WEBVTT

00:00:09.300 --> 00:00:11.810
(item:0.1:Chairwoman Jackson calls meeting to order & Commissioner McAdams' recognition) Good morning. This meeting of the Public Utility Commission

00:00:11.819 --> 00:00:14.359
of Texas will come to order. To consider matters that

00:00:14.368 --> 00:00:17.048
have been duly posted with the Secretary of State for

00:00:17.059 --> 00:00:20.699
August 3, 2023. For the record, my name is Kathleen

00:00:20.708 --> 00:00:24.359
Jackson. I'm joined by Will McAdams, Lori Cobos and

00:00:24.370 --> 00:00:27.449
Jimmy Glotfelty. Before we get started, I just wanted

00:00:27.458 --> 00:00:30.728
to recognize Commissioner McAdams for being selected

00:00:30.739 --> 00:00:34.929
as Vice President of SPP's Regional State Committee.

00:00:35.179 --> 00:00:36.168
Congratulations. Thank you. 

00:00:39.560 --> 00:00:42.118
Volunteer work is always appreciated in other places.

00:00:42.368 --> 00:00:45.060
Glutton for punishment. We so appreciate your leadership role and

00:00:45.069 --> 00:00:47.509
having a seat at the table. Thank you all. McAdams for President.

00:00:49.889 --> 00:00:54.789
I don't know how she writes in the transcript.

00:00:57.109 --> 00:00:59.368
(item:0.1:Shelah Cisneros with Commission Counsel lays out Consent Agenda) Shelah, please walk us through the Consent Items on

00:00:59.380 --> 00:01:02.848
today's Agenda. Good morning, Commissioners. By individual

00:01:02.859 --> 00:01:05.349
ballot, the following items were placed on your Consent

00:01:05.359 --> 00:01:12.879
Agenda. Items 3, 5-7, 11, 17, 18, 31 and 32.

00:01:13.698 --> 00:01:15.900
(item:0.1:Chairwoman Jackson asks for motion to approve items on Consent Agenda) I will entertain a motion to approve the Items just

00:01:15.909 --> 00:01:16.989
described by Shelah.

00:01:18.638 --> 00:01:21.180
So moved. Second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. 

00:01:21.198 --> 00:01:25.719
Motion passes. Additionally, Items 10 and 12 will

00:01:25.730 --> 00:01:29.469
not be taken up. (item:1:Chairwoman Jackson lays out instructions for Public Comment) Let's begin with Item No. 1,

00:01:29.480 --> 00:01:33.260
Public Comment. Oral comments related to a specific Agenda

00:01:33.269 --> 00:01:36.219
Item will be heard when that item is taken up. This

00:01:36.230 --> 00:01:39.620
is for general comments. When we get to oral comments

00:01:39.629 --> 00:01:42.109
on specific items, stakeholders should not approach

00:01:42.120 --> 00:01:44.778
the table unless oral argument has been granted or

00:01:44.790 --> 00:01:47.680
they have been invited by a Commissioner. Speakers

00:01:47.689 --> 00:01:50.439
will be limited to 3 minutes each. (item:1:Shelah Cisneros confirms there are no Public Comments) Shelah, do we

00:01:50.448 --> 00:01:53.239
have anyone from the public signed to speak? No, ma'am.

00:01:53.250 --> 00:01:56.549
No one is signed up to speak. (item:1:Chairwoman Jackson closes Public Comment) If not, Public Comment is

00:01:56.558 --> 00:01:57.528
now closed.

00:01:59.180 --> 00:02:01.838
Next up is Item No. 2. Shelah, will you please

00:02:01.849 --> 00:02:05.750
lay out this item? Yes. (item:2:Shelah Cisneros lays out petition of multiple MUDs appealing City of Round Rock's wholesale water & wastewater rates) Item No. 2 is Docket No. 

00:02:05.760 --> 00:02:09.949
48836. This is the petition of Paloma Lake MUD Nos.

00:02:09.960 --> 00:02:13.520
1 and 2, Vista Oaks MUD, Williamson County MUD,

00:02:13.528 --> 00:02:16.719
Nos. 10 and 11. Appealing the wholesale water and

00:02:16.729 --> 00:02:20.000
wastewater rates of the City of Round Rock. At the April

00:02:20.008 --> 00:02:23.099
27 Open Meeting, the Commission considered the petitioner's

00:02:23.110 --> 00:02:26.618
appeal of Order No. 30, and Commissioner Cobos filed

00:02:26.629 --> 00:02:30.610
a memo. Commissioner Cobos, would you please walk us through

00:02:30.618 --> 00:02:36.479
your memo? Yes. (item:2:Commissioner Cobos’ lays out her memo) So, um my memo has a draft order appended

00:02:36.490 --> 00:02:40.538
to it. And basically the draft order uh memorializes

00:02:40.550 --> 00:02:43.830
the Commission's determinations at the April 27, 2023

00:02:43.838 --> 00:02:48.069
Open Meeting. That reversed the SOAH ALJ's denial of the district's

00:02:48.080 --> 00:02:51.460
motion to compel. Um, and a finding that Round Rock's

00:02:51.469 --> 00:02:56.118
2017 wholesale sewer rates and 2018 wholesale water

00:02:56.129 --> 00:02:58.550
rates are the subject of the district's appeal, in

00:02:58.558 --> 00:02:59.069
this order.

00:03:00.778 --> 00:03:04.360
The draft order also clarifies the Commission's prior

00:03:04.368 --> 00:03:10.050
determinations um in, in its order on appeal of SOAH

00:03:10.058 --> 00:03:13.889
Order No. 17 and the discussion at the April 27,

00:03:13.899 --> 00:03:17.479
2023 Open Meeting. By finding that a public interest

00:03:17.490 --> 00:03:20.460
determination that the Commission is not required um

00:03:21.449 --> 00:03:26.949
under Texas Water Code Section 13.044. Um before fixing

00:03:26.960 --> 00:03:30.899
rates that are on appeal. And then secondly, that the

00:03:30.909 --> 00:03:35.319
Commission um rather that the um date that, that the

00:03:35.330 --> 00:03:37.270
rates that were instituted by law, at the time of the

00:03:37.278 --> 00:03:40.409
appeal. Are the rates that are the subject of the appeal.

00:03:40.889 --> 00:03:46.669
So in other words um that, the um, you know the,

00:03:46.679 --> 00:03:49.349
the rates are not the rate set after a final order.

00:03:50.020 --> 00:03:52.830
That is issued by the Commission. So those are the

00:03:52.838 --> 00:03:55.490
two main clarifications. Because Texas Water Code 13.

00:03:55.500 --> 00:04:01.330
044, has specific statutory provisions that set forward

00:04:01.338 --> 00:04:05.649
this process. And I, my order just clarifies that process.

00:04:05.659 --> 00:04:09.069
Um based from our discussion at the open meeting and

00:04:09.080 --> 00:04:12.288
our order, on order appeal of Order No. 17.

00:04:14.419 --> 00:04:17.410
You have any discussion? Hey, uh, (item:2:Commissioner McAdams’ thoughts on Commissioner Cobos' memo) Commissioner Cobos

00:04:17.420 --> 00:04:19.528
I would like to thank you first for filing the memo

00:04:19.540 --> 00:04:22.879
and the order. Um it took uh it, it took it was

00:04:22.889 --> 00:04:27.000
yeoman's work. Um to move this along to clarify and

00:04:27.009 --> 00:04:30.899
to um appropriately order uh the decisions that the

00:04:30.910 --> 00:04:34.199
Commission needs to affirm and clarify as part of this

00:04:34.209 --> 00:04:36.819
uh proceeding. I agree with your interpretation of

00:04:36.829 --> 00:04:42.028
the Water Code 13.044. And uh and if appropriate um

00:04:42.040 --> 00:04:44.949
pending any other discussion. (item:2:Motion to approve draft order on appeal that's attached to the memo) Uh I would move to approve

00:04:44.959 --> 00:04:48.920
the draft order on appeal of SOAH Order No. 30 attached

00:04:48.928 --> 00:04:54.209
to your memo. Uh I'm, uh I would second that. Okay, we

00:04:54.220 --> 00:04:57.220
have a motion and a second. All in favor, say aye. Aye.

00:04:57.389 --> 00:04:58.869
Motion passes. Thank you, ma'am.

00:05:01.139 --> 00:05:04.389
Item No. 3 was Consented. Next up is Item No. 

00:05:04.399 --> 00:05:07.949
4. Shelah, will you please lay out this item? Yes.

00:05:07.959 --> 00:05:11.850
(item:4:Application of Undine Development, LLC for system improvement charges) Item No. 4 is Docket No. 53109. This is the

00:05:11.858 --> 00:05:15.428
application of Undine Development, LLC for system improvement

00:05:15.439 --> 00:05:19.838
charges. And bear with me while I lay this one out. Um

00:05:19.949 --> 00:05:23.238
in this Docket the SOAH ALJ certified 5 issues to

00:05:23.250 --> 00:05:25.879
the Commission. Regarding the exclusive jurisdiction

00:05:25.889 --> 00:05:29.899
of water, over water and sewer rates at the March 23

00:05:29.910 --> 00:05:32.009
Open Meeting. The Commission decided that for 2 of

00:05:32.019 --> 00:05:34.720
the jurisdictional issues. It was appropriate to seek

00:05:34.730 --> 00:05:37.879
an Attorney General opinion and delayed responding

00:05:37.889 --> 00:05:41.358
to the certified issues. On June 30, the AG's Office

00:05:41.369 --> 00:05:43.939
sent a letter declining to issue an opinion on the

00:05:44.048 --> 00:05:47.178
two jurisdictional issues, as a matter of policy. Because

00:05:47.189 --> 00:05:49.819
a separate pending docket at SOAH implicates the same

00:05:49.829 --> 00:05:52.629
jurisdictional issues. So now we're back to where we

00:05:52.639 --> 00:05:56.028
left off at the March 23 Open Meeting. And the 5

00:05:56.040 --> 00:05:58.250
certified issues are before you for consideration.

00:05:58.528 --> 00:06:00.829
And Commissioner McAdams filed a memo on this Docket.

00:06:01.939 --> 00:06:05.108
Would you like to lay out your memo? Yes, ma'am. Um

00:06:05.119 --> 00:06:09.278
(item:4:Commissioner McAdams’ lays out his memo) And my memo was intended uh to start as a jumping off

00:06:09.290 --> 00:06:12.379
point. Um, so that we can order our thoughts and, and

00:06:12.389 --> 00:06:17.230
ultimately affirm some decisions. Um I started by spending

00:06:17.238 --> 00:06:20.009
some time with the transcript from our March 23

00:06:20.019 --> 00:06:23.910
uh Open Meeting. And I think, uh as a part of our

00:06:23.920 --> 00:06:27.259
discussion at that meeting. We had established consensus

00:06:27.278 --> 00:06:31.119
on the issues of good cause. Um And that we had agreed

00:06:31.129 --> 00:06:34.798
that an area is either clearly in the municipality's

00:06:34.809 --> 00:06:39.278
corporate boundaries or in extraterritorial jurisdiction.

00:06:40.170 --> 00:06:44.338
Next, I believe that we uh, we need to affirm our position

00:06:44.350 --> 00:06:48.939
on two issues we had previously spoken to. Um first

00:06:49.160 --> 00:06:51.959
a property in a subdivision that is partially inside

00:06:51.970 --> 00:06:56.199
and partially outside of the corporate limits. We appeared

00:06:56.209 --> 00:06:58.738
to agree that the location of the residence should

00:06:58.750 --> 00:07:03.059
be the determining factor um in establishing jurisdiction.

00:07:03.528 --> 00:07:06.819
Now second, for an area that has been fully annexed.

00:07:07.220 --> 00:07:10.189
I believe we agreed that the area in question would

00:07:10.199 --> 00:07:12.160
be under the municipality's jurisdiction.

00:07:13.879 --> 00:07:16.889
Now, for the part that we had not reached conclusive

00:07:16.899 --> 00:07:21.079
agreement on as per our discussion. When an area that

00:07:21.088 --> 00:07:24.798
is annexed by municipality for limited purposes, that's

00:07:24.809 --> 00:07:29.069
how it uh what we did not settle on. This could be

00:07:29.079 --> 00:07:32.000
a situation where an area has been annexed for limited

00:07:32.009 --> 00:07:36.838
purposes of as examples, um firefighting services. Or

00:07:36.850 --> 00:07:39.970
it could in fact be an area where uh that has been

00:07:39.980 --> 00:07:43.069
annexed for the purposes of water and sewer services.

00:07:43.928 --> 00:07:46.319
In these instances. I think we need to look at the

00:07:46.329 --> 00:07:49.369
specific facts in a given case to make the determination.

00:07:49.988 --> 00:07:53.059
If it can be shown that a municipality undertook annexation

00:07:53.069 --> 00:07:55.660
for the limited purpose of providing water and sewer

00:07:55.670 --> 00:07:59.100
service. Then the area would be under the municipality's

00:07:59.108 --> 00:08:02.850
jurisdiction. If on the other hand, the municipality

00:08:02.858 --> 00:08:05.470
appears to have annexed the area without demonstrated

00:08:05.480 --> 00:08:08.738
intention to provide water or sewer service. Then I

00:08:08.750 --> 00:08:13.889
think the area remains under our jurisdiction. Um now

00:08:13.899 --> 00:08:16.298
I, I don't wanna get into this next point too deeply

00:08:16.309 --> 00:08:18.298
because I don't think we have to. But as a further

00:08:18.309 --> 00:08:21.949
thought, uh I will want to revisit this issue if we

00:08:21.959 --> 00:08:25.019
arrive at a scenario. Where the residents of an area

00:08:25.028 --> 00:08:28.420
annexed for limited water and sewer purposes cannot

00:08:28.428 --> 00:08:31.730
vote in an election for the municipality in question.

00:08:31.920 --> 00:08:35.969
Now, that does not appear to be an issue here in this

00:08:35.979 --> 00:08:40.758
project. Um so we don't need to address the issue in

00:08:40.768 --> 00:08:45.388
my opinion, uh as an on an advisory basis. But in the

00:08:45.398 --> 00:08:48.558
future, if those scenarios do arrive. I believe we

00:08:48.567 --> 00:08:52.658
will need to readdress that. Um and I'd welcome any

00:08:52.668 --> 00:08:55.899
discussion on kind of the parameters, the framework

00:08:55.908 --> 00:08:58.519
of uh the policy that I've laid out.

00:09:01.349 --> 00:09:03.960
(item:4:Commissioner Cobos’ thoughts on Commissioner McAdams' memo) Commissioner McAdams, I generally agree with all of

00:09:03.969 --> 00:09:09.288
your um, decision points on, on the different scenarios

00:09:09.298 --> 00:09:12.349
that can arise in these, in these case. That the one

00:09:12.359 --> 00:09:14.330
that I would like to explore a little bit more is the

00:09:14.340 --> 00:09:18.109
limited purpose annexation. And that one, that one

00:09:18.119 --> 00:09:21.820
I'm just wondering. Um the City of Austin has not

00:09:21.830 --> 00:09:24.580
been very involved in this case. And I'm wondering

00:09:24.590 --> 00:09:27.928
how much cities in the future will be involved in these

00:09:27.940 --> 00:09:32.678
cases. And so who would provide us with the information

00:09:32.690 --> 00:09:37.519
to review. Um to determine whether the ordinance is

00:09:37.529 --> 00:09:41.979
limited purposes extended to water and sewer, rate and

00:09:41.989 --> 00:09:45.168
service, and operation. So I'm just wondering mechanically

00:09:45.178 --> 00:09:47.580
how that would work going forward. I I, you know, the

00:09:47.590 --> 00:09:50.038
utilities it's, you know, they want us to process

00:09:50.048 --> 00:09:52.769
these cases, right? Because that, that's what they

00:09:52.779 --> 00:09:57.359
want and it would be to their benefit. Um for those

00:09:57.369 --> 00:10:01.940
properties to stay under our jurisdiction. Um the cities

00:10:02.099 --> 00:10:04.529
as we've seen with the City of Austin hasn't been involved

00:10:04.538 --> 00:10:07.808
here. And it's up to them if they wanted to intervene

00:10:07.820 --> 00:10:10.178
in these cases. But I'm just wondering if, if they're

00:10:10.190 --> 00:10:14.450
gonna be, you know, vocal in our cases going forward.

00:10:14.460 --> 00:10:17.190
And what documentation who would provide that documentation

00:10:17.200 --> 00:10:22.229
for our review? And would it make, you know, an alternative

00:10:22.239 --> 00:10:25.668
would be to potentially just a certain jurisdiction.

00:10:25.678 --> 00:10:28.340
And if somebody had a problem with it they, they could

00:10:28.349 --> 00:10:32.950
challenge our, our decision or, or submit documentation.

00:10:34.288 --> 00:10:37.538
Telling us that they want to serve their own jurisdiction

00:10:37.548 --> 00:10:39.750
as a new city. I'm just trying to think mechanically

00:10:39.759 --> 00:10:41.879
going forward. Because of what we've seen with this

00:10:41.889 --> 00:10:44.830
one case, the first case. What it's gonna look like

00:10:44.840 --> 00:10:48.099
in the future. (item:4:Commissioner McAdams’ follow-up on his memo) So I believe this framework that I laid

00:10:48.109 --> 00:10:54.000
out establishes a message if disputes arise. And again

00:10:54.070 --> 00:10:58.668
if clarity is not present as it, as it relates to this

00:10:58.678 --> 00:11:03.139
limited purpose. Then uh within those disputes, we

00:11:03.149 --> 00:11:06.788
look to okay what was the fact pattern behind the annexation.

00:11:07.288 --> 00:11:09.788
Uh and that's the determining factor. So again, it

00:11:09.798 --> 00:11:12.529
will be a case-by-case basis as these move through.

00:11:12.658 --> 00:11:15.279
But if there is ambiguity, the Commission through this

00:11:15.288 --> 00:11:19.070
uh project has asserted jurisdiction. Um and it is

00:11:19.080 --> 00:11:22.450
the default position of regulator of last resort. Okay.

00:11:22.719 --> 00:11:25.389
So we have a SIC case in the future and there's

00:11:25.399 --> 00:11:29.119
no submission of an ordinance documentation. On, on

00:11:29.129 --> 00:11:32.899
the fact pattern behind the, the limited purpose annexation

00:11:32.908 --> 00:11:34.440
then we just assert jurisdiction.

00:11:36.700 --> 00:11:39.960
Yes unless uh other, other uh evidence can be brought

00:11:39.969 --> 00:11:41.849
forward to clarify that.

00:11:46.668 --> 00:11:49.418
(item:4:Commissioner Glotfelty's thoughts on Commissioner McAdams memo) I mean I, I'm kind of falling on the, the

00:11:51.029 --> 00:11:54.009
side of Commissioner Cobos. Which is just assert as

00:11:54.019 --> 00:11:56.928
much jurisdiction as we can right now and leave less

00:11:56.940 --> 00:12:01.000
ambiguity. And um it's not to say that yours is wrong.

00:12:01.009 --> 00:12:02.769
I don't think either of them are wrong. It's just a

00:12:02.779 --> 00:12:08.639
matter of how we uh, uh try to be clear. I think

00:12:08.649 --> 00:12:13.269
this is gonna get a little muddy either way. Yeah, I agree. Um and

00:12:13.538 --> 00:12:16.580
you know, as I said in the first discussion of this.

00:12:16.590 --> 00:12:19.298
Um we, we don't need anybody else to tell us who our

00:12:19.308 --> 00:12:22.729
where our jurisdiction is. Um, at least parties to

00:12:22.739 --> 00:12:26.729
the cases and I think the cases will all work themselves

00:12:26.739 --> 00:12:30.739
out in time. So I can go either way on this. I'm

00:12:30.750 --> 00:12:34.330
not uh I think we need to find consensus. On what

00:12:34.340 --> 00:12:38.969
is the uh most expeditious way and the clearest way

00:12:38.979 --> 00:12:42.369
to go forward. Um, yeah. (item:4:Commissioner McAdams’ additional thoughts on his memo) No, no I see the argument.

00:12:42.379 --> 00:12:44.609
It is a default position of the Commission. And, and

00:12:44.619 --> 00:12:48.849
that's where uh I mean, I strongly agree with that.

00:12:48.859 --> 00:12:52.440
Um, my proposal was following a line of thought to

00:12:52.450 --> 00:12:56.690
where okay um, when we get into these disputes. There's

00:12:56.700 --> 00:12:59.779
going to be an establishment of a, of a fact pattern.

00:13:00.038 --> 00:13:03.570
And that's where okay they either annexed and asserted

00:13:03.580 --> 00:13:07.009
that they were going to own this responsibility of

00:13:07.019 --> 00:13:10.590
regulating these rates or they didn't. In which case

00:13:10.599 --> 00:13:14.200
um the, the next step is okay Commission has it. We've

00:13:14.210 --> 00:13:17.418
got the ball and we need to set those rates. Uh, but

00:13:17.428 --> 00:13:22.500
if a blanket statement of uh jurisdictional scope

00:13:22.509 --> 00:13:27.200
is you know more clear I, I do not oppose that. (item:4:Commissioner Cobos’ follow-up comments on the memo) And

00:13:27.210 --> 00:13:29.989
I'll be the first to recognize that I, I wanted more

00:13:30.000 --> 00:13:32.678
you know, feedback on this. Yeah you did. And, you know, you were the one who

00:13:32.840 --> 00:13:35.408
wanted a lot of arguing. And, and I think I would recognize also that

00:13:35.418 --> 00:13:37.450
you wanted, you both wanted to steam forward ahead.

00:13:37.639 --> 00:13:40.239
Um and make the cut and go forward. And that's why

00:13:40.250 --> 00:13:42.489
I kind of went from okay, we're not gonna get an AG

00:13:42.500 --> 00:13:45.590
opinion then let's just. Let's own it. You know let's, let's own

00:13:45.599 --> 00:13:49.529
it and move forward. And, um but you know I, I just

00:13:49.538 --> 00:13:51.320
really wanted to discuss the mechanics of how it would

00:13:51.330 --> 00:13:54.119
look like in the future. Right. And, and I mean, these cases

00:13:54.129 --> 00:13:56.340
are, are a little bit different than what we've been

00:13:56.349 --> 00:13:59.969
dealing with, with every other case, right? And the

00:13:59.979 --> 00:14:02.979
whole point of the SIC proceedings is to have an efficient

00:14:02.989 --> 00:14:05.058
process. So these water utilities come in and start

00:14:05.070 --> 00:14:07.649
recouping their costs on their infrastructure investment.

00:14:07.658 --> 00:14:09.479
And this is the first one and I know there's probably

00:14:09.489 --> 00:14:11.889
some lined up in the back. And they're looking to this

00:14:11.899 --> 00:14:15.048
case to see um you know we can gain some traction

00:14:15.058 --> 00:14:20.099
and efficiency. And process. And process um as we kind of

00:14:20.109 --> 00:14:24.369
um unpack this first one. Yeah. Which in turn benefits the

00:14:24.379 --> 00:14:25.109
ratepayers.

00:14:26.849 --> 00:14:31.710
So in terms of the clear assertion of Commission jurisdiction

00:14:32.200 --> 00:14:35.918
uh how would you, um how would you articulate that?

00:14:36.509 --> 00:14:39.479
(item:4:Commissioner Cobos' articulation of Commission jurisdiction) I think I would just say, um as a matter of law.

00:14:39.489 --> 00:14:43.139
We would find that um the Commission has jurisdiction

00:14:43.149 --> 00:14:47.908
and limited purpose, annexation um areas and, and move

00:14:47.918 --> 00:14:50.369
forward. And if, if somebody wants to challenge us down

00:14:50.379 --> 00:14:52.489
the road they're, they're welcome to. But at this

00:14:52.500 --> 00:14:55.349
point we, we you know the City of Austin didn't intervene

00:14:55.359 --> 00:14:59.538
and we don't have any um real certainty. Yeah, that

00:14:59.548 --> 00:15:02.928
the other cities are gonna get involved. And, and um

00:15:02.940 --> 00:15:06.678
they may not even really you know. I just don't want

00:15:06.690 --> 00:15:10.629
to sort of um add more on our end. When we don't

00:15:10.639 --> 00:15:12.320
even know what the future looks like with the cities

00:15:12.330 --> 00:15:14.229
getting involved and we can't make them intervene.

00:15:14.239 --> 00:15:17.158
And so I think just pushing forward as a matter of

00:15:17.168 --> 00:15:20.288
law that we're gonna start our jurisdiction. And, and

00:15:20.298 --> 00:15:22.649
um we'll deal with any challenges down the road if,

00:15:22.658 --> 00:15:25.000
if any arise. Just to make sure we have clarity on the

00:15:25.009 --> 00:15:27.788
other parts of the memo. Do we, do we all agree on

00:15:27.798 --> 00:15:30.928
the other aspects of the memo? Yes. Yes. Okay, great.

00:15:31.408 --> 00:15:35.279
Um so for a limited purpose uh, annexation uh the

00:15:35.288 --> 00:15:39.469
Commission would assert uh our authority. Based on the

00:15:39.479 --> 00:15:45.849
principles outlined in the residence uh of the, uh

00:15:47.210 --> 00:15:52.239
of the um. Help me out here, Shelah. The residence?

00:15:52.330 --> 00:15:55.469
The location of the premises. The relocation of premises

00:15:55.479 --> 00:15:55.700
yeah.

00:15:59.308 --> 00:16:01.269
(item:4:Commissioner Glotfelty's thoughts on Commission jurisdiction) I'm supportive of that. I mean, I think that's the

00:16:01.279 --> 00:16:02.440
right way to go. And

00:16:04.149 --> 00:16:07.529
I would move, I would so move that we uh, uh. Do

00:16:07.538 --> 00:16:09.779
we have an order for that or do we need to write

00:16:09.788 --> 00:16:12.690
the order for that? Write the order. Modify the order

00:16:12.700 --> 00:16:16.200
to be consistent with our discussion. (item:4:Shelah Cisneros' clarification on a modified order consistent with memo & discussion) It would uh

00:16:16.210 --> 00:16:19.048
so there's not an order before you this time. But it

00:16:19.058 --> 00:16:22.519
would be uh it would be responding to the certified

00:16:22.529 --> 00:16:25.969
issues consistent with Commissioner McAdam's memo and

00:16:25.979 --> 00:16:28.320
is modified by the discussion. That's what I would

00:16:28.330 --> 00:16:28.639
move.

00:16:30.558 --> 00:16:33.178
Second. Is what I, is what I heard the Commission say to me.

00:16:33.190 --> 00:16:35.538
(item:4:Motion to respond to certified issues with an order consistent with memo & discussion) Okay, so you move for the Commission to respond to the

00:16:35.548 --> 00:16:37.830
certified issues with an order that is consistent with

00:16:37.840 --> 00:16:41.509
Commissioner McAdams' memo and our discussion. We have

00:16:41.519 --> 00:16:46.639
a second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Motion passes.

00:16:51.259 --> 00:16:55.989
Items 5, 6 and 7 were Consented. Next up is Item

00:16:56.000 --> 00:17:00.840
No. 8. Shelah, will you please lay out this

00:17:00.849 --> 00:17:05.279
Item? Yes, ma'am. (item:8:Complaint of Rio Bravo Subdivision Property Owners Assoc. against Valley MUD No. 2) Item 8 is Docket No. 54532.

00:17:05.469 --> 00:17:08.529
This is the complaint of Rio Bravo Subdivision Property

00:17:08.539 --> 00:17:12.199
Owners Association against Valley MUD No. 2.

00:17:12.640 --> 00:17:15.880
Before you is proposal for decision filed on June 22.

00:17:16.098 --> 00:17:18.799
No corrections or exceptions were filed by the parties.

00:17:18.809 --> 00:17:21.750
Chairman Jackson filed a memo and a Commission Counsel

00:17:21.759 --> 00:17:25.939
memo was filed, recommending changes to the PFD. (item:8:Chairwoman Jackson lays out her memo) I

00:17:25.949 --> 00:17:29.299
did file a memo here. I think the PFDs recommendation

00:17:29.309 --> 00:17:32.670
to dismiss the complaint is appropriate. However, I

00:17:32.680 --> 00:17:35.189
recommend the basis for dismissal be changed from lack

00:17:35.199 --> 00:17:38.338
of jurisdiction to failure to state a claim. For which

00:17:38.348 --> 00:17:42.160
relief can be granted as detailed in my memo. So any

00:17:42.170 --> 00:17:45.000
additional thoughts on this one? (item:8:Commissioner McAdams' thoughts on Chairwoman Jackson's memo) No I, 100% agree with

00:17:45.009 --> 00:17:48.838
the, the changes and I appreciate you filing a memo.

00:17:48.848 --> 00:17:52.729
I think it makes the motion easier. Agreed. Agreed.

00:17:53.130 --> 00:17:56.000
(item:8:Motion to modify PFD in accordance with memo) Then I would make a motion to modify the PFD in accordance

00:17:56.009 --> 00:18:02.608
with my memo. Second. Second. (item:8:Shelah Cisneros' comments with consideration of updating motion) May, I would ask to maybe consider

00:18:02.618 --> 00:18:04.209
revising that. There's also, there's your memo and

00:18:04.219 --> 00:18:05.160
also the Commission Council

00:18:07.160 --> 00:18:10.318
memo. And the Commission Counsel memo. And consistent with the Commission Counsel

00:18:10.328 --> 00:18:16.500
memo. (item:8:Motion revised) Um so you have a revised motion. Second. All

00:18:16.509 --> 00:18:19.229
in favor, say aye. Aye. Motion passes.

00:18:20.779 --> 00:18:22.588
Next up is Item No. 9.

00:18:24.309 --> 00:18:27.608
Yes, ma'am. (item:9:Complaint of Jyoti Naik Against Guadalupe Blanco River Authority) Item No. 9 is Docket No. 54533.

00:18:27.618 --> 00:18:31.529
This is the complaint of Jyoti Naik against Guadalupe Blanco 

00:18:31.539 --> 00:18:35.029
River Authority. Before you is a proposal for a decision

00:18:35.039 --> 00:18:38.430
that was filed on June 27. No corrections or exceptions

00:18:38.439 --> 00:18:40.608
were filed by the parties. Commissioner. I'm sorry.

00:18:40.618 --> 00:18:43.160
Chairman Jackson filed a memo on this one as well.

00:18:43.170 --> 00:18:45.519
And there is also a Commission Counsel memo that was

00:18:45.529 --> 00:18:49.279
filed, recommending changes to the PFD. (item:9:Chairwoman Jackson lays out her memo) I did file

00:18:49.289 --> 00:18:52.049
a memo here similar to the last Item. I think the PFDs

00:18:52.059 --> 00:18:55.368
recommendation to dismiss the complaint is appropriate.

00:18:55.630 --> 00:18:57.779
However, I recommend that the basis for dismissal be

00:18:57.789 --> 00:19:00.410
changed from lack of jurisdiction to failure to state

00:19:00.420 --> 00:19:03.868
a claim. For which relief can be granted as detailed

00:19:03.880 --> 00:19:06.449
in my memo. Uh any additional thoughts on this

00:19:08.250 --> 00:19:12.118
one? (item:9:Motion to approve modification and Commission Counsel conclusions of law) I would just move that we approve

00:19:13.729 --> 00:19:16.568
the modification that you outlined in your memo. And

00:19:17.189 --> 00:19:19.289
in addition to the Commission Counsel conclusions of

00:19:19.299 --> 00:19:23.289
law and uh I make that motion. Second. We have a motion and a

00:19:23.299 --> 00:19:26.189
second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Motion passes.

00:19:29.670 --> 00:19:33.160
Item 10 will not be taken up. Item 11 was Consented.

00:19:33.519 --> 00:19:36.380
Item 12 will not be taken up. I don't have anything

00:19:36.390 --> 00:19:40.318
for 13 or 14 unless, unless y'all do? Uh next up is

00:19:40.328 --> 00:19:43.098
Item No. 15. Shelah, will you please lay out this Item.

00:19:43.539 --> 00:19:47.529
Yes, ma'am. (item:15:Application of CenterPoint Energy for approval to amend its DCRF) Item No. 15 is Docket No. 53442.

00:19:47.539 --> 00:19:51.098
This is the application of CenterPoint Energy for approval

00:19:51.108 --> 00:19:55.858
to amend its DCRF. Before you are motions for rehearing

00:19:55.868 --> 00:19:58.108
on the Commission's order on rehearing that was filed

00:19:58.118 --> 00:20:03.309
on May 25. Team and Arm filed a joint motion for rehearing

00:20:03.390 --> 00:20:06.729
and the Texas Competitive Power Advocates also filed

00:20:06.739 --> 00:20:10.390
a motion for rehearing. (item:15:Chairwoman Jackson recommends denial of motions for rehearing) I would recommend that we deny

00:20:10.400 --> 00:20:13.549
the motions for rehearing. Uh any thoughts? I don't

00:20:13.559 --> 00:20:15.598
think the parties have identified any issues that 

00:20:15.608 --> 00:20:18.709
warrant rehearing. (item:15:Commissioner McAdams' motion to deny rehearing) So uh I would move to deny the

00:20:18.719 --> 00:20:22.189
rehearing in this matter. I second. A motion and a second.

00:20:22.199 --> 00:20:26.598
All in favor, say aye. Aye. Motion passes. Next up is Item

00:20:26.608 --> 00:20:29.209
No. 16. Uh Shelah, will you please lay out this

00:20:29.219 --> 00:20:34.750
Item? (item:16:Application of Entergy Texas for authority to change rates) Item No. 16 is Docket No. 53719. This

00:20:34.759 --> 00:20:37.390
is the application of Entergy Texas for authority to

00:20:37.400 --> 00:20:41.390
change rates. Before you is a SOAH proposal for a decision

00:20:41.400 --> 00:20:44.400
that addresses two issues from the preliminary order.

00:20:44.410 --> 00:20:47.650
Related to vehicle charging stations or vehicle charging

00:20:47.660 --> 00:20:51.358
facilities. And other transportation, electrification

00:20:51.368 --> 00:20:54.779
and charging infrastructure. Also before you is an

00:20:54.789 --> 00:20:57.509
unopposed agreement between the parties on other issues

00:20:57.519 --> 00:21:01.420
in the proceeding. Uh Commissioner Cobos, as our MISO

00:21:01.509 --> 00:21:04.118
representative, would you like to start this discussion?

00:21:06.930 --> 00:21:11.019
Good. (item:16:Commissioner Cobos' thoughts on the application) Yes, I would. Um okay. So based on my review of the

00:21:11.029 --> 00:21:13.838
NFO settlement agreement, um I am in favor of approving

00:21:13.848 --> 00:21:17.009
the agreement. The agreement seems to be a reasonable

00:21:17.019 --> 00:21:19.328
resolution of the case. It strikes an appropriate middle

00:21:19.338 --> 00:21:23.400
ground among the parties. Um it, it was reached out

00:21:23.410 --> 00:21:26.650
to full discovery direct testimony. And um I think

00:21:26.660 --> 00:21:29.709
that um the agreement is, is reasonable and I think

00:21:29.719 --> 00:21:32.640
we should approve the agreement. Um, with respect to

00:21:32.650 --> 00:21:37.420
the PFD on the electric vehicle issues. I just want

00:21:37.430 --> 00:21:40.719
to lay out three options that we have and then identify

00:21:40.729 --> 00:21:43.709
the option that I'm in favor of. I guess the first

00:21:43.719 --> 00:21:48.279
option we have is to dismiss the PFD and address these

00:21:48.289 --> 00:21:53.410
issues later when we implement a rulemaking proceeding.

00:21:53.420 --> 00:21:56.509
To implement the Legislation that was passed this past

00:21:56.519 --> 00:21:59.509
session. However as we all know, we have a very long

00:21:59.519 --> 00:22:02.900
list of rulemaking projects and Legislation to implement.

00:22:03.279 --> 00:22:07.880
So we would be um stalling the implement this, this

00:22:07.890 --> 00:22:13.019
process for moving forward and so that's um one option.

00:22:13.400 --> 00:22:18.578
The second option is to remand the case back to Docket

00:22:18.588 --> 00:22:23.848
management. Um so that um Entergy and the other parties

00:22:23.858 --> 00:22:27.680
have an opportunity to file evidence. And that evidence

00:22:27.689 --> 00:22:31.979
being the proposed revised tariff and the opportunity

00:22:31.989 --> 00:22:34.000
and the parties have an opportunity to respond to that

00:22:34.009 --> 00:22:38.299
evidence. However um we would be, you know, basically

00:22:38.309 --> 00:22:40.769
holding back the settlement agreement on all the other

00:22:40.779 --> 00:22:44.078
issues that set the base rates for the company. And

00:22:44.088 --> 00:22:48.880
um in order to make a decision on riders. And so I

00:22:48.890 --> 00:22:51.979
I don't know that this is the best option to move forward

00:22:51.989 --> 00:22:57.368
on. The third and final option is um Severine did this

00:22:57.380 --> 00:23:01.019
um these, these issues into a separate proceeding. So

00:23:01.029 --> 00:23:04.858
that Entergy can enter the proposed revised tariffs

00:23:04.868 --> 00:23:08.318
into evidence. As they had submitted them in their,

00:23:08.328 --> 00:23:12.618
you know, reply exceptions to the PFD. Which are not

00:23:12.630 --> 00:23:15.410
in evidence and then the parties would have an opportunity

00:23:15.420 --> 00:23:19.509
to respond to the tariffs. That would then be in evidence.

00:23:19.858 --> 00:23:23.559
We can move the record over from this case, the rate

00:23:23.568 --> 00:23:26.469
case to the new proceeding. Because these issues on

00:23:26.479 --> 00:23:30.739
the riders have been addressed. But the parties would

00:23:30.750 --> 00:23:35.289
then have an opportunity to address these issues with

00:23:35.299 --> 00:23:42.219
the Legislation that got passed. Um Senate Bill, um 1002.

00:23:42.539 --> 00:23:47.449
And um also have an opportunity to um address those

00:23:47.459 --> 00:23:50.449
issues with respect to the ownership that's laid out

00:23:50.459 --> 00:23:53.949
in the Senate Bill. But also with how the costs will

00:23:53.959 --> 00:23:59.699
be recovered for these um ed measures. So, um from

00:23:59.709 --> 00:24:03.009
my perspective, I would be in favor of severing the

00:24:03.019 --> 00:24:06.989
proceeding. And um moving forward in that process because

00:24:07.000 --> 00:24:08.650
I think that's the cleanest way to move forward. I

00:24:08.660 --> 00:24:11.949
think we have past precedent where in similar cases.

00:24:11.959 --> 00:24:17.759
We have um you know, adjudicated proceedings on issues

00:24:17.769 --> 00:24:21.509
that were addressed by Legislation before we've implemented

00:24:21.519 --> 00:24:24.140
a rulemaking such as Mobile DG. And I think in this

00:24:24.150 --> 00:24:28.670
situation, um given all the work we have in rulemaking

00:24:28.680 --> 00:24:32.769
implementation of, of um Legislation. And, and remanding

00:24:32.779 --> 00:24:34.900
and the inefficiencies there. I think severing is the

00:24:34.910 --> 00:24:41.900
best course of action. (item:16:Commissioner McAdams' thoughts on application) Uh I, I support that. Um Entergy

00:24:41.910 --> 00:24:46.098
is a high growth area of the state. Um it is in

00:24:46.108 --> 00:24:49.199
the best interests of the, the people in that area.

00:24:49.209 --> 00:24:52.170
To have a resolved uh comprehensive base rate proceeding

00:24:52.539 --> 00:24:56.039
um we can do that now. And then address this separate

00:24:56.049 --> 00:25:00.559
very targeted rider issue in the separate proceeding.

00:25:00.568 --> 00:25:04.160
Uh that can be adjudicated as a, a contested case.

00:25:04.170 --> 00:25:07.969
Um, parties can file uh we have active Legislation

00:25:07.979 --> 00:25:11.979
that um will be enacted on September 1. That will have

00:25:11.989 --> 00:25:16.328
to comply with anyway. It seems prudent to uh to

00:25:16.338 --> 00:25:20.640
have the relevant discussion within the parties. Targeted

00:25:20.650 --> 00:25:24.299
at both the implementation of that Bill and how uh

00:25:25.209 --> 00:25:29.828
Entergy's rider can be formed moving forward. So I, I concur with Commissioner

00:25:29.838 --> 00:25:34.000
Cobos. (item:16:Commissioner Glotfelty's thoughts on the application) Yeah, I think the question is, uh to me do

00:25:34.009 --> 00:25:38.529
you remand it or do you sever it? Um I, it seems

00:25:38.608 --> 00:25:42.858
the, the appropriate mechanism is to sever it. To allow

00:25:42.868 --> 00:25:45.088
those issues to go forward on their own. Allow the

00:25:45.098 --> 00:25:51.108
base rates to uh, to be completed. Um and um, I just

00:25:51.118 --> 00:25:57.068
do wanna say that uh in the uh this is another creative

00:25:57.078 --> 00:26:00.549
Black Box settlement, I think. Uh I'm just wondering

00:26:00.559 --> 00:26:02.269
can we do a Black Box order?

00:26:05.559 --> 00:26:08.568
Just kidding. Anyway, I approve that we uh we sever

00:26:08.578 --> 00:26:12.828
it. And, and go forward with the order. And then as Commissioner

00:26:12.838 --> 00:26:15.670
McAdams and Cobo said, move all the relevant information

00:26:15.680 --> 00:26:19.019
over to a new, new docket. (item:16:Chairwoman Jackson's thoughts on the application) So I agree as well. And

00:26:19.029 --> 00:26:21.390
I think, you know, the points that you brought up. And

00:26:21.400 --> 00:26:25.250
that, you know, y'all as well have kind of underlined

00:26:25.449 --> 00:26:27.699
uh it makes all the sense in the world. Southeast Texas

00:26:27.709 --> 00:26:31.150
is a very high growth area. And um being able to kind

00:26:31.160 --> 00:26:34.009
of move forward with this in the most expeditious way

00:26:34.019 --> 00:26:36.000
possible. As well as having the opportunity to come

00:26:36.009 --> 00:26:38.549
back and get the evidence on the two riders makes

00:26:38.559 --> 00:26:42.068
all the sense. So, um we would entertain a motion. And

00:26:42.078 --> 00:26:45.358
maybe the thought here would be to have um two separate

00:26:45.368 --> 00:26:50.549
motions to sever first. And then um to direct uh OPDM

00:26:50.559 --> 00:26:53.959
to draft an order. Um yes. So can, can we draft a

00:26:53.969 --> 00:26:56.939
single order that approves the na post settlement

00:26:56.949 --> 00:27:01.439
agreement and severs the um EV issues addressing the

00:27:01.449 --> 00:27:03.309
PFD into a separate proceeding?

00:27:06.969 --> 00:27:10.299
(item:16:Shelah Cisneros with Commission Counsel addressing the question of 2 separate orders) I think, I think it's possible. It may be cleaner to

00:27:10.309 --> 00:27:12.920
have two separate orders. And I'm looking over at Steven

00:27:12.930 --> 00:27:15.068
Journeay and Mark to see if they, if they nod and agree

00:27:15.078 --> 00:27:15.559
with me.

00:27:18.029 --> 00:27:18.719
Mark's nodding yes. Steven's nodding no. Whatever's best.

00:27:25.588 --> 00:27:29.180
Were you just teasing her? Um I think because you would be directing 

00:27:29.189 --> 00:27:32.299
OPDM to draft an order consistent with the party's unopposed

00:27:32.390 --> 00:27:35.229
agreement. Um and that may take a minute for us to

00:27:35.239 --> 00:27:38.459
draft. Then we, if we have two separate orders. Um

00:27:38.469 --> 00:27:41.618
one severing the PFD issues. We could possibly

00:27:44.108 --> 00:27:47.039
that may move along a little bit faster. Okay. Whatever

00:27:47.049 --> 00:27:49.799
is the most efficient way uh to proceed. I'm, I'm in

00:27:49.809 --> 00:27:53.039
favor of. I just wanted to kind of see what, what it

00:27:53.049 --> 00:27:55.160
meant to do with the order. And you could also, uh

00:27:55.170 --> 00:27:57.519
perhaps you could, you could delegate authority to

00:27:57.529 --> 00:27:59.459
use our judgment on whether one order, two separate

00:27:59.469 --> 00:28:02.500
orders is, is the way is appropriate. Yes.

00:28:04.479 --> 00:28:06.439
I would delegate that authority to use your judgment

00:28:06.449 --> 00:28:06.818
Shelah.

00:28:08.430 --> 00:28:11.000
Okay. Do you have what you need? Uh well, you haven't.

00:28:11.009 --> 00:28:13.680
Uh I think you talked about doing two separate motions?

00:28:13.930 --> 00:28:19.828
(item:16:First of 2 separates motions by Chairwoman Jackson related to PFD issues) Okay. So, um I would entertain a motion to um move that

00:28:19.838 --> 00:28:22.969
we sever the PFD issues into a separate docket for

00:28:22.979 --> 00:28:26.259
further processing by Docket Management. And that we

00:28:26.269 --> 00:28:28.739
authorize the ALJ to transfer the relative portions

00:28:28.750 --> 00:28:31.439
of the record related to the PFD issues into the new

00:28:31.449 --> 00:28:32.848
docket. So

00:28:34.500 --> 00:28:36.779
moved. Second. We have a, a motion and second. All in favor, say aye. 

00:28:36.799 --> 00:28:41.479
Aye. Motion carries. (item:16:Second of 2 separates motions by Chairwoman Jackson related to OPDM drafting orders) And then entertain a second um motion.

00:28:42.078 --> 00:28:45.759
Um that we direct OPDM to draft an order that is consistent

00:28:45.769 --> 00:28:49.529
with the party's unopposed agreement. So moved. Second. We have a motion

00:28:49.539 --> 00:28:52.789
and second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Motion passes.

00:28:58.479 --> 00:29:02.009
Okay. Items 17 and 18 were Consented. I don't have anything

00:29:02.019 --> 00:29:08.130
on items 19 or 20 unless y'all do? No ma'am. (item:21: Chairwoman Jackson lays out Project No. 53298) Um next up is

00:29:08.140 --> 00:29:13.568
Item No. 21, Project 53298. Our wholesale electric

00:29:13.578 --> 00:29:16.719
market design implementation project. And we're going

00:29:16.729 --> 00:29:23.088
to discuss the ORDC. As a reminder, on January 19 of this

00:29:23.098 --> 00:29:25.989
year, the Commission instructed ERCOT to evaluate bridging

00:29:26.000 --> 00:29:29.670
options. To retain existing assets and build new dispatchable

00:29:29.680 --> 00:29:33.500
generation until the PCM could be fully implemented.

00:29:34.029 --> 00:29:38.199
On April 17, the R&M Committee voted to recommend

00:29:38.209 --> 00:29:40.900
that the ERCOT Board approve ORDC enhancements for

00:29:40.910 --> 00:29:43.930
recommendation to the Commission. Subsequently, on

00:29:43.939 --> 00:29:46.920
April 18, the ERCOT Board recommended to the Commission

00:29:46.930 --> 00:29:50.140
that the ORDC enhancements as the preferred bridge

00:29:50.150 --> 00:29:54.160
solution. The Board's resolution recommends an enhancement

00:29:54.170 --> 00:29:58.500
to the ORDC using a multi-step floor. The Legislature

00:29:58.509 --> 00:30:03.809
has since passed HB1500. Uh ERCOT has filed some supplemental

00:30:03.818 --> 00:30:08.019
information. PUC Staff and Commissioner Cobos also filed

00:30:08.029 --> 00:30:10.170
memos. I think Harika is here.

00:30:12.150 --> 00:30:15.189
If you could come on up. Um and then uh Commissioner

00:30:15.199 --> 00:30:17.469
Cobos, uh do you want to go ahead and lay out your

00:30:17.479 --> 00:30:20.588
memo so that we can have a discussion? (item:21:Commissioner Cobos lays out her memo) Yes. And, and

00:30:20.598 --> 00:30:22.969
thank you for your background on, on this issue. As

00:30:22.979 --> 00:30:25.358
we've been addressing this for several months now.

00:30:25.680 --> 00:30:29.410
Uh my memo continues to reiterate my position that

00:30:29.420 --> 00:30:33.009
I believe the near term action is important. Um to retain

00:30:33.019 --> 00:30:35.880
our long duration, dispatchable thermal generation

00:30:35.890 --> 00:30:40.160
um assets. That I believe are extremely necessary to

00:30:40.170 --> 00:30:43.059
maintain reliability during extreme weather conditions.

00:30:43.519 --> 00:30:46.719
And I believe that um we, we need to use a

00:30:46.729 --> 00:30:49.969
market-based tool to incent self-commitment by generators.

00:30:49.979 --> 00:30:52.660
In the real time market to help reduce RUC and that

00:30:52.670 --> 00:30:57.719
that was the goal from my perspective. Of a near term

00:30:57.729 --> 00:31:01.259
action bridge solution. And so my memo continues to

00:31:01.269 --> 00:31:04.959
reiterate my position as laid out in my January memo.

00:31:05.189 --> 00:31:10.219
Um on the goal and the intended purpose of a near term

00:31:10.229 --> 00:31:18.180
bridge solution. But also lays out based on um on my

00:31:18.189 --> 00:31:22.618
review of, of the um just what, what the intended goal

00:31:22.630 --> 00:31:27.068
is. And to ensure that the intended purpose is fulfilled

00:31:27.078 --> 00:31:31.809
lays out three specific metrics. That um I believe the

00:31:31.818 --> 00:31:35.449
Commission should require ERCOT to track going forward

00:31:35.469 --> 00:31:39.750
in their ORDC report. And specifically, those are

00:31:39.979 --> 00:31:44.130
um providing information um in the report on the amount

00:31:44.140 --> 00:31:47.420
of new revenue. That specifically results from the ORDC

00:31:47.430 --> 00:31:50.838
price for adders. The specific type of generation

00:31:50.848 --> 00:31:53.578
that received the new revenue from the ORDC price

00:31:53.588 --> 00:31:56.729
for adders. And, and performance data showing whether

00:31:56.739 --> 00:31:59.539
or not the ORDC price for adders are, in fact reducing

00:31:59.549 --> 00:32:04.019
RUC. I think that's very important because again, my position

00:32:04.029 --> 00:32:08.299
is the whole goal here was to, from my perspective

00:32:08.309 --> 00:32:12.699
and I hear everyone else's perspective. Was that um

00:32:13.459 --> 00:32:17.009
putting market based tool into incent generation self

00:32:17.019 --> 00:32:19.439
commitment. To reduce RUC so that we take the physical

00:32:19.449 --> 00:32:23.328
pressure off these long, older. Especially older, long

00:32:23.338 --> 00:32:27.108
duration um thermal generation assets. Because we, we

00:32:27.118 --> 00:32:29.489
need those for the multi day events, especially the

00:32:29.500 --> 00:32:33.900
extreme cold um multiday event. So these metrics I

00:32:33.910 --> 00:32:37.529
think help us keep track of whether or not this action

00:32:37.939 --> 00:32:41.068
if approved by the Commission. Would is accomplishing

00:32:41.078 --> 00:32:44.420
what we set out to do. Um also, I think that we

00:32:44.430 --> 00:32:47.969
need to, in addition to this reporting measure. Um that

00:32:47.979 --> 00:32:51.368
we, we would ask ERCOT to, to comply with. Um we would

00:32:51.380 --> 00:32:54.630
have ERCOT, I would recommend that the Commission evaluate

00:32:54.640 --> 00:32:58.699
the need for the ORDC price for adders after ERCOT implements

00:32:58.709 --> 00:33:03.049
the dispatchable reliability reserve service. Um House

00:33:03.059 --> 00:33:07.449
Bill 1500 required ERCOT to implement DRS by December

00:33:07.459 --> 00:33:11.368
1, 2024. To account for market uncertainty and ERCOT

00:33:11.410 --> 00:33:13.910
must develop criteria to ensure that RUC is reduced.

00:33:13.920 --> 00:33:18.890
By the amount of DRS that is procured by ERCOT. So um

00:33:18.900 --> 00:33:21.479
if the Commission decides to conduct this, this additional

00:33:21.489 --> 00:33:25.500
evaluation. I think we should do it 66 months out after

00:33:25.509 --> 00:33:30.848
DRS is implemented. And or the subject of discussion

00:33:30.858 --> 00:33:34.828
a year out. Because ultimately, we need to keep tabs

00:33:34.838 --> 00:33:38.660
on whether or not this ORDC price floor adder um

00:33:38.709 --> 00:33:42.539
measure is actually working, right? So we'll have the

00:33:42.549 --> 00:33:45.348
first step will be the report that's due November

00:33:45.358 --> 00:33:48.979
1, 2024. We'll get an accounting of this data and

00:33:48.989 --> 00:33:52.660
be able to um get, get some more information. On whether

00:33:52.670 --> 00:33:56.049
or not it's meeting its intended purpose. Uh but also

00:33:56.059 --> 00:34:00.019
as we implement DRS, if you know, make sure that we're

00:34:00.029 --> 00:34:01.979
understanding how the two are interacting with each

00:34:01.989 --> 00:34:04.209
other. And whether or not we still continue to need

00:34:04.219 --> 00:34:06.930
the price for adder. I just think that we just have to

00:34:06.939 --> 00:34:10.978
have accountability measures to ensure that. Um, we're

00:34:10.989 --> 00:34:14.530
being good stewards of, of um, you know, ratepayer

00:34:14.539 --> 00:34:19.329
money. But also ensuring that we um, are accomplishing

00:34:19.340 --> 00:34:20.228
what we set out to do.

00:34:24.750 --> 00:34:29.500
(item:21:Commissioner McAdams' thoughts on memo) So um I filed a memo uh relating to this policy.

00:34:29.510 --> 00:34:33.809
I think you uh, you will know my position on it. Um

00:34:34.179 --> 00:34:37.519
I'm gonna hold fire uh on, on further comments. But

00:34:37.530 --> 00:34:39.820
I, I want to hear from the other Commissioners that

00:34:39.829 --> 00:34:42.969
haven't voiced uh, opinions on it yet. And then, and

00:34:42.978 --> 00:34:46.500
and I'd like to follow up uh with a clarification

00:34:46.510 --> 00:34:49.369
of intent. And, and I am in alignment with you, Commissioner

00:34:49.378 --> 00:34:53.769
Cobos. Um love to hear any other thoughts. So um,

00:34:55.039 --> 00:34:58.889
uh. (item:21:Commissioner Glotfelty's thoughts on the memo) I, I struggle with this. Um I know the uh, the

00:34:58.898 --> 00:35:04.550
TAC and ERCOT and uh ERCOT Board. Have all uh requested

00:35:04.559 --> 00:35:07.610
that we move in this direction and approve this. Um

00:35:08.570 --> 00:35:14.478
the um it's not clear to me that we are creating

00:35:14.489 --> 00:35:18.659
a bridge solution to eliminate RUC. Or we're creating

00:35:18.668 --> 00:35:26.099
a bridge solution to bridge us to a, a um a reliability

00:35:26.110 --> 00:35:29.929
capacity issue. To solve our resource adequacy issue.

00:35:30.849 --> 00:35:36.889
Um and I think this came up, this bridge came up. As

00:35:36.898 --> 00:35:40.469
a discussion about resource adequacy. Not as an elimination

00:35:40.478 --> 00:35:40.708
of RUC.

00:35:42.289 --> 00:35:45.688
Um Commissioner McAdams, you may disagree with

00:35:45.699 --> 00:35:49.688
me. But uh I, I what I want is um, if we

00:35:49.699 --> 00:35:51.949
want to eliminate RUC. I think we should be looking at

00:35:51.958 --> 00:35:56.179
all of the solutions that could eliminate RUC. Not

00:35:56.188 --> 00:36:03.320
just one. And um I, I know RUC is problematic for generators.

00:36:03.918 --> 00:36:07.010
But what I don't want is another out of market solution

00:36:07.070 --> 00:36:09.840
to solve an out of market solution that we created.

00:36:09.849 --> 00:36:12.360
Which solved a conservative operation out of market

00:36:12.369 --> 00:36:15.590
solution that we created. Um I feel like we're just

00:36:15.599 --> 00:36:18.550
piling on by and trying to fix the market with other

00:36:18.559 --> 00:36:24.659
modifications. And um and I think that as we continue

00:36:24.668 --> 00:36:28.929
to look at the ancillary services out there. Which

00:36:28.938 --> 00:36:35.228
were we, were required under uh, uh Senate Bill 3. To look at

00:36:35.239 --> 00:36:37.438
ancillary services. I think we have not really done

00:36:37.449 --> 00:36:39.829
that and would suggest that we really take a look at

00:36:39.840 --> 00:36:45.059
that, which would encompass this. So my, my um my only

00:36:45.070 --> 00:36:49.159
comfort in this is that. If we do really look at ancillary

00:36:49.168 --> 00:36:52.478
services, it will encompass what's happening with this

00:36:52.489 --> 00:36:59.148
ORDC floor. And if in fact, we realize that this is

00:36:59.159 --> 00:37:03.418
not working for its intended effect. Then we have to

00:37:03.429 --> 00:37:07.340
redo and relook at ancillary services as an entire market.

00:37:07.360 --> 00:37:12.159
All of the tools at once. Um because adding tools,

00:37:12.199 --> 00:37:19.519
um I think with resource adequacy as a goal, it's creating

00:37:19.530 --> 00:37:22.438
uncertainties. We don't want to create uncertainties.

00:37:22.449 --> 00:37:24.878
Me saying that we should, we should do this and then

00:37:25.019 --> 00:37:27.228
look at it in the future is creating an uncertainty

00:37:27.239 --> 00:37:30.179
to understand. But we have to, we have to find a way

00:37:30.840 --> 00:37:36.329
to create certainty in this market. And allow investment

00:37:36.340 --> 00:37:40.619
to happen. Um the only other, you know, issue that

00:37:40.628 --> 00:37:46.849
I have, um, and I say this as the ability to eliminate

00:37:46.860 --> 00:37:49.708
RUC. I know this issue has been brought up at ERCOT.

00:37:49.978 --> 00:37:54.780
And that is if we, if we just prohibit the opting

00:37:54.789 --> 00:38:00.978
out of RUC, does that incent or induce self commitment

00:38:00.989 --> 00:38:03.820
in a easier cleaner way? And I don't know the answer

00:38:03.829 --> 00:38:06.780
to that again. I know that they've had these discussions

00:38:06.789 --> 00:38:11.978
at ERCOT within the stakeholder process. But I think

00:38:12.050 --> 00:38:15.628
that should be an issue in the future. That is on the

00:38:15.639 --> 00:38:20.059
table for discussion. If in fact this option doesn't

00:38:20.070 --> 00:38:25.369
solve the reliability unit commitment issue. And so

00:38:25.378 --> 00:38:30.898
to that end, I'm tentatively supportive of the effort

00:38:31.070 --> 00:38:37.800
you have my vote. But this ORDC uh I, I in

00:38:37.809 --> 00:38:43.099
fact. I, I went back and I looked at um the uh,

00:38:43.369 --> 00:38:47.050
uh some of the reasons for the ORDC. And there was

00:38:47.059 --> 00:38:53.659
a, an IMM um presentation uh in 2017 or 2019. That was

00:38:53.978 --> 00:38:59.250
uh that ORDC was actually being implemented um instead

00:38:59.260 --> 00:39:00.869
of real time co-optimization.

00:39:02.708 --> 00:39:07.800
And that, and that. At some point in time when RTC

00:39:07.809 --> 00:39:10.590
gets approved and finally in the market. That is another

00:39:10.599 --> 00:39:14.458
signal that we have to look at this ORDC, and its

00:39:14.469 --> 00:39:17.090
role in the market. Because just throwing money into

00:39:17.099 --> 00:39:20.949
the market when the reserves get tighter is not necessarily

00:39:20.958 --> 00:39:23.739
a solution we have seen, it might be in the future.

00:39:23.750 --> 00:39:26.820
But we have seen it is not necessarily a solution to

00:39:26.829 --> 00:39:31.119
put more steel in the ground. So with that I, I would

00:39:31.128 --> 00:39:34.750
say that I'm supportive of this effort of this bridge.

00:39:34.918 --> 00:39:38.668
That I reserve the right to say that it ain't going

00:39:38.699 --> 00:39:41.849
to work. I'm not sure it will, but I think we have

00:39:41.860 --> 00:39:45.438
to move forward and create some certainty as best as

00:39:45.449 --> 00:39:49.429
we can. (item:21:Commissioner Cobos' follow-up on memo) So I want to say a few things. One is

00:39:49.438 --> 00:39:51.849
Commissioner Glotfelty, I really appreciate you raising

00:39:51.860 --> 00:39:53.909
all your concerns. And those are, you know, they're

00:39:53.918 --> 00:39:57.599
all valid. I think the first one, what is the goal

00:39:57.610 --> 00:40:02.309
of this, this um this near term bridge solution? I

00:40:02.340 --> 00:40:05.918
think, you know, we had a very robust discussion at

00:40:05.929 --> 00:40:09.010
our workshops about what the near term solution was

00:40:09.019 --> 00:40:13.579
intended to do. Um you know the, the few of us pounded

00:40:13.590 --> 00:40:17.639
you know, the table on any (inaudible) to reduce RUC. But unfortunately

00:40:17.648 --> 00:40:21.800
in the blueprint the, the wording was very

00:40:21.809 --> 00:40:25.079
broad. And I believe ultimately when it arrived at ERCOT

00:40:25.090 --> 00:40:27.289
it turned into a resource adequacy solution. When it

00:40:27.300 --> 00:40:31.309
left here as a RUC reduction solution. So I think what

00:40:31.320 --> 00:40:35.269
we need to do is reset and, and say what is it

00:40:35.280 --> 00:40:37.418
intended to do? And I think there's agreement here.

00:40:37.429 --> 00:40:40.260
that what we're trying to do here is retain our long

00:40:40.269 --> 00:40:44.010
duration thermal dispatchable, thermal generation assets.

00:40:44.469 --> 00:40:50.539
And uh reducing RUC and naturally the ORDC price floor

00:40:50.550 --> 00:40:53.099
adders are going to put more money in the market. How

00:40:53.110 --> 00:40:55.639
much ultimately that is, you know, that's subject to

00:40:55.648 --> 00:40:58.309
debate, right? I mean based on market behavior, we

00:40:58.320 --> 00:41:02.449
could be um less than what our projected. Um And so

00:41:02.458 --> 00:41:05.360
we have to monitor that right? As, as you know we

00:41:05.369 --> 00:41:07.708
go forward. But naturally it is going to provide more

00:41:07.719 --> 00:41:10.628
money in the market. That should help retain provide

00:41:10.639 --> 00:41:13.539
should help cover the marginal cost of existing generation.

00:41:13.789 --> 00:41:17.789
And hopefully would, you know, uh yet another revenue

00:41:17.800 --> 00:41:20.760
stream to our market where generators can go and look

00:41:20.769 --> 00:41:24.099
at a portfolio of revenue streams. To make a decision

00:41:24.110 --> 00:41:27.030
on whether they want to invest in our market. And because

00:41:27.039 --> 00:41:29.610
I don't believe it's one mechanism that's a driver

00:41:29.619 --> 00:41:33.438
of investment in our market. It's a portfolio of revenue

00:41:33.449 --> 00:41:38.320
streams. And so this is yet another piece uh another

00:41:38.329 --> 00:41:41.840
addition to the portfolio. So it, it you know well

00:41:42.579 --> 00:41:46.579
I continue to believe it's not a resource adequacy

00:41:46.590 --> 00:41:51.378
measure. Um and more of a um RUC you know uh, uh

00:41:51.389 --> 00:41:55.478
more of a, a measure to um take the physical pressure

00:41:55.489 --> 00:41:58.340
off our long duration. Especially older generation

00:41:58.349 --> 00:42:01.648
units and reduce RUC and through a market based tool.

00:42:02.110 --> 00:42:05.878
Ultimately it will, you know, have some revenue impact

00:42:05.889 --> 00:42:08.679
right? I mean naturally it's the ORDC's. Uh second

00:42:10.010 --> 00:42:14.958
um on the auto market solution to address the out of

00:42:14.969 --> 00:42:17.619
market solution and we, you know, I view it a little

00:42:17.628 --> 00:42:20.449
bit different. Um I I believe that the ORDC is an

00:42:20.458 --> 00:42:24.719
in market, market based tool. That is um was developed

00:42:24.728 --> 00:42:30.800
by the Commission to um incent price responsive behavior.

00:42:31.260 --> 00:42:35.688
And uh more appropriately value uh reserve, reserves

00:42:35.699 --> 00:42:38.809
as um we are in scarcity conditions as those reserves

00:42:38.820 --> 00:42:40.938
become more scarce. So I believe the ORDC is an in

00:42:40.949 --> 00:42:45.918
market, market based tool. However, the um addition

00:42:45.929 --> 00:42:49.110
of the ORDC price floor adders are certainly administrative

00:42:49.119 --> 00:42:52.478
changes and actions that um ERCOT would be putting

00:42:52.489 --> 00:42:56.239
in place. Third, I understand your point on kind of

00:42:56.250 --> 00:43:01.418
unpacking and, and you know, not pancaking. Um ultimately

00:43:02.010 --> 00:43:05.750
that's why I want these metrics in there. Because even

00:43:05.760 --> 00:43:07.570
though they're isolated metrics on where, how much

00:43:07.579 --> 00:43:10.679
money is the are the ORDC price force producing? Where

00:43:10.688 --> 00:43:14.789
is it going? Is it reducing RUC? You know we, we got

00:43:14.800 --> 00:43:17.909
to track those metrics, but there are other factors

00:43:17.918 --> 00:43:21.570
in our market. That will, that will impact whether or

00:43:21.579 --> 00:43:24.489
not these ORDC price for adders work as intended.

00:43:24.909 --> 00:43:27.239
And like you mentioned, ancillary services. You know

00:43:27.250 --> 00:43:30.688
the more power you reserve, the more is less available

00:43:30.699 --> 00:43:34.989
for real time operation dispatch. And more scarcity

00:43:35.280 --> 00:43:38.510
and, and potentially more use of the ORDC. But there

00:43:38.519 --> 00:43:41.929
there's a, a direct interact, direct correlation between

00:43:41.938 --> 00:43:43.829
those two markets. You know, with real time and day

00:43:43.840 --> 00:43:46.349
ahead market and, and how much ancillary services you're

00:43:46.360 --> 00:43:49.898
reserving? And, and we do have to be diligent about

00:43:50.280 --> 00:43:53.590
the ancillary service portfolio. And, and ensuring

00:43:53.599 --> 00:43:56.728
that um we're buying what we need going forward. Obviously

00:43:56.739 --> 00:43:58.668
we have a lot of, a lot of renewables on the system.

00:43:58.679 --> 00:44:00.570
And a lot more coming and you know, our market and

00:44:00.579 --> 00:44:03.208
grid is evolving. But we wanna make sure that when

00:44:03.219 --> 00:44:07.289
we um go to the drawing board with, with our counterparts

00:44:07.300 --> 00:44:09.969
ERCOT. Who ultimately approves these annual, the annual

00:44:09.978 --> 00:44:12.949
ancillary service methodology. That we roll up our sleeves

00:44:12.958 --> 00:44:15.510
all together and we make, make sure that we're doing

00:44:15.909 --> 00:44:18.039
what's best for the market going forward on the Ancillary

00:44:18.050 --> 00:44:21.449
service portfolio basis. So I understand your point

00:44:21.458 --> 00:44:26.590
there. Um but ultimately I think um I appreciate your

00:44:26.599 --> 00:44:29.688
support. And, and those are just some responses I wanted

00:44:29.699 --> 00:44:32.800
to provide to clarify and hopefully um add more to

00:44:32.809 --> 00:44:35.188
the discussion. (item:21:Commissioner Glotfelty's comments on ORDC as a market solution) The, the only thing that I would uh

00:44:35.199 --> 00:44:38.389
come back and say is. I agree with you ORDC was

00:44:38.398 --> 00:44:43.500
implemented as a market solution but modifications

00:44:43.510 --> 00:44:48.110
to that market solution Uh seem uh as we've moved the

00:44:48.119 --> 00:44:50.168
standard deviation as we've done a lot of different

00:44:50.179 --> 00:44:53.208
things. Those are our actions, that's not the market

00:44:53.219 --> 00:44:55.559
functioning. It's the market functioning to what we

00:44:55.570 --> 00:44:58.228
are doing, which is putting more money into the market

00:44:58.239 --> 00:45:01.079
for a reason that we have chosen so. Administratively.

00:45:01.090 --> 00:45:04.869
(item:21:Commissioner McAdams on clarity of purpose) And that gets to the issue of clarity of purpose. There

00:45:04.878 --> 00:45:08.164
was insufficient clarity of purpose on each one of

00:45:08.175 --> 00:45:13.114
the ORDC modifications. Uh and that's the goal, the

00:45:13.125 --> 00:45:15.273
mission, the clarity of the goal. Where do you want

00:45:15.284 --> 00:45:18.264
to get to? And it was based on resource adequacy and

00:45:18.273 --> 00:45:21.534
meeting some nebulous definition of resource adequacy.

00:45:21.543 --> 00:45:24.175
Which has never been clearly defined. Nor is it defined

00:45:24.184 --> 00:45:26.405
in any other place in the country right now. And we're,

00:45:26.414 --> 00:45:31.458
we're seeing that. Um it was, it was pitched. It was

00:45:31.469 --> 00:45:35.119
sold um to the Legislature, to the Commission. That it

00:45:35.128 --> 00:45:38.699
would drive uh installation of new capacity into the

00:45:38.708 --> 00:45:42.500
system, for which it is not done to date. Um but it

00:45:42.510 --> 00:45:46.800
could do uh theoretically. But what we're discussing

00:45:46.809 --> 00:45:51.418
here is not that. These are not revenues um introduced

00:45:51.429 --> 00:45:57.119
into the market to um maintain or in, in order to achieve

00:45:58.019 --> 00:46:01.789
key distinction, to achieve resource adequacy. What,

00:46:01.800 --> 00:46:04.958
what they are designed to do is to induce self commitment

00:46:04.969 --> 00:46:08.438
and market driven behavior into the market. So that

00:46:08.449 --> 00:46:13.349
we can maintain our conservative uh operations. Stay

00:46:13.360 --> 00:46:16.969
out of conservation alerts, not unduly alarm the public

00:46:16.978 --> 00:46:19.958
or degrade confidence in the system. And in order to

00:46:19.969 --> 00:46:23.570
retain the generation that we have today. Stabilize

00:46:23.579 --> 00:46:26.099
the system and then start working toward a long term

00:46:26.110 --> 00:46:30.148
solution. And the bridge is a bridge to the statutory

00:46:30.159 --> 00:46:35.438
framework that is now in law, which is DRRS. And DRRS

00:46:35.449 --> 00:46:38.708
is specifically designed and required to reduce RUCing.

00:46:38.769 --> 00:46:41.079
And I would like to say something about RUCing. We're

00:46:41.090 --> 00:46:43.458
not talking about all RUCing, we're talking about

00:46:43.469 --> 00:46:47.260
capacity driven RUCs. Not for congestion and there

00:46:47.269 --> 00:46:50.239
is a distinction. So when we start accounting for this

00:46:50.250 --> 00:46:54.208
I want to see a reduction in capacity driven RUCs. Not necessarily

00:46:54.219 --> 00:46:58.179
congestion driven RUCs which are a real time reliability

00:46:58.309 --> 00:47:02.110
uh a constraint on the system. And you have to, have

00:47:02.119 --> 00:47:05.280
emergency mechanisms available to the system operator

00:47:05.289 --> 00:47:09.829
to manage through those constraints. And so I, I

00:47:09.840 --> 00:47:13.199
believe in, in terms of a mission on the part of the

00:47:13.208 --> 00:47:19.469
Commission. This, this uh mechanism that we are considering

00:47:19.478 --> 00:47:24.610
today is specifically designed to maintain levels of

00:47:24.619 --> 00:47:31.648
current uh generation and reduce uh the RUCing for capacity.

00:47:31.869 --> 00:47:35.840
Which is an out of market action by the system operator.

00:47:35.860 --> 00:47:40.619
Which is linked to the amount of uh, uh conservative

00:47:40.628 --> 00:47:44.378
operations. Uh renewable penetration into the system

00:47:44.639 --> 00:47:49.300
and ancillary procurement um we need to see reduction.

00:47:49.309 --> 00:47:52.648
And as a result Commissioner Cobos' memo lays out a

00:47:52.659 --> 00:47:58.340
road map. To um to a series of touch points, checkpoints.

00:47:58.530 --> 00:48:01.599
Where this Commission should automatically initiate

00:48:01.610 --> 00:48:05.159
evaluations of its success on that very narrow and

00:48:05.168 --> 00:48:10.208
clearly defined mission. And uh and if it is not working

00:48:10.280 --> 00:48:13.378
it should go away. And the market should know that and

00:48:13.389 --> 00:48:16.829
they should see that coming well in advance. And so

00:48:16.840 --> 00:48:22.579
I think um the, the clear line that we cross when DRRS

00:48:22.590 --> 00:48:28.039
launches is the first such checkpoint. And uh we need

00:48:28.050 --> 00:48:31.679
to see a testing period of DRRS. Because right now DRRS

00:48:31.688 --> 00:48:35.878
will take some time to uh accomplish its intended purpose.

00:48:36.570 --> 00:48:40.360
And so that, that includes seeing it perform in a shoulder

00:48:40.369 --> 00:48:43.628
season and a peak season, you should see how it interacts

00:48:43.639 --> 00:48:49.300
with the system. And then um, we should evaluate adamantly

00:48:49.309 --> 00:48:53.898
evaluate the success of ORDC. And potentially how this

00:48:53.909 --> 00:48:58.289
this minimum, uh adder mechanism could be phased out

00:48:58.300 --> 00:49:01.750
due to the success of DRRS in accomplishing its mission.

00:49:05.510 --> 00:49:09.059
(item:21:Chairwoman Jackson's thoughts on memo) So, lots of discussion. I think what I'm hearing though

00:49:09.070 --> 00:49:13.099
is that we are in consensus in terms of moving forward

00:49:13.269 --> 00:49:17.188
with um, with the resolution. And I think as stated

00:49:17.199 --> 00:49:19.668
in Commissioner Cobos memo and then

00:49:21.360 --> 00:49:24.458
touched on by, you know, the other two Commissioners

00:49:24.469 --> 00:49:27.789
here. In terms of the value and the need for the metrics.

00:49:28.239 --> 00:49:32.280
And the fact that you know with, with any uh with

00:49:32.289 --> 00:49:35.320
any change moving forward. It is incumbent on us to

00:49:35.469 --> 00:49:39.000
measure that success and determine along the way whether

00:49:39.010 --> 00:49:42.760
there needs to be change. Based on its performance in

00:49:42.769 --> 00:49:45.769
the vein of continuous improvement. And so you've,

00:49:45.780 --> 00:49:49.128
you've laid that out in your memo. I know that, that

00:49:49.938 --> 00:49:52.378
you know, you had had a memo and you, you talked about

00:49:52.389 --> 00:49:55.449
the metrics. And so, you know, is this, is this what

00:49:55.458 --> 00:49:58.219
Staff kind of envisioned in terms of the metrics. That,

00:49:58.228 --> 00:50:00.789
that you were talking about? This is exactly the guidance we were looking

00:50:00.800 --> 00:50:05.610
for. Yes. Okay, and I think ERCOT um. I, I do have a

00:50:05.619 --> 00:50:10.148
question. Harika, do you um do you know how much this

00:50:10.159 --> 00:50:13.898
floor is intended to put in the market? I mean, is

00:50:13.909 --> 00:50:18.239
there a number that's tied to that, that is based upon

00:50:18.449 --> 00:50:23.168
a past study or a past model run? Yes, I believe it

00:50:23.179 --> 00:50:27.478
was tied to around $500 million, $500 million. So I,

00:50:27.489 --> 00:50:31.668
I just want to say again I'm, I'm on board with this.

00:50:31.679 --> 00:50:35.789
But I do not believe $500 million in this market is

00:50:35.800 --> 00:50:39.070
going to keep a unit operating in this market or in

00:50:39.079 --> 00:50:41.889
sent new generation in this market. There are too many

00:50:41.898 --> 00:50:45.079
other variables that are going on in the face of this

00:50:45.090 --> 00:50:49.409
dynamic market. To allow that much money for long duration

00:50:49.418 --> 00:50:51.679
high capital cost resources. Do you think

00:50:53.739 --> 00:50:56.610
because that's what we're trying to achieve. Can we

00:50:56.619 --> 00:50:59.438
do? I, I don't know. I mean I don't think that we

00:50:59.449 --> 00:51:03.719
are the ones, I don't think this will uh will uh will

00:51:03.728 --> 00:51:05.728
a generator be happy that we're doing this for a year

00:51:06.269 --> 00:51:08.938
But in conjunction with other mechanisms, again, this

00:51:08.949 --> 00:51:11.918
is a framework. I don't, I don't know, I act in concert

00:51:11.929 --> 00:51:14.469
not alone. And that's an important consideration. I

00:51:14.478 --> 00:51:17.688
don't know the answer to that. I don't think generators

00:51:17.699 --> 00:51:21.369
based upon our Load growth are going to go away. So

00:51:21.378 --> 00:51:24.969
I think it's hard to tell if it's, if it's this money

00:51:24.978 --> 00:51:29.829
or if it is high prices in the market. I think but

00:51:29.840 --> 00:51:36.119
my point is that we, this ORDC, since 2014. Has put

00:51:36.128 --> 00:51:40.679
in over $12 billion into the market. Um Some years

00:51:40.688 --> 00:51:43.829
lower than others. We are going to continue to see

00:51:43.840 --> 00:51:47.188
this issue, the more renewables we have, the more money

00:51:47.199 --> 00:51:49.849
is going to have to be put on some capacity function

00:51:50.300 --> 00:51:54.309
Uh The PCM, the DRRS I don't know what it is.

00:51:54.320 --> 00:51:57.289
You know but um. By the way, that's a big number. So

00:51:57.300 --> 00:51:59.340
everybody do the math correctly. Including the press

00:51:59.349 --> 00:52:02.728
That's over nine years. It's, uh it's since 2014. That's

00:52:02.739 --> 00:52:06.260
right. And um, you know, average, it's, it's pretty

00:52:06.269 --> 00:52:09.659
low but it's uh in some years it can be high. Um

00:52:09.668 --> 00:52:13.070
And, and I'm not saying that number is wrong. Um I

00:52:13.079 --> 00:52:19.300
I think the the reality is. The more you have zero cost

00:52:19.309 --> 00:52:23.590
resources, zero marginal cost resources in the market

00:52:24.389 --> 00:52:27.769
the higher we're going to have to provide resources

00:52:27.780 --> 00:52:31.250
to those that have high operating costs. If we want

00:52:31.260 --> 00:52:33.969
reliability, those are the resources we need for the

00:52:33.978 --> 00:52:36.519
blue sky days. Those are the ones that we need for

00:52:36.679 --> 00:52:40.918
the reliability of long term winter events that we

00:52:41.728 --> 00:52:45.570
it's buying insurance is what it is. But I just, I

00:52:45.579 --> 00:52:49.519
want you all to know that, you know, without this big

00:52:49.530 --> 00:52:51.628
vision of where we're going. I think it's hard for

00:52:51.639 --> 00:52:56.519
us to keep determining what success will be with all

00:52:56.530 --> 00:53:00.628
of these little modifications and that I really encourage

00:53:00.719 --> 00:53:05.110
us and Acott to undertake a longer term view of Ancillary

00:53:05.119 --> 00:53:09.550
services at some point in time here in the fairly near

00:53:09.559 --> 00:53:14.128
future. Um Once we get some data from this. And uh

00:53:14.139 --> 00:53:16.898
and we, we go forward, I feel like I'm back in A

00:53:16.909 --> 00:53:21.250
R it's conditions dependent. Um It is what it is and

00:53:21.260 --> 00:53:22.840
and you're gonna say, feel like you're back in the

00:53:22.849 --> 00:53:27.510
legislature. No. Um success is conditions dependent

00:53:27.780 --> 00:53:31.648
and you know it when you get there or you feel it

00:53:31.659 --> 00:53:36.570
and right now we are not there. And uh I know you

00:53:36.579 --> 00:53:39.208
have thought. Yeah. (item:21:Commissioner Cobos' comments on incentives) Well, I mean, I just want to reiterate

00:53:39.219 --> 00:53:40.949
that, I don't believe that this one action is gonna

00:53:40.958 --> 00:53:43.679
be the monumental action. That's gonna drive, retain

00:53:43.688 --> 00:53:47.938
or incent investment. It's one piece of a broad portfolio

00:53:48.250 --> 00:53:51.418
of revenue streams in our market. And we've, you know

00:53:51.429 --> 00:53:54.019
to your point about how much money the ORDC has put

00:53:54.030 --> 00:53:55.889
in the market. I mean, we've put incentives in the

00:53:55.898 --> 00:53:58.958
market. We, we can't make the market invest, right?

00:53:58.969 --> 00:54:01.269
We can't make generators invest. That we've put in,

00:54:01.320 --> 00:54:03.829
we've put money in the market. There has been some

00:54:03.840 --> 00:54:07.668
investment as a result of the ORDC. And um you know

00:54:07.679 --> 00:54:09.780
this is yet another administrative action that the

00:54:09.789 --> 00:54:12.688
Commission is taking that will result in more money

00:54:12.699 --> 00:54:16.228
in the market, but is ultimately trying to get these

00:54:16.239 --> 00:54:18.639
generators to self commit. And if they don't self commit

00:54:18.648 --> 00:54:20.389
and it doesn't work, then we have another problem and

00:54:20.398 --> 00:54:23.000
we have to address it in another way. And we'll see

00:54:23.010 --> 00:54:25.938
that and we'll see that. So and, and I think

00:54:25.949 --> 00:54:29.679
(item:21:Commissioner McAdams on defining mission and goals) Um I think one of the important features of this is

00:54:30.760 --> 00:54:34.438
through our clearly defining the mission and the goal.

00:54:34.820 --> 00:54:37.829
We are building in an a, a means of accountability

00:54:37.840 --> 00:54:41.059
into the ORDC. Which previously the Commission had

00:54:41.070 --> 00:54:47.369
not addressed. We are, we are obligating uh this Commission

00:54:47.378 --> 00:54:50.110
or future Commissions to check in on this to make sure

00:54:50.119 --> 00:54:54.148
that it is accomplishing the desired effect. Um And

00:54:54.159 --> 00:54:56.829
and the stakeholders will provide information. The

00:54:56.840 --> 00:55:00.619
IMM will provide information on to verify whether this

00:55:00.628 --> 00:55:04.659
is in fact working. And ERCOT as well, but this is not

00:55:04.668 --> 00:55:07.250
a fire and forget tool. This is something that we got

00:55:07.260 --> 00:55:10.840
to track and see if it's if, if it's providing the

00:55:10.849 --> 00:55:13.878
desired effect for the system. (item:21:Commissioner Cobos' comments on building appropriately for the future) And as we build for

00:55:13.889 --> 00:55:15.978
the future we, we need to start like Commissioner

00:55:16.340 --> 00:55:18.188
Glotfelty has said unpacking some things, and looking

00:55:18.199 --> 00:55:20.398
at things and having metrics. So that we are building

00:55:20.409 --> 00:55:22.260
appropriately for the future and not just, you know

00:55:22.269 --> 00:55:25.639
pancaking things on without doing a holistic, a thorough

00:55:25.648 --> 00:55:27.800
evaluation. How everything interacts with each other

00:55:27.809 --> 00:55:30.769
to your point on ancillary services. We, we we've got

00:55:30.780 --> 00:55:34.458
some work to do to plan forward on the statutory framework

00:55:34.469 --> 00:55:38.110
in 1500. But also incumbent on us and ERCOT. To really

00:55:38.119 --> 00:55:41.019
take a deep dive into how, you know what, how we're

00:55:41.030 --> 00:55:43.019
gonna set up going forward. So that the measures that

00:55:43.030 --> 00:55:46.809
we put in place as a result of 1500 do work as

00:55:46.820 --> 00:55:50.949
intended. (item:21:Chairwoman Jackson's comments on reliability) Well, I think we're still, the North Star

00:55:50.958 --> 00:55:53.590
is still reliability. And I think we all recognize

00:55:53.599 --> 00:55:56.769
that it's not, it's not one big answer. It's a lot

00:55:56.780 --> 00:55:59.938
of answers and everything interconnects. And um, and

00:55:59.958 --> 00:56:05.168
what we want is, you know, what is in the best interest

00:56:05.179 --> 00:56:08.079
of the consumer, which is reliability. And also, you

00:56:08.090 --> 00:56:11.079
know, the lowest cost possible. And that it's going

00:56:11.090 --> 00:56:13.708
to take, you know, thoughtful and deliberate action

00:56:13.719 --> 00:56:17.418
to get there based on good science and good data. And

00:56:17.429 --> 00:56:19.550
so you know in my mind, I see this as a very

00:56:19.559 --> 00:56:24.559
important step. And something that kind of again demonstrates

00:56:24.570 --> 00:56:28.559
that we are in fact moving forward. And that we are

00:56:28.570 --> 00:56:31.280
concerned about not just the long term but also the

00:56:31.289 --> 00:56:35.030
near term. And that one action builds on another and

00:56:35.039 --> 00:56:37.590
you know, having this thoughtful oversight, having

00:56:37.599 --> 00:56:42.090
metrics clearly delineated. And knowing ahead of time

00:56:42.099 --> 00:56:44.148
this is what we're going to gather. The data here is

00:56:44.159 --> 00:56:46.429
at least initially what we're going to evaluate its

00:56:46.438 --> 00:56:50.250
performance based on. And that it interacts and engages

00:56:50.260 --> 00:56:52.590
with all of the other actions that we need to be taking

00:56:52.599 --> 00:56:56.750
moving forward so. Madam Chair, before we move on. You

00:56:56.760 --> 00:57:00.878
just to have a good uh agreement from the Commission.

00:57:00.889 --> 00:57:04.050
We are talking about reduction in capacity driven RUCs,

00:57:04.079 --> 00:57:07.789
correct not transmission? Yes. Okay. I just wanted to make

00:57:07.800 --> 00:57:10.699
sure that was in the record. To clearly define, you

00:57:10.708 --> 00:57:12.449
know, what we want to see. That's what I.

00:57:15.679 --> 00:57:19.179
Okay. (item:21:Motion to approve ERCOT's Board of Director's resolution) Well, do I have a motion to approve ERCOT's Board

00:57:19.188 --> 00:57:22.760
of Director's resolution included as Attachment A in

00:57:22.769 --> 00:57:26.119
ERCOT's report and recommend, recommendation on Bridge

00:57:26.128 --> 00:57:31.750
Solutions filed on, on April 20 2023. Require reporting

00:57:31.760 --> 00:57:34.739
metrics consistent with our discussion and direct Staff

00:57:34.750 --> 00:57:38.719
to file a me memorializing this decision. So moved.

00:57:39.639 --> 00:57:42.300
Second. I have a motion and second. All in favor, say

00:57:42.309 --> 00:57:46.300
aye. Aye. Motion passes. It's a good Commission.

00:57:49.059 --> 00:57:53.340
Thank you Harika. Uh I don't have anything on Items 22 or

00:57:53.349 --> 00:57:59.648
26, unless y'all do? (item:27: Chairwoman Jackson lays out Project No. 41210) Next up is Item No. 27, Project

00:57:59.659 --> 00:58:04.188
No. 41210. Commissioner McAdams who filed a memo

00:58:04.199 --> 00:58:06.300
um could you please walk us through? Thank you, Madam

00:58:06.309 --> 00:58:11.550
Chair. (item:27:Commissioner McAdams' lays out his memo on SPP) Um the purpose of my memo was one I, I promised

00:58:11.559 --> 00:58:14.119
a more comprehensive report at our last open meeting.

00:58:14.128 --> 00:58:17.280
On the activities and efforts currently underway at

00:58:17.289 --> 00:58:19.889
uh the Southwest Power Pool. I wanted to highlight

00:58:19.898 --> 00:58:24.500
key projects uh that SPP has launched. Where um we as

00:58:24.510 --> 00:58:28.228
a state Texas will need to engage uh over the next

00:58:28.260 --> 00:58:33.550
two years. Um as seen in my memo SPP, uh intends to

00:58:33.559 --> 00:58:40.119
grow into the West um uh across the Rockies. Um and

00:58:40.128 --> 00:58:46.340
they intend to file um this new expansive plan, a plan

00:58:46.349 --> 00:58:52.429
of approval with the FERC by next year 2024. Um and

00:58:52.438 --> 00:58:55.438
over the next two years, uh once they gain that approval

00:58:55.449 --> 00:58:59.610
from FERC. We will be engaged in uh governance related

00:58:59.619 --> 00:59:04.280
discussions. Around um how the, the two halves of the

00:59:04.289 --> 00:59:08.110
system, the East and the West will work together, right?

00:59:08.119 --> 00:59:11.059
Now they're contemplating two separate balancing authority

00:59:11.070 --> 00:59:15.820
areas um interconnected by uh existing and potentially

00:59:15.829 --> 00:59:20.219
future uh DC ties. Um As, as I said in the memo

00:59:20.228 --> 00:59:23.739
Colorado is a major uh loads center which will be uh

00:59:23.750 --> 00:59:28.309
coming in. Um This, this is gonna afford us the opportunity

00:59:28.320 --> 00:59:31.809
to talk about governance. And how cost allocation in

00:59:31.820 --> 00:59:36.639
my view, especially as it relates to um interregional

00:59:36.648 --> 00:59:42.329
uh transfer capacity. Um Upgrades is debated and ultimately

00:59:42.340 --> 00:59:46.699
settled upon with SPP. As you know, uh Texas is a major

00:59:46.708 --> 00:59:50.599
has a major loaded ratio share uh within the footprint.

00:59:50.918 --> 00:59:54.050
And uh so we want to make sure that it is equitably

00:59:54.059 --> 01:00:00.989
and fairly um portioned within the ISO/RTO. So, uh

01:00:01.000 --> 01:00:05.478
I also want to highlight uh I mentioned RAMP. Um uh

01:00:05.489 --> 01:00:10.119
and RAMP accreditation. That is a policy that the real

01:00:10.128 --> 01:00:13.648
team has taken on in conjunction with other stakeholder

01:00:13.659 --> 01:00:18.320
driven uh groups at Southwest Power Pool. Ramp capabilities

01:00:18.329 --> 01:00:24.599
are becoming a more acute um uh challenge to achieve

01:00:24.610 --> 01:00:29.610
in all of the uh ISOs. Um it's very valuable to

01:00:29.619 --> 01:00:33.478
have RAMP capabilities. In a system where variable uh

01:00:33.489 --> 01:00:38.000
energy is, is becomes the dominant energy source: ie

01:00:38.010 --> 01:00:42.958
uh solar and wind. You need a certain threshold of

01:00:42.969 --> 01:00:46.750
RAMP capacity to meet the challenges of falloffs and

01:00:46.760 --> 01:00:51.228
wind and the daily um uh rising of the sun and setting

01:00:51.239 --> 01:00:55.360
of the sun. This is a more challenging topic. It's

01:00:55.369 --> 01:00:57.958
very complicated. It's requiring a lot of analysis

01:00:57.969 --> 01:01:02.780
with SPP. What's on your chart is shifting by the moment

01:01:02.789 --> 01:01:07.188
in terms of our evaluation of a new policy. To include

01:01:07.199 --> 01:01:11.199
a separate accreditation or RAMP capabilities inside

01:01:11.208 --> 01:01:14.409
of their capacity obligations. You'll see on your chart

01:01:14.418 --> 01:01:17.219
that it's currently slated for some type of policy

01:01:17.228 --> 01:01:21.688
deliverable by January, I believe of 2024. That's going

01:01:21.699 --> 01:01:23.219
to shift to the right a bit,

01:01:25.219 --> 01:01:28.929
that's gonna shift to the right a bit. And um and it's

01:01:28.938 --> 01:01:33.309
because through the uh work that is currently underway

01:01:33.320 --> 01:01:37.668
at SPP. We're starting to prioritize um various projects

01:01:37.679 --> 01:01:42.530
depending on the near term needs of the system. And

01:01:42.539 --> 01:01:46.719
that is uh, uh very much dependent on some of these

01:01:46.728 --> 01:01:50.280
other steps that we're currently reviewing. And uh

01:01:50.289 --> 01:01:53.519
that includes the performance based accreditation and

01:01:53.530 --> 01:01:57.840
the expected Load carrying capability evaluation uh

01:01:57.849 --> 01:02:02.349
within the system. We hope to have a policy construct

01:02:02.360 --> 01:02:07.708
before the board of directors in RSC in October. The

01:02:07.719 --> 01:02:13.789
uh, uh SAWG the uh system uh Adequacy Working Group. Um

01:02:13.958 --> 01:02:16.090
has a recommendation that they've been working on in

01:02:16.099 --> 01:02:19.289
partnership with the REAL team which uh Texas leads.

01:02:19.829 --> 01:02:25.628
Um to accredit facilities based on their actual performance

01:02:25.639 --> 01:02:28.438
and that accreditation is gonna perform the foundation

01:02:28.449 --> 01:02:32.418
of capacity obligations in the future. As such as a

01:02:32.429 --> 01:02:35.309
part of this recommendation, it also accounts for fuel

01:02:35.320 --> 01:02:39.030
security. So similar to what uh ERCOT has done inside

01:02:39.039 --> 01:02:41.889
of uh in, in Texas.

01:02:43.550 --> 01:02:46.579
SPP is approaching fuel security through an accreditation

01:02:46.590 --> 01:02:49.769
construct. So it will receive, if you have firm fuel

01:02:49.780 --> 01:02:52.590
contracts or on site fuel storage. You will in fact

01:02:52.599 --> 01:02:55.760
receive a higher degree of accreditation moving forward.

01:02:55.769 --> 01:02:58.820
And thus there's value there to offset your capacity

01:02:58.829 --> 01:03:03.010
obligations. Um And, and all of this is apples to oranges

01:03:03.019 --> 01:03:05.739
because you're dealing with vertically integrated monopolies

01:03:05.750 --> 01:03:10.148
um in, in SPP. Whereas in ERCOT it's completely competitive.

01:03:10.159 --> 01:03:13.878
So that's the distinction, but we have high hopes for

01:03:13.889 --> 01:03:18.989
ELCC and PBA. Um This is going to provide uh the

01:03:19.000 --> 01:03:22.070
foundation for where we move next. As you see on your

01:03:22.079 --> 01:03:26.119
charts in 2023 and 2024. Um

01:03:28.550 --> 01:03:29.938
So, um

01:03:32.168 --> 01:03:34.840
you have also seen in my memo that we have imposed

01:03:34.849 --> 01:03:37.708
an actual capacity obligation, a financial capacity

01:03:37.719 --> 01:03:41.159
obligation for the Winter season. And this is a first

01:03:41.168 --> 01:03:44.938
for South, Southwest Power Pool. Other regions including

01:03:45.110 --> 01:03:48.869
so have applied seasonal capacity obligations. Now

01:03:48.878 --> 01:03:53.188
SPP has one as of our most recent board meeting last

01:03:53.199 --> 01:03:58.708
week. Uh The, the issue with the level of the current

01:03:58.719 --> 01:04:02.869
capacity obligation is it's very low for Winter and

01:04:02.878 --> 01:04:06.070
there is broad based recognition, recognition within

01:04:06.079 --> 01:04:09.949
several ISOs that Winter is the new problem. It is

01:04:09.958 --> 01:04:13.530
not summer gross Load that we are targeting more. But

01:04:13.539 --> 01:04:15.929
it's those Winter months for which the system has not

01:04:15.938 --> 01:04:20.000
been designed uh over the last century. And as a result

01:04:20.228 --> 01:04:25.590
the probable appropriate level of capacity uh for which

01:04:25.599 --> 01:04:30.070
uh these utilities must meet is probably much higher.

01:04:30.079 --> 01:04:34.030
And I've discussed this in, in past um uh updates than

01:04:34.039 --> 01:04:37.478
it currently is and it currently sits at 15%. Because

01:04:37.489 --> 01:04:40.769
we just took the, the obligation of Summer and applied

01:04:40.780 --> 01:04:45.039
it to Winter. Um But in order to evaluate what the

01:04:45.050 --> 01:04:48.019
appropriate level is. We must first overcome other

01:04:48.030 --> 01:04:52.389
policy decisions. Namely, we must evaluate how outages

01:04:52.398 --> 01:04:55.309
are uh planned outages are accounted for during Winter

01:04:55.320 --> 01:05:00.570
seasons. And this is becoming uh a real um point of

01:05:00.579 --> 01:05:05.648
strain within the governing, governing Council of Regulators

01:05:05.739 --> 01:05:09.969
at SPP. Because the Northern states are much more susceptible

01:05:09.978 --> 01:05:13.519
to extreme cold than, than the Southern states are.

01:05:14.309 --> 01:05:18.800
And as a result, they are acutely aware of how uh planned

01:05:18.809 --> 01:05:23.309
outages can impact their ability to meet a capacity

01:05:23.320 --> 01:05:26.610
obligation. So they want the rules of the road established

01:05:26.800 --> 01:05:29.760
um and delineated on how, how those are are accounted

01:05:29.769 --> 01:05:34.039
for. And that has become one of our key priorities

01:05:34.050 --> 01:05:36.918
on the part of REAL team and the stakeholder work groups.

01:05:36.929 --> 01:05:41.119
Is to delineate how we can do that once that is accomplished.

01:05:41.128 --> 01:05:45.329
And you see that uh in January of 2024.

01:05:47.139 --> 01:05:50.679
Once that is accomplished, the REAL team and the SPP

01:05:50.688 --> 01:05:54.309
will then take on a more comprehensive look of the

01:05:54.320 --> 01:05:58.369
cadence of capacity uh evaluations. We will look at

01:05:58.378 --> 01:06:01.610
a more enhanced threshold for the Winter season at

01:06:01.619 --> 01:06:05.989
that point because it'll be more uh accurate. And therefore

01:06:06.000 --> 01:06:10.780
we'll know what uh what capacity we need to satisfy

01:06:10.789 --> 01:06:14.208
a reliability standard. And the reliability standard

01:06:14.418 --> 01:06:18.079
is probably strategically the most important thing

01:06:18.090 --> 01:06:23.300
that um the system will establish next Spring. And

01:06:23.309 --> 01:06:29.369
that includes uh an evaluation of an a expected unserved

01:06:29.378 --> 01:06:33.309
energy based reliability standard. Uh which will be

01:06:33.320 --> 01:06:38.079
determined based upon an evaluation of value of lost

01:06:38.090 --> 01:06:43.269
Load as well within the system. Which is uh a, a value

01:06:43.280 --> 01:06:46.929
of lost Load study will be moving concurrent to our

01:06:46.938 --> 01:06:50.958
uh analysis of EUE driven metrics. And all of this

01:06:50.969 --> 01:06:53.708
should sound familiar to you because that's exactly

01:06:53.719 --> 01:06:57.599
what we're doing in the ERCOT system. And that evaluation

01:06:57.610 --> 01:07:01.250
should line up almost in parallel with when we're making

01:07:01.260 --> 01:07:04.208
key decisions in ERCOT. So I'll keep you informed in

01:07:04.219 --> 01:07:07.500
terms of the results of those studies and how we are

01:07:07.510 --> 01:07:11.320
in alignment regionally over the coming months. So

01:07:11.329 --> 01:07:15.530
all this to say, um there's a lot of heavy lift in

01:07:15.539 --> 01:07:19.579
strategic decisions that are on order in the SPP footprint

01:07:19.590 --> 01:07:23.530
over the next year. And uh, uh we're, we're making good

01:07:23.539 --> 01:07:26.878
progress. But I think it, these little check-ins with

01:07:26.889 --> 01:07:31.179
the Texas Commission are appropriate. So that um we

01:07:31.188 --> 01:07:33.739
can proceed eyes wide open on everything that we're

01:07:33.750 --> 01:07:38.519
doing for both ERCOT, MISO and the SPP. Happy to answer

01:07:38.530 --> 01:07:41.269
your question. (item:27:Commissioner Cobos' comments on SPP overview) Commission McAdams, thank you for

01:07:41.280 --> 01:07:43.360
that overview. And a lot of it does sound familiar in

01:07:43.389 --> 01:07:46.559
ERCOT but also in MISO, as you noted. Um, with respect to

01:07:46.570 --> 01:07:50.789
the vol study that um, SPP is currently conducting. I

01:07:50.800 --> 01:07:52.750
know you've been a strong proponent of the customer

01:07:52.760 --> 01:07:57.438
survey aspect of the vol study. Is SPP conducting a customer

01:07:57.449 --> 01:07:58.878
survey as part of their vol study?

01:08:00.489 --> 01:08:04.878
(item:27:Commissioner McAdams' follow-up response to Commissioner Cobos) Well, there's been concerns about that. But um after

01:08:04.889 --> 01:08:09.219
repeated uh 9 hour meetings of the REAL team and

01:08:09.228 --> 01:08:12.208
discussions before the Board of Directors and RSC.

01:08:12.219 --> 01:08:15.289
I believe there is a commitment to conduct a consumer

01:08:15.300 --> 01:08:20.569
facing vol study. Okay. Um and do you know how they'll

01:08:20.579 --> 01:08:22.909
proceed forward? Are they gonna hire an independent

01:08:22.918 --> 01:08:25.699
consultant? Will it be done internally through SPP

01:08:25.708 --> 01:08:28.628
Staff? Uh no, it is not gonna be uh done internally

01:08:28.640 --> 01:08:31.649
through SPP Staff. There are several partnerships that

01:08:31.659 --> 01:08:35.248
are currently underway. Um Berkeley National Labs is

01:08:35.257 --> 01:08:38.688
already conducting uh consumer facing outreach on a

01:08:38.698 --> 01:08:42.148
regional basis. And I believe that is also being uh

01:08:42.158 --> 01:08:46.087
tied in with potential ERCOT efforts. Through now our

01:08:47.219 --> 01:08:49.719
um I don't wanna make anything public before everybody's

01:08:49.729 --> 01:08:53.489
ready. But I believe ERCOT may have settled on some

01:08:53.500 --> 01:08:56.918
type of framework um not ready for announcement yet.

01:08:56.930 --> 01:09:00.310
But Berkeley National Labs is conducting regional analysis.

01:09:00.319 --> 01:09:03.739
Which will help tie into the settled upon contractor

01:09:03.750 --> 01:09:07.668
and a path forward for SPP and potentially ERCOT as well.

01:09:08.029 --> 01:09:10.798
(item:27:Commissioner Cobos on gaining ideas from other markets) Great. Okay. Yes. So, and I think that's important to

01:09:10.810 --> 01:09:13.229
know. As we, you know, work on all these different market

01:09:13.239 --> 01:09:16.219
issues outside of ERCOT. Is what other markets are doing?

01:09:16.229 --> 01:09:19.059
Everybody's looking at planning for the future, establishing

01:09:19.068 --> 01:09:21.528
a reliability standard to account for our evolving

01:09:21.658 --> 01:09:25.047
resource mix nationally. And um we can all borrow,

01:09:25.059 --> 01:09:27.667
borrow great ideas and frameworks from each other on

01:09:27.679 --> 01:09:30.349
how to proceed forward. As I think, you know, is looking

01:09:30.358 --> 01:09:34.538
at their reliability standard. Right. Um, and SPP is looking

01:09:34.547 --> 01:09:36.498
at theirs and of course we we're all very familiar

01:09:36.507 --> 01:09:38.988
with ERCOT's work on theirs. And um there's a framework

01:09:38.998 --> 01:09:42.358
that can be borrowed from SPP and other markets on

01:09:42.368 --> 01:09:45.949
how to proceed forward. With having a robust vol study

01:09:45.958 --> 01:09:49.009
I think it's, it's important to, to, for the ISO and

01:09:49.020 --> 01:09:51.470
RTOs. To, to communicate with each other. (item:27:Commissioner McAdams on regional consistency) One of the

01:09:51.479 --> 01:09:53.600
conclusions that's coming out of the, the discussion

01:09:53.609 --> 01:09:57.189
around vol is. Man, it's got a lot of good uses if

01:09:57.199 --> 01:10:00.310
you can have a good detailed study or settled upon

01:10:00.319 --> 01:10:02.159
some type of um

01:10:04.140 --> 01:10:08.548
methodology around vol. That has some type of regional

01:10:08.560 --> 01:10:12.779
consistency and consensus from stakeholders. You can

01:10:13.128 --> 01:10:17.069
that helps set the value of scarcity. Which can drive

01:10:17.079 --> 01:10:20.979
market driven behavior even amongst a, a grouping of

01:10:20.989 --> 01:10:23.180
vertically integrated monopolies. Because again, the

01:10:23.189 --> 01:10:26.708
whole point of the ISOs/RTOs is to incent trade

01:10:26.720 --> 01:10:31.149
among them. And, and especially um an SPP who's gonna

01:10:31.159 --> 01:10:35.759
be trading now with uh SPP West and MISO. Because that's

01:10:35.770 --> 01:10:39.270
part of the Federal vision for this system. Um ERCOT

01:10:39.279 --> 01:10:43.989
it jeez it could have any number of positive uh uses.

01:10:44.000 --> 01:10:46.470
Just because of the competitive nature of the system.

01:10:47.378 --> 01:10:50.470
So no I we there are high hopes for vol. It, it

01:10:50.479 --> 01:10:53.838
takes a certain amount of convincing people to take

01:10:53.850 --> 01:10:56.310
the leap of actually engaging with consumers. They

01:10:56.319 --> 01:11:00.270
are terrified of consumers. And uh rightly so, I mean

01:11:00.279 --> 01:11:04.119
we're subject to that too. But um, I think it's going

01:11:04.128 --> 01:11:06.890
to benefit all the systems if we do this right.

01:11:11.680 --> 01:11:15.189
(item:27:Commissioner McAdams on SPP going to the West) How far do you think uh, uh SP is gonna try to

01:11:15.199 --> 01:11:19.970
push in the West? Oh, They wanna go to the Pacific.

01:11:21.220 --> 01:11:26.418
They, they wanna go to the Pacific and uh so the map

01:11:26.430 --> 01:11:30.060
will continue to grow. Um It's heavily dependent on

01:11:30.069 --> 01:11:34.208
actions taken by Cal ISO. Um in trying to set up their

01:11:34.220 --> 01:11:39.189
own RTO/ISO uh and competing markets. Markets plus

01:11:39.199 --> 01:11:43.229
is already well established and has broad based participation.

01:11:43.689 --> 01:11:47.619
Um Governance is a key uh stumbling block in terms

01:11:47.628 --> 01:11:50.759
of CAL ISOs ambitions uh to secure the Western part

01:11:50.770 --> 01:11:57.149
of the US, especially West of the Sierras. Um but SPP

01:11:57.378 --> 01:12:01.548
has visions of a broad based balancing authority that

01:12:01.560 --> 01:12:06.430
goes all the way to Washington and Oregon. And um and

01:12:06.439 --> 01:12:09.500
they're actively engaged in convincing those Commissions,

01:12:09.509 --> 01:12:13.319
state regulators and utilities. That it can be effectively

01:12:13.329 --> 01:12:19.208
managed. And um for my part, I'm more of a uh iterative

01:12:19.220 --> 01:12:24.168
incremental phased approach kind of guy. And uh but

01:12:24.529 --> 01:12:29.029
the East, no matter what will be secure. As from a resource

01:12:29.039 --> 01:12:32.579
adequacy and reliability standpoint, the West is gonna

01:12:32.588 --> 01:12:35.838
be um something to watch over the next decade.

01:12:39.168 --> 01:12:42.128
Well, I think we found that uh we've seen these

01:12:42.140 --> 01:12:45.689
uh, RTOs continue to grow and grow and grow and grow.

01:12:45.699 --> 01:12:48.779
And it's not always good, it's not always easy. But

01:12:48.789 --> 01:12:51.750
uh, we're going to continue to see them fight for territory.

01:12:51.759 --> 01:12:54.390
They all just want the land that's attached to theirs.

01:12:54.399 --> 01:12:58.350
So it's going to be never ending until it gets to the

01:12:58.359 --> 01:13:01.168
Pacific. And then, and then uh Hawaii. And then there's

01:13:01.180 --> 01:13:02.060
Japan. Yeah.

01:13:04.628 --> 01:13:09.560
Alaska. Okay. Uh, I don't have anything for Items 28, 29,

01:13:09.569 --> 01:13:14.000
or 30, unless y'all do? Uh, items, 31 and 32 were Consented.

01:13:14.009 --> 01:13:20.048
Uh, I don't have anything for Item uh, 33. (item:34:Thomas Gleeson, PUC Executive Director on Steven Journeay's retirement) Um, next

01:13:20.060 --> 01:13:24.239
we'll take up Item 34, our Standing Item for Agency

01:13:24.250 --> 01:13:28.569
Administration Issues. Thomas has an update. Thank

01:13:28.579 --> 01:13:31.140
you, Madam Chair. Good morning, Commissioners. Um, just

01:13:31.149 --> 01:13:34.128
one Item this morning. I'm holding in my hand something

01:13:34.140 --> 01:13:36.979
that I knew was coming but didn't know exactly when.

01:13:36.989 --> 01:13:40.529
It is a uh, notice of retirement for Stephen Journeay.

01:13:41.470 --> 01:13:44.399
Um so we, we've been asked what we're gonna do. Steven

01:13:44.409 --> 01:13:46.970
doesn't want to do anything to celebrate. I know he

01:13:46.979 --> 01:13:48.489
left before I could talk about it.

01:13:50.000 --> 01:13:52.259
He, he doesn't want to do anything. So of course,

01:13:52.270 --> 01:13:55.489
that means we're going to hold a Steven Journeay Celebration

01:13:55.500 --> 01:14:00.289
Day on August 10, a week from today at 10 am in

01:14:00.298 --> 01:14:03.918
this room. Because of capacity limitations, we're gonna

01:14:03.930 --> 01:14:09.600
ask that, that be uh only former PUC Staff. So alumni

01:14:09.609 --> 01:14:12.588
of the PUC will hold something else. I'm sure the festivities

01:14:12.600 --> 01:14:15.180
will continue beyond that morning. Uh, somewhere else

01:14:15.189 --> 01:14:18.079
perhaps at Schultz's. Um that, that we can have a

01:14:18.088 --> 01:14:22.259
larger crowd out, crowd at. But we're gonna hold that

01:14:22.270 --> 01:14:25.890
event here. Um I've, I've asked some special guests

01:14:25.899 --> 01:14:28.628
to come back and, and say a few words about Steven.

01:14:28.979 --> 01:14:32.918
And uh, you know, he's been here since 1996. And I've

01:14:32.930 --> 01:14:35.220
told people often that he, he's the equivalent of a

01:14:35.229 --> 01:14:38.259
human uh you know city limit sign. When you're, when

01:14:38.270 --> 01:14:41.489
you see him you, you know where you are. And so, uh

01:14:41.500 --> 01:14:44.048
just wanted to put that out publicly for all the former

01:14:44.060 --> 01:14:46.958
PUC Staff that will be holding that at 10 am next

01:14:46.970 --> 01:14:52.918
Thursday uh in this room. Okay, thank you. Um I don't

01:14:52.930 --> 01:14:57.500
have anything for items 35 or 36. (item:37:Chairwoman Jackson pauses Open Meeting, to hold Closed Session) This brings us to

01:14:57.509 --> 01:15:01.890
Item No. 37, Closed Session. Having convened in a

01:15:01.899 --> 01:15:04.949
duly noticed Open Meeting. The Commission will now

01:15:05.310 --> 01:15:10.298
at 10:50 on August 3, 2023, hold a Closed Session.

01:15:10.310 --> 01:15:13.970
Pursuant to Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code

01:15:14.119 --> 01:15:22.020
sections 551.071, 551.074 and 551.076. Uh we'll be

01:15:22.029 --> 01:15:25.359
back in a few minutes. Thank you. (item:37:Chairwoman Jackson concludes Closed Session, Public Meeting resumed) The Closed Session

01:15:25.369 --> 01:15:31.180
is hereby concluded at 11:02 am on August 3, 2023.

01:15:31.338 --> 01:15:34.239
and the Commission will resume its Public Meeting.

01:15:34.539 --> 01:15:36.979
(item:37:Chairwoman Jackson states Commission takes no action concerning Closed Session and adjourns meeting) The Commission will take no action as a result of Closed

01:15:36.989 --> 01:15:40.020
Session deliberations. There being no further business

01:15:40.029 --> 01:15:41.699
to come before the Commission. This meeting of the

01:15:41.708 --> 01:15:44.659
Public Utility Commission of Texas is hereby adjourned

01:15:45.100 --> 01:15:47.390
at 11:02 am