> 01:32:32.360
and TCPA came in
kind of late in the process

01:32:32.360 --> 01:32:35.110
and just to kind of make sure
everybody seemed up on that.

01:32:35.110 --> 01:32:37.610
I know it was a quick
turnaround would be helpful.

01:32:39.050 --> 01:32:41.783
<v ->All right, any questions
or clarifying questions</v>

01:32:41.783 --> 01:32:43.493
on what Commission needs?

01:32:44.492 --> 01:32:45.590
<v ->Yes, sir.</v>

01:32:45.590 --> 01:32:49.328
With regard to Oncor's
program under the EECRF,

01:32:49.328 --> 01:32:51.610
would you like us to
wait until January 1st

01:32:51.610 --> 01:32:54.000
to begin implementation of it

01:32:54.000 --> 01:32:57.073
or can we go ahead and begin
implementation December?

01:32:59.770 --> 01:33:02.490
<v ->Let's wait for
the consideration</v>

01:33:02.490 --> 01:33:04.404
with the rest of them at
the December 2nd meeting

01:33:04.404 --> 01:33:06.920
and by no means I think
Commissioner Cobos

01:33:06.920 --> 01:33:09.210
is saying that the
critical part of the winter

01:33:09.210 --> 01:33:10.635
doesn't start until January 1st

01:33:10.635 --> 01:33:12.820
or I guess the winter
season, technically,

01:33:12.820 --> 01:33:14.179
usually December 20th, December.

01:33:14.179 --> 01:33:19.179
I think her point is that
a week or two delay

01:33:19.610 --> 01:33:24.530
won't have a significant
impact on reliability.

01:33:24.530 --> 01:33:25.640
I don't think she intends

01:33:25.640 --> 01:33:28.580
to specifically delay it implementation

01:33:28.580 --> 01:33:29.413
to January 1st.

01:33:29.413 --> 01:33:31.800
I think I'm guessing, yeah.

01:33:31.800 --> 01:33:33.567
Generally, if we give her approval

01:33:33.567 --> 01:33:35.550
the sooner the better,

01:33:35.550 --> 01:33:39.640
but let's wait till the
December 2nd meeting

01:33:41.880 --> 01:33:44.270
for the Commission to give
a yay or nay at that point.

01:33:44.270 --> 01:33:45.779
I think all of us, if it is an approval,

01:33:45.779 --> 01:33:50.779
we would all encourage
implementation as soon as possible.

01:33:51.800 --> 01:33:53.680
<v ->Chairman, just briefly,
just for clarification,</v>

01:33:53.680 --> 01:33:55.095
you mentioned having a budget.

01:33:55.095 --> 01:33:56.831
I think the way the programs are now

01:33:56.831 --> 01:33:58.580
there's an estimated budget.

01:33:58.580 --> 01:34:00.552
Would you prefer to see a hard cap?

01:34:00.552 --> 01:34:02.220
<v ->I would say I would prefer</v>

01:34:02.220 --> 01:34:04.010
to see a consensus driven cap

01:34:04.010 --> 01:34:08.534
on what the universe
of expensive rate payers.

01:34:08.534 --> 01:34:09.823
<v ->Thank you.</v>

01:34:11.000 --> 01:34:12.310
<v ->Thank you.</v>

01:34:12.310 --> 01:34:15.470
All right, I think that's
all we've got for y'all.

01:34:15.470 --> 01:34:18.550
I have a couple other parties
that would like to approach.

01:34:18.550 --> 01:34:19.750
Thank you all very much.

01:34:24.520 --> 01:34:29.303
Commission staff can hang
out for a minute would be great.

01:34:48.520 --> 01:34:49.540
<v ->Morning, Commissioners,</v>

01:34:49.540 --> 01:34:53.270
Andreas Mitrano for Texas
competitive power advocates.

01:34:53.270 --> 01:34:54.903
We've intervened this case,

01:34:56.320 --> 01:34:57.890
I don't want to into technicalities.

01:34:57.890 --> 01:34:59.198
This case was very accelerated

01:34:59.198 --> 01:35:02.556
and we got it in as soon as
we were aware of the issues

01:35:02.556 --> 01:35:04.240
that were being discussed here,

01:35:04.240 --> 01:35:07.400
and we have some serious
concerns about the implementation.

01:35:07.400 --> 01:35:09.350
Certainly TCPA is not trying to stand

01:35:09.350 --> 01:35:11.940
in the way of any program
that could add megawatts

01:35:11.940 --> 01:35:13.057
in the winter at all,

01:35:13.057 --> 01:35:15.340
simply that we have an energy market.

01:35:15.340 --> 01:35:16.720
It's very sensitive,

01:35:16.720 --> 01:35:18.170
we've seen that the implications

01:35:18.170 --> 01:35:20.127
of that throughout this year
from three days in February,

01:35:20.127 --> 01:35:21.910
four days in February.

01:35:21.910 --> 01:35:23.820
And we want to make
sure that any program

01:35:23.820 --> 01:35:25.560
is fully incorporated into the market

01:35:25.560 --> 01:35:29.060
and operated by ERCOT
with market principles

01:35:29.060 --> 01:35:30.720
and keeping the market impacts in mind

01:35:30.720 --> 01:35:32.664
so that we don't have
a piecemeal approach

01:35:32.664 --> 01:35:36.209
that uses this program as a band-aid

01:35:36.209 --> 01:35:38.310
but then it has a cascading effect

01:35:38.310 --> 01:35:42.070
of having a worse impact
on disincentivizing investment

01:35:42.070 --> 01:35:44.267
in resource adequacy,
further down the line.

01:35:44.267 --> 01:35:45.442
And our ask is very simple.

01:35:45.442 --> 01:35:47.270
We simply are asking

01:35:47.270 --> 01:35:52.270
that ERCOT ensure that
this program be incorporated

01:35:52.830 --> 01:35:54.260
into wholesale price formation

01:35:54.260 --> 01:35:58.880
that in all the joint
TDUs will provide ERCOT

01:35:58.880 --> 01:36:02.038
with the information they
need to account for this program

01:36:02.038 --> 01:36:06.032
and that this be
implemented operationally

01:36:06.032 --> 01:36:11.032
in accordance with NPRR 1006,
which was approved in 2020,

01:36:11.490 --> 01:36:16.490
which directed the TDU
load response programs

01:36:17.020 --> 01:36:20.330
be incorporated into the ORDC

01:36:20.330 --> 01:36:23.937
and the other reserve
pricing capacities at ERCOT.

01:36:23.937 --> 01:36:25.250
And simply, we just want

01:36:25.250 --> 01:36:26.650
to make sure it's accounted for

01:36:26.650 --> 01:36:28.980
so that if there are
pricing impacts of this,

01:36:28.980 --> 01:36:31.660
that it not dis-incentivized generation

01:36:31.660 --> 01:36:33.945
or other normal processes
through the market.

01:36:33.945 --> 01:36:36.587
And I'm a little concerned about

01:36:36.587 --> 01:36:38.510
the prices that we're
talking about here.

01:36:38.510 --> 01:36:41.125
I mean, they're talking
about 30 or $40 a kilowatt

01:36:41.125 --> 01:36:44.900
that's tremendously
above the value of loss load

01:36:44.900 --> 01:36:46.003
in the market cap.

01:36:46.003 --> 01:36:48.886
And so you're having a
vastly disproportionate impact

01:36:48.886 --> 01:36:52.390
even though the relatively
small number of megawatts,

01:36:52.390 --> 01:36:54.861
the proportion of the impact
of that could be very great.

01:36:54.861 --> 01:36:56.240
And again, we're not trying

01:36:56.240 --> 01:36:57.470
to stand in the way of this program.

01:36:57.470 --> 01:36:58.983
We just want to make
sure it's accounted for

01:36:58.983 --> 01:37:00.499
in the wholesale process.

01:37:00.499 --> 01:37:03.220
And unfortunately we've had difficulty

01:37:03.220 --> 01:37:05.430
getting response from the TDUs

01:37:05.430 --> 01:37:07.330
on incorporating this concern,

01:37:07.330 --> 01:37:09.730
but it seems like it's
not that big of an ask

01:37:09.730 --> 01:37:11.903
simply to have this accounted for.

01:37:14.050 --> 01:37:16.340
<v ->Yeah, so as soon as
Mr Madrano intervened,</v>

01:37:16.340 --> 01:37:19.190
I got on a phone call with
him, shot him an email,

01:37:19.190 --> 01:37:22.034
sent him some follow up
emails, radio silence on his part.

01:37:22.034 --> 01:37:27.034
We received TCPA's
red lines, Monday 5:44.

01:37:27.740 --> 01:37:30.720
We sent a response back to
him yesterday in the morning.

01:37:30.720 --> 01:37:33.450
So I want to clear that
misconception right now.

01:37:33.450 --> 01:37:34.456
<v ->Thank you.</v>

01:37:34.456 --> 01:37:37.614
I certainly appreciate your points

01:37:37.614 --> 01:37:40.910
about maintaining market operations

01:37:40.910 --> 01:37:42.260
and market principles throughout.

01:37:42.260 --> 01:37:45.132
And I think that that sentiment
has been expressed up here

01:37:45.132 --> 01:37:48.460
and between now and our next meeting,

01:37:48.460 --> 01:37:53.460
I think all of us will expect
all of the related parties

01:37:54.510 --> 01:37:56.164
to continue those discussions

01:37:56.164 --> 01:38:01.164
and move towards what
Commissioner McAdams

01:38:01.687 --> 01:38:05.120
nicely said as a consensus agreement

01:38:05.120 --> 01:38:08.901
on how best to integrate these
demands response programs

01:38:08.901 --> 01:38:12.990
with current market operations at ERCOT.

01:38:12.990 --> 01:38:13.890
<v ->Thank you, sir.</v>

01:38:16.543 --> 01:38:18.200
<v ->Rebecca Zara for
Commission staff.</v>

01:38:18.200 --> 01:38:21.106
I think the issue with the MTRR

01:38:21.106 --> 01:38:23.580
Mr. Madrano referenced 1006,

01:38:23.580 --> 01:38:27.128
it was approved in 2020
following information

01:38:27.128 --> 01:38:31.550
about ERS recall after it was deployed

01:38:31.550 --> 01:38:35.282
in the summer of 2019,
and that is still in the queue,

01:38:35.282 --> 01:38:38.700
and it's not a project
that's been started ERCOT.

01:38:38.700 --> 01:38:40.010
I don't want to speak for them,

01:38:40.010 --> 01:38:43.038
but I think the operational
ability for them to implement

01:38:43.038 --> 01:38:46.625
that before this program
would be available for winter

01:38:46.625 --> 01:38:50.817
and 2022 is not a possibility.

01:38:50.817 --> 01:38:52.324
<v ->Thank you.</v>

01:38:52.324 --> 01:38:54.484
And I appreciate that clarification.

01:38:54.484 --> 01:38:58.087
And as between now and our next meeting,

01:38:58.087 --> 01:39:02.350
as the Commission staff also
work with the relevant parties

01:39:02.350 --> 01:39:04.417
to given those constraints,

01:39:04.417 --> 01:39:09.417
come up with the closest we can get

01:39:09.890 --> 01:39:13.290
to a viable balance between
the demand response

01:39:13.290 --> 01:39:14.123
we need for this winter,

01:39:14.123 --> 01:39:18.400
while integrating within
existing constraints at ERCOT

01:39:18.400 --> 01:39:22.783
again, in inconsistency
with our market principles.

01:39:28.020 --> 01:39:31.090
<v ->Certainly, just briefly,
Rashid Water for staff.</v>

01:39:31.090 --> 01:39:34.410
We do think it will be
valuable to have ERCOT's input

01:39:34.410 --> 01:39:36.576
on this request and how
that would impact those things.

01:39:36.576 --> 01:39:38.242
So as part of the other information,

01:39:38.242 --> 01:39:40.930
that job ordered them to provide,

01:39:40.930 --> 01:39:43.413
we think this would be
a good addition to that.

01:39:45.456 --> 01:39:46.565
<v ->We'll ask ERCOT to add</v>

01:39:46.565 --> 01:39:49.881
that request from south
to the report on pricing

01:39:49.881 --> 01:39:54.148
and the interrelated market dynamics

01:39:54.148 --> 01:39:57.120
between those both on price point

01:39:57.120 --> 01:39:57.953
between the ERS

01:39:57.953 --> 01:40:00.250
and the existing energy
efficiency program.

01:40:00.250 --> 01:40:03.897
And this proposal, Commissioner Cobos.

01:40:03.897 --> 01:40:07.960
<v ->And I would add that in
ERCOT's feedback to us,</v>

01:40:07.960 --> 01:40:09.718
that they address any constraints,

01:40:09.718 --> 01:40:11.430
why they're having the constraints

01:40:11.430 --> 01:40:12.935
and what potential
constraints we may face

01:40:12.935 --> 01:40:16.360
with respect to take into consideration

01:40:16.360 --> 01:40:19.540
the impact of load programs on price.

01:40:19.540 --> 01:40:21.900
These are important matters that we need

01:40:21.900 --> 01:40:23.510
to have done out there

01:40:23.510 --> 01:40:24.870
and I'd like to better understand

01:40:24.870 --> 01:40:26.520
what the constraints are and why.

01:40:28.120 --> 01:40:29.585
<v ->Well put.</v>

01:40:29.585 --> 01:40:31.730
<v ->Yeah, it's just a case of
appointments, Mr Chairman,</v>

01:40:31.730 --> 01:40:33.347
you've scheduled it well,

01:40:33.347 --> 01:40:35.550
all roads lead to December 2nd,

01:40:35.550 --> 01:40:38.036
because again, high
cap has to be formalized

01:40:38.036 --> 01:40:40.180
as of December 2nd as well.

01:40:40.180 --> 01:40:43.330
So that'll give us a ballpark
figure for Mr. Mcdonald

01:40:43.330 --> 01:40:44.973
like what is going to be the value

01:40:44.973 --> 01:40:47.850
of power at that point, EEA2.

01:40:47.850 --> 01:40:49.148
So at least we'll have that visibility

01:40:49.148 --> 01:40:53.210
and it's going to be a bit of a matter

01:40:53.210 --> 01:40:57.490
of structuring the workshop
versus the open meeting

01:40:57.490 --> 01:41:00.043
and when and where all
these things come together.

01:41:00.043 --> 01:41:02.543
But yeah, December 2nd.

01:41:03.970 --> 01:41:04.960
<v ->Record our food.</v>

01:41:04.960 --> 01:41:06.350
<v ->Yep.</v>

01:41:06.350 --> 01:41:07.720
<v ->Commissioners,
Kelly Kayla Brown</v>

01:41:07.720 --> 01:41:09.156
for the Alliance for Retail Markets.

01:41:09.156 --> 01:41:12.152
And just a couple of clarifications.

01:41:12.152 --> 01:41:14.497
And we also intervened

01:41:14.497 --> 01:41:17.960
after we saw the
additional information filed

01:41:17.960 --> 01:41:20.087
by the TDUs in this proceeding

01:41:20.087 --> 01:41:23.373
and we had lots of
discussions with them,

01:41:23.373 --> 01:41:27.870
and I think we've got some
general agreement on the items

01:41:27.870 --> 01:41:29.858
that we'd like to see
added to their programs.

01:41:29.858 --> 01:41:33.180
The first one is to allow
retailers to providers

01:41:33.180 --> 01:41:34.330
to be project sponsors.

01:41:34.330 --> 01:41:35.580
We think that's an efficient way,

01:41:35.580 --> 01:41:37.330
especially given the speed

01:41:37.330 --> 01:41:39.290
with which we would like
to get this implemented.

01:41:39.290 --> 01:41:41.228
And that's consistent
with the Oncor program

01:41:41.228 --> 01:41:46.228
that includes retail as
providers, as project sponsors.

01:41:46.490 --> 01:41:51.490
The second is about a gap
that was identified in February,

01:41:54.490 --> 01:41:57.670
which is we would like the TDUs

01:41:57.670 --> 01:42:00.680
to notify the retail rep of record

01:42:02.289 --> 01:42:04.780
when that reps customers enroll

01:42:04.780 --> 01:42:07.350
in the TDU load response program,

01:42:07.350 --> 01:42:09.930
especially as one of
the TDUs pointed out

01:42:09.930 --> 01:42:11.560
that this program
is a little bit different

01:42:11.560 --> 01:42:14.290
than their other EECRF programs,

01:42:14.290 --> 01:42:15.800
where transmission level customers

01:42:15.800 --> 01:42:17.420
can participate in this one,

01:42:17.420 --> 01:42:20.750
it could involve large swings of power

01:42:20.750 --> 01:42:21.850
that the reps were responsible

01:42:21.850 --> 01:42:24.750
for scheduling being curtailed.

01:42:24.750 --> 01:42:26.900
And so if they have a
heads up that their customers

01:42:26.900 --> 01:42:28.060
are enrolled in this program.

01:42:28.060 --> 01:42:30.460
And then working out some sort of

01:42:30.460 --> 01:42:33.516
after the fact notification to the reps,

01:42:33.516 --> 01:42:37.017
when those customers are curtailed.

01:42:37.017 --> 01:42:41.110
And you talked about ERCOT,

01:42:41.110 --> 01:42:43.890
there might be a way for
ERCOT to provide that information

01:42:43.890 --> 01:42:46.240
and we're open to figuring that out.

01:42:46.240 --> 01:42:48.057
But talking with my members,

01:42:48.057 --> 01:42:51.430
they spent a lot of time
kind of tracking that down

01:42:51.430 --> 01:42:52.263
after the fact

01:42:52.263 --> 01:42:54.870
and if there's just some
way to notify the reps

01:42:54.870 --> 01:42:56.550
since they are the customer,

01:42:56.550 --> 01:42:59.833
they're the interface with the
market for those customers.

01:43:00.720 --> 01:43:03.220
We definitely appreciate the discussion

01:43:03.220 --> 01:43:07.295
about adding a hard cap, a budget.

01:43:07.295 --> 01:43:08.870
We think that's important.

01:43:08.870 --> 01:43:10.300
And one of the things
that we'd identified

01:43:10.300 --> 01:43:15.300
was, TNP and AEP, Texas
proposed budgets in this proceeding

01:43:17.239 --> 01:43:20.780
and we've asked that
CenterPoint, do the same thing.

01:43:20.780 --> 01:43:25.780
And then the AEP Texas budget
as filed was set at $650,000.

01:43:29.420 --> 01:43:31.560
I understand that from AEP, Texas,

01:43:31.560 --> 01:43:34.817
that that needs to be
corrected to $350,000.

01:43:34.817 --> 01:43:37.880
And again, lawyer doing math here,

01:43:37.880 --> 01:43:42.880
but just wanted to also clarify
that the payment amounts

01:43:44.710 --> 01:43:47.507
will be somewhere between 30,000

01:43:47.507 --> 01:43:50.503
and 40,000 per megawatt hour.

01:43:51.630 --> 01:43:52.660
<v Peter>There's a
lot of fuzzy math,</v>

01:43:52.660 --> 01:43:53.730
which is why I asked you-

01:43:53.730 --> 01:43:55.250
<v ->Not 3000 to 4,000.</v>

01:43:55.250 --> 01:43:57.360
So it is when he said, it's magnitudes

01:43:57.360 --> 01:44:00.260
above what the high cap is.

01:44:00.260 --> 01:44:01.093
<v ->That's exactly why I wanted</v>

01:44:01.093 --> 01:44:03.403
and asked him to put it on paper.

01:44:04.966 --> 01:44:07.410
Like there was a whole
sequence of people

01:44:07.410 --> 01:44:09.124
that got that math wrong, thank you.

01:44:09.124 --> 01:44:11.170
(Commissioners laughing)

01:44:11.170 --> 01:44:12.003
<v Scott>Commissioner.</v>

01:44:12.003 --> 01:44:13.291
<v ->Yes.</v>

01:44:13.291 --> 01:44:14.124
<v ->Didn't mean to
interrupt, sorry,</v>

01:44:14.124 --> 01:44:15.623
Scott Seamster, with TNMP.

01:44:15.623 --> 01:44:17.016
With regard to notice,

01:44:17.016 --> 01:44:19.330
I think one of the issues of just

01:44:19.330 --> 01:44:23.973
to calibrate from
the utility standpoint,

01:44:25.530 --> 01:44:27.770
providing notice of enrollment

01:44:27.770 --> 01:44:29.350
has typically been considered

01:44:29.350 --> 01:44:33.633
proprietary confidential
information under 25272.

01:44:35.279 --> 01:44:40.279
And the problem being is that
it's a choice to the customer

01:44:40.870 --> 01:44:43.890
to contract directly with TDU

01:44:43.890 --> 01:44:47.500
and therefore, since
there's no other interaction

01:44:47.500 --> 01:44:48.850
with the rep,

01:44:48.850 --> 01:44:50.750
we've kept that information separate.

01:44:50.750 --> 01:44:52.100
And I mean, we've been
running these programs

01:44:52.100 --> 01:44:55.160
for decades and not
provided that notice.

01:44:55.160 --> 01:44:57.639
I understand that ERCOT,

01:44:57.639 --> 01:45:02.053
doesn't provide the
subscription list for ERS either.

01:45:02.890 --> 01:45:07.890
So that confidential issue
would need to be addressed.

01:45:10.462 --> 01:45:12.920
As far as curtailment,

01:45:12.920 --> 01:45:16.990
we understand that
ERCOT does issue directive

01:45:16.990 --> 01:45:19.260
when it would draw down and pardon me,

01:45:19.260 --> 01:45:21.740
and with regard to our programs,

01:45:21.740 --> 01:45:25.000
however, we're allowing
ERCOT to make that direction.

01:45:25.000 --> 01:45:25.980
And therefore we would think

01:45:25.980 --> 01:45:28.900
that it would be able
to make a notification,

01:45:28.900 --> 01:45:30.840
but having their
involvement on that point,

01:45:30.840 --> 01:45:34.000
as far as notifying winter
curtailment occurred

01:45:35.270 --> 01:45:37.370
and getting that to the reps seems

01:45:37.370 --> 01:45:38.870
that it would come from ERCOT.

01:45:39.720 --> 01:45:43.190
<v ->Okay, thank you for
bringing those issues.</v>

01:45:43.190 --> 01:45:44.110
Yes, Ma'am.

01:45:44.110 --> 01:45:49.015
<v ->One response about the rule
that Mr. Seamster mentioned.</v>

01:45:49.015 --> 01:45:53.170
So 25272 G1 A provides
a specific exception

01:45:53.170 --> 01:45:56.160
to that proprietary
customer formation rule,

01:45:56.160 --> 01:45:59.710
where if the PUC puts in
an order telling the TDUs

01:45:59.710 --> 01:46:01.580
to share that information
with the rep of record,

01:46:01.580 --> 01:46:02.970
it's consistent with the rule.

01:46:02.970 --> 01:46:04.750
<v ->Okay, well, this
is another thing</v>

01:46:04.750 --> 01:46:06.980
that I hope y'all will
both work with staff

01:46:06.980 --> 01:46:11.523
on to either recognize
existing precedent

01:46:12.960 --> 01:46:16.840
or find a way to accommodate the needs

01:46:16.840 --> 01:46:17.673
under this new proposal.

01:46:17.673 --> 01:46:19.360
<v ->I would say, just because
it used to be the way</v>

01:46:19.360 --> 01:46:20.950
it doesn't mean it's the
right way going forward

01:46:20.950 --> 01:46:21.945
with the market.

01:46:21.945 --> 01:46:24.743
<v ->Took the words right
out of my mouth, Jimmy.</v>

01:46:24.743 --> 01:46:28.081
We should all say that
three times every day,

01:46:28.081 --> 01:46:29.180
(Commissioners laughing)

01:46:29.180 --> 01:46:30.400
just because we used to do it that way

01:46:30.400 --> 01:46:32.940
doesn't mean that we need
to keep doing it that way.

01:46:32.940 --> 01:46:35.500
All right, anything else on this item?

01:46:35.500 --> 01:46:37.470
All right, we can table
it for the next meeting.

01:46:37.470 --> 01:46:39.930
Do we need a motion to grant authority?

01:46:39.930 --> 01:46:42.257
All right, we'll direct
staff to work with ERCOT

01:46:42.257 --> 01:46:44.854
on the dispatch mechanics.

01:46:44.854 --> 01:46:46.240
Thank you all very much.

01:46:46.240 --> 01:46:47.073
<v ->Thank you.</v>

01:46:51.520 --> 01:46:52.780
<v ->Alright, we've got a
couple of minutes left</v>

01:46:52.780 --> 01:46:54.563
before our lunch break.

01:46:57.500 --> 01:46:58.333
<v ->I think we can
probably get through.</v>

01:46:58.333 --> 01:46:59.430
<v ->Yeah, we're gonna
knock out a couple,</v>

01:46:59.430 --> 01:47:00.803
item number 14, please sir.

01:47:02.170 --> 01:47:06.903
<v ->So Item 14, we have a
report on utility earnings.</v>

01:47:09.690 --> 01:47:10.990
<v ->Appreciate staff work on this.</v>

01:47:10.990 --> 01:47:13.770
I don't have any particular
comments or thoughts,

01:47:13.770 --> 01:47:16.313
but open the floor for
comments, if you do.

01:47:18.670 --> 01:47:20.650
<v ->I don't have any comments.</v>
<v ->All right.</v>

01:47:20.650 --> 01:47:22.043
<v ->No comment.</v>
<v ->All right.</v>

01:47:23.383 --> 01:47:25.264
I don't think there's any
formal action on that.

01:47:25.264 --> 01:47:29.223
I don't have anything
for items 15 through 21

01:47:29.223 --> 01:47:32.410
and 22 Commissioner Cobos,

01:47:32.410 --> 01:47:34.850
you have an update on this docket?

01:47:34.850 --> 01:47:36.549
<v ->Yes, I just wanted to know</v>

01:47:36.549 --> 01:47:41.549
that pursuant to our order
in project number 52682

01:47:43.740 --> 01:47:44.983
on October 14th,

01:47:44.983 --> 01:47:49.360
the TSPs that we'll be
constructing the San Miguel

01:47:49.360 --> 01:47:52.140
to Palmetto double-circuit line

01:47:52.140 --> 01:47:53.601
in the closed loop facilities,

01:47:53.601 --> 01:47:58.601
which include Stack, ETT,
AEP Texas, and Cherryland

01:47:58.910 --> 01:48:02.247
have filed their first quarterly
update on November 1st

01:48:02.247 --> 01:48:05.093
and it provided us with the charts

01:48:05.093 --> 01:48:08.870
of where they are with
their projects at this time.

01:48:08.870 --> 01:48:11.901
I know they're incrementally
starting their work

01:48:11.901 --> 01:48:16.158
with respect to the second circuit

01:48:16.158 --> 01:48:20.138
and I know that
Cherryland's getting ready

01:48:20.138 --> 01:48:21.934
to start working on their CCN

01:48:21.934 --> 01:48:24.835
and expects to comply with our order

01:48:24.835 --> 01:48:27.790
to file it no later than June 30th.

01:48:27.790 --> 01:48:30.330
So things are kind of, bubbling up

01:48:30.330 --> 01:48:33.216
and getting going to degree

01:48:33.216 --> 01:48:36.190
so far of what I've seen
from the progress reports

01:48:36.190 --> 01:48:38.082
it doesn't appear to be,

01:48:38.082 --> 01:48:43.082
I think at least ETT
noted that there could be,

01:48:43.480 --> 01:48:44.690
potential supply chain issues,

01:48:44.690 --> 01:48:46.210
but I don't think they've actually noted

01:48:46.210 --> 01:48:48.449
any specific ones yet
and have this deck.

01:48:48.449 --> 01:48:50.250
So things are moving along.

01:48:50.250 --> 01:48:51.550
I wanted to add this here

01:48:51.550 --> 01:48:54.200
because also it kind of correlates

01:48:54.200 --> 01:48:58.940
with our discussion in
the stack case earlier

01:48:58.940 --> 01:49:02.720
with respect to item number four,

01:49:02.720 --> 01:49:05.748
where we decided when a
CCN application is needed,

01:49:05.748 --> 01:49:10.748
just to remind you that we
have Stack, ETT and Cherryland

01:49:13.827 --> 01:49:18.080
all constructed the first single circuit

01:49:18.080 --> 01:49:20.030
from Simon Gilda, Palmetto,

01:49:20.030 --> 01:49:25.030
and based on our review of those,

01:49:25.580 --> 01:49:27.020
well, first of all, let me backtrack,

01:49:27.020 --> 01:49:30.200
in that project, we
had asked the parties

01:49:30.200 --> 01:49:32.620
that the Stack, ETT and Cherryland

01:49:32.620 --> 01:49:34.810
to let us know whether
or not they thought

01:49:34.810 --> 01:49:36.221
that they needed a CCN amendment

01:49:36.221 --> 01:49:39.106
and just to see what their basis was.

01:49:39.106 --> 01:49:44.106
And so their basis was
that the prior CCN in order

01:49:44.360 --> 01:49:47.631
had granted him the
second circuit, I believe.

01:49:47.631 --> 01:49:51.700
So based on our
review of the information

01:49:51.700 --> 01:49:52.960
that was submitted by the utilities

01:49:52.960 --> 01:49:54.240
at the time in this project

01:49:54.240 --> 01:49:58.487
and our decision in the stack
case on the threshold issue,

01:49:58.487 --> 01:50:02.070
that these companies
Stack, ETT and Cherryland

01:50:02.070 --> 01:50:06.610
would not have to file a
CCN for the second circuit,

01:50:06.610 --> 01:50:09.380
but of course, Cherryland
hall and AEP Texas

01:50:09.380 --> 01:50:10.960
will have to file a CCN

01:50:10.960 --> 01:50:12.935
for the new closed loop
transmission facilities.

01:50:12.935 --> 01:50:15.652
So that's how it
dovetails into this project

01:50:15.652 --> 01:50:18.212
but I just wanted to note that for you.

01:50:18.212 --> 01:50:22.840
And then also the parties
in this project requested

01:50:22.840 --> 01:50:25.570
that the Commission enter
a standard protective order

01:50:25.570 --> 01:50:27.250
to protect confidential information,

01:50:27.250 --> 01:50:29.880
that they may be required to provide us

01:50:29.880 --> 01:50:32.310
as they continue to
provide us quarterly updates.

01:50:32.310 --> 01:50:33.730
And I have been visiting with Steven

01:50:33.730 --> 01:50:35.910
and I think notified docket management.

01:50:35.910 --> 01:50:39.190
<v ->I learned the chief judge
yesterday of that request.</v>

01:50:39.190 --> 01:50:42.440
And so it should be worked on.

01:50:42.440 --> 01:50:43.710
<v ->Okay.</v>

01:50:43.710 --> 01:50:46.391
And that is all I have for this project.

01:50:46.391 --> 01:50:47.885
<v ->Thank you for the update.</v>

01:50:47.885 --> 01:50:50.653
That was a major, major
initiative and a big step forward.

01:50:51.800 --> 01:50:54.200
That brings us to item 23.

01:50:54.200 --> 01:50:56.230
<v ->Yeah before you have proposal</v>

01:50:56.230 --> 01:50:58.053
for publication of this rule.

01:50:59.575 --> 01:51:02.330
<v Peter>Is there a
standard for your review?</v>

01:51:02.330 --> 01:51:03.550
<v ->Yes, sir.</v>

01:51:03.550 --> 01:51:05.490
<v Peter>Any questions,
comments, or a motion</v>

01:51:05.490 --> 01:51:07.020
to approve the proposal for publication?

01:51:07.020 --> 01:51:08.090
<v Glotfelty>So moved.</v>

01:51:08.090 --> 01:51:09.287
<v Cobos>Second.</v>

01:51:09.287 --> 01:51:10.120
<v ->All in favor, say aye.</v>

01:51:10.120 --> 01:51:11.750
<v All>Aye.</v>

01:51:11.750 --> 01:51:13.943
<v Peter>None opposed motion passes.</v>

01:51:15.371 --> 01:51:17.240
It brings us to item 25.

01:51:17.240 --> 01:51:18.890
I know you've got an update here.

01:51:20.060 --> 01:51:21.187
<v Cobos>I do.</v>

01:51:21.187 --> 01:51:24.470
I was at the November board meeting

01:51:24.470 --> 01:51:26.160
for the Entergy
regional state committee.

01:51:26.160 --> 01:51:28.183
I was named the vice president of board.

01:51:28.183 --> 01:51:30.660
And so I just wanted
to let you all know.

01:51:30.660 --> 01:51:32.310
<v Jimmy>Congratulations.</v>

01:51:32.310 --> 01:51:35.180
<v Cobos>See what I'm
getting myself into here, but.</v>

01:51:35.180 --> 01:51:36.013
<v ->[Jimmy Glotfelty ] Real easy</v>

01:51:36.013 --> 01:51:37.533
and is talking about succeeding so.

01:51:38.370 --> 01:51:39.370
<v Cobos>Well that
that's actually been</v>

01:51:39.370 --> 01:51:40.790
a topic of conversation here in Texas

01:51:40.790 --> 01:51:44.220
so it won't be anything that
we haven't heard of before.

01:51:44.220 --> 01:51:47.820
So I can, trade some notes with them

01:51:47.820 --> 01:51:50.393
and tell them how to
serve themselves on that.

01:51:50.393 --> 01:51:52.143
But just want to let y'all know,

01:51:52.143 --> 01:51:55.453
as I may be bringing you
updates in the future on that.

01:51:56.381 --> 01:51:59.185
<v Peter>Look forward
to that, congratulations</v>

01:51:59.185 --> 01:52:02.493
and thank you because I know
how much free time do you have.

01:52:03.393 --> 01:52:06.123
So I appreciate you taking that on.

01:52:07.600 --> 01:52:12.290
I don't have anything
for item 26 through 29.

01:52:12.290 --> 01:52:17.290
That'll bring us to the water
segment of our program today.

01:52:20.420 --> 01:52:22.120
I know you've got a memo on this item.

01:52:22.120 --> 01:52:26.050
Is that something I'll you
put the memo out on this.

01:52:26.050 --> 01:52:27.860
Do you want to move forward with it now?

01:52:27.860 --> 01:52:28.693
Or just break for lunch?

01:52:28.693 --> 01:52:30.975
Now we can start with water?

01:52:30.975 --> 01:52:32.050
<v ->[Jimmy Glotfelty ] I
think it's simple unless</v>

01:52:32.050 --> 01:52:34.458
it becomes more in
depth so we could label it

01:52:34.458 --> 01:52:35.291
and then bring it back up.

01:52:35.291 --> 01:52:37.570
But the memo, Mr. Chairman was good.

01:52:37.570 --> 01:52:39.060
<v ->Call it item 30, sir.</v>

01:52:39.060 --> 01:52:41.560
<v Peter>Item 30 please,
Mr. Jeanette would lay that out.</v>

01:52:41.560 --> 01:52:43.113
<v ->Item 30 is the dock at 49351,</v>

01:52:43.113 --> 01:52:45.770
it's a rate payer appeal

01:52:45.770 --> 01:52:48.420
of a bear said, rate changes.

01:52:48.420 --> 01:52:51.460
Commission issued an
order on September 29th

01:52:51.460 --> 01:52:54.780
motion for rehearing
was filed on October 22nd.

01:52:54.780 --> 01:52:55.613
Then it's noted.

01:52:55.613 --> 01:52:57.040
Commissioner McAdams has a memo.

01:52:58.990 --> 01:53:01.920
<v ->As I was about to discuss,</v>

01:53:01.920 --> 01:53:03.902
the memo was intended
to clean up the order

01:53:03.902 --> 01:53:05.920
and allow parties to know

01:53:05.920 --> 01:53:09.280
what needed to be refunded and where.

01:53:09.280 --> 01:53:13.944
So it's a procedural
cleanup, initiative on my part.

01:53:13.944 --> 01:53:15.800
I hope it is well taken.

01:53:15.800 --> 01:53:20.230
I think it'll do some good
standby for any questions.

01:53:20.230 --> 01:53:23.340
<v ->Yeah, but thank you for
tackling that very much needed.</v>

01:53:23.340 --> 01:53:25.083
Appreciate, pretty sure on that.

01:53:27.090 --> 01:53:29.643
I agree with everything
you put in there.

01:53:29.643 --> 01:53:34.550
And certainly think that
we've got a clear direction

01:53:34.550 --> 01:53:37.110
to order the re-hearing.

01:53:37.110 --> 01:53:39.530
Any other thoughts, comments, questions?

01:53:39.530 --> 01:53:41.630
<v ->I agree with Commissioner
McAdam's memo.</v>

01:53:44.169 --> 01:53:45.730
<v ->Yeah, all right?</v>

01:53:45.730 --> 01:53:47.031
<v ->Fabulous memo.</v>

01:53:47.031 --> 01:53:48.830
(Commissioners laughing)

01:53:48.830 --> 01:53:49.950
<v ->All right, in that case,</v>

01:53:49.950 --> 01:53:53.170
is there a motion to grant
the motion for rehearing

01:53:53.170 --> 01:53:55.576
to the extent provided in
Commissioner guidance memo

01:53:55.576 --> 01:54:00.070
and modify the order in
accordance importantly

01:54:00.070 --> 01:54:01.160
with that memo?

01:54:01.160 --> 01:54:02.171
<v ->So moved.</v>

01:54:02.171 --> 01:54:03.720
<v ->Second,</v>

01:54:03.720 --> 01:54:05.060
<v ->All in favor, say aye.</v>

01:54:05.060 --> 01:54:06.390
<v All>Aye.</v>

01:54:06.390 --> 01:54:08.373
<v ->None opposed, motion passes.</v>

01:54:09.540 --> 01:54:13.560
Brings us to item number 31.

01:54:13.560 --> 01:54:15.870
I think that should be
pretty straight forward.

01:54:15.870 --> 01:54:17.770
Mr. Jeanette will lay that out for us.

01:54:19.870 --> 01:54:22.103
<v ->Item 31 is docket 51224.</v>

01:54:23.190 --> 01:54:25.071
It's the complaint of John Blaylock

01:54:25.071 --> 01:54:27.883
against Mercy Water supply Corp.

01:54:27.883 --> 01:54:32.544
There's a PFD issues on
September 30th, no exceptions.

01:54:32.544 --> 01:54:35.507
I mean, except since
the replies were filed,

01:54:35.507 --> 01:54:39.365
the ALJ filed a memo with
suggesting no changes to the PFD.

01:54:39.365 --> 01:54:42.460
I have a memo with proposed changes.

01:54:42.460 --> 01:54:44.530
<v Peter>I think the PFD is
pretty straightforward here.</v>

01:54:44.530 --> 01:54:49.530
You got to provide evidence
to move forward and the other.

01:54:50.985 --> 01:54:51.837
<v Cobos>Agreed.</v>

01:54:51.837 --> 01:54:52.960
<v Peter>All right,
is there a motion</v>

01:54:52.960 --> 01:54:54.960
to adopt the proposal
for decision as modified

01:54:54.960 --> 01:54:57.754
by Commission counsel's
November 17 memo?

01:54:57.754 --> 01:54:58.587
<v ->[Jimmy Glotfelty ] So moved.</v>

01:54:58.587 --> 01:54:59.420
<v McAdams>Second.</v>

01:54:59.420 --> 01:55:00.442
<v Peter>All in favor, say aye.</v>

01:55:00.442 --> 01:55:01.275
<v All>Aye.</v>

01:55:01.275 --> 01:55:03.310
<v Peter>None opposed,
the motion passes.</v>

01:55:04.546 --> 01:55:08.380
That moves us onto item 34.

01:55:08.380 --> 01:55:09.933
I don't have anything there.

01:55:10.960 --> 01:55:15.100
Item 35, Mr. Jeanette,
could you lay that out for us?

01:55:15.100 --> 01:55:17.660
<v ->35 is docket 51790</v>

01:55:17.660 --> 01:55:19.760
it's the application of Keegan Monster

01:55:19.760 --> 01:55:23.100
to amend its SPCOA certificate.

01:55:23.100 --> 01:55:27.438
There is a PFD of dismissal
filed on September 30th.

01:55:27.438 --> 01:55:30.770
No exceptions or replies were filed.

01:55:30.770 --> 01:55:31.603
<v ->This is another one.</v>

01:55:31.603 --> 01:55:34.973
I think that the PFT pretty
straight forward got it right.

01:55:37.120 --> 01:55:40.170
Go ahead in the fumbling,

01:55:40.170 --> 01:55:41.820
but happy to hear other thoughts.

01:55:43.055 --> 01:55:45.400
<v ->Definitely agree.</v>
<v ->Total agreement.</v>

01:55:45.400 --> 01:55:46.233
<v ->Same.</v>

01:55:46.233 --> 01:55:47.070
<v ->All right, is there a motion</v>

01:55:47.070 --> 01:55:48.460
to adopt the proposal for decision?

01:55:48.460 --> 01:55:49.878
<v Both>So moved.</v>

01:55:49.878 --> 01:55:51.235
<v ->Second.</v>

01:55:51.235 --> 01:55:52.068
<v ->There we go.</v>

01:55:52.068 --> 01:55:52.901
All in favor, say aye.

01:55:52.901 --> 01:55:53.734
<v All>Aye.</v>

01:55:53.734 --> 01:55:55.653
<v ->None opposed, motion passes.</v>

01:55:57.460 --> 01:56:00.154
That'll bring us to item number 36

01:56:00.154 --> 01:56:01.390
and you know what that seems

01:56:01.390 --> 01:56:04.520
we'll get to our
telecommunications segment of-

01:56:04.520 --> 01:56:06.510
<v ->I think we'll break
there for lunch.</v>

01:56:06.510 --> 01:56:07.880
<v ->Got it.</v>

01:56:07.880 --> 01:56:10.263
<v ->Thank you all, we'll
reconvene at 12:15.</v>

01:56:11.810 --> 01:56:13.190
All right, thank you.