WEBVTT

00:00:04.139 --> 00:00:07.440
Good morning. This meeting of the public utility commission

00:00:07.440 --> 00:00:09.570
of texas will come to order to consider matters have

00:00:09.570 --> 00:00:11.720
been duly posted with the secretary of State of texas

00:00:11.730 --> 00:00:14.800
for March 10th 2022. For the record. My name is Peter

00:00:14.800 --> 00:00:17.089
Lake and with me today, or will Mcadams, Lori provost

00:00:17.170 --> 00:00:20.800
and jimmy Gladfelter Mr Journey. Could you please walk

00:00:20.800 --> 00:00:25.500
us through the consent items on today's agenda? Good

00:00:25.500 --> 00:00:27.949
morning. Commissioners by individual ballot. Following

00:00:27.949 --> 00:00:33.450
items were placed on your consent agenda 35 17 18 2021

00:00:33.460 --> 00:00:38.000
23 24 27. And I need to announce that commissioner

00:00:38.000 --> 00:00:41.460
Cobos recused herself on item three. Thank you sir

00:00:41.460 --> 00:00:43.609
Is there a motion to approve the items just described

00:00:43.609 --> 00:00:43.990
by Mr?

00:00:45.939 --> 00:00:50.659
All in favor say aye. And opposes the motion passes

00:00:51.439 --> 00:00:53.719
We'll move to the public comment portion of our agenda

00:00:53.719 --> 00:00:55.640
today. I'd like to remind parties and stakeholders

00:00:55.640 --> 00:00:57.909
as always, this should not approach the table unless

00:00:57.920 --> 00:01:00.079
oral argument has been granted or they have been invited

00:01:00.079 --> 00:01:03.179
by a commissioner. Uh This time we'll open for public

00:01:03.179 --> 00:01:07.370
comment. Uh not oral arguments. Uh Any oral arguments

00:01:07.379 --> 00:01:10.290
related to a specific agenda item will be heard when

00:01:10.290 --> 00:01:14.180
that item is taken up. This segment is for general

00:01:14.180 --> 00:01:16.819
comments only speakers will be limited to three minutes

00:01:16.819 --> 00:01:19.659
each. Mr Junior. Do we have anyone from the public

00:01:19.840 --> 00:01:22.519
signed up to speak? No sir. No one signed up this morning

00:01:22.939 --> 00:01:26.689
Thank you sir. Public comment is now closed. We will

00:01:26.689 --> 00:01:31.540
not be taking up items eight and 25 which brings us

00:01:31.540 --> 00:01:33.560
to item number one (item:1)

00:01:35.519 --> 00:01:41.099
Item one is docked at 47775. It's a. n. o. v. Um

00:01:41.109 --> 00:01:45.459
against the city of Bartlett for violations of Pure

00:01:45.459 --> 00:01:48.700
and commission rules. A proposal for decision was filed

00:01:48.700 --> 00:01:53.219
January 26 exceptions and replies were filed and LJ

00:01:53.219 --> 00:01:56.489
filed a memorandum declining to make any changes to

00:01:56.489 --> 00:02:00.900
the PFD. In response, I have a memo with proposed changes

00:02:01.000 --> 00:02:04.269
to the PFD. Thank you sir,

00:02:07.040 --> 00:02:09.370
relatively straightforward penalty case but I would

00:02:09.370 --> 00:02:12.400
love to hear your thoughts and comments on them. Yes

00:02:12.400 --> 00:02:16.849
sir, thank you. Um My my thoughts were Mr Chairman

00:02:17.539 --> 00:02:21.250
It is very clear cut in terms of the thresholds um

00:02:21.840 --> 00:02:27.759
of of applying and and judging an infraction on the

00:02:27.759 --> 00:02:32.560
part of a violation of both pura and ERCOT protocols

00:02:33.240 --> 00:02:42.009
Um In my view, the PFD reflects a bridge, it is a

00:02:42.020 --> 00:02:46.919
near term action on the part of the commission that

00:02:46.930 --> 00:02:52.810
if not remedied by the by the municipal utility could

00:02:52.810 --> 00:03:00.759
lead to more enhanced um findings later on right now

00:03:00.770 --> 00:03:07.389
Um They under this ruling could be assessed $25,000

00:03:07.599 --> 00:03:12.580
of a penalty but Pure grants us the authority Under

00:03:12.610 --> 00:03:17.550
section 15.023. Administrative penalty. The penalty

00:03:17.550 --> 00:03:21.919
for violation be in in an amount not to exceed $25,000

00:03:21.930 --> 00:03:25.979
each day. A violation continues to occur is a separate

00:03:25.979 --> 00:03:28.449
violation for the purposes of imposing the penalty

00:03:28.939 --> 00:03:34.250
So it is my hope that by, by meeting the municipal

00:03:34.250 --> 00:03:38.650
utility halfway here that they have time to enter into

00:03:38.650 --> 00:03:41.849
an agreement to come into compliance under the law

00:03:42.539 --> 00:03:46.129
and that they should consider this as a notice that

00:03:46.129 --> 00:03:48.759
they need to come into compliance with the law. And

00:03:48.759 --> 00:03:53.449
the reason for that is is very apparent. Winter storm

00:03:53.449 --> 00:03:57.039
Uri has occurred. This commission has adopted a overarching

00:03:57.050 --> 00:04:00.840
policy construct of we will ensure reliability on the

00:04:00.840 --> 00:04:05.090
system. This is a reliability related infraction because

00:04:05.090 --> 00:04:09.180
it impacts load shed allocation during the most dire

00:04:09.180 --> 00:04:12.669
circumstances for the grid. So you've got to get right

00:04:12.680 --> 00:04:14.949
you've got to get a transmission service provider that

00:04:14.949 --> 00:04:18.060
can manage your load so that you can be allocated just

00:04:18.060 --> 00:04:20.519
like everybody else. Otherwise you are burdening your

00:04:20.519 --> 00:04:23.560
neighbors with that allocation while your lights stay

00:04:23.560 --> 00:04:28.000
on and that's not right. So it is my hope that that

00:04:28.000 --> 00:04:31.529
the message is received that they need to come into

00:04:31.529 --> 00:04:32.149
compliance.

00:04:34.040 --> 00:04:34.550
Well, put,

00:04:36.839 --> 00:04:40.730
I was gonna say I'm an agreement here. I think that

00:04:40.750 --> 00:04:44.470
it's obvious that this is not just an overlaps this

00:04:44.470 --> 00:04:47.230
case oversight. This case has been going on for a long

00:04:47.230 --> 00:04:51.790
time and I hope we can come to an agreement here at

00:04:51.790 --> 00:04:56.189
the end. But I think that the penalty is, is appropriate

00:04:56.199 --> 00:05:00.990
Um, and you know, the, the warning if I use those words

00:05:01.000 --> 00:05:04.180
that you said Commissioner Mcadams about $25,000 a

00:05:04.189 --> 00:05:07.610
day. Um, let's, let's get it there. It's a small amount

00:05:07.610 --> 00:05:11.430
This is a unique case, but we just can't continue to

00:05:11.430 --> 00:05:13.779
burden your neighbors and burden the rest of the people

00:05:13.779 --> 00:05:18.009
of the state, we have to get on with this and register

00:05:18.009 --> 00:05:20.720
as a transmission operator or find that entity that

00:05:20.720 --> 00:05:25.269
will do it for you. I agree. I agree as well. Um

00:05:25.279 --> 00:05:28.399
the city needs to come in compliance with the ERCOT

00:05:28.399 --> 00:05:34.110
protocols, guides in tempura and um, particularly um

00:05:34.120 --> 00:05:36.930
the issue of reliability and the load shedding practices

00:05:36.930 --> 00:05:39.300
is very important. Um, you can't burden your neighbors

00:05:39.300 --> 00:05:41.490
You need to come in compliance. They, this case has

00:05:41.490 --> 00:05:45.680
been on the books for I think almost nine years and

00:05:45.680 --> 00:05:48.040
so they've exhausted their remedies that ERCOT at the

00:05:48.040 --> 00:05:51.759
commission and um, we need to come to a close on the

00:05:51.759 --> 00:05:55.759
situation and um, I agree with, so is PFD and the assessment

00:05:55.759 --> 00:06:00.040
of the administrative penalties um, from a policy perspective

00:06:00.040 --> 00:06:03.829
going forward, I think, you know, you know, you've

00:06:03.829 --> 00:06:06.569
got to comply and either register as a T. O. Transmission

00:06:06.569 --> 00:06:10.879
operator or designate one and with perhaps need to

00:06:10.889 --> 00:06:14.350
see if there's any kind of assistance that we can provide

00:06:14.740 --> 00:06:18.629
to these smaller cities. Um, so that if they are struggling

00:06:18.629 --> 00:06:22.269
to find a T. O. That will take them, um, that that

00:06:22.269 --> 00:06:25.970
there is at least some, some framework to get them

00:06:25.970 --> 00:06:28.689
some help. I know that there's not a lot of instances

00:06:28.699 --> 00:06:30.560
there's maybe like four or five instances where this

00:06:30.560 --> 00:06:34.560
has happened, but um, you know, they're the T. O. S

00:06:34.560 --> 00:06:39.800
Are not required to take them, but um, we there's gotta

00:06:39.800 --> 00:06:43.120
be some kind of assistance there. Um, maybe working

00:06:43.120 --> 00:06:45.189
through the associations or something. If if they if

00:06:45.189 --> 00:06:48.939
there is a situation like this, that there's some assistance

00:06:48.939 --> 00:06:51.970
We can help on that end to make sure that they're just

00:06:51.970 --> 00:06:57.180
not left, you know, out out to dry. I'm sure staff

00:06:57.180 --> 00:06:59.360
will do everything to help accommodate an arrangement

00:07:00.540 --> 00:07:03.769
and yes, too long the 12 months.

00:07:05.379 --> 00:07:10.290
And I think it's safe to say Mr Mcadams speaks for

00:07:10.290 --> 00:07:13.160
all of us when saying that issue, that warning has

00:07:13.160 --> 00:07:17.170
been issued and will be, we'll be watching and helping

00:07:17.170 --> 00:07:17.810
as we can.

00:07:19.540 --> 00:07:25.319
Alright, is there a motion to adopt? Can I ask a question

00:07:25.329 --> 00:07:28.959
MR Journey, is this is the 12 month time to come in

00:07:28.970 --> 00:07:36.029
total compliance with the T. O. Uh, regulations. I

00:07:36.339 --> 00:07:40.269
mean, it seems like that's a long time for such a small

00:07:40.269 --> 00:07:43.000
entity to come into compliance. And I know there are

00:07:43.069 --> 00:07:45.379
things that have to happen. If you're going to become

00:07:45.379 --> 00:07:49.839
a transmission operator, it would seem unlikely that

00:07:49.839 --> 00:07:51.750
they would become their own transmission operator.

00:07:51.939 --> 00:07:55.439
They would contract with somebody because of the requirements

00:07:55.439 --> 00:07:59.250
of having a, um, a transmission operating center and

00:07:59.250 --> 00:08:01.509
a backup center and, and things like that according

00:08:01.509 --> 00:08:05.790
to Newark rules. But um, is that in total compliance

00:08:05.790 --> 00:08:07.660
or is there a way that we could push that to make

00:08:07.660 --> 00:08:10.360
it sooner, since this has been going on for so long

00:08:11.740 --> 00:08:15.329
I would read it as saying, you need to be in compliance

00:08:15.339 --> 00:08:19.129
with the protocols are rules in bureau At the end of

00:08:19.129 --> 00:08:19.949
these 12 months.

00:08:21.759 --> 00:08:24.720
If you wanted to make it sooner, you're going to have

00:08:24.720 --> 00:08:27.550
to modify required to be sooner

00:08:29.670 --> 00:08:34.230
to me. Um, look, the day after this order is signed

00:08:34.360 --> 00:08:38.220
there still out of compliance under bureau. And so

00:08:38.220 --> 00:08:42.690
the clock is ticking. The cloud of, of a future penalty

00:08:42.700 --> 00:08:47.269
is only growing darker by the minute. It's $25,000

00:08:47.269 --> 00:08:52.450
a day and that adds up to the millions. So it behooves

00:08:52.450 --> 00:08:55.440
the municipal utility to come into compliance as soon

00:08:55.440 --> 00:08:59.580
as possible. And then, and this commission, as per

00:08:59.590 --> 00:09:04.220
our conversation here at the diocese has warned that

00:09:04.230 --> 00:09:05.330
we will take action.

00:09:06.940 --> 00:09:11.720
So the clock's ticking. So just to clarify the, the

00:09:11.720 --> 00:09:16.009
actual proposal has languages has on the, on the 12

00:09:16.009 --> 00:09:19.669
months must comply with ERCOT requirement that a DSP

00:09:19.669 --> 00:09:23.580
either register as a T. O. Or designated T. O. So that's

00:09:23.580 --> 00:09:27.169
the focus of the 12 months, become a T. O. Or get

00:09:27.169 --> 00:09:30.980
someone else to act for you within 12 months by within

00:09:30.980 --> 00:09:34.679
12 months. Yesterday. It's a lot of time. That's plenty

00:09:34.679 --> 00:09:36.460
of time, especially with nine years of practice,

00:09:39.330 --> 00:09:43.289
Comfortable. 12 months. No, not at all. Would you like

00:09:43.289 --> 00:09:46.539
to modify the, I would move that we modify the PFD

00:09:46.539 --> 00:09:48.000
to say six months.

00:09:49.840 --> 00:09:52.610
I might even go to 90 days. But I mean six months

00:09:52.610 --> 00:09:55.440
is still an issue that we're going to see these guys

00:09:55.440 --> 00:09:58.799
sooner rather than later, What's the message here is

00:09:58.799 --> 00:10:01.259
you've got to be in compliance with these regulations

00:10:01.480 --> 00:10:04.610
if they want to seek an exemption um in some fashion

00:10:04.610 --> 00:10:08.190
fine, but they are part of the bulk electric system

00:10:08.330 --> 00:10:11.649
which is interconnected with every other person in

00:10:11.649 --> 00:10:14.149
this room and across the state. That's in our ERCOT

00:10:14.149 --> 00:10:19.330
So, mhm. I think, I mean, I don't I don't even like

00:10:19.330 --> 00:10:22.279
six months, but it seems like it's in the spirit of

00:10:22.279 --> 00:10:24.139
what Commissioner Mcadams said a meeting in the middle

00:10:27.940 --> 00:10:30.909
Mhm. Yeah, I would defer to your experience. I mean

00:10:30.909 --> 00:10:34.149
you know, there's a lot of unknowns out there for this

00:10:34.149 --> 00:10:40.370
utility uh one the the co op that could serve them

00:10:40.379 --> 00:10:44.669
There's there's a lot of unknowns there. Um So I would

00:10:44.679 --> 00:10:46.909
I would really defer to your experience here. How long

00:10:46.909 --> 00:10:49.549
do you think it could take them to reasonably find

00:10:49.549 --> 00:10:55.149
someone To act and that any agreement that one day

00:10:56.490 --> 00:10:59.230
it could take one day or it could take 12 months. I

00:10:59.230 --> 00:11:02.899
mean, it depends on how how quick you are to to find

00:11:02.899 --> 00:11:09.830
that party, it takes two. It was pointed out. And so

00:11:09.830 --> 00:11:14.720
I think we also as a commission need to hold the other

00:11:14.720 --> 00:11:19.330
side of that, Be mindful of the other side and ensure

00:11:19.330 --> 00:11:22.210
that we keep an eye on their whatever county party

00:11:22.210 --> 00:11:25.990
they are. So, so the city is not held hostage. Um but

00:11:25.990 --> 00:11:27.830
they got to get it done. And and the the other thing

00:11:27.830 --> 00:11:30.740
I would I would add for us to consider is as per

00:11:30.740 --> 00:11:34.389
commissioner, Tomo koizumi's comments, I think it behooves

00:11:34.399 --> 00:11:37.950
the Public Power Association. Um again, this is this

00:11:37.950 --> 00:11:41.440
is a larger policy issue for a subset of municipal

00:11:41.440 --> 00:11:43.860
utilities that that we need to get worked through.

00:11:44.139 --> 00:11:47.259
So, a broader policy construct needs to be framed out

00:11:47.440 --> 00:11:49.820
by the texas Municipal League, the texas Public Power

00:11:49.820 --> 00:11:55.610
Association, because we've got other utilities out

00:11:55.610 --> 00:11:59.629
there. Um, So it with that 12 months is a reasonable

00:11:59.629 --> 00:12:03.570
time. I mean, sessions occur every two years to to

00:12:03.580 --> 00:12:05.950
construct some type of framework that would give us

00:12:06.440 --> 00:12:10.100
that would get everybody under compliance commissioner

00:12:10.809 --> 00:12:14.330
You you've alternatively given them the command to

00:12:14.330 --> 00:12:18.919
either register as a T O, which I would presume includes

00:12:18.919 --> 00:12:21.559
that they'd be able to operate as a T O when they

00:12:21.570 --> 00:12:24.600
register, which means they have talked about perhaps

00:12:24.600 --> 00:12:27.230
construction requirements, correct?

00:12:28.840 --> 00:12:32.820
So, just to keep that in your head right, because they

00:12:32.820 --> 00:12:35.080
only have a distribution feeder right now. So, I don't

00:12:35.080 --> 00:12:37.879
know how, from a technical engineering standpoint that

00:12:37.879 --> 00:12:41.269
could require what what Stephen is is advising, but

00:12:41.269 --> 00:12:43.740
I agree with you. Commissioner Mcadams, um, with respect

00:12:43.740 --> 00:12:46.679
to um, collaboration through the association's, that's

00:12:46.679 --> 00:12:49.230
kind of what I was alluding to. Um, you know, through

00:12:49.230 --> 00:12:52.879
TPP a with our staff to TML is a great organization

00:12:52.879 --> 00:12:55.580
as well to make sure that the cities have At least

00:12:55.580 --> 00:12:57.970
some kind of a framework to work through these issues

00:12:57.970 --> 00:13:00.500
in the future. With respect to your timeline. Commissioner

00:13:00.500 --> 00:13:03.190
got felt. Ei I see your points. I think 12 months is

00:13:03.190 --> 00:13:06.200
a long time, especially for how long these this case

00:13:06.200 --> 00:13:08.960
has been on the books. I I can live with with six

00:13:08.960 --> 00:13:11.070
months. I mean I I kind of mentioned even a shorter

00:13:11.070 --> 00:13:13.460
timeline, which I, but we do want to make sure that

00:13:13.460 --> 00:13:15.480
they have enough time to, to come into compliance.

00:13:15.480 --> 00:13:18.120
So I, I would be okay with six months, especially as

00:13:18.120 --> 00:13:22.559
you think about, you know, um, it could impact load

00:13:22.559 --> 00:13:24.879
shedding practices. Obviously we're planning for no

00:13:24.879 --> 00:13:26.820
load shedding practices but we do have some er, we

00:13:26.820 --> 00:13:29.690
do have winter and and seasons where you know, we,

00:13:29.700 --> 00:13:32.870
we are focused on reliability and so six months to

00:13:32.870 --> 00:13:35.250
me seems an appropriate amount of time

00:13:37.240 --> 00:13:40.659
if you want to move it to six months, you of course

00:13:40.669 --> 00:13:44.299
y'all can always grant some discretion down the road

00:13:44.299 --> 00:13:46.820
if you want to, whether it's, it's said if, whether

00:13:46.820 --> 00:13:51.059
you say anything in this order about it or not. So

00:13:51.840 --> 00:13:56.120
so what I would propose is six months and um, to have

00:13:56.129 --> 00:14:00.070
a uh, an interim filing at three months to tell us

00:14:00.070 --> 00:14:03.100
where they are in this process. Um, if they choose

00:14:03.100 --> 00:14:06.860
to become a T O and have to build a transmission operations

00:14:06.860 --> 00:14:09.990
center um then we should grant some deference at that

00:14:09.990 --> 00:14:12.419
point in time when we understand it, but not until

00:14:12.419 --> 00:14:16.100
we um understand what route they've chosen because

00:14:16.100 --> 00:14:18.700
it could be very quickly and but nor do we want to

00:14:18.700 --> 00:14:20.529
put them at a disadvantage where someone's gonna hold

00:14:20.529 --> 00:14:23.460
them hostage and say look you've got to do it. So I

00:14:23.460 --> 00:14:27.519
think I would say um move the timeframe to six months

00:14:27.519 --> 00:14:33.279
and um request a an updated three to the interim following

00:14:33.279 --> 00:14:36.620
would ask them to tell us which route they've committed

00:14:36.620 --> 00:14:41.200
to the status and the status and commissioners staff

00:14:41.200 --> 00:14:44.330
will provide you updates on our progress on our progress

00:14:44.330 --> 00:14:48.269
in helping facilitate any of this work as well. Thank

00:14:48.269 --> 00:14:54.620
you Greg. Thank you. Alright, so we've got a pft that

00:14:54.629 --> 00:15:00.470
it has as considering a motion to adopt a PFD amended

00:15:00.470 --> 00:15:07.870
by both counsel memo and these six months changing

00:15:07.870 --> 00:15:12.669
a 12 month timeline to six months with the interim

00:15:12.669 --> 00:15:15.309
filing. It three months per commissioner glove lt's

00:15:15.320 --> 00:15:16.159
description.

00:15:18.149 --> 00:15:22.580
That's the motion. Do we have a motion second all in

00:15:22.580 --> 00:15:25.870
favor say aye, unopposed motion passes

00:15:27.509 --> 00:15:31.929
Item number two Please sir. (item:2) Item two is docket 51912

00:15:31.929 --> 00:15:35.659
is the application of ap to amend the CCN in the b

00:15:35.659 --> 00:15:40.190
referrals and Patricia counties. Pft was filed December

00:15:40.190 --> 00:15:44.850
22 exceptions replies were filed so Elyse filed a letter

00:15:44.850 --> 00:15:48.820
February two with corrections to the PhD. I have filed

00:15:48.820 --> 00:15:52.450
a memo with proposed changes to the PFD. The Commission

00:15:52.450 --> 00:15:55.450
heard our arguments at February 10 meeting and also

00:15:55.460 --> 00:15:57.850
heard from some of the parties at the last meeting

00:15:58.360 --> 00:16:01.850
The commission has again granted our argument on this

00:16:05.340 --> 00:16:09.149
thank you sir. Last time we had a variety of options

00:16:09.740 --> 00:16:16.230
Mhm. Come up the as we all know and have, I've been

00:16:16.240 --> 00:16:18.419
clear about this is a critical line, so I think we

00:16:18.419 --> 00:16:20.139
need to move forward with a decision one way or the

00:16:20.139 --> 00:16:20.860
other today,

00:16:23.159 --> 00:16:28.070
oral argument was granted because the uh contemplated

00:16:28.070 --> 00:16:31.210
Route G was something that not that had not been discussed

00:16:31.220 --> 00:16:34.759
publicly before and those stakeholders had not been

00:16:35.340 --> 00:16:39.350
given a chance to present oral argument that being

00:16:39.350 --> 00:16:42.529
said, uh we have heard from other stakeholders. So

00:16:42.529 --> 00:16:44.759
any oral argument today, I think should be limited

00:16:44.769 --> 00:16:51.039
to Route G. Is that work for y'all? Alright. Um and

00:16:51.039 --> 00:16:57.179
I think to recount from last time, the the sentiment

00:16:57.179 --> 00:17:02.100
were two thoughts on 22 commissioners were leaning

00:17:02.100 --> 00:17:04.930
towards L and Commissioner Claude felt towards G. Are

00:17:04.930 --> 00:17:10.579
those, are those still the leading, leading options

00:17:10.579 --> 00:17:16.970
in your mind, Lng Okay, well, can I address G? Um So

00:17:16.980 --> 00:17:19.670
I think I was the one who started this hornet's nest

00:17:19.670 --> 00:17:27.740
and um I don't apologize for it, but I um I have

00:17:27.740 --> 00:17:32.329
seen the error of my ways in this discussion primarily

00:17:32.329 --> 00:17:36.789
for the issue that if we would um pick that route,

00:17:36.799 --> 00:17:40.099
I fear the Corps of Engineers would get involved um

00:17:40.099 --> 00:17:43.829
and require a longer term analysis under the waters

00:17:43.829 --> 00:17:46.680
of the U. S. Um which would thus create a reliability

00:17:46.680 --> 00:17:50.740
problem. Um And I don't feel like that is the appropriate

00:17:50.740 --> 00:17:54.759
way for us to go in that regard. Um I also want

00:17:54.759 --> 00:18:01.140
to say that um I characterized um the crossing of the

00:18:01.150 --> 00:18:05.099
bark hollow property as industrial. Um And I think

00:18:05.099 --> 00:18:09.740
there were numerous comments um back towards um us

00:18:09.750 --> 00:18:14.769
or me in parentheses that said that that was a mischaracterization

00:18:14.769 --> 00:18:17.920
and I agree it was a mischaracterization. It was the

00:18:17.930 --> 00:18:21.210
choice of words that I used was wrong because we want

00:18:21.210 --> 00:18:25.430
all the resources in the state and um it's uh it's

00:18:25.440 --> 00:18:30.769
utilizing uh one's own property for energy development

00:18:30.769 --> 00:18:33.380
of whatever sort that does not make it an industrial

00:18:33.380 --> 00:18:37.880
property. So I wanted to say that I withdraw my my

00:18:37.880 --> 00:18:41.519
support for Route G. I want to continue the discussion

00:18:41.529 --> 00:18:45.670
on the other routes, but just at the head of at the

00:18:46.109 --> 00:18:48.400
started the discussion to say that I'm not going to

00:18:48.400 --> 00:18:54.569
push throughout G for a decision. Okay, thank you for

00:18:54.579 --> 00:18:58.920
clarifying that any other sentiment for algae remaining

00:18:58.920 --> 00:19:01.450
or can we take that off the table? No, sir, I'd like

00:19:01.450 --> 00:19:04.539
to look at the map back to the old map, you know

00:19:04.539 --> 00:19:10.369
that we can take off the table. Yes, in that case

00:19:12.240 --> 00:19:14.859
because we don't have a need for oral argument related

00:19:14.859 --> 00:19:20.529
to route G. Um Okay, so back to your question,

00:19:22.069 --> 00:19:26.559
why don't you clarify that for the audience um as we

00:19:27.240 --> 00:19:31.250
Good, good point jimmy, thank you. Um We've heard oral

00:19:31.250 --> 00:19:33.779
argument on numerous other routes, we have not heard

00:19:33.789 --> 00:19:37.220
oral argument on Route G. So we wanted to make sure

00:19:37.220 --> 00:19:38.269
that stakeholders

00:19:39.839 --> 00:19:43.349
with concerns related to Route G. I had the chance

00:19:43.349 --> 00:19:45.119
to speak in front of the commission. Now that algae

00:19:45.119 --> 00:19:48.140
is no longer under consideration, I don't think we

00:19:48.140 --> 00:19:54.000
need to go through the oral arguments. So I apologize

00:19:54.000 --> 00:19:57.529
for people taking the time to come up here to speak

00:19:57.529 --> 00:19:59.519
about a route that's no longer under consideration

00:19:59.940 --> 00:20:03.920
but thank you for your interest and concern. I think

00:20:03.930 --> 00:20:06.869
we'll we'll move forward with the remaining routes

00:20:06.880 --> 00:20:09.140
under consideration. And I think they're really in

00:20:09.140 --> 00:20:13.589
an L. Um and given that we've we've heard from those

00:20:13.660 --> 00:20:17.630
stakeholders before, I think, well, we will not have

00:20:17.630 --> 00:20:20.720
any oral argument today related to this item. Yeah

00:20:20.730 --> 00:20:22.829
And and since they're sitting here before us, I can

00:20:22.839 --> 00:20:26.059
read body language pretty well, so, don't worry. Um

00:20:26.440 --> 00:20:26.769
What,

00:20:28.339 --> 00:20:33.680
So, so just real briefly, L has not been discussed

00:20:33.690 --> 00:20:36.079
in this context. It was raised for the first time.

00:20:36.089 --> 00:20:39.019
Yes, it's in the application as far as are all of the

00:20:39.029 --> 00:20:42.349
26 rounds, but L has not been discussed. And it has

00:20:42.940 --> 00:20:45.279
extraordinary effects on some of these property owners

00:20:45.940 --> 00:20:49.359
And and and your comments last time were extremely

00:20:49.359 --> 00:20:52.029
compelling to me. And that's what I was going to cite

00:20:52.029 --> 00:20:56.759
here. So, in the interest of not trying to to managing

00:20:56.769 --> 00:21:01.049
the effects of bisecting properties, especially large

00:21:01.049 --> 00:21:02.549
tracts um

00:21:05.339 --> 00:21:08.970
as as I advocated for l last time, it was a question

00:21:08.980 --> 00:21:14.740
of distance, cost by section of properties, overall

00:21:14.750 --> 00:21:21.259
impact. And um since mister O'Connor's Attorney's arguments

00:21:21.269 --> 00:21:27.670
he was absolutely right that l does impact his tract

00:21:28.039 --> 00:21:30.930
um vastly more than the previously considered one the

00:21:30.930 --> 00:21:38.170
PFD. And then uh to um certainly other routes considered

00:21:39.339 --> 00:21:41.819
it becomes a question of cost. It narrows down the

00:21:41.819 --> 00:21:45.410
costs on the other options. So as we discussed, l last

00:21:45.410 --> 00:21:50.200
time, um I would also point out that m is a viable

00:21:50.210 --> 00:21:55.609
option Mm is an increase of cost of 1.4 million compared

00:21:55.609 --> 00:22:00.569
to the low cost option, which is route L but it avoids

00:22:00.569 --> 00:22:05.490
the car Turnbull's um it crosses mr O'Connor's tracked

00:22:05.500 --> 00:22:10.089
at the neck of the property um in between those uh

00:22:10.099 --> 00:22:14.880
locations of five because again he has those two tracks

00:22:15.519 --> 00:22:17.660
in the center of the the area

00:22:19.539 --> 00:22:25.509
and it also closely conforms to rights of way and recommended

00:22:25.519 --> 00:22:31.769
a ep routes toward the southern end of the uh of the

00:22:31.769 --> 00:22:32.670
proposed area.

00:22:36.039 --> 00:22:37.809
So I would just throw that out there. Mr Chairman,

00:22:37.819 --> 00:22:40.799
as further consideration as an attempt at compromise

00:22:40.880 --> 00:22:46.670
to conform this project with our avowed principles

00:22:47.039 --> 00:22:54.990
So, a slight increase in expense for fewer unless disruptive

00:22:55.220 --> 00:22:56.819
by sections of property.

00:22:58.539 --> 00:23:02.869
Thank you. So, thank you. Commissioner Mcadams. Um

00:23:02.880 --> 00:23:06.059
you know, last open meeting, I was in a similar spot

00:23:06.059 --> 00:23:09.970
of trying to see where um what what route would be

00:23:09.980 --> 00:23:13.549
um the best with respect to cost length impacts the

00:23:13.549 --> 00:23:16.660
properties. And since then, after the feedback that

00:23:16.660 --> 00:23:19.369
we received at the last open meeting, I went back and

00:23:19.369 --> 00:23:24.779
studied the routes a lot harder and have decided that

00:23:24.789 --> 00:23:28.779
myself that m is what I would lean towards because

00:23:28.779 --> 00:23:33.059
it has less impact to the O'Connor property um does

00:23:33.059 --> 00:23:36.920
not like in continue to hit two more properties, the

00:23:36.920 --> 00:23:45.259
term bo and the Kar properties and would cut into one

00:23:45.259 --> 00:23:48.690
which is burke hollow rather than 10 and 12 with are

00:23:48.700 --> 00:23:52.240
the two ranches car and in turn bow and one. I know

00:23:52.240 --> 00:23:55.619
this uh my understanding is undeveloped land with cattle

00:23:55.630 --> 00:24:00.049
and and potential wind farm um recognizing that there

00:24:00.049 --> 00:24:02.890
could be impacts of the wind farm, I, my interest here

00:24:02.890 --> 00:24:05.430
is to protect the property rights of of these, these

00:24:05.440 --> 00:24:10.349
um these families here and so I lean towards him. Okay

00:24:11.339 --> 00:24:12.059
so the same

00:24:14.240 --> 00:24:17.859
slight increase in costs for less disruption on landowners

00:24:18.539 --> 00:24:22.470
closer closer to property line's actually, it's a slight

00:24:22.480 --> 00:24:25.359
decrease in cost from in. That's correct.

00:24:27.279 --> 00:24:29.890
Okay, I'm sorry. But yeah, when I was shooting for

00:24:29.890 --> 00:24:34.940
l of course you're talking about 100 and 30. Okay,

00:24:34.940 --> 00:24:38.529
so consistent with PFD cheaper than L is, which you

00:24:38.529 --> 00:24:42.430
were also talking to last more expensive than now,

00:24:43.640 --> 00:24:47.960
but in exchange for more right away on property lines

00:24:47.960 --> 00:24:49.450
less disruption to landowners.

00:24:51.390 --> 00:24:57.130
So I think that that's a uh well, well put argument

00:24:57.130 --> 00:25:01.480
from both of you jimmy, What's your, I tend to believe

00:25:01.480 --> 00:25:07.410
that m is the appropriate round. I respect the um you

00:25:07.410 --> 00:25:10.750
know, these are these are not easy decisions by anybody

00:25:10.750 --> 00:25:15.559
These lines impact people all across the the region

00:25:16.250 --> 00:25:18.650
It's just inevitable that somebody is going to be impacted

00:25:18.660 --> 00:25:21.259
But I think the the right round.

00:25:23.240 --> 00:25:24.559
All right. Do we have any

00:25:26.119 --> 00:25:28.099
you're a pretty consistent agreement on him. Do we

00:25:28.099 --> 00:25:31.809
have any desire to hear any stakeholder input at this

00:25:31.809 --> 00:25:35.160
time? No, sir. I think our job is to call the play

00:25:35.539 --> 00:25:38.559
this that's what we're paid to do here. All right.

00:25:39.539 --> 00:25:43.680
We've got some other elements to consider in this docket

00:25:43.680 --> 00:25:48.269
single circuit and a good cause exception for virtual

00:25:48.269 --> 00:25:52.319
meetings. Everybody I know we need to clarify it's

00:25:52.319 --> 00:25:55.730
a single circuit. I'm certainly comfortable granting

00:25:55.730 --> 00:26:00.130
the good cause exemption for the virtual meetings during

00:26:00.130 --> 00:26:04.470
the pandemic work for everybody. Yes sir, agreed Chairman

00:26:04.849 --> 00:26:08.519
I just have one statement on behalf of I confer with

00:26:08.529 --> 00:26:11.859
the O'Connor and mr O'Connor. They did not oppose route

00:26:11.869 --> 00:26:16.059
OK, okay. Runs along the east side of the property

00:26:16.940 --> 00:26:19.269
and it runs through the property line.

00:26:22.740 --> 00:26:22.950
Right,

00:26:24.839 --> 00:26:25.130
ERCOT

00:26:28.140 --> 00:26:29.859
ever park. Now,

00:26:31.589 --> 00:26:32.559
the internal process

00:26:34.740 --> 00:26:38.599
moving off and avoiding the TNT and respect

00:26:41.240 --> 00:26:43.569
I'm going to respect the O'Connor property which I

00:26:43.569 --> 00:26:48.839
understand during agreement on ralph is slightly higher

00:26:49.160 --> 00:26:52.369
cost but as we all know, these are cost estimates were

00:26:52.380 --> 00:26:56.690
really large margins in there. I've gone over my one

00:26:56.690 --> 00:26:58.960
seconds limit and I apologize but

00:27:00.839 --> 00:27:04.329
the fact that there is any sensors between the problem

00:27:04.380 --> 00:27:05.259
in your country.

00:27:07.039 --> 00:27:11.750
Thanks. Mhm. You did indeed go over your zero sentence

00:27:11.750 --> 00:27:14.490
limit and that'll be the last disruption we have until

00:27:14.509 --> 00:27:17.549
this commission grants oral argument or ask somebody

00:27:17.559 --> 00:27:18.549
to the bench

00:27:20.940 --> 00:27:25.710
any other questions about that. Okay. Does anyone on

00:27:25.710 --> 00:27:28.250
the commission desire to hear any more comments from

00:27:28.250 --> 00:27:30.819
stakeholders on any of the routes under consideration

00:27:33.339 --> 00:27:38.859
Jimmy. All right. So we've got a good cause exception

00:27:41.339 --> 00:27:43.589
with a clarification that this is single circuit

00:27:45.220 --> 00:27:52.559
and a modification to the PFD to route facilities along

00:27:52.559 --> 00:27:53.039
route.

00:27:54.839 --> 00:27:59.000
All right. Do we have a motion and adopt the changes

00:27:59.000 --> 00:28:03.769
in commission Counsel's memo? Um which covers both

00:28:03.769 --> 00:28:07.279
the single circuit. I would I would move to reflect

00:28:07.279 --> 00:28:09.950
your comments um and the good cause exception. Mr Chairman

00:28:10.640 --> 00:28:13.380
and the commission Counsel's memo clarifying single

00:28:13.380 --> 00:28:16.269
circuit. We have a motion Is there a second second

00:28:17.240 --> 00:28:20.690
All in favor say, aye, none opposed motion passes.

00:28:20.700 --> 00:28:23.390
Thank you all. And thank you again for those folks

00:28:23.390 --> 00:28:25.799
who came up here uh, for oral argument on g

00:28:27.539 --> 00:28:31.259
mm hmm. These are as jimmy said, these are never easy

00:28:32.839 --> 00:28:37.299
but I hope all take comfort in knowing that as everybody

00:28:37.299 --> 00:28:41.339
could see this was a very comprehensive process and

00:28:41.339 --> 00:28:44.769
much thorough evaluation. I went into this

00:28:46.940 --> 00:28:49.900
thanks to all involved. Next time employees. MR journey

00:28:51.140 --> 00:28:55.460
(item:4) Item four is docket 52397 application of swept code

00:28:55.460 --> 00:28:58.980
implement a net Interim fuel surcharge and proposals

00:28:58.980 --> 00:29:02.779
for decisions filed January 12 exceptions and replies

00:29:02.779 --> 00:29:05.440
were filed. The LJ filed a memo recommending changing

00:29:05.450 --> 00:29:08.539
to findings of fact and ordering paragraph that were

00:29:08.539 --> 00:29:11.400
related to rape case expenses but otherwise declined

00:29:11.400 --> 00:29:13.160
to make any changes.

00:29:18.740 --> 00:29:22.160
There's this is certainly an interesting one. I would

00:29:22.160 --> 00:29:25.359
love to hear you paul's comments suggestions.

00:29:27.339 --> 00:29:27.599
Mr

00:29:29.539 --> 00:29:29.769
mhm.

00:29:31.640 --> 00:29:33.450
Um Yeah, I don't

00:29:35.039 --> 00:29:36.430
I don't have anything right now. I kind of want to

00:29:36.430 --> 00:29:41.619
hear it. We've we've had some similar similar conversations

00:29:41.619 --> 00:29:45.059
regarding interest rates recently. I think we were

00:29:45.940 --> 00:29:50.490
pretty unanimous and our thought that weighted average

00:29:50.490 --> 00:29:53.529
cost of capital is not the right way to approach this

00:29:54.660 --> 00:29:58.960
There's no equity component or capital investment involved

00:30:00.029 --> 00:30:03.339
So I think that's, it feels like we can take that off

00:30:03.339 --> 00:30:06.859
the table again. Uh The annual the proposed annual

00:30:06.869 --> 00:30:08.359
interest rates are,

00:30:10.940 --> 00:30:15.670
That's of course one way to take a cut at this. Ah

00:30:17.039 --> 00:30:18.359
I think last time we

00:30:21.039 --> 00:30:25.230
all had a sentiment to get as close as we could to

00:30:25.230 --> 00:30:28.349
matching the interest rate of whatever the related

00:30:28.349 --> 00:30:32.359
entity was receiving or paying on the their own debt

00:30:33.039 --> 00:30:36.720
which seems to be a reasonable practice. That also

00:30:36.720 --> 00:30:40.670
has very clear parameters as because there are comparable

00:30:40.670 --> 00:30:43.880
debt agreements in place that we can use as a measuring

00:30:43.880 --> 00:30:47.180
stick. So I threw out for consideration.

00:30:50.839 --> 00:30:54.839
Mirroring the Interest rate in terms that's what you

00:30:54.839 --> 00:30:57.559
received for its $500 million dollar bond issuance

00:30:57.559 --> 00:31:01.799
last year. The term of five years at I think they received

00:31:01.799 --> 00:31:06.789
1.6, interesting throw that out for consideration of

00:31:06.789 --> 00:31:07.670
course. Happy to hear

00:31:11.140 --> 00:31:17.150
Any other. I think it was also discussed. 1.2%. Um

00:31:17.160 --> 00:31:21.529
to me I think you're 1.65% does reflect a little bit

00:31:21.539 --> 00:31:27.170
of the longer term Duration um and perhaps a little

00:31:27.170 --> 00:31:29.140
bit more risk but there's not a whole lot of risk to

00:31:29.140 --> 00:31:32.880
this uh to this transaction. So um I would support

00:31:32.880 --> 00:31:35.589
1.65%.

00:31:38.740 --> 00:31:40.950
I agree as well. I think, you know, we're looking at

00:31:40.950 --> 00:31:45.119
$148 million. I would prefer to elongate the recovery

00:31:45.119 --> 00:31:48.539
period 2-5 years and I'm comfortable with your interest

00:31:48.539 --> 00:31:52.869
rate proposal. Um I think the five year period um continue

00:31:52.880 --> 00:31:55.660
mitigates the impact, continues to further mitigate

00:31:55.660 --> 00:31:58.460
the impact on consumers and is also consistent with

00:31:58.460 --> 00:32:02.079
the five year bombs. Yeah. And my overarching principle

00:32:02.079 --> 00:32:05.250
here is I just want this is a new commission. So I

00:32:05.250 --> 00:32:08.960
want us to try to establish a consistent path and as

00:32:08.970 --> 00:32:13.029
as you say, this reflects the direction that we had

00:32:13.029 --> 00:32:16.289
taken on their base rate case. So as long as we're

00:32:16.289 --> 00:32:19.960
consistent um That's that's my first and an overarching

00:32:19.960 --> 00:32:23.740
principle. So I would support you here, sir. Commissioner

00:32:23.740 --> 00:32:26.640
just to make sure you know, this rule does have an

00:32:26.640 --> 00:32:29.220
interest rate specified in it but it also has a term

00:32:29.230 --> 00:32:31.289
We're we're popping both of them were popping both

00:32:31.289 --> 00:32:36.109
of those given the conversation. Yes sir. Okay. Part

00:32:36.109 --> 00:32:40.920
of that on the interest rate and the term is to provide

00:32:40.920 --> 00:32:45.829
a very clear metric that yeah, reflects exactly the

00:32:45.829 --> 00:32:49.130
terms that the indian question received when they borrowed

00:32:49.130 --> 00:32:53.539
money. So it's a good consistent measuring stick if

00:32:53.539 --> 00:32:57.819
you will. And as commissioner Cobos mentioned the by

00:32:57.819 --> 00:33:02.880
extending the term and it's reducing the monthly cost

00:33:02.980 --> 00:33:06.539
for our customers. So too two elements of logic there

00:33:06.539 --> 00:33:12.980
I think both are beneficial to our ratepayers and consistent

00:33:12.990 --> 00:33:15.140
with his commission. Mcadams said consistent with the

00:33:15.140 --> 00:33:18.910
principles we have a commission are starting to lay

00:33:18.910 --> 00:33:24.119
out and establishment and the principles that are sound

00:33:24.130 --> 00:33:28.470
and we will. And it's also of course important to know

00:33:28.470 --> 00:33:30.079
that the marketplace to know that we're going to plan

00:33:30.079 --> 00:33:32.049
to continue adhering to those principles.

00:33:34.539 --> 00:33:37.990
Alright. Any other thoughts on this 1? I guess we have

00:33:37.990 --> 00:33:40.960
to address the right case expense issue. That's good

00:33:42.839 --> 00:33:46.240
Yes, of course. The judge addressed that a little bit

00:33:46.240 --> 00:33:49.690
in the, in, in their memo in response to exceptions

00:33:49.690 --> 00:33:54.180
to. Okay, so they can seek recovery of the wreckage

00:33:54.190 --> 00:33:56.609
expenses they were going to pay the city and then come

00:33:56.609 --> 00:34:00.349
back as would come back in a future proceeding to have

00:34:00.349 --> 00:34:03.170
us review those amounts and seek recovery.

00:34:05.319 --> 00:34:06.609
I think that's a reasonable path forward,

00:34:08.139 --> 00:34:12.239
correct the LJ's letter, yep, yep. And just to be clear

00:34:12.239 --> 00:34:14.050
on this, I mean the rule gives you all the right to

00:34:14.050 --> 00:34:18.309
move the recovery period. But um with all you've said

00:34:18.309 --> 00:34:21.260
that will be your finding of good cause on why to deviate

00:34:21.260 --> 00:34:24.969
off the interest rate in the room. Fair enough. Good

00:34:25.610 --> 00:34:27.690
And then there's the issue that I think the parties

00:34:27.820 --> 00:34:30.170
might have agreed not to address in this case but did

00:34:30.170 --> 00:34:33.769
raise and that's the 10% of offsets themselves. Um

00:34:33.769 --> 00:34:36.309
I think that's something the issue an issue we won't

00:34:36.309 --> 00:34:38.809
address in this case and would defer to sub housing

00:34:38.809 --> 00:34:42.559
x fuel reconciliation cases agreed, agreed.

00:34:44.940 --> 00:34:47.800
Alright. So I think we're looking for a motion to adopt

00:34:47.800 --> 00:34:53.210
the PFD With modifications to reflect a 1.65% surcharge

00:34:53.210 --> 00:34:55.750
interest rate on a five year surcharge period

00:34:57.639 --> 00:35:01.059
showing good cause a good cause finding to deviate

00:35:01.070 --> 00:35:03.250
from the annually set interest rate because of the

00:35:03.250 --> 00:35:04.260
length of the surfboards period

00:35:06.570 --> 00:35:10.230
and concurrence with the LJ's letter on card rate case

00:35:10.230 --> 00:35:15.159
expenses and said concurrence, do we have that motion

00:35:15.170 --> 00:35:19.469
so moved second, all in favor say aye I don't oppose

00:35:19.469 --> 00:35:22.920
the motion passes. The next item please. Mr Journey

00:35:22.929 --> 00:35:27.849
was consented. Uh We don't have anything for six through

00:35:27.849 --> 00:35:33.250
14 which brings us to ERCOT update on items 15

00:35:36.539 --> 00:35:42.059
separate rental. (item:15) We've got to uh two issues discussed

00:35:42.489 --> 00:35:46.539
today. I know commissioner Mike Adams has an item he'd

00:35:46.539 --> 00:35:51.409
like to bring to the commission's attention or an update

00:35:51.409 --> 00:35:55.969
if you will and I know you you have an update from

00:35:56.440 --> 00:36:01.199
you've requested from ERCOT. What Start with the Commissioner

00:36:01.210 --> 00:36:02.079
Matters 1st.

00:36:03.909 --> 00:36:07.880
Yes sir. So I would like to lay out a topic uh

00:36:07.889 --> 00:36:11.489
at a high level and for the ERCOT that's that watches

00:36:11.489 --> 00:36:15.110
us all the time. Uh It is not my intention to opine

00:36:15.110 --> 00:36:18.420
to make any type of policy move on this setting but

00:36:18.420 --> 00:36:22.750
since we're all here uh in an open meeting um the I

00:36:22.750 --> 00:36:26.269
M. M. Is also present, ERCOT is also present. I would

00:36:26.269 --> 00:36:31.360
like to have us uh have a conversation about our policy

00:36:31.369 --> 00:36:33.889
consistent with changes that have been made as a part

00:36:33.889 --> 00:36:36.690
of our phase one implementation which was certainly

00:36:36.690 --> 00:36:40.670
the object of discussion yesterday at the legislature

00:36:41.130 --> 00:36:44.349
But uh I think we need to just try to keep talking

00:36:44.349 --> 00:36:47.079
about this so we can try to smooth out and harmonize

00:36:47.079 --> 00:36:50.360
the policies and collaborate with ERCOT because I know

00:36:50.360 --> 00:36:55.329
they're thinking through this but offer them questions

00:36:55.340 --> 00:36:58.659
to have answered on our part. Um so that we get a

00:36:58.659 --> 00:37:03.179
good fix on how the individual policies are interacting

00:37:03.179 --> 00:37:07.460
with each other. So if Kerry um could you approach

00:37:08.030 --> 00:37:09.000
and then Canon,

00:37:11.030 --> 00:37:13.130
Don't worry cannon, I'm not gonna expect anything of

00:37:13.130 --> 00:37:13.429
you

00:37:21.519 --> 00:37:22.019
sure.

00:37:24.829 --> 00:37:28.519
Um but having MS Bevins uh the independent ERCOT monitor

00:37:28.519 --> 00:37:33.860
here, I would like to have carry you lay out the the

00:37:33.860 --> 00:37:38.409
policy framework that we have um on on track and their

00:37:38.409 --> 00:37:40.889
individual tracks and how they are interacting with

00:37:40.889 --> 00:37:44.590
each other in terms of rook versus O. R. D. C versus

00:37:44.590 --> 00:37:48.079
our ancillary service procurement and what phenomenon

00:37:48.090 --> 00:37:50.280
you are monitoring and I know you've done this before

00:37:50.280 --> 00:37:52.940
So at a high level that'll set the table for us to

00:37:52.940 --> 00:37:55.710
be able to discuss this on a more granular basis for

00:37:55.719 --> 00:37:58.929
cannons. Both consideration to take back to senior

00:37:58.929 --> 00:38:03.380
staff at ERCOT Um, and, and for our continued deliberation

00:38:03.380 --> 00:38:06.250
could you lay that out for us? Certainly. That's fine

00:38:07.260 --> 00:38:09.590
for the record. Carrie Bivens with atomic economics

00:38:09.599 --> 00:38:14.679
or cut I mm. So I'll start with discussing the, you

00:38:14.679 --> 00:38:18.019
know, what are broadly considered or called the conservative

00:38:18.019 --> 00:38:23.139
operations. Um, I will note three things. One is that

00:38:23.150 --> 00:38:26.440
ERCOT is procuring additional ancillary services in

00:38:26.440 --> 00:38:31.820
the day ahead ERCOT Um, MW. Now that is all the services

00:38:31.820 --> 00:38:34.809
minus the regulation down so all the upward services

00:38:34.820 --> 00:38:37.840
and on days in which they see there's going to be high

00:38:37.840 --> 00:38:41.130
forecast uncertainty or or or high uncertainty in the

00:38:41.130 --> 00:38:43.690
forecast, they procure an additional 1000 on top of

00:38:43.690 --> 00:38:49.199
that. Another thing is they are bringing on more generation

00:38:49.210 --> 00:38:53.000
earlier in the, in the timeline. So rather than kind

00:38:53.000 --> 00:38:55.380
of waiting until the last minute we're seeing more

00:38:55.389 --> 00:38:58.510
rocks that are being uh reliability unit commitment

00:38:58.510 --> 00:39:00.530
decisions that are being made earlier in the day

00:39:02.300 --> 00:39:04.969
that is to not leave units on the side long lead time

00:39:08.099 --> 00:39:12.530
Previously the, You know, if you have a six hour start

00:39:12.539 --> 00:39:15.059
you typically wait until about six hours ahead of when

00:39:15.059 --> 00:39:17.320
you need them to bring on that unit and instead we're

00:39:17.320 --> 00:39:20.139
seeing, you know 12 hours or something like that depending

00:39:20.139 --> 00:39:25.659
on the day and um another thing that is occurring is

00:39:25.670 --> 00:39:30.489
more conservative forecasting so rather than choosing

00:39:30.500 --> 00:39:35.199
um forecasts that are uh predicted to be the most accurate

00:39:35.210 --> 00:39:38.860
um picking the ones that are most conservative so you

00:39:38.860 --> 00:39:41.030
know they have the highest load or the lowest wind

00:39:41.219 --> 00:39:45.539
um just in the, in the case of that comes to fruition

00:39:46.619 --> 00:39:49.139
like it did two weeks ago today I think. Absolutely

00:39:49.619 --> 00:39:53.960
So these factors combined and then with that 6500 and

00:39:53.960 --> 00:39:57.849
7500 additional reserves, they are looking in that

00:39:57.849 --> 00:40:00.329
target to determine whether or not they need to bring

00:40:00.329 --> 00:40:02.869
on any of those resources through the reliability unit

00:40:02.869 --> 00:40:06.710
commitment. They're using that 6500 and 7500 megawatt

00:40:06.710 --> 00:40:11.630
target as a determination based on the load forecast

00:40:11.809 --> 00:40:14.769
Of what the reserves are going to be and whether or

00:40:14.769 --> 00:40:17.380
not they need to bring on additional units. Now I do

00:40:17.380 --> 00:40:20.510
want to note that that does not include the non controllable

00:40:20.510 --> 00:40:23.639
load resources that provide responsive reserve service

00:40:23.650 --> 00:40:27.670
and so there is a disconnect between the 6500 that

00:40:27.670 --> 00:40:31.090
are being procured day ahead and then the number target

00:40:31.090 --> 00:40:33.929
that are cut is using for the reliability unit commitments

00:40:34.510 --> 00:40:38.690
Um so I think those and and and uh added with the

00:40:38.690 --> 00:40:42.420
forecast uncertainty. In addition there is a incentive

00:40:42.420 --> 00:40:44.920
issue that we have identified and have filed a protocol

00:40:44.920 --> 00:40:49.260
revision request to correct um I think are the factors

00:40:49.260 --> 00:40:52.079
that are leading towards the more reliably unit commitments

00:40:52.079 --> 00:40:57.719
that we've seen, you say the so non controllable load

00:40:58.000 --> 00:41:02.260
and Rs is not being counted towards the In the sum

00:41:02.260 --> 00:41:08.429
that gets to 60 500. What is just, I'm a picture book

00:41:08.429 --> 00:41:12.130
God help me paint the picture. So even though we would

00:41:12.130 --> 00:41:14.739
have, I'm asking, I'm making sure I got this straight

00:41:14.739 --> 00:41:21.329
we would Would actually have 60 500 megawatts in reserve

00:41:21.340 --> 00:41:25.829
between all of the ancillary services. The formula

00:41:25.829 --> 00:41:28.320
used to calculate the reserves on whether or not we

00:41:28.320 --> 00:41:32.219
need to rock would only show 5000 because that non

00:41:32.219 --> 00:41:35.239
controllable loads, not part of that formula correct

00:41:36.469 --> 00:41:40.559
And so thus we ERCOT would say, Hey, we're supposed

00:41:40.559 --> 00:41:44.199
to have 6500 but we only have 5000. We need to rock

00:41:44.199 --> 00:41:48.289
units. Yes. And you know, it doesn't happen every day

00:41:48.289 --> 00:41:50.469
because sometimes self commitment fills that void.

00:41:50.659 --> 00:41:54.519
But if those things were in alignment there on the

00:41:54.519 --> 00:41:57.619
days it's not working. So it's not that we are seeing

00:41:57.630 --> 00:42:00.179
those additional. I'm making feel free to clarify.

00:42:00.179 --> 00:42:02.239
I'm just making sure yes and ERCOT can feel free to

00:42:02.239 --> 00:42:09.480
clarify. I'm the only addition I would make is the

00:42:09.489 --> 00:42:13.550
I don't take issue with anything Kerry said um the

00:42:13.550 --> 00:42:18.139
reason why the uh loads are treated the way they are

00:42:18.139 --> 00:42:23.679
is that they're deployed last in the order. Uh so it's

00:42:23.690 --> 00:42:28.099
it's any a if you were to count those reserves, the

00:42:28.110 --> 00:42:32.199
probability of going into E. A is higher. Having said

00:42:32.199 --> 00:42:36.639
that there is an NPR are out 939 I believe it is

00:42:37.019 --> 00:42:43.280
That lets us stratify that load um kind of like what

00:42:43.280 --> 00:42:49.730
we did with the Non-spin load in terms of deployment

00:42:49.739 --> 00:42:55.230
So that would be an option to slightly deviate from

00:42:55.800 --> 00:42:59.460
that accounting. Um So that this is something we have

00:42:59.460 --> 00:43:03.590
been looking at, that that 11 issue that she's raised

00:43:03.599 --> 00:43:08.679
and that also sounds like somewhat similar to the changes

00:43:08.690 --> 00:43:12.579
we made to er s which was only, it was only accessible

00:43:12.579 --> 00:43:16.719
in the E. A. The protocols were changed to allow her

00:43:16.840 --> 00:43:19.909
to deploy that. I think it's M. C. L. But we don't

00:43:19.909 --> 00:43:21.739
have we're gonna use that resource before we get to

00:43:21.739 --> 00:43:26.340
crisis. Exactly. That's so we are we're trying to kind

00:43:26.340 --> 00:43:30.789
of mirror some of those other what I guess I would

00:43:30.789 --> 00:43:33.980
describe as best practices given the feedback from

00:43:33.980 --> 00:43:40.469
the commission. Um but I think as miss Bivens described

00:43:40.469 --> 00:43:44.889
it today that she's very accurate in terms of. Okay

00:43:44.889 --> 00:43:46.719
so it sounds like there's if we want to

00:43:49.579 --> 00:43:52.159
humor me if you will, nothing is set in stone. That's

00:43:52.159 --> 00:43:54.820
why I want to have this conversation there too. If

00:43:54.820 --> 00:43:59.949
we want us work to resolve this, there are two potential

00:43:59.949 --> 00:44:02.429
tracks for both tracks need to be addressed the deployment

00:44:02.429 --> 00:44:05.639
question like we dealt with with the non controllable

00:44:05.639 --> 00:44:07.010
load and Non-spin

00:44:08.789 --> 00:44:13.500
and then also the accessibility of the resource no

00:44:13.500 --> 00:44:18.920
longer restricted to. E a essentially I would I mean

00:44:18.929 --> 00:44:22.130
that I agree with you first of all those are are both

00:44:22.139 --> 00:44:26.099
issues to be addressed. I think that is a small subset

00:44:26.110 --> 00:44:30.239
of the continuum that was described so another would

00:44:30.239 --> 00:44:34.659
be uh and and the commission has teed this issue up

00:44:34.659 --> 00:44:39.269
with reexamining ball and so forth. But the commitment

00:44:39.280 --> 00:44:43.800
decision, the self commitment decision by resources

00:44:43.800 --> 00:44:48.570
needs to happen and and be demonstrated to us so that

00:44:48.570 --> 00:44:52.449
we don't feel the obligation to ruck. So there are

00:44:52.449 --> 00:44:57.800
some outstanding ERCOT design considerations um around

00:44:57.800 --> 00:45:02.429
Vaulx in particular that could impact that uh decision

00:45:02.429 --> 00:45:04.010
making process.

00:45:06.389 --> 00:45:09.010
Okay, so that's what I'm at, I think what I'm hearing

00:45:09.010 --> 00:45:12.929
you say is the more any further adjustments that the

00:45:12.929 --> 00:45:16.440
adjustments to steepening the curve by changed by raising

00:45:16.440 --> 00:45:21.570
ball and separating it from age cap Could further enhance

00:45:21.570 --> 00:45:23.639
the market-based incentives to bring those generators

00:45:23.639 --> 00:45:26.969
on sooner rather than later. Exactly you said it much

00:45:26.969 --> 00:45:29.650
better than I did. Thank you. It could have other effects

00:45:29.650 --> 00:45:34.769
as well. So specifically around the rocks that were

00:45:34.769 --> 00:45:39.059
experienced on 24 February. We saw the pricing outcomes

00:45:39.059 --> 00:45:43.150
where because if there is a deep number of rocks that

00:45:43.150 --> 00:45:48.769
are committed then um the O. R. D. C adder is significant

00:45:48.780 --> 00:45:52.880
and can lead to prices. High prices that may may not

00:45:52.880 --> 00:45:56.000
necessarily reflect the underlying operational uncertainty

00:45:56.010 --> 00:45:59.579
and so I think there's some caution there is that um

00:45:59.590 --> 00:46:03.880
we want to see high prices when there is, uh, potential

00:46:03.880 --> 00:46:07.809
or expectation of scarcity and not necessarily on a

00:46:07.820 --> 00:46:12.039
non scarce state in an effort to manage the scale of

00:46:12.039 --> 00:46:15.179
the rucks and again, hitting that conservative posture

00:46:15.179 --> 00:46:18.429
And I, by the way, I would affirm and applaud the conservative

00:46:18.429 --> 00:46:21.159
posture. I think we've all been in agreement since

00:46:21.159 --> 00:46:25.400
Uri doctrinally, that is what this commission has aired

00:46:25.400 --> 00:46:30.710
on the side of caution toward, um, is how the operator

00:46:30.980 --> 00:46:36.329
accounts for the load In the Rrs. And again, if, if

00:46:36.329 --> 00:46:41.690
that is an average of 1500 MW couldn't, and, and if

00:46:41.690 --> 00:46:43.840
you're granted, if you grant yourself the discretion

00:46:43.840 --> 00:46:47.440
to use that outside of the EEA conditions while not

00:46:47.440 --> 00:46:50.559
distorting the ERCOT at, you know, 3000 because I'm

00:46:50.559 --> 00:46:53.730
sure the generators are one of the highly interested

00:46:53.739 --> 00:46:57.590
and when those, those units will come in. Uh, yeah

00:46:57.599 --> 00:47:01.559
absolutely, absolutely. So, um, as a, as a point of

00:47:01.559 --> 00:47:04.750
discretion for the operator, if you could account for

00:47:04.750 --> 00:47:09.550
those load resources in your 6500, that would, uh,

00:47:09.559 --> 00:47:14.679
suppress the need theoretically to rock so much, is

00:47:14.679 --> 00:47:18.329
that accurate? Um, I think, and you don't have to give

00:47:18.329 --> 00:47:20.070
me an answer right now. Okay. I would just urge you

00:47:20.070 --> 00:47:22.539
to go back and think about that. I think that's my

00:47:22.539 --> 00:47:26.559
best answer that is going to go back and check. So

00:47:26.570 --> 00:47:29.739
I just want to make sure I peel back all these layers

00:47:29.750 --> 00:47:33.670
Um, so Kerry, um, you mentioned the controllable loads

00:47:33.670 --> 00:47:36.110
not being included. And I think your interest is, you

00:47:36.110 --> 00:47:39.480
know, balancing out the rocking and from your perspective

00:47:39.480 --> 00:47:42.409
and, and cannon, there's an NPR, our existing NPR are

00:47:42.409 --> 00:47:46.139
that would allow ERCOT to use those um, loader resources

00:47:46.150 --> 00:47:49.150
outside of emergency conditions, It's about 1500 megawatts

00:47:49.159 --> 00:47:54.250
It's a sizable chunk of megawatts. And so if ERCOT

00:47:54.260 --> 00:47:58.219
gets this NPR through and now has the ability to use

00:47:58.219 --> 00:48:00.539
these load resources outside of emergency conditions

00:48:00.550 --> 00:48:04.230
then the total amount of a s that ERCOT carried would

00:48:04.230 --> 00:48:07.650
increase and, and, and, and so that additional level

00:48:07.650 --> 00:48:11.159
of reserves would um, as, as commissioner Mcadam said

00:48:11.159 --> 00:48:14.179
would not um, would would mitigate the need for rock

00:48:14.190 --> 00:48:18.269
right? Is that the number that you're buying would

00:48:18.269 --> 00:48:21.010
be more in alignment with what ERCOT is wanting to

00:48:21.010 --> 00:48:26.530
see in real time. And so if you, um, you'll have fewer

00:48:26.530 --> 00:48:30.130
need to have that out of ERCOT action, not saying it's

00:48:30.130 --> 00:48:33.309
going to go away completely. Just, I don't, I don't

00:48:33.309 --> 00:48:37.719
want to um, to state that, but it is a factor in

00:48:37.719 --> 00:48:41.050
the rocks. Yes. So it's one factor, right? I think

00:48:41.050 --> 00:48:43.280
there's a variety of factors that are at interplay

00:48:43.280 --> 00:48:46.739
with each other. One of them is also, and I'm not disagreeing

00:48:46.739 --> 00:48:48.699
with the use of conservative forecast, but I think

00:48:48.699 --> 00:48:52.670
that the use of conservative forecasts might have led

00:48:52.679 --> 00:48:55.929
potentially. And I'll let you explain um, to the pricing

00:48:55.929 --> 00:48:58.880
event that you decided to, with respect to the conservative

00:48:58.880 --> 00:49:02.820
forecast that, that um, you know, some units didn't

00:49:02.820 --> 00:49:06.969
come online because they perhaps didn't believe the

00:49:06.969 --> 00:49:09.909
conservative forecast. So then you have less reserves

00:49:09.909 --> 00:49:13.909
on the system. So rock capacities not including the

00:49:13.909 --> 00:49:18.110
O R D C. So the RdC detected scarcity because there

00:49:18.110 --> 00:49:22.980
was less self commitment and so RdC kicks in but ERCOT

00:49:22.980 --> 00:49:26.559
has fewer reserves. So they had a ruck and so there's

00:49:26.570 --> 00:49:29.840
there's an interplay there, a few factors that are

00:49:29.840 --> 00:49:34.050
leading to the rocking. And so my point is just to

00:49:34.050 --> 00:49:36.329
kind of pull back the layers so that we can kind of

00:49:36.329 --> 00:49:41.110
look at them, you know, separate apart. But ultimately

00:49:41.190 --> 00:49:43.889
to your point about the O. R. D. C. Having just modified

00:49:43.889 --> 00:49:47.449
the O R D C effective january 1st. You know, I think

00:49:47.449 --> 00:49:50.090
there's, you know, we've got to also be cognizant about

00:49:50.099 --> 00:49:52.719
that too. Right? Because we've sent one message and

00:49:52.719 --> 00:49:56.449
we've got to let it play out um, and see where we

00:49:56.460 --> 00:50:03.130
land on that issue. But um, I mean the whole point

00:50:03.130 --> 00:50:08.260
of the RdC changes that we made was to encourage operational

00:50:08.869 --> 00:50:11.389
operational reliability so that we have fewer rocks

00:50:12.659 --> 00:50:14.889
Well, we, we get reliability without rocking through

00:50:14.900 --> 00:50:20.130
RdC, your forecast comments is good and carry, you

00:50:20.139 --> 00:50:22.039
did a nice job laying out the difference between the

00:50:22.050 --> 00:50:25.909
early february event and the late february event. The

00:50:25.909 --> 00:50:28.599
conservative forecast in early february were exactly

00:50:28.599 --> 00:50:33.110
that conservative and we had the conservative operations

00:50:33.760 --> 00:50:37.349
had more resources than we need needed at that particular

00:50:37.360 --> 00:50:41.219
operating day and really kind of kept prices down and

00:50:41.230 --> 00:50:46.400
you know, we all heard about that. Um but on the late

00:50:46.400 --> 00:50:51.800
february event the conservative forecast was not accurate

00:50:51.960 --> 00:50:56.920
but not conservative enough and we had 900 MW of wind

00:50:56.920 --> 00:51:00.130
out of 35,000 installed and higher load because it

00:51:00.130 --> 00:51:02.989
was colder than expected and

00:51:05.460 --> 00:51:08.750
it was, we were in scarcity and we needed we needed

00:51:08.750 --> 00:51:09.809
those resources.

00:51:11.559 --> 00:51:14.380
But I think, I think what you're saying is that we

00:51:14.380 --> 00:51:18.400
would have rather have gotten them through, oh Rdc

00:51:18.400 --> 00:51:24.579
adder at 100 or 500 rather than and not having to rock

00:51:25.360 --> 00:51:29.130
rather than an even higher rd Seattle when we had already

00:51:29.130 --> 00:51:32.900
rocked that, you know what we're aiming for. Right

00:51:32.900 --> 00:51:35.500
I mean the whole, we need to let the O. R. D

00:51:35.500 --> 00:51:40.409
C function under the intended purpose of, you know

00:51:40.420 --> 00:51:43.159
bringing on the reserves earlier with a stronger price

00:51:43.159 --> 00:51:46.250
signal earlier. Right? So that's why we raised the

00:51:46.250 --> 00:51:50.090
M. C. L. From 2000 to 3000 And mitigated the consumer

00:51:50.090 --> 00:51:54.280
impacts by lowering the price cap from 9000 to 5000

00:51:54.659 --> 00:51:57.510
And so what we're trying to do is incent operational

00:51:57.510 --> 00:52:00.239
reliability, bringing on the reserves on earlier with

00:52:00.239 --> 00:52:05.699
a strong stronger price signal earlier and and um so

00:52:05.710 --> 00:52:09.070
we're kind of in this interplay of, you know, conservative

00:52:09.949 --> 00:52:16.000
operations posture with, with ERCOT reforms and that

00:52:16.010 --> 00:52:21.119
um you know, we put in place to, to to improve operational

00:52:21.130 --> 00:52:25.739
reliability and so we just needed to continue to explore

00:52:25.739 --> 00:52:27.769
what the right balance is. I think between the two

00:52:29.150 --> 00:52:34.619
Yes, you know, Um for example on that day on the 24th

00:52:34.619 --> 00:52:36.880
I think the minimum physical responsive capability

00:52:36.880 --> 00:52:40.889
was 30,700 MW and the highest price was $4,000. And

00:52:40.889 --> 00:52:44.550
so I think that was an example of um you know, and

00:52:44.550 --> 00:52:46.429
there's factors with that because of the rock and everything

00:52:46.429 --> 00:52:49.460
like that. But is that you know, these are the questions

00:52:49.460 --> 00:52:51.280
that will continue to ask ourselves as we have these

00:52:51.280 --> 00:52:53.630
types of events. Is that the rice processing outcome

00:52:53.639 --> 00:52:57.650
at that level of reliability and and as commissioner

00:52:57.650 --> 00:52:59.619
Mike Adams said and I know you've reached chairman

00:52:59.630 --> 00:53:02.019
you know the rocking tool is a very important tool

00:53:02.019 --> 00:53:06.250
that ERCOT has a disposal um but we have to balance

00:53:06.250 --> 00:53:09.090
it out and make sure that it's imbalanced with every

00:53:09.090 --> 00:53:12.309
other ERCOT reform and putting in place and just kind

00:53:12.309 --> 00:53:15.269
of continue to analyze how it's inter playing with

00:53:15.650 --> 00:53:18.940
with the R. D. C. And other measures that that's kind

00:53:18.940 --> 00:53:21.340
of where I'm coming from on this issue?

00:53:25.750 --> 00:53:26.590
We'll put jimmy,

00:53:29.250 --> 00:53:33.090
is there, can I just ask this question, I mean is there

00:53:33.090 --> 00:53:36.639
any responsibility on the load side here, you know

00:53:36.650 --> 00:53:42.840
that they're not actively or more active involved in

00:53:42.840 --> 00:53:45.210
the day ahead ERCOT on situations like this or is that

00:53:45.219 --> 00:53:48.900
am I off based on that? It seems like they could have

00:53:48.900 --> 00:53:51.670
solved some of this problem as well uh, in the later

00:53:51.670 --> 00:53:55.679
february event. Um, but I'm, I'm just asking the question

00:53:57.349 --> 00:54:01.730
I guess the best way I would try and answer this is

00:54:01.739 --> 00:54:05.090
um, that first of all at a high level the load is

00:54:05.099 --> 00:54:08.849
pursuing the incentives that are there before it, before

00:54:08.849 --> 00:54:14.239
them, but it's kind of comparing as, as the chairman

00:54:14.239 --> 00:54:19.309
did that um, early february event versus the late february

00:54:19.309 --> 00:54:23.070
event and load doesn't necessarily know any better

00:54:23.070 --> 00:54:27.510
than in anyone else how it is exactly going to play

00:54:27.510 --> 00:54:33.550
out. So we could b b long um more wind shows up

00:54:33.559 --> 00:54:36.969
the temperature is a little bit warmer than than expected

00:54:36.980 --> 00:54:41.380
or you could have the second scenario where, you know

00:54:41.389 --> 00:54:46.210
um, the intermittent production is, is very low and

00:54:46.219 --> 00:54:50.170
it's colder than expected. So the load serving entities

00:54:50.179 --> 00:54:53.190
entities try and manage that as, as best they can,

00:54:53.199 --> 00:54:58.360
but um, within the, you know, reward penalty structure

00:54:58.360 --> 00:55:03.170
that exists, there are ways to that you are considering

00:55:03.539 --> 00:55:07.760
in order to, you know, make them rethink that calculation

00:55:08.139 --> 00:55:11.800
but they're responding in my opinion logically to the

00:55:11.800 --> 00:55:15.820
set of information that's out there, I don't know,

00:55:15.829 --> 00:55:20.469
carrie, if you have, and I just, I say that in the

00:55:20.469 --> 00:55:25.050
sense that if you get stuck with $4000 real time price

00:55:25.059 --> 00:55:29.230
you may think differently the second time this um scenario

00:55:29.230 --> 00:55:31.940
comes along, which is, we need to be in the day ahead

00:55:31.940 --> 00:55:35.519
ERCOT to secure our prices much lower and hopefully

00:55:35.530 --> 00:55:38.579
you won't get stuck with the, with the higher prices

00:55:38.590 --> 00:55:42.300
in the real time ERCOT and feel that some of it may

00:55:42.300 --> 00:55:48.219
be self correcting hopefully. Um, and that, you know

00:55:48.219 --> 00:55:52.780
we need to, as we've modified O R D C, we're making

00:55:52.780 --> 00:55:57.050
these changes. We are not gonna see the markets work

00:55:57.059 --> 00:56:00.170
exactly the way we want all the time and we have to

00:56:00.170 --> 00:56:05.449
let them work as markets. Um, both generation and load

00:56:05.449 --> 00:56:08.519
have a responsibility here for their, for their customers

00:56:08.519 --> 00:56:11.989
And I just hope that we, we continue to let these things

00:56:11.989 --> 00:56:14.550
we need to have these discussions, but we continue

00:56:14.559 --> 00:56:17.570
perhaps to do a back cast analysis to figure out. So

00:56:17.570 --> 00:56:19.889
what would have been the best thing that day and you

00:56:19.889 --> 00:56:25.050
know, or um, we just, we need to keep having that discussion

00:56:25.519 --> 00:56:28.239
It's not all a generator issue, it's somewhat a load

00:56:28.239 --> 00:56:34.059
issue. And I think that we need to have, you know,

00:56:34.059 --> 00:56:36.210
the discussion. The other thing that I would say on

00:56:36.210 --> 00:56:39.039
this and I, I've tried to say this quite frequently

00:56:39.039 --> 00:56:43.469
we do um, in these events. Talk about um, the times

00:56:43.469 --> 00:56:47.650
when the renewables um, go offline when, when they

00:56:47.650 --> 00:56:53.539
are, when they do not meet um, the projected or forecasted

00:56:53.539 --> 00:56:58.750
amounts for me, an underlying part of that also is

00:56:58.750 --> 00:57:02.940
the number of thermal units that are um, offline in

00:57:02.940 --> 00:57:05.449
an unplanned outage. So how many have been forced out

00:57:05.449 --> 00:57:09.230
And that is, You know, many times over this last fall

00:57:09.230 --> 00:57:13.030
it has been 9000 MW a day also. Um, and that has

00:57:13.030 --> 00:57:16.059
a detrimental effect on the ERCOT and reliability and

00:57:16.059 --> 00:57:19.730
is a, a critical point that I think we need to continue

00:57:19.730 --> 00:57:22.420
to look at. I know you're, I've asked ERCOT and y'all

00:57:22.420 --> 00:57:26.380
are working on, um, fixing the dropdown menu on, on

00:57:26.389 --> 00:57:30.070
outage reasons. Um, we still have lots of unknowns

00:57:30.070 --> 00:57:35.519
but um, I think that, um, you know, we need to encourage

00:57:35.530 --> 00:57:39.519
um, you know, those generators, it's in their financial

00:57:39.519 --> 00:57:44.340
incentive to be available not to be in, in Yeah, we're

00:57:44.340 --> 00:57:48.340
hoping so anyway, I just, um, you know, I think that

00:57:48.349 --> 00:57:52.670
we need to talk about wind and, and other thermal outages

00:57:52.670 --> 00:57:54.869
kind of in the same sentence most of the time because

00:57:54.869 --> 00:57:58.250
they both have an interplay on the day ahead and real

00:57:58.250 --> 00:58:00.920
time ERCOT. Uh, you know, from my perspective, that's

00:58:00.920 --> 00:58:04.539
exactly right. Our job here is risk management, risk

00:58:04.539 --> 00:58:07.500
management for the consumer, for the system, the system

00:58:07.510 --> 00:58:11.880
then consumer. Um, and, and that's what this dialogue

00:58:11.880 --> 00:58:15.130
is completely about on all of these individual components

00:58:15.139 --> 00:58:18.110
that we have brought on very quickly. And I think the

00:58:18.119 --> 00:58:20.860
legislature was happy with that yesterday. I mean that

00:58:20.860 --> 00:58:23.639
was the takeaway. It's like we're, we're doing a good

00:58:23.639 --> 00:58:27.889
job and we're calming the public as a result of that

00:58:27.889 --> 00:58:31.940
good job and that is foundational to our mission. So

00:58:32.719 --> 00:58:36.409
we have to look at it holistically, but uh, these,

00:58:36.420 --> 00:58:41.409
these events are very, um, they're teaching us a master's

00:58:41.409 --> 00:58:45.679
class on human nature and how these individual segments

00:58:45.690 --> 00:58:49.349
are responding because as Kerry has continually alluded

00:58:49.349 --> 00:58:54.780
to loads, responded to the miss in uh, during winter

00:58:54.780 --> 00:58:58.019
storm landing With the overshoot of the forecast and

00:58:58.019 --> 00:59:01.190
they didn't participate in the day ahead to the degree

00:59:01.199 --> 00:59:06.039
um, during the 23rd and 24th Cold Snap. And and thus

00:59:06.050 --> 00:59:09.400
we were rocking and renewables. We're not playing all

00:59:09.400 --> 00:59:13.860
of this was feeding into a, which is not of of events

00:59:13.860 --> 00:59:17.670
that force prices sky high um, for a four hour duration

00:59:17.679 --> 00:59:21.250
So uh, yeah, ERCOT got a lot on his plate. What what

00:59:21.250 --> 00:59:25.550
I do want to to know as a commissioner is, what amount

00:59:25.559 --> 00:59:30.329
of discretion can we allow for for the grid operator

00:59:30.719 --> 00:59:34.940
to, to harness these forces uh, for the ruck, which

00:59:34.940 --> 00:59:39.909
is absolutely necessary um, as a construct. But also

00:59:39.909 --> 00:59:41.820
these new tools that are coming into play that are

00:59:41.820 --> 00:59:45.599
extremely valuable um, and to make all this sync up

00:59:45.610 --> 00:59:48.440
Uh, so I think we're all saying the same thing in another

00:59:48.440 --> 00:59:52.179
important factor is the forecasting. The forecasting

00:59:52.179 --> 00:59:55.099
is not only important for reliability planning, but

00:59:55.099 --> 01:00:00.809
it also has a real, real ERCOT impact to pricing and

01:00:00.820 --> 01:00:04.329
ultimately investment. So, you know, continuing to

01:00:04.329 --> 01:00:07.579
refine how, you know, I think ERCOT misuse of conservative

01:00:07.579 --> 01:00:12.159
forecasting has benefits, but you know, it's, it's

01:00:12.159 --> 01:00:15.030
forecasting drives a lot of ERCOT behavior and prices

01:00:15.510 --> 01:00:21.650
So um ERCOT needs to continue to um refine how really

01:00:21.659 --> 01:00:24.719
analyze how the forecasting is impacting behavior because

01:00:24.719 --> 01:00:28.150
there's two drastically different responses from winter

01:00:28.150 --> 01:00:31.340
storm landing to the week of the pricing event. Right

01:00:31.349 --> 01:00:34.320
And and forecasting is just one factor but it was an

01:00:34.320 --> 01:00:37.969
important factor and so I just want to leave that on

01:00:37.969 --> 01:00:40.360
the table and you you made a very good point earlier

01:00:40.360 --> 01:00:43.179
that a lot of new things are happening very quickly

01:00:43.389 --> 01:00:47.369
and it's important to let the ERCOT and the ERCOT participants

01:00:47.639 --> 01:00:51.599
adapt to those changes. We're what 60 days into the

01:00:51.599 --> 01:00:57.280
new CDC um and like Kerry pointed out there's ERCOT

01:00:57.280 --> 01:00:59.110
potential for learning one thing happened, we've had

01:00:59.119 --> 01:01:01.739
two events really write like a sample size of two.

01:01:02.409 --> 01:01:05.599
So we want to we want to allow ERCOT participants to

01:01:05.599 --> 01:01:08.760
continue to adapt their business model and actions

01:01:09.460 --> 01:01:13.489
and they have forecast to there's nothing written in

01:01:13.489 --> 01:01:18.030
stone sign that I've got to accept ERCOT forecast but

01:01:18.409 --> 01:01:21.139
reliability is paramount as Commissioner Matt Mcadams

01:01:21.139 --> 01:01:24.829
said and we'll certainly continue that I think as

01:01:27.210 --> 01:01:30.400
clarifying a path forward in terms of questions to

01:01:30.400 --> 01:01:34.820
be asked. One thing I'd like to very much here from

01:01:35.309 --> 01:01:41.010
or ask you all to dig in on is the um the

01:01:41.010 --> 01:01:45.719
load the demand response locked up in the ea we address

01:01:45.719 --> 01:01:50.179
that with E. R. S and would be very interested to see

01:01:50.179 --> 01:01:53.340
what a similar approach both on deployment, reconciling

01:01:53.340 --> 01:01:55.530
deployment like we did with non controllable load and

01:01:55.530 --> 01:02:00.920
Non-spin and also Having access to that those 1500

01:02:00.920 --> 01:02:04.760
MW before we get to emergency we're paying for the

01:02:04.760 --> 01:02:08.230
resource I think just like us we want to be able to

01:02:08.239 --> 01:02:11.079
utilize that resource before the crisis, not after

01:02:11.079 --> 01:02:13.610
the crisis. Um so I would love to see

01:02:15.559 --> 01:02:20.090
hear your thoughts on that and more detail on what

01:02:20.099 --> 01:02:23.420
that might look like. Not something to think about

01:02:24.639 --> 01:02:27.869
Absolutely, absolutely. Does that make sense for you

01:02:27.869 --> 01:02:28.050
all?

01:02:30.099 --> 01:02:33.820
Alright, any other thoughts or comments? Thank you

01:02:33.820 --> 01:02:35.519
for thank you all for laying that out.

01:02:37.900 --> 01:02:41.880
Alright Commissioner Cobos, I know you have requested

01:02:41.880 --> 01:02:47.980
an update from another member of the team. Yes um thank

01:02:47.980 --> 01:02:51.880
you chairman Lake. So I um I requested that ERCOT have

01:02:51.889 --> 01:02:54.099
be here today to go over their survey results that

01:02:54.099 --> 01:02:56.920
they filed. I think we would all benefit from getting

01:02:56.920 --> 01:02:59.639
a little bit more information on what the numbers really

01:02:59.639 --> 01:03:03.210
mean. As I know staff maybe looking to issue out questions

01:03:03.210 --> 01:03:06.019
in the future to help us with the policy decisions

01:03:06.400 --> 01:03:09.489
that we still need to make to provide feedback to ERCOT

01:03:09.500 --> 01:03:12.329
on their RFP that they'll be issuing out in august

01:03:12.329 --> 01:03:16.869
for the firm fuel product but as we look to um continue

01:03:16.869 --> 01:03:20.260
to think about sizing the amount of firm fuel product

01:03:20.269 --> 01:03:23.400
that we will procure ultimately for this first tranche

01:03:23.409 --> 01:03:26.239
in the first RFP I think getting a little bit more

01:03:26.239 --> 01:03:29.389
color on the figures that ERCOT submitted in their

01:03:29.389 --> 01:03:33.039
survey results I think would benefit us all. And and

01:03:33.039 --> 01:03:35.639
Jeff I'll let you just walk through the three different

01:03:35.639 --> 01:03:38.929
buckets in the valley. Sure, Good morning. Commissioners

01:03:38.929 --> 01:03:43.179
Jeff billow with ERCOT So in the filing we submitted

01:03:43.179 --> 01:03:46.300
we separated the responses, we got back from resource

01:03:46.300 --> 01:03:50.789
entities into three buckets. The first bucket is the

01:03:50.800 --> 01:03:55.960
resources that currently have dual dual fuel capability

01:03:55.969 --> 01:04:01.000
and can switch over to the fuel oil. Uh and our operational

01:04:01.289 --> 01:04:05.730
ah I think there was a question about whether the tanks

01:04:05.730 --> 01:04:11.289
are full and I would say that uh we don't have real

01:04:11.289 --> 01:04:13.849
time information about if the tanks are full, but they

01:04:13.849 --> 01:04:17.969
have the ability to fill the tanks. And I think most

01:04:17.969 --> 01:04:20.000
if not all of them had full tanks at one point this

01:04:20.000 --> 01:04:23.380
winter, a lot of them have run this winter. So I don't

01:04:23.380 --> 01:04:26.309
know today if if they if they refilled all the way

01:04:26.309 --> 01:04:28.860
back but but they do have that capability. So, so that's

01:04:28.860 --> 01:04:31.929
resources that do have that capability. And if you

01:04:31.929 --> 01:04:36.400
look at the bar chart that that we included, the way

01:04:36.400 --> 01:04:41.530
to look at that is If you had a requirement that the

01:04:41.539 --> 01:04:44.179
resources needed to be able to run for at least 72

01:04:44.179 --> 01:04:48.780
hours, Then we would have 4400 megawatts of capacity

01:04:48.780 --> 01:04:52.449
that could meet that requirement. However, if the requirement

01:04:52.449 --> 01:04:56.349
were 96 hours, we would have 3900 megawatts of capacity

01:04:56.360 --> 01:05:00.960
that could meet that requirement. Mhm. So that's the

01:05:00.960 --> 01:05:07.119
first bucket. The second bucket uh is resources that

01:05:07.119 --> 01:05:12.750
can Yeah, sure picks up. Um So just for for edification

01:05:12.760 --> 01:05:16.159
for my fellow commissioner. So on this bar chart you

01:05:16.159 --> 01:05:21.309
note about 500 megawatts of that 4,404,441 megawatts

01:05:21.789 --> 01:05:26.670
About 500 MW of that are blackstar units? That's correct

01:05:26.679 --> 01:05:30.369
So those are, so, you know, there were some questions

01:05:30.380 --> 01:05:34.300
about if we have this firm fuel service uh from fuel

01:05:34.300 --> 01:05:37.840
supply services that going to take away from the units

01:05:37.840 --> 01:05:40.469
that are currently providing Black Start service. Uh

01:05:40.480 --> 01:05:44.400
So we we we separated out the amount of megawatts that

01:05:44.400 --> 01:05:47.550
are currently uh that that currently have a Black Start

01:05:47.550 --> 01:05:50.389
service contract. Okay. Did you see have that information

01:05:50.400 --> 01:05:54.050
So in order not to cannibalize the black start program

01:05:54.059 --> 01:05:57.159
potentially as we continue to look at this this policy

01:05:57.159 --> 01:06:00.809
issue, If you subtract the 500 out, you're looking

01:06:00.809 --> 01:06:05.599
at more like 30, this this first bucket, Right? Yeah

01:06:05.610 --> 01:06:08.650
And I think it's 400 something megawatts. So it's it's

01:06:08.659 --> 01:06:12.519
roughly about 4000 that you'd have. And and just just

01:06:12.519 --> 01:06:16.409
a high level the black star system has other requirements

01:06:16.409 --> 01:06:19.590
other than on site fuel storage, correct? That that

01:06:19.590 --> 01:06:22.949
feed into their bids into that that's correct their

01:06:22.949 --> 01:06:24.539
ability to bid into that program.

01:06:26.170 --> 01:06:30.650
And and do those. Um I asked this, I've been to an

01:06:30.650 --> 01:06:33.500
nRG plant, I think I'm getting into black Start here

01:06:33.500 --> 01:06:37.090
more than the firm fuel piece, but At one of their

01:06:37.090 --> 01:06:41.099
plants, they're black start unit was 13 MW. So if they

01:06:41.099 --> 01:06:44.750
have firm fuel for 13 MW, obviously it's not the important

01:06:44.760 --> 01:06:47.239
well, that's half the important piece. The other important

01:06:47.239 --> 01:06:51.739
pieces that Um, the next unit in that black star plan

01:06:51.739 --> 01:06:57.769
is 450 MW Um, is, are we, am I mixing things already

01:06:57.780 --> 01:07:01.590
Uh, that, I mean we want farm fuel for the 450 MW

01:07:01.590 --> 01:07:06.460
Also Not just the 13 MW black store program or the

01:07:06.460 --> 01:07:09.380
firm fuel, so that, I mean, that's why I'm mixing them

01:07:09.380 --> 01:07:13.449
So from Black Start already has that requirement. Um

01:07:13.460 --> 01:07:17.230
you know, I think they are actually kind of combined

01:07:17.239 --> 01:07:20.059
but um, because these plants are going to have firm

01:07:20.059 --> 01:07:23.739
fuel, I mean, there are plants that are, will have

01:07:23.750 --> 01:07:26.929
firm fuel storage on their site that may also be in

01:07:26.929 --> 01:07:31.059
the Black Start plan, um, that are needed, you know

01:07:31.059 --> 01:07:35.059
if there was a catastrophic outage. But anyway, so

01:07:35.059 --> 01:07:38.340
I'm just thinking about how we would, you know, at

01:07:38.340 --> 01:07:41.269
least understand the interplay between those two. Right

01:07:41.269 --> 01:07:44.010
And for clarification today, there's not a requirement

01:07:44.010 --> 01:07:46.030
for the Black Start units to have that, but there is

01:07:46.030 --> 01:07:49.460
an NPR are 11 10 that is going through the process

01:07:49.469 --> 01:07:52.099
the stakeholder process that would add that requirement

01:07:52.099 --> 01:07:55.429
in. But as of right now, it's just for the Black Start

01:07:55.429 --> 01:07:58.610
units, it's, it's not for the next next Start units

01:07:58.650 --> 01:08:05.079
wait, the NPR are, is just for firm on site. Fuel for

01:08:05.090 --> 01:08:07.659
the Black Star unit. That's not the second unit in

01:08:07.659 --> 01:08:13.250
that process may be helpful to provide some clarification

01:08:13.250 --> 01:08:18.250
on this Black Start or help me understand this question

01:08:18.869 --> 01:08:23.399
There's a Black Start requirement or eligibility relate

01:08:23.399 --> 01:08:26.640
to a specific piece of infrastructure or is it a certain

01:08:26.640 --> 01:08:30.289
number of megawatts out of a larger asset?

01:08:32.069 --> 01:08:36.439
So it's, I think it's closer to the first one. It's

01:08:36.449 --> 01:08:41.050
uh, it is a specific unit. However, there are plants

01:08:41.050 --> 01:08:45.800
that qualify that they can Black start any of a number

01:08:45.800 --> 01:08:49.199
of units at the plant site. So, so it is for one

01:08:49.199 --> 01:08:52.569
of those units to be able to black start in, in uh

01:08:52.579 --> 01:08:55.039
in the situation that we need them to. So I think it

01:08:55.039 --> 01:08:59.100
could be because they're modular right? Like inside

01:08:59.100 --> 01:09:01.989
the fence, you got 100 megawatt capability somewhere

01:09:01.989 --> 01:09:04.520
in there. You've got to get 15 megawatts or 13 megawatts

01:09:04.529 --> 01:09:10.130
for the Black Start. Um, and so it could directly be

01:09:10.140 --> 01:09:12.819
pieced together like antlers or some segment of your

01:09:12.829 --> 01:09:17.140
production is black starts in segments from fuel. And

01:09:17.140 --> 01:09:21.569
you could have the fuel infrastructure aggregated across

01:09:21.569 --> 01:09:21.699
it.

01:09:24.460 --> 01:09:27.800
Yeah, I would agree with that, in which case it's not

01:09:27.810 --> 01:09:30.529
a question of, we're not worried about cannibalizing

01:09:30.539 --> 01:09:34.359
it almost it would be an enhancement potentially to

01:09:34.359 --> 01:09:38.180
their ability to qualify for a more lucrative service

01:09:38.180 --> 01:09:41.939
which is Black Star. So assuming they have the, the

01:09:41.939 --> 01:09:45.090
fuel tank capability then? I would agree with that

01:09:45.100 --> 01:09:47.109
We're not going to pay for the 15 megawatts twice,

01:09:47.710 --> 01:09:50.260
but you get paid for the 15 megawatts for Black Start

01:09:50.270 --> 01:09:54.520
and then The next 85. But then you go and fill those

01:09:54.520 --> 01:09:56.430
tanks up to a higher level. Right? And you're going

01:09:56.430 --> 01:09:59.359
to match it to what, what you're being paid for. Okay

01:09:59.369 --> 01:10:03.609
good. Yes. Okay. That's very good. Good discussion

01:10:03.609 --> 01:10:06.000
on on that issue because I was trying to make sure

01:10:06.010 --> 01:10:10.340
that we separated out appropriately as we look to really

01:10:10.340 --> 01:10:12.479
try to understand how many megawatts are available

01:10:12.479 --> 01:10:15.199
in this first track, this first bucket. And so that's

01:10:15.199 --> 01:10:19.039
very helpful. Um, To understand. So as we're looking

01:10:19.039 --> 01:10:22.920
at those 500 MW that are in Black Start potentially

01:10:22.930 --> 01:10:25.619
it sounds like we might be able to squeeze some of

01:10:25.619 --> 01:10:29.789
those out for firm fuel. Is that fair? Like they could

01:10:29.789 --> 01:10:34.029
also participate in assuming they had the tank capacity

01:10:34.029 --> 01:10:38.489
then? I think that's fair. Okay. Okay. Is there a way

01:10:38.489 --> 01:10:42.390
to sort of study that that's 500 megawatts and see

01:10:42.399 --> 01:10:45.229
what, what can be pulled out for firm fuel and how

01:10:45.229 --> 01:10:47.000
many megawatts, how many megawatts can be pulled out

01:10:47.010 --> 01:10:49.329
from fuel and how many could be left for Black Start

01:10:49.340 --> 01:10:52.949
Is that something that's possible? We probably need

01:10:52.949 --> 01:10:54.939
to wait until the NPR goes through to clarify

01:10:56.460 --> 01:10:58.520
fuel requirements for Black Start and then take a look

01:10:58.520 --> 01:11:03.680
at. Right. Right. Yeah. And it would be in the addition

01:11:03.680 --> 01:11:07.920
of how many hours worth of fuel, you know, for black

01:11:07.920 --> 01:11:11.409
star plus how, how many hours for firm fuel, you know

01:11:11.420 --> 01:11:12.569
we could do that math

01:11:14.140 --> 01:11:16.180
megawatts. But I just want to make sure that, you know

01:11:16.180 --> 01:11:18.760
as we look to size, that we just have all the details

01:11:18.760 --> 01:11:22.250
in there. But okay. And I want to make sure that so

01:11:22.250 --> 01:11:25.430
a unit that is in firm fuel can also be in Black

01:11:25.430 --> 01:11:27.880
Start. It's just the payment is, they're not going

01:11:27.880 --> 01:11:30.920
to get paid for both for that. I don't think we want

01:11:30.920 --> 01:11:33.050
to do that. Yeah, that's what, that's what a subset

01:11:33.050 --> 01:11:35.350
of that unit will be dedicated and paid for under the

01:11:35.350 --> 01:11:38.739
black star. Sometimes sometimes they're, they're dedicated

01:11:38.739 --> 01:11:42.829
units for Black Start at different points. So, um,

01:11:42.840 --> 01:11:45.369
I just want to make sure that both sides are covered

01:11:45.470 --> 01:11:48.680
but that were not double paying, but, but on the whole

01:11:49.060 --> 01:11:53.670
for our purposes, we're looking at 4400 megawatts existing

01:11:53.680 --> 01:11:58.760
existing. Uh, That could go into either program 50%

01:11:58.760 --> 01:12:01.159
of your, if you have the fuel capability, 50% of your

01:12:01.159 --> 01:12:03.569
generator could go to the black started 40%. The other

01:12:03.569 --> 01:12:08.010
60% could go to firm fuel. That's economics really

01:12:08.210 --> 01:12:11.060
depending on what the pricing is a business decision

01:12:11.550 --> 01:12:13.880
But the key point is, we, we don't want to pay for

01:12:15.050 --> 01:12:17.510
we don't want double pay for the same megawatts, but

01:12:17.520 --> 01:12:19.770
but we're buying reserves and that's what we want to

01:12:20.270 --> 01:12:22.850
and part of as we scale this part of it is also

01:12:22.850 --> 01:12:28.319
to get more representative. So once we get to 4400

01:12:28.850 --> 01:12:33.689
that'll that'll be one Price Point and, the you know

01:12:33.699 --> 01:12:38.289
4400 plus one the next megawatts, a new firm fuel that

01:12:38.289 --> 01:12:42.710
will be more expensive. But if we are, the sizing question

01:12:42.710 --> 01:12:45.630
is an open question. But if we want to eventually scale

01:12:45.630 --> 01:12:48.340
it to just by way of example, 10,000 megawatts of firm

01:12:48.340 --> 01:12:51.020
fuel, Alright, We're gonna we're gonna pay for the

01:12:51.020 --> 01:12:55.079
1st 4400. We know we've got that Once you get to 5000

01:12:55.449 --> 01:12:56.949
that's gonna get more expensive because it's a new

01:12:56.949 --> 01:13:00.579
build within the year after that you get a six out

01:13:00.579 --> 01:13:03.079
you know, it'll it'll the price will go down as that

01:13:03.079 --> 01:13:03.970
supply comes in

01:13:05.819 --> 01:13:09.520
established and it's actually constructed. Yes. And

01:13:09.520 --> 01:13:11.159
and one thing we've got to keep in mind at least some

01:13:11.159 --> 01:13:13.970
of the feedback I got from ERCOT maybe not used specifically

01:13:13.970 --> 01:13:17.149
Jeff, but some feedback I got was these are the megawatts

01:13:17.159 --> 01:13:19.460
um that we're getting based on the survey feedback

01:13:19.460 --> 01:13:22.569
from the generation resource owners. However, not all

01:13:22.569 --> 01:13:25.640
of these generation resource owners will bid into the

01:13:25.649 --> 01:13:29.689
program necessarily. Um, we can go out for it, but

01:13:29.689 --> 01:13:32.489
we might not, you know, they may choose not to participate

01:13:32.500 --> 01:13:32.880
Okay.

01:13:34.850 --> 01:13:35.270
Okay.

01:13:37.449 --> 01:13:42.039
So the the second bucket are resources that at some

01:13:42.039 --> 01:13:45.000
point in time had some infrastructure in place. I think

01:13:45.000 --> 01:13:48.550
all of them still have fuel tanks on site but that

01:13:48.560 --> 01:13:52.430
uh that that infrastructure has gone into some state

01:13:52.430 --> 01:13:56.300
of disrepair. Uh And I apologize I do not need to make

01:13:56.300 --> 01:14:01.789
a correction on the numbers I sent you. Uh We realized

01:14:01.789 --> 01:14:03.960
yesterday we had a type of where it says that there

01:14:03.960 --> 01:14:06.520
are 18 resources at 11 plant sites. That should be

01:14:06.529 --> 01:14:09.699
18 resources at six plant sites. So I apologize. Well

01:14:09.699 --> 01:14:13.260
we'll get that corrected in the filing but all the

01:14:13.260 --> 01:14:16.500
other numbers are are accurate. I would just sort of

01:14:16.500 --> 01:14:19.609
informally characterize the responses that we got back

01:14:19.619 --> 01:14:23.439
as I think of the six plant sites. I think one of

01:14:23.439 --> 01:14:26.229
the plant sites was somewhat optimistic that they could

01:14:26.229 --> 01:14:29.520
get their infrastructure uh going again. I think the

01:14:29.520 --> 01:14:31.800
other five, I would say we're extremely pessimistic

01:14:31.800 --> 01:14:34.659
about their ability to get there infrastructure back

01:14:34.659 --> 01:14:37.489
up again. So I I would say I would be hesitant to

01:14:37.489 --> 01:14:40.960
count on any of those, especially for this coming winter

01:14:43.939 --> 01:14:48.939
And then the the third bucket is the the the resources

01:14:48.939 --> 01:14:54.819
that have um uh stored natural gas. Uh And and there

01:14:54.819 --> 01:14:57.970
were really just to storage facilities for for two

01:14:57.970 --> 01:15:02.819
Q. S. C. S. Uh The first I'll say QsC one, they

01:15:02.829 --> 01:15:06.359
own the storage facility and they own the pipeline

01:15:06.439 --> 01:15:10.300
from the storage facility to their plant sites. They

01:15:10.300 --> 01:15:12.569
have to two different plant sites that can draw from

01:15:12.569 --> 01:15:18.880
that uh that storage facility, it's uh such that they

01:15:18.890 --> 01:15:22.180
cannot run both of those plants sites at full output

01:15:22.189 --> 01:15:25.539
from that storage facility at the same time. Uh They

01:15:25.550 --> 01:15:28.890
could run some combination of what one at full want

01:15:28.890 --> 01:15:33.520
one less or zero or that they could run both a lower

01:15:33.529 --> 01:15:36.560
number for the purposes of the numbers that we gave

01:15:36.560 --> 01:15:39.069
you, we assume that the larger plant site was running

01:15:39.069 --> 01:15:42.449
at full and the other plant site was off about how

01:15:42.449 --> 01:15:47.170
many megawatts. So I think that was roughly 550 MW

01:15:47.180 --> 01:15:52.640
for that one. So 550 MW for where a generation resource

01:15:52.649 --> 01:15:56.920
owner um owns and operates the transmission pipeline

01:15:56.970 --> 01:16:01.560
to the offsite natural gas facility, correct? And they

01:16:01.560 --> 01:16:05.430
own the the storage facility as well. They own every

01:16:05.430 --> 01:16:08.069
aspect of the supply chain, with the exception of the

01:16:08.069 --> 01:16:10.359
production. That's my understanding. And this is why

01:16:10.359 --> 01:16:12.409
I asked that question because I thought somewhere along

01:16:13.130 --> 01:16:18.659
this evaluation, I suspected there was a very finite

01:16:18.659 --> 01:16:24.489
small um subset in our ERCOT today where a generation

01:16:24.489 --> 01:16:27.279
resource owner owned and controlled their pipeline

01:16:27.289 --> 01:16:29.850
to their own natural gas facility. That's offside.

01:16:30.930 --> 01:16:34.050
Right. Yeah. So that that was the only one uh from

01:16:34.050 --> 01:16:36.029
the survey and the R. F. I. S. That we sent, that

01:16:36.029 --> 01:16:38.460
was the only one that responded that controlled everything

01:16:39.229 --> 01:16:43.439
Uh The other what I'll call qsc to uh they have a

01:16:43.449 --> 01:16:46.949
contract for the storage facility, They own the pipeline

01:16:47.000 --> 01:16:50.739
they do not own the storage facility uh and and they

01:16:50.739 --> 01:16:56.489
are able to run part of their plant. Uh It's it's a

01:16:56.500 --> 01:16:59.359
large plant site with many units. They're able to run

01:16:59.359 --> 01:17:01.819
part of that from that storage facility that they would

01:17:01.819 --> 01:17:04.840
not be able to run all of the plant from that storage

01:17:04.840 --> 01:17:06.550
facility. You have to say that again? They own the

01:17:06.550 --> 01:17:08.880
pipeline, they do not own the storage facility, they

01:17:08.880 --> 01:17:13.000
are in contract for the storage. That's correct. Do

01:17:13.000 --> 01:17:18.060
they own 100% of the pipeline capacity from the storage

01:17:18.060 --> 01:17:20.739
facility to their plant or they, is it a header system

01:17:20.739 --> 01:17:22.939
that goes, I mean, is it a header system that goes

01:17:22.939 --> 01:17:25.729
from the storage facility to the plant or is it bypassing

01:17:25.729 --> 01:17:29.560
the plant carrying additional gas to other customers

01:17:30.229 --> 01:17:33.439
Um I mean when we get into these issues, there are

01:17:33.439 --> 01:17:37.810
nuances here that are are that we have to be careful

01:17:37.819 --> 01:17:42.489
that we we don't want to eliminate the possibility

01:17:42.489 --> 01:17:45.029
but we do need to have this good understanding of what

01:17:45.029 --> 01:17:47.560
the attributes actually are and what are the, what's

01:17:47.560 --> 01:17:49.819
the contracted right of withdrawal from the facility

01:17:50.109 --> 01:17:54.909
at what rate? And that's something that, yeah, as,

01:17:54.970 --> 01:17:57.289
as with all this, the devil's in the details and in

01:17:57.289 --> 01:18:01.670
terms like that are incredibly important. And so I

01:18:01.670 --> 01:18:04.380
know we've, we've asked it before, but again, please

01:18:04.390 --> 01:18:08.699
I think we all want the stakeholders to include suggestions

01:18:08.699 --> 01:18:11.460
on how to address that. What are the most important

01:18:11.460 --> 01:18:13.970
terms and conditions, covenants, etcetera, in these

01:18:13.970 --> 01:18:18.170
contracts for transport, withdrawal delivery, etcetera

01:18:18.170 --> 01:18:20.949
So I don't know, we don't know what the answer is yet

01:18:20.960 --> 01:18:21.250
but

01:18:23.319 --> 01:18:26.920
if we're, if we're going to, I mean texas has extraordinary

01:18:26.949 --> 01:18:30.319
natural gas resources, we certainly just don't want

01:18:30.319 --> 01:18:33.189
to thumb our nose at that. But if we're going to consider

01:18:33.189 --> 01:18:38.159
it, those details are absolutely critical to ensure

01:18:38.159 --> 01:18:40.750
that the farm really means for me. I think the one

01:18:40.750 --> 01:18:43.189
other thing on that with, with the withdrawal capacity

01:18:43.369 --> 01:18:47.380
um, I'm not a pro on, on the gas side of the

01:18:47.380 --> 01:18:50.670
equation here, but it seems like you could have somebody

01:18:50.670 --> 01:18:52.640
that would say, well we're part owner of a pipeline

01:18:52.640 --> 01:18:55.960
and they own 1% or point oh, 1% of the pipeline Um

01:18:55.970 --> 01:18:58.670
as a limited partner. And uh, the question would be

01:18:58.670 --> 01:19:03.020
would that give you any capability to have any firm

01:19:03.020 --> 01:19:05.689
reserve or you own the whole, the whole thing and you

01:19:05.689 --> 01:19:09.960
sold 50% of it to the right. So I again, devil's in

01:19:09.960 --> 01:19:12.229
the details to just try to understand that to make

01:19:12.229 --> 01:19:15.430
sure that the endgame that there, there is a firm fuel

01:19:15.430 --> 01:19:18.729
component to that um, is, is really,

01:19:21.220 --> 01:19:23.520
yeah, understanding the pipeline configuration, I guess

01:19:23.520 --> 01:19:28.479
what you're saying as well. Okay with that being said

01:19:28.479 --> 01:19:31.479
I mean, I believe that we should consider that I think

01:19:31.489 --> 01:19:34.529
in different parts of the, especially in the gulf coast

01:19:34.529 --> 01:19:37.289
with salt domes. It's just a massive resource that

01:19:37.289 --> 01:19:41.039
we ought to evaluate closely and look at that for the

01:19:41.039 --> 01:19:44.109
way that we might be able to ensure reliability for

01:19:44.109 --> 01:19:46.640
that part of the ERCOT. Um It's not the same for every

01:19:47.119 --> 01:19:49.569
region of the state but in that region it's something

01:19:49.569 --> 01:19:51.779
that could be hugely valuable to consumers.

01:19:54.619 --> 01:19:56.640
Thank you, Jeff. I don't have any more questions. I

01:19:56.640 --> 01:20:00.869
don't have anything else to do. Alright. Any other

01:20:00.869 --> 01:20:03.510
questions? Thank you, appreciate you being here.

01:20:06.810 --> 01:20:12.640
You don't have anything on items 16 Which will take

01:20:12.640 --> 01:20:15.710
us to item 19. (item:19) Would you like that out for us? Mr

01:20:15.710 --> 01:20:16.029
generic

01:20:18.699 --> 01:20:23.250
item 19. Stock at 51091 is the complaint of members

01:20:23.250 --> 01:20:27.319
of the Rio Ancho homeowners Association and others

01:20:27.329 --> 01:20:28.779
against aqua texas

01:20:32.109 --> 01:20:34.930
before you as a proposal for decision.

01:20:39.409 --> 01:20:44.439
Thank you sir. Uh This docket presents a somewhat unique

01:20:44.810 --> 01:20:48.880
issue to be addressed that neither this commission

01:20:48.880 --> 01:20:52.729
or t ce que has addressed in the past related to water

01:20:52.729 --> 01:20:58.270
use um and given the complexities and the unprecedented

01:20:58.270 --> 01:21:03.800
nature of this, this docket, my my first instinct is

01:21:03.800 --> 01:21:07.619
to take a little more time to make sure we can have

01:21:07.619 --> 01:21:10.550
a thorough and comprehensive evaluation of all elements

01:21:10.550 --> 01:21:14.390
of the docket. So I'd propose tabling it for today

01:21:14.390 --> 01:21:17.729
but I'm happy to hear their thoughts or other considerations

01:21:18.510 --> 01:21:23.300
I agree with you in in that this case could have real

01:21:23.310 --> 01:21:27.710
Um Yeah, there's there's a lot of gravity associated

01:21:27.710 --> 01:21:32.239
with the decision associated with this case. Um I think

01:21:32.239 --> 01:21:35.210
it plays into long term policy considerations on the

01:21:35.210 --> 01:21:39.470
part of the commission. So I I think uh any type of

01:21:39.470 --> 01:21:42.439
consideration on the part of staff stakeholders um

01:21:42.449 --> 01:21:48.869
to to enshrine a doctrine that could have long lasting

01:21:48.869 --> 01:21:52.449
precedent. Um we should take care in considering all

01:21:52.449 --> 01:21:56.319
options, so I appreciate the thinking on this. Mr Chairman

01:21:57.409 --> 01:21:59.689
I would appreciate the extra time. I think it's it's

01:21:59.699 --> 01:22:04.229
um well worth taking a deeper dive. Right, I'm supportive

01:22:04.229 --> 01:22:08.020
of that. All right, we'll table this item for consideration

01:22:08.020 --> 01:22:13.470
at a future commission meeting 21, consented, we don't

01:22:13.470 --> 01:22:17.579
have anything on 22 through 28 Which will bring us

01:22:17.579 --> 01:22:21.550
to our update from our executive director. And item

01:22:21.550 --> 01:22:22.119
29.

01:22:23.800 --> 01:22:27.590
(item:29) Thank you. Mr Chairman Commissioners. Um Two items

01:22:27.590 --> 01:22:31.100
of note this morning, the first bit of unfortunate

01:22:31.100 --> 01:22:34.729
news, as you are aware, Rachel robles, our Director

01:22:34.729 --> 01:22:38.699
of Legal division um has tendered her resignation her

01:22:38.699 --> 01:22:41.300
last day is next week. I would just want to take this

01:22:41.300 --> 01:22:44.430
opportunity to publicly thank her for her work and

01:22:44.430 --> 01:22:48.289
service here. She accepted that position at a time

01:22:48.289 --> 01:22:51.859
of great need in that division and um did an amazing

01:22:51.859 --> 01:22:55.090
job and and we will definitely miss her around the

01:22:55.090 --> 01:23:00.890
office and the the great work that she did here absolutely

01:23:00.899 --> 01:23:07.220
hate to see her go and Like everybody in that division

01:23:07.229 --> 01:23:09.930
the last 12 months have been tumultuous to say the

01:23:09.930 --> 01:23:13.090
least. We're grateful to have had her leadership through

01:23:13.090 --> 01:23:16.100
that period and grateful for the team that she led

01:23:16.100 --> 01:23:20.989
and all the all the work and challenges they've addressed

01:23:20.989 --> 01:23:26.020
and overcome. Mr Rogers. I would also like to say when

01:23:26.020 --> 01:23:29.630
we were all um sort of para dropped into this commission

01:23:29.640 --> 01:23:34.020
almost a year ago. It was of great comfort to me to

01:23:34.020 --> 01:23:38.380
see the people who held the leadership positions at

01:23:38.380 --> 01:23:41.340
the agency, but also the rank and file. Although those

01:23:41.340 --> 01:23:44.260
cubicles were quite empty for some time given the constraints

01:23:44.260 --> 01:23:48.840
of the pandemic. But the leadership um Rachel being

01:23:48.850 --> 01:23:53.350
uh, top among them was was a great comfort at a very

01:23:53.350 --> 01:23:58.710
trying time for for us rookie commissioners and I appreciated

01:23:58.710 --> 01:24:01.770
her work. I want to thank Rachel for her service and

01:24:01.770 --> 01:24:04.050
leadership as well. I had the pleasure of working with

01:24:04.050 --> 01:24:07.590
her when I was public council um at open prior to joining

01:24:07.590 --> 01:24:10.949
the commissioners Commissioner. Um and due to the black

01:24:10.949 --> 01:24:12.640
curtain, unfortunately, I didn't get to see her as

01:24:12.640 --> 01:24:15.239
much as I would like to have seen her in this role

01:24:15.239 --> 01:24:20.079
But she is a has been a great asset to the commission

01:24:20.079 --> 01:24:22.619
and um I want to thank her for her service and leadership

01:24:25.390 --> 01:24:28.670
So, um I'm sorry, I was just gonna say all service

01:24:28.680 --> 01:24:30.739
to the, to the state and to the people of the state

01:24:30.739 --> 01:24:33.579
is is admirable and we just appreciate all of the efforts

01:24:33.579 --> 01:24:37.420
all of the sacrifices that she made uh for all of us

01:24:37.890 --> 01:24:41.399
Absolutely. And as you know, I'm, I'm not one to bring

01:24:41.399 --> 01:24:43.979
you some bad news without a little bit of good news

01:24:43.989 --> 01:24:48.229
from time to time. Uh an update on some construction

01:24:48.229 --> 01:24:51.560
unfortunately not construction of your office commissioner

01:24:51.819 --> 01:24:55.439
guilty. Um but one of particular note perhaps given

01:24:55.439 --> 01:24:58.199
the non verbal communication that I've had during this

01:24:58.199 --> 01:25:03.460
meeting with our court reporter, our new Diess is actually

01:25:03.460 --> 01:25:07.260
completed that will accommodate Up to five Commissioners

01:25:07.789 --> 01:25:10.479
And we'll make it easier for you all to speak to one

01:25:10.479 --> 01:25:12.760
another without having to pull back from your microphones

01:25:12.760 --> 01:25:15.819
to turn your head. So that has been constructed and

01:25:15.829 --> 01:25:18.920
is planned to be delivered on the 23rd of this month

01:25:19.489 --> 01:25:24.500
So congratulations to all. I don't know what I'll do

01:25:24.500 --> 01:25:25.960
without having to do this.

01:25:28.489 --> 01:25:32.859
That does delivery include installation thomas. Yes

01:25:32.869 --> 01:25:37.250
And I believe if not happy to see, you know, if you're

01:25:37.250 --> 01:25:39.970
willing to help out with your tools, happy to have

01:25:39.970 --> 01:25:43.420
that. And I do believe I'll check with Cindy, I do

01:25:43.420 --> 01:25:47.310
believe it is firm delivery. Our previous conversations

01:25:47.319 --> 01:25:50.930
I don't know but I believe it is firm delivery so no

01:25:50.930 --> 01:25:53.840
supply chain issues. I don't believe so. I think our

01:25:53.840 --> 01:25:59.109
contract is for firm delivery as with all new reforms

01:25:59.109 --> 01:26:02.699
This commission is undertaken, firm means firm and

01:26:02.779 --> 01:26:06.779
lack of performance of any type of resource will be

01:26:06.779 --> 01:26:07.930
met with stiff penalties

01:26:09.979 --> 01:26:13.100
I believe so. And and Mr chairman noted And I look

01:26:13.100 --> 01:26:18.000
forward to my future job performance evaluation. I

01:26:18.000 --> 01:26:23.859
do too. Alright. Any other questions for the executive

01:26:23.859 --> 01:26:24.359
director?

01:26:25.880 --> 01:26:27.989
All right, thank you for the update. We'll miss you

01:26:27.989 --> 01:26:32.939
Rachel. Alright. Having convened in a duly notice,

01:26:32.939 --> 01:26:35.750
open meeting, the commission will now at 11 a.m. On

01:26:35.750 --> 01:26:38.590
March 10, to hold a closed session, pursuant to chapter

01:26:38.590 --> 01:26:43.470
five of 1 of the texas government code, Section 551.71551

01:26:43.470 --> 01:26:48.810
point 074 and 551.76. We'll be back in a bit. Sorry

01:26:58.989 --> 01:27:02.020
is hereby concluded at 11:20 a.m. On March 10th 1 22

01:27:02.020 --> 01:27:04.119
and the commission will now resume its public meeting

01:27:04.119 --> 01:27:07.090
No action will be taken by the commission regarding

01:27:07.090 --> 01:27:09.529
matters discussed in the closed session, so having

01:27:09.529 --> 01:27:12.649
no further business. This meeting of the Public utility

01:27:12.649 --> 01:27:16.029
commission is hereby adjourned. Happy spring break

01:27:16.029 --> 01:27:16.310
everybody.