WEBVTT 00:00:09.750 --> 00:00:12.470 (item:00:Chairwoman Jackson calls meeting to order) Good morning. This meeting of the Public Utility Commission 00:00:12.478 --> 00:00:15.019 of Texas will come to order. To consider matters that 00:00:15.028 --> 00:00:17.750 have been duly posted with the Secretary of State for 00:00:17.760 --> 00:00:21.798 September 28, 2023. For the record, my name is Kathleen 00:00:21.809 --> 00:00:25.620 Jackson. I'm joined by Will McAdams, Lori Cobos and 00:00:25.629 --> 00:00:29.109 Jimmy Glotfelty. I'm pleased to announce right off 00:00:29.120 --> 00:00:32.408 the bat. (item:00:Chairwoman Jackson announces new appointments for Commissioners Cobos and Glotfelty) That Commissioner Cobos, Cobos will now be taking 00:00:32.418 --> 00:00:35.859 the lead on transmission issues. As Commissioner Glotfelty 00:00:35.868 --> 00:00:38.969 will be turning more of his attention and expertise 00:00:39.009 --> 00:00:41.969 to leading the Texas Advanced Nuclear Reactor Working 00:00:41.978 --> 00:00:45.770 Group. Um Commissioner Cobos has decades of experience 00:00:45.779 --> 00:00:48.759 working on transmission issues in the public and private 00:00:48.770 --> 00:00:53.740 sector, both in ERCOT and MISO. Most recently, um Commissioner 00:00:53.750 --> 00:00:56.918 Cobos led the effort to grow transmission infrastructure 00:00:56.929 --> 00:01:00.478 for reliability in the Rio Grande Valley. And a special 00:01:00.490 --> 00:01:03.810 thanks to Commissioner Glotfelty for his leadership and hard 00:01:03.819 --> 00:01:07.168 work related to transmission planning. We know you 00:01:07.180 --> 00:01:10.040 will continue to be engaged and involved. 00:01:11.620 --> 00:01:13.588 (item:00:Commissioner Glotfelty's remarks on his new appointment from the Governor) I will I promise. 00:01:15.750 --> 00:01:18.790 This nuclear thing obviously, it builds a life of 00:01:18.799 --> 00:01:20.900 its own. And when the Governor asks you to do it, you 00:01:20.909 --> 00:01:23.790 have to do it. So I'm appreciative of Commissioner 00:01:23.799 --> 00:01:26.778 Cobos willing to take this on. And we will work with 00:01:26.790 --> 00:01:29.230 industry, and we will work with consumers, and we will 00:01:29.239 --> 00:01:31.480 work with ERCOT. And make this a great transmission 00:01:31.549 --> 00:01:33.269 system with your leadership. Thank you. Absolutely. 00:01:33.278 --> 00:01:35.730 (item:00:Commissioner Cobos remarks on her new appointment) Thank you for the wonderful introduction, Chair Jackson. 00:01:35.739 --> 00:01:38.230 And thank you um Commissioner Glotfelty. I look forward 00:01:38.370 --> 00:01:41.079 to working with everybody involved, as you mentioned. 00:01:41.230 --> 00:01:44.028 ERCOT, the stakeholders, the consumers. And continue to 00:01:44.040 --> 00:01:46.338 work with you, Commissioner Glotfelty on these very 00:01:46.349 --> 00:01:49.269 important issues for our State. (item:00:Commissioner McAdams' thoughts on his fellow Commissioners appointments) And I fully support 00:01:49.278 --> 00:01:52.939 this prioritization of scope of work. So I think they're 00:01:52.948 --> 00:01:55.418 going to collaborate well together and look forward 00:01:55.430 --> 00:01:59.069 to the ultimate products and outcome. Well, now I have 00:01:59.079 --> 00:02:03.500 the 1, 2 punch. That's right. (item:00:Chairwoman Jackson gives update on new Agenda structure) Um as you probably noticed we have 00:02:03.510 --> 00:02:06.349 restructured the order of our Open Meeting Agenda. 00:02:06.459 --> 00:02:10.349 All contested case items are now under Section 1. 00:02:10.699 --> 00:02:13.210 And as a reminder, Public Comment is not available 00:02:13.219 --> 00:02:16.929 for Contested Cases. And Rules, Projects and Miscellaneous 00:02:16.939 --> 00:02:21.169 Items are now under Section 2. We will start Section 00:02:21.179 --> 00:02:24.250 2 with the standing item for General Public Comment. 00:02:24.569 --> 00:02:27.929 And if you signed up to speak on a specific Item. You'll 00:02:27.939 --> 00:02:31.990 be recognized when we get to that Item. Shelah, will 00:02:32.000 --> 00:02:34.949 you walk us through the Consent Items on today's Agenda. 00:02:35.250 --> 00:02:38.008 Yes. Good morning, Commissioners. (item:00:Shelah Cisneros with Commission Counsel lays out Consent Agenda) By individual ballot, 00:02:38.020 --> 00:02:40.729 the following items are placed on your Consent Agenda: 00:02:41.189 --> 00:02:47.778 Items 5, 6, 7, 11-13, and 15-18. (item:00:Chairwoman Jackson asks for motion to approve items on Consent Agenda) I 00:02:47.788 --> 00:02:50.599 will entertain a motion to approve the items just described 00:02:50.610 --> 00:02:56.159 by Shelah. So moved. Second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Motion passes. 00:02:57.069 --> 00:03:00.099 Next up is Item No. 1. Shelah, will you please 00:03:00.110 --> 00:03:03.199 lay out this Item? (item:1:Application of Medina Highlands d/b/a Avalon Point Water System, LLC for authority to change rates) Item No. 1 is Docket No. 00:03:03.210 --> 00:03:07.758 52365. This is the application of Medina Highlands 00:03:07.770 --> 00:03:11.889 doing business as Avalon Point Water System, LLC for 00:03:11.899 --> 00:03:14.550 authority to change rates. Before you is a proposed 00:03:14.558 --> 00:03:18.169 order. No corrections or exceptions were filed. Commissioner 00:03:18.179 --> 00:03:21.599 Jackson filed a memo. (item:1:Chairwoman Jackson lays out her memo) It's my understanding that this 00:03:21.610 --> 00:03:26.050 community is on uh TCEQ's 180 day list. That means that 00:03:26.058 --> 00:03:29.740 they are within 180 days of running out of water. 00:03:29.750 --> 00:03:32.449 This is something they self reported. Uh the utility 00:03:32.460 --> 00:03:35.210 states, they need a final tariff to seek funding from 00:03:35.219 --> 00:03:37.800 the Texas Water Development Board and time is of the 00:03:37.808 --> 00:03:41.258 essence. I filed a memo addressing several issues. So 00:03:41.270 --> 00:03:44.189 that the order and the tariff can be approved quickly. 00:03:44.528 --> 00:03:46.830 Um any additional thoughts on this one? 00:03:48.379 --> 00:03:51.729 (item:1:Commissioner McAdams makes motion to approve Chairwoman's memo) Madam Chair, I agree with you, uh with your memo. Uh, 00:03:51.740 --> 00:03:54.129 I agree with you on this. I agree with the sentiments 00:03:54.139 --> 00:04:00.270 in your memo. Uh and I would move uh, to um move 00:04:00.278 --> 00:04:03.349 forward as you suggest in the memo. I would second. Okay. 00:04:03.360 --> 00:04:06.129 I have a motion and a second. All in favor, say aye. 00:04:06.618 --> 00:04:07.939 Aye. Motion passes. 00:04:11.069 --> 00:04:13.389 (item:1:Shelah Cisneros with Commission Counsel asks for motion to state specific language) Chairman? Yes. I'm gonna back up for just a moment on that 00:04:13.399 --> 00:04:17.699 motion. Um, it might be best to specify that the motion 00:04:17.709 --> 00:04:22.910 is to approve the proposed order consistent with the memo. I'd be happy to do so. I, I missed that. 00:04:22.920 --> 00:04:27.470 It's been a long week already. That's all right. That's why I'm here. So I, I would uh correct 00:04:27.480 --> 00:04:31.129 my motion. (item:1:Commissioner McAdams updates his motion to approve proposed order modified by memo) Um I would move to approve the proposed 00:04:31.139 --> 00:04:35.338 order as modified by your memo. I would second. I, I have a motion 00:04:35.350 --> 00:04:39.319 and a second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Motion passes. 00:04:43.420 --> 00:04:45.588 Next up is Item No. 2. Shelah, will you please 00:04:45.600 --> 00:04:48.048 lay out this Item? Yes. (item:2:Petition of the City of Fulshear appealing N. Fort Bend Water Authority to increase groundwater reduction plan & surface water fees) Item 2 is Docket No. 00:04:48.059 --> 00:04:52.259 53363. This is the petition of the City of Fulshear appealing 00:04:52.269 --> 00:04:56.149 the decision of North Fort Bend Water Authority. To 00:04:56.160 --> 00:04:59.160 increase groundwater reduction plan and surface water 00:04:59.170 --> 00:05:03.559 fees. Before you is a SOAH proposal for decision. Commission 00:05:03.569 --> 00:05:06.178 Staff in the City of Fulshear filed exceptions to the 00:05:06.189 --> 00:05:10.588 proposal for decision. The SOAH ALJ filed a memo declining 00:05:10.600 --> 00:05:13.858 to make changes to the proposal for decision. And Commissioner 00:05:13.869 --> 00:05:17.329 McAdams filed a memo in this docket. Commissioner McAdams, 00:05:17.338 --> 00:05:19.358 you filed a memo. Could you please lay out your memo? 00:05:19.369 --> 00:05:22.838 Thank you, Madam Chair. (item:2:Commissioner McAdams’ lays out his memo) Um as outlined in the memo, 00:05:22.850 --> 00:05:25.209 I believe that the Commission has the authority under 00:05:25.220 --> 00:05:30.410 Texas Water Code 13.043, Subsection F to address this 00:05:30.420 --> 00:05:33.309 appeal. The presence of the water service rates being 00:05:33.319 --> 00:05:36.519 charged to Fulshear is sufficient for this petition to 00:05:36.528 --> 00:05:41.540 be considered. Um really the application of the crystal 00:05:41.548 --> 00:05:45.720 clear standard was a novel approach. As uh as applied 00:05:45.730 --> 00:05:50.350 by, in by the ALJ. And um I believe the, the 00:05:50.358 --> 00:05:54.139 distinctive factor is whether rates were involved. 00:05:54.149 --> 00:05:56.059 (item:2:Motion to adopt & reject parts of decision and remand to SOAH consistent with memo) And so therefore, I would move that the Commission 00:05:56.069 --> 00:05:59.540 adopt in part and reject in part the proposal for decision. 00:05:59.548 --> 00:06:01.980 And remand the docket to SOAH for further processing 00:06:01.988 --> 00:06:04.910 consistent with any discussion we may have, but certainly 00:06:04.920 --> 00:06:08.369 my memo. I'm in agreement with Commissioner McAdams' 00:06:08.379 --> 00:06:10.850 memo and I would second his motion. Unless y'all have 00:06:10.858 --> 00:06:14.959 additional feedback. Okay. I have a motion to adopt the 00:06:14.970 --> 00:06:17.769 PFD in part and reject the PFD in part. Consistent with 00:06:17.778 --> 00:06:21.250 Commissioner McAdams memo and our discussion. Um we 00:06:21.259 --> 00:06:24.899 have a second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Motion passes. 00:06:27.338 --> 00:06:30.160 Next up is Item No. 3. Shelah, will you please 00:06:30.170 --> 00:06:33.259 lay out this Item? (item:3:Application of Aqua Texas for system improvement charges) Item No. 3 is Docket No. 00:06:33.269 --> 00:06:37.160 53428. This is the application of Aqua Texas for 00:06:37.170 --> 00:06:41.269 system improvement charges. Before you is proposed order 00:06:41.278 --> 00:06:44.119 that addresses the unanimous agreement between the parties. 00:06:44.220 --> 00:06:46.540 Commission Staff filed corrections to the proposed 00:06:46.548 --> 00:06:49.509 order. Aqua Texas filed exceptions and corrections 00:06:49.519 --> 00:06:53.720 to the proposed order. And the ALJ filed a memo revising 00:06:53.730 --> 00:06:56.649 the proposed order. Commission Counsel memo is filed 00:06:56.660 --> 00:06:59.759 recommending changes to the proposed order and Commissioner 00:06:59.769 --> 00:07:04.009 Jackson filed a memo. (item:3:Chairwoman Jackson lays out her memo) While Aqua Texas was diligent 00:07:04.019 --> 00:07:06.209 in ensuring that all of the tariffs were admitted as 00:07:06.220 --> 00:07:09.149 evidence. There was no single filing that included 00:07:09.160 --> 00:07:12.170 the most up to date proposed tariffs for all 6 regions 00:07:12.178 --> 00:07:15.009 that are subject to this proceeding. I filed a memo 00:07:15.019 --> 00:07:18.048 to clarify which tariffs are being approved. Uh do 00:07:18.059 --> 00:07:21.410 we have any additional thoughts on this one? (item:3:Commissioner McAdams makes motion to approve proposed order as modified by Chairwoman's memo) Once again 00:07:21.420 --> 00:07:23.608 Madam Chair, I agreed with your memo. And I would move 00:07:23.619 --> 00:07:26.660 to approve the proposed order as modified by your memo. 00:07:27.088 --> 00:07:31.139 Do I have a second? Second. I have a motion and a second. 00:07:31.149 --> 00:07:34.608 All in favor, say aye. Aye. Motion passes. (item:3:Shelah Cisneros with Commission Counsel asks for motion to state specific language) Commissioners, I'm 00:07:34.619 --> 00:07:37.500 sorry. I'm gonna jump in one more time. Um to ask if 00:07:37.509 --> 00:07:40.509 perhaps the motion was to approve the proposed order 00:07:40.519 --> 00:07:42.798 consistent with both the Commission Counsel memo and 00:07:42.809 --> 00:07:46.100 Chairman Jackson's memo? Yes, Commission Counsel. (item:3:Motion updated to approve proposed order modified by Chairman Jackson & Commission Counsel memos) I would modify my motion 00:07:46.358 --> 00:07:48.569 and move to approve the proposed order as modified 00:07:48.579 --> 00:07:52.480 by your memo and that of Commission Counsel memo. I have 00:07:52.488 --> 00:07:58.278 a motion. Second. And a second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Motion 00:07:58.290 --> 00:08:02.298 passes. Next up is Item No. 4. Shelah, will you 00:08:02.309 --> 00:08:05.170 please lay out this item? Yes. (item:4:Application of Oak Bend Homeowners Water Supply Corp. for authority to change rates) Item 4 is Docket 00:08:05.178 --> 00:08:09.189 No. 54153. This is the application of Oak Bend Homeowners 00:08:09.199 --> 00:08:13.048 Water Supply Corporation for authority to change rates. 00:08:13.059 --> 00:08:16.920 Before you is a proposed order. No corrections or exceptions 00:08:16.928 --> 00:08:19.309 were filed by the parties. A Commission Counsel memo 00:08:19.319 --> 00:08:22.319 was filed recommending changes to the order. Commissioner 00:08:22.350 --> 00:08:25.459 Glotfelty filed a memo in this docket. The Item was 00:08:25.470 --> 00:08:28.809 set for consideration at the August 24 Open Meeting. 00:08:28.819 --> 00:08:31.459 Commission Staff filed a motion to delay discussion 00:08:31.470 --> 00:08:34.320 of the Item at that meeting. And Staff followed up 00:08:34.330 --> 00:08:38.178 with a filing on September 20, September 20. Recommending 00:08:38.190 --> 00:08:40.820 the entry of an order consistent with Commissioner 00:08:41.200 --> 00:08:45.570 Glotfelty's memo. So Commissioner Glotfelty, you filed a memo? (item:4:Commissioner Glotfelty lays out his memo) I did. Uh, I 00:08:45.580 --> 00:08:49.580 filed it on August 23. Um just, uh some clarifications 00:08:49.590 --> 00:08:54.029 on uh um in, in the order. And I would request that 00:08:54.038 --> 00:08:58.029 we uh if there's no uh, discussion. Uh, approve 00:08:58.038 --> 00:09:00.538 the order consistent with the Commission Counsel memo 00:09:00.548 --> 00:09:03.979 and my memo from August 23. (item:4:Motion to approve proposed order consistent with Commissioner Glotfelty & Commission Counsel memos) That sounds like a motion, 00:09:03.989 --> 00:09:07.219 I would second. Okay. I have a motion uh, to modify 00:09:07.229 --> 00:09:09.558 the proposed order consistent with uh, Commission 00:09:09.570 --> 00:09:13.019 Counsel memo and Commissioner Glotfelty's memo. Do 00:09:13.029 --> 00:09:15.798 I have, and a second. All in favor, say aye. 00:09:15.808 --> 00:09:21.099 Aye. Motion passes. Items 5, 6 and 7 were Consented. 00:09:21.109 --> 00:09:24.080 Next up is Item No. 8. Shelah, will you please 00:09:24.090 --> 00:09:27.590 lay out this item? Yes, ma'am. (item:8:Application of Denton Municipal Electric to change rates for wholesale transmission service) Item No. 8 is 00:09:27.599 --> 00:09:31.710 Docket No. 52715. This is the application of Denton 00:09:31.719 --> 00:09:35.408 Municipal Electric to change rates for wholesale transmission 00:09:35.418 --> 00:09:39.219 service. Before you is a SOAH proposal for decision. 00:09:39.769 --> 00:09:44.349 Denton, Commission Staff, OPUC and TIEC filed exceptions to 00:09:44.359 --> 00:09:48.609 the proposal for decision. The SOAH ALJ's memo, the 00:09:48.960 --> 00:09:51.918 SOAH ALJ filed a memo revising the proposal for decision 00:09:52.700 --> 00:09:54.019 and it is before you now. 00:09:56.250 --> 00:09:57.389 Any thoughts on this one? 00:09:59.590 --> 00:10:01.279 What are you looking at me for? Well, I was wondering. 00:10:02.308 --> 00:10:05.869 (item:8:Commissioner McAdams' thoughts on the application) Okay. So, so the way I look at this um set the 00:10:05.879 --> 00:10:10.129 table. Uh I didn't intend to talk about this. But this 00:10:10.139 --> 00:10:13.808 is a case that has had a drawn out process um for 00:10:13.820 --> 00:10:17.798 over 2 years, I believe. Um and bottom line is, it 00:10:17.808 --> 00:10:21.389 represents a much needed rate reduction uh for these 00:10:21.399 --> 00:10:24.629 ratepayers. So uh in my view, we should adopt the 00:10:24.639 --> 00:10:28.000 PFD and direct OPDM to draft an order consistent with 00:10:28.009 --> 00:10:31.500 with that consideration. But I welcome any thoughts. 00:10:32.190 --> 00:10:34.690 (item:8:Commissioner Cobos' thoughts on the application) I'm in agreement as well. Um it's important that 00:10:34.700 --> 00:10:37.399 we start, you know, bringing these rates up to date. 00:10:37.558 --> 00:10:40.119 You know, there hasn't been a comprehensive rate case 00:10:40.129 --> 00:10:44.178 for Denton in about 18 years. They've been filing interim T costs 00:10:44.190 --> 00:10:46.700 for over the last 9 years. And so it's important 00:10:46.710 --> 00:10:51.009 we go ahead and set the T cost rates at this time. 00:10:51.129 --> 00:10:53.690 And get them to file an interim T cost filing shortly 00:10:53.700 --> 00:10:57.649 after. And so I'm in support of the ALJ's finding 00:10:57.658 --> 00:10:58.500 and their PFD. 00:11:00.450 --> 00:11:03.428 Jimmy, what are you doing? I'm fine. Okay, cool. Okay, if we have 00:11:03.440 --> 00:11:05.889 no further discussion. I would entertain the motion to 00:11:05.899 --> 00:11:09.960 adopt the PFD as modified. (item:8:Shelah Cisneros with Commission Counsel asks for motion to state specific language) May I just jump in with 00:11:09.969 --> 00:11:14.019 one procedural issue? Um currently the order is 00:11:14.029 --> 00:11:16.678 not, my understanding is the order does not have rates. 00:11:16.690 --> 00:11:20.548 However, um included in that. However, Staff filed 00:11:20.558 --> 00:11:23.399 a uh there was a number run that was filed by Commission 00:11:23.408 --> 00:11:27.609 Staff. Right. And so the motion might be to, to adopt the 00:11:27.619 --> 00:11:30.779 PFD as modified by the number run filed by Commission 00:11:30.788 --> 00:11:36.580 Staff. (item:8:Motion updated to adopt PFD modified by filed Commission Staff number run & OPDM draft order consistent with motion) So I would uh, move to adopt the PFD um as 00:11:36.590 --> 00:11:39.820 modified by the number run filed by Commission Staff. 00:11:40.058 --> 00:11:43.428 And direct OPDM to draft an order consistent with that 00:11:44.379 --> 00:11:45.928 uh with our consideration. 00:11:47.808 --> 00:11:52.058 Second. Okay. So I have a motion to, um to adopt the PFD 00:11:52.070 --> 00:11:54.840 is modified by the number run filed by Commission Staff. 00:11:54.989 --> 00:11:59.279 And would ask uh, OPDM to prepare an order consistent 00:11:59.288 --> 00:12:02.519 with this motion. And a second. All in favor, say aye. 00:12:02.529 --> 00:12:06.558 Aye. Motion passes. Next up is Item No. 9. Shelah, 00:12:06.570 --> 00:12:09.009 will you please lay out this item? Yes. (item:1:Complaint of McKamie Real Estate Services, LLC against Texas New Mexico Power Company) Item 9 is 00:12:09.019 --> 00:12:12.288 Docket No. 53195. This is the complaint of McKamie 00:12:12.500 --> 00:12:17.320 Real Estate Services, LLC against Texas New Mexico Power 00:12:17.330 --> 00:12:20.798 Company. Before you is the proposal for decision. No 00:12:20.808 --> 00:12:23.729 corrections or exceptions were filed by the parties. 00:12:23.739 --> 00:12:27.038 Commissioner Cobos filed a memo in the docket. 00:12:27.048 --> 00:12:31.808 Yes. (item:9:Commissioner Cobos lays out her memo) So the um ALJ in this proceeding is denying the 00:12:31.820 --> 00:12:37.000 complaint um basically, um just on its merits. And 00:12:37.009 --> 00:12:41.940 so I believe that it would be preferable to um, address 00:12:41.950 --> 00:12:46.009 it under failure to prosecute without prejudice. So 00:12:46.019 --> 00:12:49.158 that the pro se complainant will have an opportunity 00:12:49.168 --> 00:12:52.460 to refile a complaint in the future. Because as it 00:12:52.469 --> 00:12:55.168 as it stands right now. The pro se complainant would 00:12:55.178 --> 00:13:00.200 be unable, would not be able to file a complaint in the future, 00:13:00.210 --> 00:13:05.928 if the case is dismissed on, on its merits. I agree. (item:9:Motion to reject PFD & remand back to docket management for processing consistent with memo) And so I would 00:13:05.940 --> 00:13:10.210 um, then reject the PFD and remand um, the proceeding 00:13:10.219 --> 00:13:12.219 back to docket management for further processing to 00:13:12.229 --> 00:13:15.840 take into consideration this preference. Second. Um 00:13:15.849 --> 00:13:19.580 if that's a motion. Okay. So we have a motion to reject 00:13:19.590 --> 00:13:22.349 the proposal for decision and remand to docket management 00:13:22.359 --> 00:13:24.649 for further processing consistent with Commissioner 00:13:24.729 --> 00:13:28.710 Cobos' memo. Um and in a second. All in favor, say aye. 00:13:28.719 --> 00:13:33.259 Aye. Motion passes. Um next up is Item No. 10. Shelah, 00:13:33.269 --> 00:13:37.210 will you please lay at this Item. Yes, ma'am. (item:10:Application of SWEPCO for authority to reconcile fuel costs) Item 10 is Docket No. 00:13:37.229 --> 00:13:42.099 53931. This is the application of SWEPCO for authority 00:13:42.109 --> 00:13:45.798 to reconcile fuel costs. Before you are two Items. 00:13:45.918 --> 00:13:48.769 There is an unopposed agreement between certain parties 00:13:48.779 --> 00:13:52.719 and there is a SOAH proposal for decision. The parties 00:13:52.729 --> 00:13:56.349 to the agreement are: SWEPCO, Commission Staff, OPUC, TIEC and 00:13:56.359 --> 00:13:59.019 CARD. The parties that did not join the agreement but 00:13:59.029 --> 00:14:01.779 don't, do not oppose the agreement are: New Course Steel, 00:14:01.788 --> 00:14:04.479 North American Coal Corporation, East Texas Electric 00:14:04.489 --> 00:14:08.979 Co-op and Northeast Texas Co-op. Uh there was one contested 00:14:08.989 --> 00:14:11.658 issue that was not addressed in the agreement and that 00:14:11.668 --> 00:14:14.798 item is addressed in the SOAH proposal for decision. 00:14:16.279 --> 00:14:20.119 There's more. Commission Staff, CARD, East Texas Electric 00:14:20.129 --> 00:14:23.070 Co-op and Northeast Electric, Northeast Texas Electric 00:14:23.080 --> 00:14:26.340 Co-op and TIEC all filed exceptions to the proposal 00:14:26.349 --> 00:14:28.960 for decision. The Commission considered this docket 00:14:28.969 --> 00:14:31.609 at the August 24 Open Meeting. And the Commission 00:14:31.619 --> 00:14:35.058 requested additional testimony in support of the agreement 00:14:35.070 --> 00:14:38.408 or to address the agreements. The uh, additional testimony 00:14:38.418 --> 00:14:41.250 was filed in support of the agreement. And Commissioner 00:14:41.259 --> 00:14:43.119 McAdams filed a memo in this docket. 00:14:44.658 --> 00:14:46.668 Commissioner McAdams, you filed a memo? Could you 00:14:46.678 --> 00:14:51.729 please lay out your thoughts? (item:10:Commissioner McAdams lays out his memo) Yes, ma'am. Um I, I don't 00:14:51.739 --> 00:14:54.690 think it's a surprise to parties or anyone on the dais 00:14:54.700 --> 00:14:58.109 that I've made my feelings known. About um, the Pirkey 00:14:58.119 --> 00:15:01.558 Plant retirement in the past. Uh, I understand that 00:15:01.570 --> 00:15:04.529 the prudent standard is not a high bar. I believe my 00:15:04.538 --> 00:15:07.950 memo made that clear. But the lack of depth in the 00:15:07.960 --> 00:15:11.399 2020 analysis, uh especially when you're retiring a 00:15:11.408 --> 00:15:16.269 plant that is 12 years early. Um it, it simply did 00:15:16.279 --> 00:15:20.000 not sit well with me. Um, and then to not go back 00:15:20.009 --> 00:15:23.509 and reexamine the analysis in the wake of Winter Storm 00:15:23.519 --> 00:15:29.629 Uri. Is in my view both imprudent and some could say 00:15:29.639 --> 00:15:34.969 unconscionable. Uh it tells me that SWEPCO knew what 00:15:34.979 --> 00:15:37.529 outcome they wanted to achieve and may have nudged 00:15:37.538 --> 00:15:42.418 the analysis parameters to match that. Um it also appears 00:15:42.428 --> 00:15:45.649 uh as I have outlined a path forward in my memo that 00:15:45.658 --> 00:15:48.629 I favor. It appears that parties of the settlement 00:15:48.639 --> 00:15:52.210 clearly contemplated the possibility that this Commission 00:15:52.989 --> 00:15:57.570 uh would reject the prudency of retiring Pirkey. And 00:15:57.580 --> 00:16:00.840 that the settlement specifies conditions that stipulate 00:16:00.849 --> 00:16:04.259 the disallowance of caring costs for the Sabine Mine 00:16:05.070 --> 00:16:09.658 which I agree with. So I, I think I my memo speaks 00:16:09.668 --> 00:16:15.168 for itself. Again, we've had a long lead up of the considerations 00:16:15.178 --> 00:16:18.058 of the fact pattern associated with the decision here. 00:16:18.558 --> 00:16:23.119 Uh prudency is at its core. Granted a high standard 00:16:23.129 --> 00:16:26.428 does not exist in that consideration. But with the 00:16:26.440 --> 00:16:31.219 circumstances of the time of the analysis. Um I believe 00:16:31.229 --> 00:16:34.969 even that that low bar was not met. I'd welcome any 00:16:34.979 --> 00:16:35.399 thought? 00:16:38.168 --> 00:16:40.279 (item:10:Commissioner Cobos' thought on the memo) Commissioner McAdams I, I'm in agreement with your 00:16:40.288 --> 00:16:42.658 position. I spent a lot of time looking at the SOAH 00:16:43.048 --> 00:16:46.798 ALJ's conclusions and the evidentiary record. And you 00:16:46.808 --> 00:16:50.629 are correct the, um the standard that's applied with 00:16:50.639 --> 00:16:54.619 respect to prudency is low. Um it, it's um 00:16:54.798 --> 00:16:58.440 but at the same time as we look at the range of 00:16:58.450 --> 00:17:00.658 of options that a reasonable utility manager would 00:17:00.668 --> 00:17:03.349 would look at. We have we, we must sort of look at 00:17:03.359 --> 00:17:07.598 that in a way that is based on the evidence. And it 00:17:07.939 --> 00:17:10.949 the 2020 analysis contained, you know, just not a robust 00:17:10.959 --> 00:17:16.479 enough um spectrum of scenarios. And um you know, the 00:17:16.489 --> 00:17:18.809 sensitivity analysis only included one natural gas 00:17:18.818 --> 00:17:20.979 price. They didn't capture a lot of the SPP energy 00:17:20.989 --> 00:17:23.848 price differentials. And, and a lot of other factors 00:17:23.858 --> 00:17:28.000 that I think um SWEPCO in the past has included. Um with respect 00:17:28.009 --> 00:17:30.219 to Pirkey to justify environment, environmental controls 00:17:30.229 --> 00:17:34.608 in the past. Um in Docket No. 46449, as you highlighted. 00:17:35.489 --> 00:17:38.750 I, I think that the 2020 analysis was just not robust 00:17:38.759 --> 00:17:42.269 enough to justify the retirement of the plant. And 00:17:42.318 --> 00:17:45.259 a reasonable utility manager would have gone back and 00:17:45.269 --> 00:17:48.380 updated its analysis from 2020 given all the changed 00:17:48.390 --> 00:17:52.449 circumstances. Not only Winter Storm Uri but also um changes in 00:17:52.459 --> 00:17:56.239 capital cost, supply chain, commodity prices. And SPP. 00:17:56.250 --> 00:18:01.729 SPP conditions, market conditions. Um and um so uh generally 00:18:01.739 --> 00:18:03.949 speaking, you know, I'm just kind of pulling pieces 00:18:03.959 --> 00:18:06.430 from your memo. But a lot of the areas that you highlighted 00:18:06.439 --> 00:18:10.078 in your memo. I went back and, and took a close look 00:18:10.088 --> 00:18:13.689 um at, at the issues and the evidence and I come out 00:18:13.699 --> 00:18:14.920 where you stand right now. 00:18:16.719 --> 00:18:19.049 (item:10:Commissioner Glotfelty's thoughts on the memo) I, I would uh I fall in the same area. I, I 00:18:19.059 --> 00:18:22.068 don't think that the while SWEPCO says the economics 00:18:22.078 --> 00:18:24.118 was the driving force here. The depth of the economic 00:18:24.130 --> 00:18:27.769 analysis didn't seem to support that effort. Um the, 00:18:27.779 --> 00:18:31.608 the uh reevaluation is absolutely necessary in my opinion 00:18:31.618 --> 00:18:34.130 and they did not provide that. So, Commissioner McAdams 00:18:34.140 --> 00:18:38.160 I support your, the memo in totality. Um and believe 00:18:38.170 --> 00:18:43.380 that uh, uh it was imprudent not to uh reevaluate 00:18:43.390 --> 00:18:45.489 this plant and it was imprudent to close it. 00:18:47.199 --> 00:18:49.449 (item:10:Chairwoman Jackson's thoughts on the memo) I support your memo as well for all the reasons that 00:18:49.459 --> 00:18:52.019 have been stated up here. Uh we'd like to think that 00:18:52.029 --> 00:18:55.189 we make decisions on the best information available. 00:18:55.239 --> 00:18:57.559 And that when conditions change or more information 00:18:57.568 --> 00:19:00.259 becomes available. That we utilize that in our decision 00:19:00.269 --> 00:19:04.098 making process. And um overall, I always think about 00:19:04.108 --> 00:19:07.930 what is best for the consumer and what's best for the 00:19:07.939 --> 00:19:11.049 system in terms of reliability as a whole. So I very 00:19:11.059 --> 00:19:14.170 much endorse what you've laid out in your memo. Appreciate 00:19:14.180 --> 00:19:16.930 that Members. With that Madam Chair, uh If you would 00:19:16.939 --> 00:19:18.229 entertain a motion I have one. 00:19:20.338 --> 00:19:23.029 Yes. (item:10:Motion to approve agreement, grant good cause exceptions, direct Commission draft order and reject PFD consistent with memo) Uh Members, I would move to approve the unopposed agreement. 00:19:23.078 --> 00:19:25.868 Grant good cause exceptions and direct Commission 00:19:25.880 --> 00:19:28.469 advising to draft an order that incorporates both the 00:19:28.479 --> 00:19:32.309 rejection of the PFD and the unopposed agreement consistent 00:19:32.318 --> 00:19:36.400 with the discussion from the dais and my memo. Second. I 00:19:36.410 --> 00:19:39.469 have a motion and a second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. 00:19:39.479 --> 00:19:40.500 Motion passes. 00:19:42.469 --> 00:19:46.299 Items 11, 12 and 13 were Consented. Next up is Item 00:19:46.309 --> 00:19:49.209 No. 14. Shelah, will you please lay out this Item? 00:19:49.529 --> 00:19:53.769 Yes, ma'am. (item:14:South TX Electric Co-op to amend its CCN for the San Miguel-to-Cruce Double Circuit 345-kV transmission line) Item 14 is Docket No. 54936. This 00:19:53.779 --> 00:19:56.799 is the application of South Texas Electric Cooperative 00:19:56.809 --> 00:20:00.078 to amend it CCN for the San Miguel-to-Cruce Double 00:20:00.088 --> 00:20:04.299 Circuit 345-kV transmission line. Before you is a 00:20:04.309 --> 00:20:07.209 proposed order that addresses an unopposed agreement 00:20:07.219 --> 00:20:09.699 between some of the parties. Commission Staff did not 00:20:09.709 --> 00:20:11.828 join the agreement but does not oppose the agreement. 00:20:12.140 --> 00:20:14.689 The Commission considered this docket at the September 00:20:14.699 --> 00:20:18.170 14 Open Meeting. And the Commission requested filings 00:20:18.180 --> 00:20:21.670 from representatives of the U.S. Navy and the National 00:20:21.680 --> 00:20:25.318 Guard Bureau. Staff filed letters from the Navy and the National 00:20:25.328 --> 00:20:29.259 Guard Bureau on September 21. And Order No. 5 00:20:29.680 --> 00:20:32.920 was issued admitting the letters into evidence. Uh 00:20:32.930 --> 00:20:35.598 one note, one procedural note is that the proposed 00:20:35.608 --> 00:20:38.529 order has not yet been revised to reflect the admission 00:20:38.539 --> 00:20:43.059 of the supplemental evidence. So Commissioner McAdams 00:20:43.180 --> 00:20:46.150 you uh I just asked for previously some additional 00:20:46.160 --> 00:20:49.979 information as well as Commissioner Cobos. (item:14:Commissioner McAdams' thoughts on the application) Yeah, absolutely Madam 00:20:49.989 --> 00:20:52.209 Chair. I just sincerely appreciate the efforts made 00:20:52.219 --> 00:20:55.769 by the U.S. Department of the Navy and the National Guard 00:20:55.779 --> 00:20:59.229 Bureau in filing and, and of the ALJ admitting this 00:20:59.239 --> 00:21:03.430 into evidence. Um, welcome Commissioner Cobos' thoughts 00:21:03.439 --> 00:21:06.430 um but I, I think this would turned out into a positive 00:21:07.189 --> 00:21:10.150 for the project. Yes. (item:4:Commissioner Cobos' thoughts on the application) And, and thank you, Commissioner 00:21:10.160 --> 00:21:13.838 McAdams for um, your additional attention to this matter. 00:21:13.848 --> 00:21:15.719 I, I wanna thank the Navy and the National Guard Bureau 00:21:15.729 --> 00:21:18.118 as well. For submitting these letters and stack for 00:21:18.130 --> 00:21:20.479 working with these um, two federal entities. To make 00:21:20.489 --> 00:21:23.269 sure we get those letters in the record. (item:14:Motion to amend proposed order, incorporate addition of letters that approves agreed route) And I would 00:21:23.279 --> 00:21:26.559 move to, I guess, amend the proposed order to incorporate 00:21:26.568 --> 00:21:30.160 the addition of these letters, um that approves the 00:21:30.170 --> 00:21:30.979 agreed route. 00:21:32.828 --> 00:21:35.858 And I would second such a motion. I have a motion and 00:21:35.868 --> 00:21:40.160 a second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Motion passes. 00:21:42.150 --> 00:21:47.549 Items 15, 16, 17 and 18 were Consented. We will now 00:21:47.559 --> 00:21:52.180 transition to Section 2 of our Agenda for Rules, Projects, 00:21:52.189 --> 00:21:53.739 and Miscellaneous Items. 00:22:08.509 --> 00:22:11.029 (item:19:Chairwoman Jackson lays out instructions for Public Comment) Let's begin with Item No. 19. General comments for 00:22:11.039 --> 00:22:14.479 topics not specifically posted on this Agenda. Speakers 00:22:14.489 --> 00:22:17.529 will be limited to three minutes each. Shelah, do we 00:22:17.539 --> 00:22:20.459 have anyone from the public signed up to speak? (item:19:Shelah Cisneros confirms 1 person - David Carter has signed up for Public Comments) Yes 00:22:20.469 --> 00:22:22.489 ma'am. We have one person that has signed up for Item 00:22:22.500 --> 00:22:26.809 19. The person is David Carter. Okay, 00:22:38.019 --> 00:22:38.140 (silence) 00:22:54.559 --> 00:22:54.578 Thank you. 00:22:56.459 --> 00:22:56.500 (inaudible) 00:23:03.410 --> 00:23:04.199 Sit here? Yes sir. (inaudible) 00:23:06.979 --> 00:23:10.479 Mr. Carter, will you please state your name and organization 00:23:10.489 --> 00:23:15.818 for the record? Okay. Is this on? Yes sir. My, my I'm David 00:23:15.828 --> 00:23:21.098 Carter out of uh Temple, Bell County. Uh last uh July 00:23:21.108 --> 00:23:25.259 of 2022. I as a consumer of electricity I received 00:23:25.269 --> 00:23:28.150 and ERCOT notice that things were getting a little tight 00:23:28.160 --> 00:23:31.299 on the supply and demand and uh they asked us to conserve. 00:23:31.309 --> 00:23:35.049 My visceral reaction at the moment was please don't 00:23:35.059 --> 00:23:38.049 ask me to conserve. Please turn the, turn the knob 00:23:38.059 --> 00:23:41.430 up and generate more electricity. It's a fundamentally 00:23:41.439 --> 00:23:45.358 uh philosophical issue I have with, with that. Uh and 00:23:45.368 --> 00:23:49.078 so I, I printed off the uh the graph that was available 00:23:49.088 --> 00:23:51.680 that day. Showing that it really was getting tight on 00:23:51.689 --> 00:23:56.239 supply and demand. And so that was my uh initial interest 00:23:56.250 --> 00:24:00.189 in this matter. Subsequently last May, and the at 00:24:00.199 --> 00:24:02.769 the, towards the end of the Legislative Session. This 00:24:02.779 --> 00:24:05.469 uh hand out here, it's a four pager. That I, it's my 00:24:05.479 --> 00:24:09.640 notes from the testimony given before the House State 00:24:09.650 --> 00:24:15.229 Affairs Committee on SB 2627. Which proposed to set 00:24:15.239 --> 00:24:19.709 up a uh investment banking system by the, by the Texas 00:24:19.719 --> 00:24:23.769 Government. To fund additional electrical generating 00:24:23.779 --> 00:24:26.410 capacity. However and listening to the testimony. 00:24:26.420 --> 00:24:28.390 I'm, I'm not an expert in this. I just learned from 00:24:28.400 --> 00:24:32.449 going to these meetings. But the, uh the issue is uh 00:24:32.459 --> 00:24:34.959 there, there's base Load and intermediate Load plants. 00:24:34.969 --> 00:24:37.209 They run all the time and they generate electricity. 00:24:37.410 --> 00:24:40.000 And then there's the peak Load plants that come on 00:24:40.219 --> 00:24:42.489 uh during the, you know, the Winter and the Summer. 00:24:42.900 --> 00:24:48.539 And this, this Bill uh really excluded uh consideration 00:24:48.549 --> 00:24:52.759 of the peak Load plants. And it came out in the testimony 00:24:52.769 --> 00:24:56.660 that uh there was, there was a change of the Law in 00:24:56.670 --> 00:24:59.900 either 2008 or 2000. I, I don't know it's in the, in 00:24:59.910 --> 00:25:03.890 here. But they uh they changed the way, that ERCOT 00:25:03.900 --> 00:25:07.789 changed the way that utilities could charge customers. 00:25:07.799 --> 00:25:11.439 To cover the cost of the generating and these peak. 00:25:11.449 --> 00:25:15.959 They, they changed it so the peak Load, uh plants cost 00:25:15.969 --> 00:25:19.559 were no longer billable to the customers. And so I 00:25:19.568 --> 00:25:22.019 I'm bringing that to your attention. That I think that 00:25:22.029 --> 00:25:25.660 uh there needs to be some serious consideration. That 00:25:25.680 --> 00:25:29.969 uh we have adequate uh funding stream, a continuous 00:25:29.979 --> 00:25:32.199 funding stream for the peak Load plants that don't 00:25:32.309 --> 00:25:36.250 generate day by day typically. That, that's the my main 00:25:36.259 --> 00:25:40.170 reason for being here today. Okay. Thank you very much. 00:25:40.759 --> 00:25:43.930 So maybe I could work with uh with Will or with John 00:25:43.939 --> 00:25:47.279 Oliver uh later. Uh we could talk about this a little 00:25:47.289 --> 00:25:47.660 bit. 00:25:49.380 --> 00:25:52.640 (item:19:Commissioner Cobos welcoming Mr. Carter meet with them) Uh yes, sir. Your Chief of Staff. Yes sir. Um you're welcome to talk to any of us 00:25:52.650 --> 00:25:56.959 about this issue. Okay. Yeah, Mr. Carter. (item:19:Commissioner Glotfelty welcoming Mr. Carter to meet) We, we've been working on market 00:25:56.969 --> 00:25:59.420 design issues which of course this goes to the heart 00:25:59.430 --> 00:26:01.900 of for quite some time. So I know Staff is really involved 00:26:01.910 --> 00:26:04.358 in that. And uh I think any of us would be happy 00:26:04.368 --> 00:26:06.068 to meet with you too. If you could point me in the 00:26:06.078 --> 00:26:08.189 right direction, I'd be glad to hang around. Absolutely 00:26:08.239 --> 00:26:11.088 (item:19:Commissioner McAdams remarks on deregulation and changes in the Law) Yeah. Mr. Carter around that time. A couple of things happened 00:26:11.098 --> 00:26:14.618 in statute too. Uh a couple of the stranded cost, tariffs 00:26:14.630 --> 00:26:18.759 started rolling off from deregulation. Uh so I don't 00:26:18.769 --> 00:26:21.098 know if that's kind of what we're referring to. But 00:26:21.108 --> 00:26:24.140 I mean we can look into that, that change in Law. 00:26:24.150 --> 00:26:29.130 But um yeah. I, I just don't recall any type of uh 00:26:29.140 --> 00:26:33.088 substantive change that occurred, that affected 00:26:33.098 --> 00:26:37.489 peak pricing. Uh and especially that, that time period. 00:26:38.838 --> 00:26:40.588 Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. 00:26:43.959 --> 00:26:47.989 This completes Item No. 19. I don't have anything 00:26:48.000 --> 00:26:49.160 on Item 20. 00:26:50.989 --> 00:26:56.500 (item:21: Chairwoman Jackson lays out Project No. 54589) Next up is Item No. 21. Project No. 54589. This 00:26:56.509 --> 00:26:59.539 is the Commission's rulemaking regarding Chapter 26 00:26:59.549 --> 00:27:03.059 of the Texas Administrative Code. Substantive rules 00:27:03.068 --> 00:27:06.239 applicable to telecommunications service providers. 00:27:06.309 --> 00:27:08.670 Shelah, do we have anyone from the public signed up 00:27:08.680 --> 00:27:10.930 to speak on Item No. 21? (item:21:Shelah Cisneros with Commission Counsel confirms there are no Public Comments) No ma'am. 00:27:13.219 --> 00:27:16.049 We have David Smeltzer with the PUC Staff here. Um 00:27:16.059 --> 00:27:19.019 David do you, do you want to uh provide a brief overview 00:27:19.029 --> 00:27:23.390 of this proposal for publication? (item:21:David Smeltzer with PUC Staff on proposal for publication) I would, I would 00:27:23.400 --> 00:27:26.430 love to um during Session when the Sunset Commission 00:27:26.539 --> 00:27:30.029 directed us to start doing substantive comprehensive 00:27:30.039 --> 00:27:33.430 rule reviews. I was running around the building telling 00:27:33.439 --> 00:27:35.789 everyone that was impossible, but nothing's impossible 00:27:35.799 --> 00:27:38.219 when Mackenzie Arthur is on your Staff. And so before 00:27:38.229 --> 00:27:42.068 before you, you have only a few pages short of four 00:27:42.078 --> 00:27:46.088 of a 400 page PFP. That you know, modifies 20 or 30 00:27:46.098 --> 00:27:50.539 different um of our telecom rules. To make a number 00:27:50.549 --> 00:27:53.779 of changes. One it implements all three of the Bills 00:27:53.789 --> 00:27:57.039 that were telecom related from the Session. It implements 00:27:57.049 --> 00:28:01.150 a number of style conforming and clarity changes that 00:28:01.160 --> 00:28:04.279 were identified by Staff. And it incorporates a number 00:28:04.289 --> 00:28:09.009 of substantive edits from um stakeholders that filed 00:28:09.019 --> 00:28:11.739 comments in response to a preliminary notice that we 00:28:11.750 --> 00:28:14.309 filed. And uh I'm happy to answer questions if you 00:28:14.318 --> 00:28:17.029 have them. But going through, you know, iterating these 00:28:17.039 --> 00:28:20.348 in detail would be too numerous uh to do at this time. 00:28:20.568 --> 00:28:24.078 Uh so, uh I'm happy to answer any questions. Otherwise 00:28:24.088 --> 00:28:26.848 I would, you know, direct everyone to the filing. Um 00:28:26.858 --> 00:28:29.568 and the, the review materials that we provided. And 00:28:29.578 --> 00:28:32.469 so in addition to Mackenzie also, this is uh Kenneth 00:28:32.479 --> 00:28:34.699 Ford from uh Customer Protections first rulemaking. 00:28:34.709 --> 00:28:37.078 He's been here for decades and he made a lot of great 00:28:37.088 --> 00:28:40.509 contributions on, on his first rule. And um Steve Mendoza 00:28:40.519 --> 00:28:42.939 in rates helped a lot too. And it's, it's also worth 00:28:42.949 --> 00:28:45.709 noting that the work doesn't end now. Because poor uh 00:28:45.719 --> 00:28:48.180 Adrianna Gonzales over there and now has to take this 400 page 00:28:48.189 --> 00:28:51.019 document. And line by line, put it into Texas Register 00:28:51.029 --> 00:28:54.009 form. So uh labor of love by a couple of heroes over 00:28:54.019 --> 00:28:57.019 there. With an area of work that a lot of us don't 00:28:57.029 --> 00:28:59.390 focus on here which is telecom regulation. So I'm 00:28:59.400 --> 00:29:03.858 very proud of their efforts. And we would, uh we would 00:29:03.868 --> 00:29:06.670 hope that you would uh approve this for publication 00:29:06.709 --> 00:29:09.818 in the Texas register. Along with the notice of 00:29:09.828 --> 00:29:13.049 rulemaking, which was also filed. Which is just a box 00:29:13.059 --> 00:29:16.348 check. Because up until this point, we've just filed 00:29:16.358 --> 00:29:18.848 a preliminary notice. But we have to formally file 00:29:18.858 --> 00:29:21.969 an actual notice for it to go forward. Thank you. Does 00:29:21.979 --> 00:29:25.789 that need to be in the motion? Yes. Okay. Yeah so, so 00:29:25.799 --> 00:29:29.920 yeah so, uh hopefully we, we'd have a motion to approve 00:29:29.930 --> 00:29:34.439 um, uh the proposal for publication and the notice of intention 00:29:34.449 --> 00:29:36.920 to review rules in the Texas Register. 00:29:39.650 --> 00:29:42.479 (item:21:Chairwoman Jackson's thoughts on rulemaking) I did wanna point out, I mean, something that you did 00:29:42.489 --> 00:29:44.390 um in this rulemaking. And like you said, it was a 00:29:44.400 --> 00:29:47.529 very comprehensive work effort. But, you know, going 00:29:47.539 --> 00:29:50.338 out there at the onset. Which I think is something 00:29:50.348 --> 00:29:52.358 kind of different than the process that we've done 00:29:52.368 --> 00:29:55.509 in the past. To give uh the that opportunity to get 00:29:55.519 --> 00:29:58.939 stakeholder input at the very beginning. I think that 00:29:58.949 --> 00:30:01.338 was very good and then you were able to be responsive 00:30:01.358 --> 00:30:05.650 to that and incorporate that into the process. So I 00:30:05.660 --> 00:30:09.328 just wanted to call that out and, and um and thank 00:30:09.338 --> 00:30:11.848 you for, for doing that. Sure. (item:21:David Smeltzer's follow-up to Chairwoman Jackson) Yes. And this, 00:30:11.858 --> 00:30:14.549 this is the, this is roughly how we plan on doing all 00:30:14.559 --> 00:30:16.910 of our rule reviews going forward. So they're gonna 00:30:16.920 --> 00:30:20.078 be more substantive and a lot more uh meaningful. 00:30:23.500 --> 00:30:25.519 (item:21:Motion to approve PFP and notice of intention, review Chapter 26 for publication to Texas Register) I'm appreciative of the hard work that y'all put forth 00:30:25.529 --> 00:30:28.459 and not support the proposal for publication. And move 00:30:28.469 --> 00:30:34.180 that it be published. And that the what Shelah? Notice of 00:30:34.189 --> 00:30:37.259 Intention to review Chapter 26 for publication to the 00:30:37.269 --> 00:30:38.140 Texas Register. 00:30:40.689 --> 00:30:44.769 That too. So moved, so moved. Second. Okay. I have a motion and a second. All in favor, 00:30:44.779 --> 00:30:49.009 say aye. Aye. Motion passes. Uh I don't have anything on 00:30:49.019 --> 00:30:55.559 Items 22, 23 or 24. (item:25:Chairwoman Jackson lays out Project No. 53298) Next up is Item No. 25. Project 00:30:55.568 --> 00:30:59.568 No. 53298. The Commission's project on wholesale 00:30:59.578 --> 00:31:03.459 electric market design implementation. Specifically 00:31:03.469 --> 00:31:06.000 we'll be discussing the results of the second procurement 00:31:06.009 --> 00:31:09.809 of the reliability product farm fuel supply service. 00:31:09.818 --> 00:31:11.989 Shelah, do we have anyone from the public signed up 00:31:12.000 --> 00:31:17.519 to speak on Item No. 25. (item:25:Shelah Cisneros with Commission Counsel confirms there are no Public Comments) No, ma'am. Um Davida uh Dwyer with uh 00:31:17.660 --> 00:31:20.818 ERCOT is here. Uh Davida, if you come on up and um 00:31:20.828 --> 00:31:22.489 provide us an update. 00:31:25.588 --> 00:31:28.640 (item:25:Davida Dwyer with ERCOT provides results of 2nd procurement of firm fuel supply service) Davida Dwyer with ERCOT. Thank you, Chair and Commissioners 00:31:28.650 --> 00:31:30.880 We appreciate the opportunity to give you an update 00:31:30.890 --> 00:31:33.578 on the results of the second procurement of firm fuel 00:31:33.588 --> 00:31:38.000 supply service. We made a filing in Projects No. 00:31:38.009 --> 00:31:43.459 53298 and 52373. With this information additionally 00:31:43.469 --> 00:31:46.479 on the ERCOT.com website. We have a website specifically 00:31:46.489 --> 00:31:48.608 regarding firm fuel supply service that provides even 00:31:48.618 --> 00:31:51.880 more information for anybody that's interested. In summary 00:31:51.890 --> 00:31:55.049 during this procurement, we were able to procure 32 00:31:55.059 --> 00:31:57.848 generation resources. That will be providing firm fuel 00:31:57.858 --> 00:32:01.068 supply service during the next obligation period which 00:32:01.078 --> 00:32:06.959 is May 15-March 15. Uh 31 of the 32 resources 00:32:06.969 --> 00:32:10.759 offered fuel oil as the reserve fuel type. One offered 00:32:10.769 --> 00:32:14.180 stored natural gas. That raises the point that all of 00:32:14.189 --> 00:32:17.368 the resources that offered um cleared. All of those 00:32:17.380 --> 00:32:19.660 that were offered and were cleared qualified under 00:32:19.670 --> 00:32:23.209 the preexisting qualifications under Phase 1. Um 00:32:23.219 --> 00:32:26.809 the results included that we had approximately 13% 00:32:26.818 --> 00:32:30.239 more awarded capacity than the first obligation period. 00:32:30.588 --> 00:32:34.390 And under your guidance, we also had um the additional 00:32:34.400 --> 00:32:36.930 benefit of the cost of the procurement being approximately 00:32:36.939 --> 00:32:40.989 43% less. It cleared up the offer cap. So we're pleased 00:32:41.000 --> 00:32:43.890 with the results and optimistic for the next procurement 00:32:43.900 --> 00:32:46.930 next year. Um one point that I did want to make. Was 00:32:46.939 --> 00:32:50.098 that um some of the lessons learned that we incorporated 00:32:50.108 --> 00:32:54.588 in another um revision. Were to move forward the timing 00:32:54.598 --> 00:32:57.848 of testing in order to qualify to provide the service. 00:32:57.858 --> 00:33:00.539 And we think that may have factored into some resources 00:33:00.549 --> 00:33:03.858 not being able to qualify under the new um parameters 00:33:03.868 --> 00:33:07.959 for Phase 2. So can, can you restate that um time 00:33:07.969 --> 00:33:11.969 frame for the Phase 2 procurement, please? Sure. 00:33:11.979 --> 00:33:15.949 (item:25:Davida Dwyer on obligation period) Uh the obligation period is mid-November, November 00:33:15.959 --> 00:33:19.769 15 and it ends mid-March, March 15. Thank you. 00:33:21.348 --> 00:33:24.640 Thank you, Davida for all your hard work on this issue. 00:33:24.650 --> 00:33:28.809 (item:25:Commissioner Cobos' thoughts on development of phases) I this has been an important issue for, for me. Um since 00:33:28.818 --> 00:33:31.209 the development of Phase 1 and now Phase 2 of this 00:33:31.219 --> 00:33:35.598 product. And um I'm very pleased to hear that we were 00:33:35.608 --> 00:33:39.078 able to get more for less and um you know, we spent 00:33:39.088 --> 00:33:41.368 a lot of time really evaluating what we should do with 00:33:41.380 --> 00:33:44.578 Phase 2 over the last several months. And this is 00:33:44.588 --> 00:33:47.818 a great result again, more for less. And to put it 00:33:47.828 --> 00:33:50.939 in context, you know, the last time we deployed firm 00:33:50.949 --> 00:33:53.930 fuel was Winter, Winter Storm Elliott. And we only 00:33:53.939 --> 00:33:57.750 had to deploy 950 megawatts. And that's about, you 00:33:57.759 --> 00:34:00.598 know, about 30% of the overall procurement at the time 00:34:00.608 --> 00:34:05.699 was 2940 megawatts. So now we've got more and, and 00:34:05.709 --> 00:34:07.650 it's always good to have more. And I think over time 00:34:07.660 --> 00:34:12.550 we'll scale up to meet that 5000ish. Uh hopefully um Winter 00:34:12.659 --> 00:34:19.349 Storm Uri, 5 to 6000. Uh Winter Storm Uri max but this is, this 00:34:19.360 --> 00:34:23.728 is great news as we prepare on all fronts for the upcoming 00:34:23.739 --> 00:34:29.300 Winter. And um and have additional resources and also 00:34:29.309 --> 00:34:32.949 from a, you know, consumer cost stand point 0.43% less in 00:34:32.958 --> 00:34:33.519 cost. 00:34:35.090 --> 00:34:41.539 (item:25:Commissioner Glotfelty's thoughts on firm fuel) I, I would say uh I, I'm uh after our discussions 00:34:41.550 --> 00:34:46.070 and more discussions on firm fuel about the qualified 00:34:46.079 --> 00:34:49.978 pipeline definition. Which it's clear that they're not 00:34:49.989 --> 00:34:52.639 participating in this for some reason. I think in the 00:34:52.648 --> 00:34:57.039 future, you know, it deserves a little bit more discussion. 00:34:58.239 --> 00:35:00.458 To see if that becomes uh, 00:35:03.199 --> 00:35:07.329 there becomes a need for more resources in this. We 00:35:07.389 --> 00:35:11.219 aren't going to do that now. But I think the contracts 00:35:11.228 --> 00:35:14.369 that we have the amount that we have as Commissioner 00:35:14.378 --> 00:35:18.418 you said. More for less is good news for the consumers. 00:35:18.978 --> 00:35:21.530 But the fact is that we still have huge numbers of 00:35:21.539 --> 00:35:24.179 pipelines and storage facilities around the state. That 00:35:24.188 --> 00:35:27.668 could be providing more reliability for these generators. 00:35:27.679 --> 00:35:31.969 And I think amongst us and over the next year, we need 00:35:31.978 --> 00:35:35.139 to reevaluate that and look. And just see what we need 00:35:35.148 --> 00:35:37.978 and if there's a better qualified pipeline definition 00:35:37.989 --> 00:35:41.750 or, or whatever as we go forward so. (item:25:Commissioner McAdams' thoughts on the report) Yeah in, in 00:35:41.760 --> 00:35:46.070 in my view, Commissioners. This was a fascinating uh 00:35:47.059 --> 00:35:51.070 report on what, what we're trying to do is send regulatory 00:35:51.079 --> 00:35:54.378 market signals and this is now a market. So now we've 00:35:54.389 --> 00:35:57.329 had the first example of real, real world feedback 00:35:57.340 --> 00:36:00.369 uh coming to us. And it seems like the capabilities 00:36:00.378 --> 00:36:03.389 of our generators have expanded somewhat uh in terms 00:36:03.398 --> 00:36:06.309 of on site fuel. Um we didn't even know there was that 00:36:06.320 --> 00:36:08.760 much storage capability out there. So somebody may 00:36:08.769 --> 00:36:11.478 be installing. But ultimately, they're filling these 00:36:11.489 --> 00:36:13.699 things and bidding into the program under Phase 1 00:36:13.708 --> 00:36:16.679 conditions. And I, and to your point, Commissioner. 00:36:16.688 --> 00:36:20.489 I think a little bit of the lag and uh we, we 00:36:20.500 --> 00:36:22.809 had to take a little while to make a determination 00:36:22.820 --> 00:36:25.260 on Phase 2. So again, the market didn't know what 00:36:25.269 --> 00:36:28.760 exactly they were facing. Until right as the window 00:36:28.769 --> 00:36:32.550 was, was upon them uh for bidding. And so I think the 00:36:32.559 --> 00:36:35.820 more lead time they have, hopefully as Davida has alluded 00:36:35.829 --> 00:36:39.699 to. We have more bids on that firm transmission and 00:36:39.708 --> 00:36:43.780 uh storage uh side of it uh under the Phase 2 construct. 00:36:43.840 --> 00:36:46.679 So I think this is uh positive for a number of reasons. 00:36:46.688 --> 00:36:51.019 But um, I'll have to see the onsite uh capabilities. 00:36:51.030 --> 00:36:53.559 I mean that, that's good resiliency right there. For 00:36:53.699 --> 00:36:56.019 sure. (item:25:Commissioner Cobos' follow-up to fellow Commissioners thoughts) And, and to your point Commissioner Glotfelty. 00:36:56.590 --> 00:36:59.179 And, and following up on Commissioner McAdams. 00:36:59.559 --> 00:37:02.639 You know we've, we've sent a market signal and, and 00:37:02.760 --> 00:37:04.809 I think we made clear. Is that we set a standard, we 00:37:04.820 --> 00:37:07.619 want the industry and the market to rise to that standard. 00:37:07.800 --> 00:37:10.010 And perhaps is what Commissioner McAdams I think you're 00:37:10.019 --> 00:37:14.039 saying is that. You know, maybe over the next year 00:37:14.128 --> 00:37:18.398 the folks with the um, storage and pipeline. Can rise 00:37:18.409 --> 00:37:22.050 to that standard and get to where they can comply with 00:37:22.059 --> 00:37:25.369 our current existing framework. Because if over the 00:37:25.378 --> 00:37:27.978 course of the next year we change what we're doing. 00:37:27.989 --> 00:37:30.349 Then we're not, we're kind of moving the standard around. 00:37:30.360 --> 00:37:33.648 And so I think that it's important to see what we get. 00:37:33.659 --> 00:37:38.119 If we get um some of these um companies and, and 00:37:38.128 --> 00:37:42.168 um to, you know, work on perhaps renegotiating contracts. 00:37:42.179 --> 00:37:44.760 And, and dealing with regulatory bodies to rise to 00:37:44.769 --> 00:37:48.148 the standard. And, and I hope that now that they have 00:37:48.159 --> 00:37:51.389 you know, over a year to, to get there. That maybe 00:37:51.398 --> 00:37:54.320 they can get there. Um I, I would just be hesitant 00:37:54.329 --> 00:37:56.750 to keep moving the standard around. Because, you know 00:37:56.760 --> 00:38:00.260 to try to get more of the offline pipeline. Um I'd 00:38:00.269 --> 00:38:02.309 like to see if they can rise to the standard and give 00:38:02.320 --> 00:38:03.389 them some additional time. 00:38:05.789 --> 00:38:09.429 (item:25:Chairwoman Jackson's thoughts on continuous improvement) So I think a great example of um continuous improvement. 00:38:09.438 --> 00:38:13.168 And I think as you mentioned um you know this is, 00:38:13.179 --> 00:38:16.719 this is real time. This is um you know, success and 00:38:16.728 --> 00:38:20.099 action. And, you know, we talk about resiliency and 00:38:20.110 --> 00:38:24.340 what can we do um moving forward. And this is a, you 00:38:24.349 --> 00:38:28.750 know real life, real time example of resiliency in 00:38:28.760 --> 00:38:32.530 action. And um you know, a work effort that, you know 00:38:32.539 --> 00:38:37.320 has, has very much been um you know, at the forefront. 00:38:37.329 --> 00:38:40.559 Here at the Commission as well as in working with ERCOT. 00:38:40.659 --> 00:38:45.239 So, um I think it's a real success and um something 00:38:45.250 --> 00:38:48.760 that again is gonna be uh moving forward. Just an important 00:38:48.769 --> 00:38:50.019 tool in our toolbox. 00:38:51.659 --> 00:38:54.070 Thank you for your. Can I ask you one question? Uh 00:38:54.079 --> 00:38:57.449 do we, do you feel comfortable with where on the ERCOT 00:38:57.458 --> 00:39:02.119 system. These um uh facilities that have been, that 00:39:02.128 --> 00:39:04.000 have been procured through this? Are they spread out 00:39:04.010 --> 00:39:06.679 enough around the system where we give all regions 00:39:06.688 --> 00:39:09.389 around the state some assurance. That this uh farm fuel 00:39:09.398 --> 00:39:11.628 will help them in an emergency? Or how do you feel 00:39:11.639 --> 00:39:15.860 about North Texas? How does that look? (item:25:Davida Dwyer on locations of resources) We're comfortable 00:39:15.869 --> 00:39:19.659 with the locations of these resources. We believe that 00:39:19.688 --> 00:39:23.059 some of these resources are, are areas that experience 00:39:23.260 --> 00:39:26.579 um disruptions in fuel supply. And so we're, we're 00:39:26.590 --> 00:39:31.360 pleased that they are providing backup fuel. Okay. They 00:39:31.369 --> 00:39:35.510 are pleased. That's an important word. (item:25:Davida Dwyer gives thank you to Commission) I just wanted 00:39:35.519 --> 00:39:37.918 to close with. Thank you so much for your attention 00:39:37.929 --> 00:39:40.659 and guidance. We know that um you've really dedicated 00:39:40.668 --> 00:39:43.039 time to this. And it's, it's been integral to the efforts. 00:39:43.050 --> 00:39:44.918 So, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Davida. 00:39:46.659 --> 00:39:50.570 Thank you. Uh I don't have anything for Items 26 or 00:39:50.579 --> 00:39:57.750 27. (item:28:Chairwoman Jackson lays out Project No. 54584) Next up is Item No. 28. Project No. 54584. 00:39:57.829 --> 00:40:01.059 The reliability standard for the ERCOT market. At the 00:40:01.070 --> 00:40:04.550 Commission's last Open Meeting on September 14. We 00:40:04.559 --> 00:40:08.708 discussed the results of the first 24 of 48 initial modeling 00:40:08.719 --> 00:40:11.429 scenarios. Today, we'll be discussing the modeling 00:40:11.438 --> 00:40:15.228 results of the remainder and consider ERCOT recommendations 00:40:15.239 --> 00:40:18.250 for the next iteration. Uh Commissioner McAdams filed 00:40:18.260 --> 00:40:22.090 a memo. So let's discuss that following the public 00:40:22.099 --> 00:40:25.760 comment and ERCOT's presentation. So Shelah, do we have 00:40:25.769 --> 00:40:28.320 anyone from the public sign to speak on Item No. 00:40:28.329 --> 00:40:32.750 28? (item:28:Shelah Cisneros with Commission Counsel confirms there are no Public Comments) No, ma'am. Uh we do have Kristi Hobbs uh, with 00:40:32.869 --> 00:40:36.119 ERCOT here. Kristi, if you wanted to come on up and 00:40:36.128 --> 00:40:37.619 tell us about the results. 00:40:40.579 --> 00:40:42.869 All right. (item:28:Kristi Hobbs with ERCOT on modeling results) Good morning, Commissioners. Kristi Hobbs 00:40:42.878 --> 00:40:46.628 with ERCOT. Um, the team has been working very hard 00:40:46.639 --> 00:40:50.289 uh since the last filing. To continue to improve upon 00:40:50.500 --> 00:40:54.208 uh the scenarios and increase the amount of output 00:40:54.219 --> 00:40:56.708 that we have to share with you. So, since the last 00:40:56.719 --> 00:40:59.619 filing that we provided. Um you will notice and now 00:40:59.628 --> 00:41:03.648 instead of the 24 you have the complete 48 scenarios. 00:41:03.800 --> 00:41:06.478 Along with that we did add some additional fields. 00:41:06.489 --> 00:41:08.648 And so you have that information for both the original 00:41:08.659 --> 00:41:11.809 24 and 48. And just try to give you some additional 00:41:11.820 --> 00:41:15.110 information on annual cost. What the Summer and Winter 00:41:15.119 --> 00:41:19.139 reserve margins would be uh maximum duration and magnitude. 00:41:19.148 --> 00:41:22.280 So for the multitude of runs for the particular parameters. 00:41:22.429 --> 00:41:25.139 What did we see were those outliers of the maximum 00:41:25.148 --> 00:41:31.188 duration um and magnitude of impact. We also um based 00:41:31.199 --> 00:41:33.030 off of the questions. Thought it would be helpful to 00:41:33.039 --> 00:41:36.019 put in a table that showed you that the resource mix. 00:41:36.030 --> 00:41:39.349 And what changes were used and how those resource mixes 00:41:39.360 --> 00:41:43.750 were built. So you'll find that um in our filing. Based 00:41:43.760 --> 00:41:45.840 on the information we provided, we think it's important 00:41:45.849 --> 00:41:48.039 to continue iterating through. And so that's where 00:41:48.050 --> 00:41:51.070 we're gonna look for your feedback today. And we laid 00:41:51.079 --> 00:41:54.500 out some thoughts um just to start the discussion um 00:41:54.510 --> 00:41:57.510 but would like your feedback. (item:28:Kristi Hobbs on limiting frequency scenarios) So um the first thing 00:41:57.519 --> 00:42:02.039 that we recommended is to limit the frequency scenarios. 00:42:02.050 --> 00:42:05.840 And what we're seeing is, you know, the 1 and 5. 00:42:06.188 --> 00:42:09.570 Probably would not be bringing us the level of reliability 00:42:09.579 --> 00:42:11.829 that we think you're probably looking for, for the region. 00:42:11.929 --> 00:42:14.530 So let's take it to those 1 and 10, 1 and 15 00:42:14.539 --> 00:42:18.250 1 and 20. Um that would, you know, help with the modeling 00:42:18.260 --> 00:42:22.708 runs. (item:28:Kristi Hobbs on more aggressive coal retirement) We also suggested including a more aggressive 00:42:22.719 --> 00:42:26.039 coal retirement. Um and this was based off of some 00:42:26.050 --> 00:42:28.610 of the work that we've done. You've seen in our filings 00:42:28.619 --> 00:42:31.849 um for the EPA rules and regulations and what could 00:42:31.860 --> 00:42:35.389 happen to the system. Um this would give the opportunity 00:42:35.398 --> 00:42:38.679 to show what the impact would be. Uh if we had that 00:42:38.688 --> 00:42:41.398 level of retirement and what the cost of the system 00:42:41.409 --> 00:42:44.708 would be to maintain reliability. (item:28:Kristi Hobbs on adding a capacity mix) And then finally 00:42:44.719 --> 00:42:47.769 add a capacity mix. Uh this was based off of the discussion 00:42:48.059 --> 00:42:51.699 um from Chairman Jackson at the last Open Meeting. About 00:42:51.708 --> 00:42:54.619 looking at a mix that added in additional inverter 00:42:54.628 --> 00:42:59.449 based resources. (item:28:Kristi Hobbs on narrowing range of probabilities) The other item that we were looking 00:42:59.458 --> 00:43:03.659 to get some guidance from you on. Is um narrowing in 00:43:03.668 --> 00:43:07.050 the range of probabilities of exceedance. I do need 00:43:07.059 --> 00:43:10.030 to highlight, we did make an error in our filing of 00:43:10.039 --> 00:43:14.469 the memo. We did, we um aligned it to the weatherization 00:43:14.478 --> 00:43:18.804 standard. But instead it was at 97% but it's actually 00:43:18.813 --> 00:43:22.554 95 percentile. I think the thing that I would take 00:43:22.563 --> 00:43:25.175 away from that. Is I still would recommend we need to 00:43:25.184 --> 00:43:28.034 maybe look at narrowing those range of probabilities. 00:43:28.333 --> 00:43:31.465 And I think it's important to point out that this Commission 00:43:31.474 --> 00:43:35.023 has made decisions in the past. You know, looking depending 00:43:35.034 --> 00:43:39.844 on your risk, um averse the risk awareness. Um based 00:43:39.853 --> 00:43:43.074 off the cost. That you would be willing to take that 00:43:43.083 --> 00:43:45.534 into consideration with your policy decisions. 00:43:48.199 --> 00:43:52.519 So with that, um would welcome any feedback you have. 00:43:52.530 --> 00:43:56.099 On how we narrow this down to continue moving forward. 00:43:59.510 --> 00:44:02.239 You got a memo? I, I do. Uh would you like me 00:44:02.250 --> 00:44:06.250 tee that up? So could we first kind of talk about. (item:28:Chairwoman Jackson on deliverables to give to ERCOT) I 00:44:06.260 --> 00:44:07.860 guess there's some deliverables that we need to get 00:44:07.869 --> 00:44:11.889 back from uh ERCOT. And so, you know, specifically 00:44:11.898 --> 00:44:15.329 they'd like to kind of get our impact on our, our feedback 00:44:15.340 --> 00:44:22.329 on um the, the next iteration. And they had suggested 00:44:22.438 --> 00:44:25.199 three things that they wanted us to kind of focus on. 00:44:25.969 --> 00:44:29.119 Um and then secondly, kind of give them some feedback 00:44:29.128 --> 00:44:34.688 on the range of probability exceedance or the the potential 00:44:34.699 --> 00:44:37.409 of, of discounting, I guess anything that would have 00:44:37.418 --> 00:44:42.449 greater than 3%. Um Chris. So can we, can we start 00:44:42.458 --> 00:44:44.889 with, I guess the iterative process and just talk about 00:44:44.898 --> 00:44:49.398 that. (item:28:Commissioner Cobos on 8300 megawatts of coal and gas steam retirements) Um so as I understand it, that the next iteration 00:44:49.409 --> 00:44:52.300 would focus on three things as you laid out. Um the 00:44:52.309 --> 00:44:55.739 one I want to further discuss is the 8300 megawatts 00:44:55.750 --> 00:44:59.750 of coal and gas steam retirements. So I, I you know 00:44:59.760 --> 00:45:01.619 you're taking into consideration potential impact of 00:45:01.628 --> 00:45:04.389 the EPA regulations. But um I'm, I'm wondering how 00:45:04.398 --> 00:45:07.789 realistic this is. Given the fact that, um you know 00:45:08.780 --> 00:45:11.090 I mean, the facts are the facts. There's a lot of money 00:45:11.099 --> 00:45:14.059 in the market right now um tremendous amount. We've 00:45:14.070 --> 00:45:16.969 hit Cone. I don't know what Cone is exactly these days. 00:45:16.978 --> 00:45:19.780 But even if you said that it was higher than 105. 00:45:19.789 --> 00:45:22.989 I mean, we could be well on our way to justifying 00:45:24.010 --> 00:45:27.728 more than one ct of the cost of new entry. Even at 00:45:27.739 --> 00:45:30.800 a very much higher cone. So facts are facts. There's 00:45:30.809 --> 00:45:32.559 a lot of money in the market right now. Maybe there's 00:45:32.570 --> 00:45:35.500 not the regulatory certainty for investment. Exactly 00:45:35.510 --> 00:45:39.340 But there's a lot of money in the market. But secondarily 00:45:39.349 --> 00:45:44.418 um as um Pablo laid out to us, um ERCOT is embarking 00:45:44.429 --> 00:45:49.059 on a new strategy on RMR for capacity. So is it realistic 00:45:49.070 --> 00:45:52.739 to think that um with the amount of money in the market 00:45:52.750 --> 00:45:55.809 and ERCOT's potential strategy for RMR for capacity. That 00:45:55.820 --> 00:45:57.958 we're really going to have 8300 megawatts of coal and 00:45:57.969 --> 00:45:59.260 gas units leave the market? 00:46:00.949 --> 00:46:04.219 I don't. (item:28:Kristi Hobbs on cost to the market if coal & gas were replaced) So I think the reason we thought we would on RMR for capacity 00:46:04.228 --> 00:46:08.378 lay it out. Is just maybe not for being um you know 00:46:08.389 --> 00:46:12.989 don't disagree um with your commentary. Um but what 00:46:13.000 --> 00:46:15.688 would happen and what would be the cost to the market 00:46:15.909 --> 00:46:19.010 if we had to replace that? It was really the approach 00:46:19.019 --> 00:46:21.958 we were taking on that scenario. Kristi, would you 00:46:21.969 --> 00:46:25.208 agree. That if, if you have if you take that into account 00:46:25.219 --> 00:46:28.648 you have to take in 3 billion in state level investment 00:46:28.659 --> 00:46:32.570 that we're gonna make in 26, 27. Uh that's gonna bring 00:46:32.579 --> 00:46:36.570 on potentially 4 gigawatts of dispatchable power 00:46:36.579 --> 00:46:40.010 to some degree. So I mean, what's good for the goose 00:46:40.019 --> 00:46:42.070 is good for the gander. I mean, if you're going to 00:46:42.079 --> 00:46:46.570 imply EPA regulations are gonna shutter 8300 megawatts 00:46:46.579 --> 00:46:50.208 of coal, you have to take into account the absolute 00:46:50.219 --> 00:46:52.570 possibility of the voters will approve the money and 00:46:52.739 --> 00:46:54.469 we have state backed financing 00:46:56.050 --> 00:46:59.909 And, and can I say. (item:28:Commissioner Glotfelty on EPA regulations) Um one of the, one of 00:46:59.918 --> 00:47:03.000 the areas that I think is probably not totally accurate. 00:47:03.010 --> 00:47:07.699 Is some of EPA's regulations are more damaging to these 00:47:07.708 --> 00:47:13.320 coal plants than others. The emissions parameters can 00:47:13.329 --> 00:47:18.050 be met by reduced run times. And if that doesn't mean 00:47:18.059 --> 00:47:19.889 that they are pulled totally out of the system. But 00:47:19.898 --> 00:47:24.668 they are there in a, in a possibility of a backstop. 00:47:24.679 --> 00:47:30.074 Or a RMR for capacity type uh program. And so, so I, I 00:47:30.083 --> 00:47:32.813 question whether we should actually take them all out. 00:47:32.824 --> 00:47:37.514 I'm, I'm all for data. Uh if we run that, maybe we 00:47:37.523 --> 00:47:40.574 should see what it's like to add, you know, 25,000 00:47:40.583 --> 00:47:44.454 megawatts of batteries. And see where we go on both 00:47:44.465 --> 00:47:47.554 sides of this equation. But um I think we, we just 00:47:47.563 --> 00:47:54.688 need to be careful about um predicting um, uh predicting 00:47:54.699 --> 00:47:58.469 what the system is gonna look like. Um we can take 00:47:58.478 --> 00:48:01.750 educated guesses. But we've got to do, we've got to 00:48:01.760 --> 00:48:04.829 have these range of possibilities on both sides of 00:48:04.840 --> 00:48:07.719 this, this equation so. (item:28:Commissioner Cobos on retirements from EPA regulations) So what I'm hearing is not 00:48:07.728 --> 00:48:10.668 looking at this in a static manner, but in a dynamic 00:48:10.679 --> 00:48:14.378 market manner. And to your point, I want to sort of 00:48:14.389 --> 00:48:18.070 supplement that. My recollection from the Obama era 00:48:18.079 --> 00:48:21.389 EPA regulations that actually resulted in retirements. 00:48:21.489 --> 00:48:23.989 I mean, those retirements came fast. Right. There was 00:48:24.000 --> 00:48:27.280 business decisions made before even the. They were marginal anyway. It was during 00:48:27.289 --> 00:48:30.219 a low natural gas price environment, spark spreads were 00:48:30.228 --> 00:48:33.030 super low. Right. So they were, and that's not the 00:48:33.039 --> 00:48:37.148 case right now. And so, um yes, so good point that 00:48:37.159 --> 00:48:39.769 that's what we wanted. Uh I mean, we, we didn't want 00:48:39.780 --> 00:48:41.739 EPA shut them down, but we wanted the economics to 00:48:41.750 --> 00:48:44.530 play out there. There were business decisions made 00:48:44.539 --> 00:48:47.820 based on, you know, probably natural gas prices and 00:48:47.829 --> 00:48:50.478 where they were at the time and impending regulations. 00:48:51.239 --> 00:48:53.860 But today, you know, we haven't heard of any retirements. 00:48:53.869 --> 00:48:56.369 Because now it's the flip side, the spark spreads are 00:48:56.378 --> 00:48:58.688 really high. Gas prices and everything that Commissioner 00:48:58.699 --> 00:49:03.148 McAdams just noted. And, and so um it, it's a different 00:49:03.159 --> 00:49:06.369 sort of, I think environment that we're in right now. 00:49:06.378 --> 00:49:10.478 Than we were back in again back in, back in the you 00:49:10.489 --> 00:49:15.510 know, Obama era EPA regulation um approach. Versus 00:49:15.519 --> 00:49:18.949 where we are today in the market. And with these EPA 00:49:18.958 --> 00:49:23.079 you know, regulations coming our way. So I, I just 00:49:23.090 --> 00:49:25.628 wanna make sure that we're looking at this in a very 00:49:25.639 --> 00:49:29.449 real, you know, realistic dynamic manner to take in 00:49:29.458 --> 00:49:31.510 a lot of factors.(item:28:Commissioner Cobos on stress testing the market) Because we are building a reliability 00:49:31.519 --> 00:49:34.289 standard for the market. And, you know, we want to 00:49:34.300 --> 00:49:35.909 stress test it. And I think that's what you're trying 00:49:35.918 --> 00:49:39.590 to do to, to kind of show variation. But we're gonna 00:49:39.599 --> 00:49:42.728 stress test it. Less stress test it based on, you 00:49:42.739 --> 00:49:46.228 know, good factors that take into account all these 00:49:46.239 --> 00:49:48.860 different um impacts. Like the loan program and the 00:49:48.869 --> 00:49:52.550 money in the market and ERCOT's RMR for capacity strategy. 00:49:52.559 --> 00:49:55.648 And everything that is going on. Because otherwise we're 00:49:55.659 --> 00:49:58.760 gonna end up building a standard. That does not truly 00:49:58.769 --> 00:50:01.849 account for um the realities of the market. And we 00:50:01.860 --> 00:50:03.938 just spend a lot of time talking about dispatchable 00:50:03.949 --> 00:50:06.489 generation or at least maybe Commissioner McAdams did 00:50:06.500 --> 00:50:10.829 in a memo. (item:28:Commissioner Cobos on dispatchable generation) Um dispatchable generation and being good 00:50:10.840 --> 00:50:14.878 reasonable um utility managers. And looking at the entire 00:50:14.889 --> 00:50:18.188 environment when you plan for the future. So, so that's 00:50:18.199 --> 00:50:21.039 really my point. I, I would offer up a little bit of 00:50:21.050 --> 00:50:24.469 food for thought. Um this decision is gonna be hard 00:50:24.478 --> 00:50:27.179 okay? (item:28:Commissioner McAdams on reasonable reliability standard) It was always gonna be hard, it's gonna be hard 00:50:27.188 --> 00:50:29.878 in every system in the country. Uh because there's 00:50:29.889 --> 00:50:33.610 gonna be costs associated with whatever standard. Contingent 00:50:33.619 --> 00:50:36.780 upon reasonable assumptions that are used in the models. 00:50:37.289 --> 00:50:40.719 And ultimately I, I think what the modeling is showing 00:50:40.728 --> 00:50:43.978 now is that under a reasonable expectation again of 00:50:43.989 --> 00:50:47.750 3300 megawatts of dispatchable retirements. Which we 00:50:47.760 --> 00:50:51.119 have heard my gosh, we have delved into this so deeply 00:50:51.128 --> 00:50:54.260 over the last 2.5 years. That is a reasonable assumption 00:50:54.269 --> 00:50:57.550 on an economic basis. Of some of these units just not 00:50:57.559 --> 00:51:01.519 being able to operate anymore. Because of the their 00:51:01.530 --> 00:51:05.860 mechanical condition. And so that's a reasonable assumption 00:51:05.869 --> 00:51:08.909 to take out. And with that reasonable assumption, we 00:51:08.918 --> 00:51:12.099 are within striking distance of some type, some would 00:51:12.110 --> 00:51:15.519 say a reasonable reliability standard. That is more 00:51:15.530 --> 00:51:17.949 conservative than what we have today. That takes into 00:51:17.958 --> 00:51:20.949 account the frequency and the magnitude. And you compare 00:51:20.958 --> 00:51:24.539 that against what we could gather and feedback. To a 00:51:24.550 --> 00:51:29.099 2011 event um which everybody remembers and for context 00:51:29.110 --> 00:51:32.208 purposes. And then also compare that to what the ultimate 00:51:32.219 --> 00:51:34.878 magnitude of Winter Storm Uri was. Which everybody in 00:51:34.889 --> 00:51:38.739 the state recognizes that is unacceptable. (item:28:Commissioner McAdams on subtracting massive amounts of megawatts) Um but I 00:51:38.750 --> 00:51:41.898 fear that if we start subtracting massive amounts of 00:51:41.909 --> 00:51:45.360 megawatts out of the, the models. Due to hypothetical 00:51:45.369 --> 00:51:48.840 federal regulations which we are sure to litigate and 00:51:48.849 --> 00:51:51.300 go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Which will 00:51:51.309 --> 00:51:55.719 take some time. Um that I believe it will blow out the 00:51:55.728 --> 00:51:59.739 top of our models, unduly alarm the public, create a 00:51:59.750 --> 00:52:04.590 narrative um that certain uh alternatives are better. 00:52:04.599 --> 00:52:09.199 And I won't see the say the, the words but um everybody 00:52:09.208 --> 00:52:13.110 in this room is thinking it. And uh and then we're, 00:52:13.119 --> 00:52:16.090 we're left with nothing. So I, I would advise simpler 00:52:16.099 --> 00:52:20.648 is better. Um provide focus to ERCOT, clear the field 00:52:20.659 --> 00:52:23.969 of the massively hypothetical scenarios. And then just 00:52:23.978 --> 00:52:26.889 look at what we have and the range fan. 00:52:29.869 --> 00:52:32.849 I don't know it's just my thought. (item:28:Kristi Hobbs with ERCOT on feedback from Commission) So I appreciate the feedback. I think, um 00:52:32.909 --> 00:52:35.329 it's always easier to red line than it is to come up 00:52:35.340 --> 00:52:37.628 with a clean slate. So we wanted to put some options 00:52:37.639 --> 00:52:41.090 out there. Thank you Kristi. And, and I know the team um will be glad 00:52:41.099 --> 00:52:43.389 that they will have less sort of scenarios to run. If 00:52:43.398 --> 00:52:46.688 we take one of those out. Um can, can I say. Um 00:52:46.699 --> 00:52:50.659 I, I'm a little. (item:28:Commissioner Glotfelty on taking out the 1 and 5) I'm opposed to taking out the 1 00:52:50.668 --> 00:52:53.378 and 5. We may not get a whole lot of data on 00:52:53.389 --> 00:52:59.789 that. But um, the um you wanna see how lean and mean 00:52:59.800 --> 00:53:02.739 we can run? No I, I just think it's another data point. 00:53:02.750 --> 00:53:06.438 I mean no, nobody has proven to me in my 35 years 00:53:06.449 --> 00:53:09.320 in this industry that 1 and 10 is the best and the 00:53:09.329 --> 00:53:12.449 only. Will, you're doing that. Lori, you're doing that. 00:53:12.458 --> 00:53:15.148 in these other markets where that's being questioned. 00:53:15.159 --> 00:53:18.668 1 and 10 is not a panacea for outages. We saw the FERC/NERC 00:53:19.039 --> 00:53:23.309 report that said that 40 something percent of the thermal 00:53:23.320 --> 00:53:29.179 outages in, in the Northeast last year. Were, you know 00:53:29.188 --> 00:53:31.648 they were in capacity markets. I mean, that's 00:53:31.659 --> 00:53:34.530 it's just another data point. And I would say it doesn't 00:53:34.898 --> 00:53:39.110 hurt to include that as a data point. So I would just 00:53:39.119 --> 00:53:41.148 I would hope that we could just keep that in there. 00:53:41.360 --> 00:53:46.728 Um I'm not, I mean I don't know in this future world. 00:53:46.739 --> 00:53:50.309 Where people have power walls and generac at their house. 00:53:50.320 --> 00:53:54.110 That 1 and 5 you know, for an hour or two each. 00:53:54.119 --> 00:53:58.579 5 years is not a bad rate for outages versus 1 00:53:58.590 --> 00:54:00.929 and 10 or1 and 15 and 1 and 20. Which are 00:54:00.938 --> 00:54:07.099 all electric utility concepts. So I, I just I feel 00:54:07.110 --> 00:54:09.639 like uh, we ought to include it. And if it's not that 00:54:09.679 --> 00:54:12.978 much of a hassle uh, to keep it in there. And, uh 00:54:14.039 --> 00:54:16.369 anyway that's my thought on, on that on the first 00:54:16.378 --> 00:54:18.789 bullet. Um 00:54:20.579 --> 00:54:24.378 so we kind of are we coalesced around not doing the 00:54:24.389 --> 00:54:31.059 coal exclusion. So Kristi, um it was coal and gas, 00:54:31.148 --> 00:54:35.539 gas together. So um and, and you specifically asked 00:54:35.550 --> 00:54:39.239 for 8300 megawatts. So can you just, you know, kind 00:54:39.250 --> 00:54:45.500 of give us ERCOT's thought. On why you made this proposal? 00:54:45.510 --> 00:54:47.469 I mean, what was your thinking behind this? Sure. 00:54:47.478 --> 00:54:50.369 (item:28:Kristi Hobbs on 8300 megawatts proposal) Was just to give you another set of data points. Looking 00:54:50.378 --> 00:54:53.128 at um some things, some topics that we have been talking 00:54:53.139 --> 00:54:56.398 about, right? This was um information that we provided 00:54:56.409 --> 00:54:59.820 in, in Woody's testimony. On our feedback on several 00:54:59.829 --> 00:55:02.059 of the EPA rules. And so that was the number that we 00:55:02.070 --> 00:55:05.809 picked, um the reason for picking it. So again, as 00:55:05.820 --> 00:55:09.500 I, I noted earlier. If you would like to disregard 00:55:09.510 --> 00:55:12.579 that recommendation uh I, I'm not opposed to that 00:55:12.590 --> 00:55:14.579 either. I just wanted to tee it up for a discussion. 00:55:14.780 --> 00:55:17.789 (item:28:Chairwoman Jackson on gaining specifics on the 8300 proposal) So again, just to be clear, are you proposing that 00:55:17.800 --> 00:55:23.119 you would do um kind of like a series of runs. That 00:55:23.128 --> 00:55:28.168 would not include this. And then do kind of like a flex 00:55:28.179 --> 00:55:32.639 case, including the 8300? So that you would have both 00:55:32.648 --> 00:55:35.969 scenarios? Or were you initially just thinking to um 00:55:37.159 --> 00:55:43.199 to, to reduce the um the availability by 8300? (item:28:Kristi Hobbs providing specifics on 8300 megawatts proposal) So if 00:55:43.208 --> 00:55:45.688 you look at um the set of runs that we have now 00:55:45.699 --> 00:55:48.969 and the different um you know, the levers that we could 00:55:48.978 --> 00:55:52.168 pull. Um we would just, you know. For example, we had 00:55:52.179 --> 00:55:55.179 um the set of frequency duration and magnitudes. Where 00:55:55.188 --> 00:55:59.655 we had a capacity mix. Where we had just 100% CTS um 00:55:59.664 --> 00:56:02.635 added to the mix. We had one where it was a CDR 00:56:02.644 --> 00:56:06.394 mix. We had one where we had 900 megawatts retired. 00:56:06.454 --> 00:56:09.784 We had uh scenarios where we had 3300. This would be 00:56:09.793 --> 00:56:12.954 just like those, but we would add a scenario. Where 00:56:12.965 --> 00:56:16.753 we kept that frequency duration magnitude. Um the capacity 00:56:16.764 --> 00:56:19.485 mix is the same, but we would change the level of megawatts 00:56:19.494 --> 00:56:23.083 that were retired, we would increase that. So it just 00:56:23.094 --> 00:56:26.889 gives you some additional information potentially to 00:56:27.128 --> 00:56:30.590 consider. (item:28:Commissioner McAdams on gaining clarity) It, it would but it's, it's a uh in my 00:56:30.599 --> 00:56:34.110 opinion, outlandish expectation. Similar to potential 00:56:34.119 --> 00:56:36.340 outlandish expectations that have been incorporated 00:56:36.349 --> 00:56:39.320 into saras of the past. Again, we're trying to get 00:56:39.329 --> 00:56:42.139 away from that. We're trying to get more granular and 00:56:42.148 --> 00:56:46.360 accurate on our data inputs. Uh and, and not cloud 00:56:46.369 --> 00:56:50.510 the issue. I mean clarity on this, in this proceeding 00:56:50.519 --> 00:56:53.110 is, is gonna be critical to the ultimate decision. 00:56:53.119 --> 00:56:56.708 But I, I would vote to exclude it. (item:28:Commissioner Cobos on outlandish scenarios) Yeah. I,I 00:56:56.719 --> 00:56:59.829 would too. Um we don't want to include outlandish 00:56:59.840 --> 00:57:04.668 scenarios that are not reality. Um 3300 is the max 00:57:04.679 --> 00:57:09.079 so far besides 83. I mean, you know, that's probably 00:57:09.090 --> 00:57:11.398 more reasonable to expect. I mean, it could maybe be 00:57:11.409 --> 00:57:13.099 a little higher, it could be less. Again, you have 00:57:13.110 --> 00:57:16.889 to take into consideration all the dynamic um sort 00:57:16.898 --> 00:57:20.648 of evolutions of the market. And, and I think that 00:57:20.659 --> 00:57:24.059 8300 is an extreme scenario. And I don't think it does 00:57:24.070 --> 00:57:26.639 any good to be planning for an extreme scenario that 00:57:26.648 --> 00:57:30.199 doesn't seem to be coming to fruition. Given market 00:57:30.208 --> 00:57:34.349 dynamics, but also ERCOT actions and Legislative action. 00:57:34.719 --> 00:57:37.719 (item:28:Commissioner McAdams on outlandish scenarios) Yeah and, and even then the state will take steps 00:57:37.728 --> 00:57:40.760 to ensure that this doesn't happen. I mean, we will 00:57:40.769 --> 00:57:44.320 we, we are not there are legal remedies here. There 00:57:44.329 --> 00:57:48.039 are market driven uh remedies uh to keep these in the 00:57:48.050 --> 00:57:52.590 system. So um we, we argued about this in the market 00:57:52.599 --> 00:57:55.219 design debate. And I said, I said to this ain't gonna 00:57:55.228 --> 00:57:58.199 happen. Um there's no way the Public Utility Commission 00:57:58.208 --> 00:58:03.469 of Texas is going to allow this to happen. Um and so 00:58:03.478 --> 00:58:05.559 no, I not accurate. 00:58:07.329 --> 00:58:10.539 So what's in the base right now is 3300. Okay. 00:58:15.119 --> 00:58:18.099 (item:28:Kristi Hobbs recaps feedback from Commission) So I guess maybe to summarize what I've heard. Um I've 00:58:18.110 --> 00:58:20.708 heard a request to go ahead and keep the 1 and 5 00:58:20.719 --> 00:58:21.039 in. 00:58:23.168 --> 00:58:28.418 To disregard the additional scenarios with removing 00:58:28.429 --> 00:58:32.989 the 8300 megawatts. So that leaves us with um just 00:58:33.000 --> 00:58:36.500 adding additional capacity mix as was discussed at 00:58:36.510 --> 00:58:39.398 the last Open Meeting. For the additional inverter based 00:58:39.409 --> 00:58:40.809 resources into the mix. 00:58:43.309 --> 00:58:46.418 I think that's accurate in my view. What, what do you 00:58:46.429 --> 00:58:51.188 mean a frequency target? Meaning the, the loss of loaded 00:58:51.199 --> 00:58:52.360 event target. 00:58:54.389 --> 00:58:57.719 So add a capacity mix to achieve a frequency target. 00:58:57.829 --> 00:59:01.438 Oh, I'm sorry. You're, you're doing frequency duration. 00:59:01.449 --> 00:59:06.250 Magnitude frequency, not system frequency. So I would 00:59:06.260 --> 00:59:08.869 say that when you put out this information. I'm, I'm 00:59:08.878 --> 00:59:11.199 you know, as an additional data point of 1 and 5. 00:59:11.208 --> 00:59:12.969 I'm, I'm good with that. Commissioner Glotfelty. (item:28:Commissioner Cobos on additional data point) Would 00:59:12.978 --> 00:59:14.780 like to see that as an additional data point. But I 00:59:14.789 --> 00:59:19.280 I do want to stress that it's not a standard that we 00:59:19.289 --> 00:59:22.860 would want to live under. I mean, the public expects 00:59:22.869 --> 00:59:25.708 more than would not want us to be in a 1 and 00:59:25.719 --> 00:59:30.329 5 year scenario, right? Um so I mean, that's not 00:59:30.340 --> 00:59:32.019 what we're driving towards. It's just an additional 00:59:32.030 --> 00:59:37.369 data point. (item:28:Commissioner Glotfelty on a 1 and 5 standard) I, I mean I, I'm not uh I don't know 00:59:37.378 --> 00:59:39.469 that we're not going to get to a 1 and 5, you 00:59:39.478 --> 00:59:42.309 know, anyway. I, I don't know, this says that 1 and 00:59:42.320 --> 00:59:47.500 5 standard, uh we have a 10% reserve margin. Um and under 00:59:47.510 --> 00:59:49.918 the existing runs. Um I don't know if that's right 00:59:49.929 --> 00:59:55.530 or wrong. Um But uh I don't know, I mean, the, the 00:59:55.539 --> 00:59:59.188 system is changing and we're not solving for one major 00:59:59.199 --> 01:00:01.679 generator leaving the system or two major generators 01:00:01.688 --> 01:00:04.728 leaving the system. The system is, is changing in that 01:00:04.739 --> 01:00:09.000 regard. And that's why um I mean I'm, I'm I, I 01:00:09.010 --> 01:00:10.860 think we're, uh. 01:00:12.590 --> 01:00:15.329 I think 1 and 5 is a valuable data point. And, and 01:00:15.340 --> 01:00:18.398 I think not to put words in your mouth. (item:28:Commissioner McAdams on scenario outputs & costs) But your point is 01:00:18.619 --> 01:00:22.360 depending on the outputs uh that those scenarios produce. 01:00:22.369 --> 01:00:27.688 It may be a really small, uh I mean event. Um I'm 01:00:27.699 --> 01:00:32.280 talking about like I, I in terms of duration, magnitude 01:00:32.289 --> 01:00:35.019 everything else. I mean, so depending on the costs 01:00:35.030 --> 01:00:37.760 I guess that's what he's saying is on a cost basis 01:00:37.769 --> 01:00:40.090 compare that. What are you buying? And what are you 01:00:40.099 --> 01:00:43.019 getting? All right. Well I, I guess what I'm saying 01:00:43.030 --> 01:00:45.469 is I, I'm fine leave it in there. I know what 01:00:45.478 --> 01:00:48.059 you're trying to do. But I, I don't know if we have 01:00:48.398 --> 01:00:52.000 an event now and, or in five years that that's gonna 01:00:52.010 --> 01:00:53.958 be palatable to anybody in the public, whether it's 01:00:53.969 --> 01:00:54.389 shorter. No I get it. Is that what you were referring too? 01:00:56.510 --> 01:00:58.648 That's my only point. (item:28:Chairwoman Jackson's thoughts on how runs give relative sense of impact) And I think the value too is 01:00:58.659 --> 01:01:01.478 that part of what you're using these runs for, is to 01:01:01.489 --> 01:01:06.168 get a relative sense of the impact, right? And so to 01:01:06.179 --> 01:01:09.059 your point, it's maybe not necessarily, you know, that 01:01:09.070 --> 01:01:12.168 we're looking at the 1 and 5. As so much as we 01:01:12.179 --> 01:01:14.300 you know to your point, we want to get that relative 01:01:14.309 --> 01:01:16.878 impact. And then use that in the, in the decision making. 01:01:16.889 --> 01:01:20.320 (item:28:Commissioner Glotfelty on other outlying opportunities) Also, if this is tied at some point in time to adding 01:01:20.329 --> 01:01:24.099 capacity to the system. We can't have my view, we can't 01:01:24.110 --> 01:01:27.750 have the starting point be this national standard. 01:01:27.760 --> 01:01:32.019 We have to have it book ended by other uh outlying 01:01:32.030 --> 01:01:35.800 uh uh opportunity. So 1 and 15, 1 and 20, and 1 and 5 01:01:35.809 --> 01:01:39.300 outline that 1 and 10. So it gives us data on both 01:01:39.309 --> 01:01:41.789 sides of that. A looser and a more stringent standard 01:01:41.800 --> 01:01:44.570 to bookend. And the ability to answer that question 01:01:44.579 --> 01:01:46.539 because it obviously is gonna come up. Yeah. Yeah. 01:01:48.550 --> 01:01:51.840 All right. So we have the, um I guess the deliverable 01:01:51.849 --> 01:01:57.849 back to ERCOT on um the, the next iteration of. Except 01:01:57.860 --> 01:02:01.719 we need to talk about um the probability exceedance 01:02:01.769 --> 01:02:03.179 which is next. Yes. 01:02:04.909 --> 01:02:10.300 So, and so your proposal had been um to eliminate scenarios 01:02:10.309 --> 01:02:16.059 with a probability of exceedance greater than 3%. So 01:02:16.070 --> 01:02:19.610 so Kristi. So um there, there were a couple of these 01:02:19.619 --> 01:02:26.688 things that clearly overshot uh 6% um in my view. Absolutely. 01:02:26.699 --> 01:02:30.438 (item:28:Commissioner McAdams on probability of exceedance) Thank you for clarifying the 3% versus 5%. Because 01:02:30.458 --> 01:02:33.789 you know, I was having PTSD on the weatherization thing. 01:02:33.800 --> 01:02:35.679 And I was like, I thought that was 95th and we, we 01:02:35.688 --> 01:02:38.878 compared that. And then we came to the conclusion that 01:02:38.889 --> 01:02:41.360 you uh ERCOT Staff had done political analysis and 01:02:41.369 --> 01:02:45.250 said that might be a little too loose um for, for 01:02:45.260 --> 01:02:50.860 us to consider. Um, 3% is certainly more stringent 01:02:51.719 --> 01:02:55.769 Uh again, I think in the ranges that we're seeing 01:02:55.849 --> 01:02:59.860 at 3300. We're still within striking distance of accomplishing 01:02:59.869 --> 01:03:03.918 our mission. With the uh, with the panacea of tools 01:03:03.929 --> 01:03:06.469 that the Legislature has given us and the Governor 01:03:06.478 --> 01:03:10.059 has signed in the Law uh, potential funding capabilities. 01:03:10.510 --> 01:03:16.179 Um, we're almost there. So I don't necessarily see great 01:03:16.188 --> 01:03:21.909 harm in eliminating 5%. But I did want to try to, I'm 01:03:21.918 --> 01:03:26.628 I'm trying to uh conform all these policies to a uniform 01:03:26.639 --> 01:03:30.139 standard. Uh I was trying to get within the ballpark 01:03:30.148 --> 01:03:33.949 of the same exceedance probability that we were looking 01:03:33.958 --> 01:03:36.438 at. Because that, that informs our risk tolerance. So 01:03:36.449 --> 01:03:39.760 what do you think? Well um I mean, how would you compare 01:03:39.769 --> 01:03:42.329 a weatherization management of risk tolerance with 01:03:42.340 --> 01:03:44.559 what we're thinking about here. Which is the overall 01:03:44.570 --> 01:03:48.239 system, right? It's not just kind of one area. By facility 01:03:48.250 --> 01:03:51.809 or region by region. Exactly. Yeah, that's a good point. 01:03:55.478 --> 01:03:58.289 Well I mean, bottom line is I'm good with 3%. Now 01:03:58.300 --> 01:04:03.769 the question is the 5%. Um But um what do you guys 01:04:03.780 --> 01:04:04.000 think? 01:04:06.418 --> 01:04:06.929 (silence) 01:04:08.829 --> 01:04:10.918 Kristi, can you lay that out a little bit more? So 01:04:10.929 --> 01:04:14.199 I could better understand. Sure. (item:28:Kristi Hobbs on probability of exceedance) So, um if you look 01:04:14.208 --> 01:04:16.369 at uh the tables that we provide and you've got the 01:04:16.378 --> 01:04:20.208 the probability of exceedance. So for example, um I'm 01:04:20.219 --> 01:04:22.769 just gonna pick a scenario and walk you through it. 01:04:23.090 --> 01:04:26.239 It's probably. I think the 1 and 10 if you could just so we know. 01:04:26.340 --> 01:04:26.938 All right. 01:04:28.550 --> 01:04:31.269 So I'm gonna look at, if you've got it printed out 01:04:31.280 --> 01:04:34.389 on Row 18. Uh, actually I'm gonna go to, I'm gonna 01:04:34.398 --> 01:04:37.958 go to a CDR Row 26. You've got a 1 and 01:04:37.969 --> 01:04:42.708 10 frequency event. Um, you've got a duration of 10 01:04:42.750 --> 01:04:45.989 hours in a magnitude of 10,000 megawatts. And that one's 01:04:46.000 --> 01:04:49.929 using the CDR mix. And with that, the probability 01:04:50.519 --> 01:04:55.010 that we would exceed the duration of the event. Which 01:04:55.019 --> 01:04:59.760 is 10 hours is 1.8%. And then the probability that 01:04:59.769 --> 01:05:02.978 we would exceed the magnitude. What we saw on the runs 01:05:02.989 --> 01:05:07.958 which the magnitude is 10,000 is 2.63%. Um If you, 01:05:07.969 --> 01:05:09.829 if you move over to the left a little bit, you can 01:05:09.840 --> 01:05:12.809 see out of all the runs that were done. What was that 01:05:12.889 --> 01:05:14.739 that highest number that came out of the runs? And 01:05:14.750 --> 01:05:18.159 you can see that the highest duration was 14 hours 01:05:18.168 --> 01:05:22.199 and the highest magnitude was just over 20,000 megawatts. 01:05:22.750 --> 01:05:28.128 So um if, if you go down to some of the, uh 01:05:28.510 --> 01:05:30.989 the lower ones. If we take a 1 and 10 on Row 01:05:31.000 --> 01:05:37.679 42. Duration of five hours magnitude of 5000 megawatts. 01:05:39.099 --> 01:05:41.469 You see that probability of exceedance is higher 01:05:43.739 --> 01:05:46.938 for both duration of magnitude. And so if you were 01:05:46.969 --> 01:05:50.679 at like a 3 per saying we don't want. Where our 01:05:50.688 --> 01:05:53.929 risk tolerance is that we don't want to exceed anything 01:05:54.159 --> 01:05:59.688 by 3%. You would eliminate that as a potential for 01:05:59.699 --> 01:06:02.090 your standard. You would, you would take out that 1 01:06:02.099 --> 01:06:05.809 and 10 duration of 5 and 5000. Yeah. (item:28:Commissioner McAdams' follow-up remarks on probability of exceedance) And, and that 01:06:05.820 --> 01:06:09.889 that impacts basically the all in impact of that magnitude 01:06:10.050 --> 01:06:12.728 and the duration. So what are the odds that you're 01:06:12.739 --> 01:06:16.708 going to exceed that maximum duration? And uh under 01:06:16.719 --> 01:06:22.179 the 1.8 exceedance is extremely small chance. That, that 01:06:22.519 --> 01:06:26.349 level event or whatever else in the future. Um comes 01:06:26.360 --> 01:06:30.760 out and uh causes us to exceed that. And so it's, it's 01:06:30.769 --> 01:06:33.949 very conservative, very. I need to stop using that 01:06:33.958 --> 01:06:37.128 word. It's strict, it's a strict standard. Um 01:06:39.070 --> 01:06:39.679 so yeah, 01:06:41.500 --> 01:06:45.349 5% is loose. (item:28:Commissioner Glotfelty's follow-up question on probability weighting) I mean, does that get you to the same mathematical 01:06:45.360 --> 01:06:49.599 point of, of uh uh. So I, I'm going back to the 01:06:49.610 --> 01:06:52.958 1 and 5. The 1 and 5 if you eliminate the 01:06:52.969 --> 01:06:55.179 1 and 5 there's only one scenario where that's 01:06:55.188 --> 01:07:02.239 lower than uh than 3%. Which would be line number 9. 01:07:03.769 --> 01:07:06.579 So, are you effectively doing the same thing by reducing 01:07:06.590 --> 01:07:11.340 that, uh that probability weighting. 01:07:13.739 --> 01:07:16.760 Kristi, may need to phone Pete uh and respond, but 01:07:16.769 --> 01:07:18.750 you could do that in response to my questions too. 01:07:21.668 --> 01:07:23.659 Okay, fair enough. (item:28:Kristi Hobbs' follow-up on probability of exceedance) I mean, you are looking at the numbers. You would, 01:07:23.958 --> 01:07:26.079 I mean you've got all of the, the probabilities and 01:07:26.090 --> 01:07:29.179 exceedances for their current runs. And so you can quickly 01:07:29.188 --> 01:07:32.039 scroll through filter out. You can see which ones would 01:07:32.050 --> 01:07:32.938 be eliminated. 01:07:36.438 --> 01:07:39.418 (item:28:Kristi Hobbs on exceeding standard & cost) So to, to Commissioner McAdams point. It really becomes 01:07:39.429 --> 01:07:43.688 a balancing of, you know, how risk averse are we for 01:07:43.699 --> 01:07:47.728 exceeding the standard? And then you'll have to look 01:07:47.739 --> 01:07:49.929 at too once you have all the cost information. What 01:07:49.938 --> 01:07:52.809 is the cost of that in weighing that? Which I think 01:07:52.820 --> 01:07:54.530 is what you were arguing earlier if. 01:07:56.250 --> 01:07:58.938 (item:28:Chairwoman Jackson on probability of exceedance threshold for risk) So, I think what you're proposing is uh in terms of 01:07:58.949 --> 01:08:01.539 probability of exceedance. And you're talking about 01:08:01.550 --> 01:08:05.369 our threshold for risk. Is that if we were to choose 01:08:05.378 --> 01:08:10.000 the 3% we're basically setting that as our kind of 01:08:10.010 --> 01:08:13.760 expectation. And again, you know, further to your memo 01:08:13.769 --> 01:08:15.610 which you're going to talk about later. You know, we 01:08:15.619 --> 01:08:18.149 have all these assumptions, right? And so, you know 01:08:18.159 --> 01:08:20.680 that enters into it as well. As to how accurate our 01:08:20.689 --> 01:08:23.779 assumptions are. And so, you know, if you kind of, 01:08:23.789 --> 01:08:26.739 if your starting point in my mind mathematically. Is 01:08:26.750 --> 01:08:29.729 if you are, you, you're willing to take you know 01:08:29.739 --> 01:08:35.069 this lower threshold of risk. Then in my mind, I mean 01:08:35.079 --> 01:08:39.149 your outcomes and what you're using to make your decision 01:08:39.159 --> 01:08:46.579 making. Is um is, is a whole lot more um provides a 01:08:46.588 --> 01:08:50.060 whole lot more better data. And a chance of you actually 01:08:50.069 --> 01:08:54.039 hitting that standard. It's a more accurate picture. 01:08:54.378 --> 01:08:55.548 Yeah, so. 01:08:57.828 --> 01:09:00.358 (item:28:Commissioner McAdams on risk threshold) So it, and there's another reason I didn't want to 01:09:00.368 --> 01:09:04.698 exclude the 8300 megawatts of coal. Because uh under 01:09:04.707 --> 01:09:08.398 these. Even at 3% which is a strict standard, a stringent 01:09:08.408 --> 01:09:13.738 uh stringent risk tolerance um threshold. That we are 01:09:13.748 --> 01:09:16.898 in striking distance. Uh the, the costs are within 01:09:16.908 --> 01:09:21.458 the realm of, you know, logic. Uh what we're doing 01:09:21.470 --> 01:09:23.659 in the market. So I, I think all this kind of converges 01:09:23.668 --> 01:09:26.989 on that point. But ultimately, just to end the debate 01:09:27.668 --> 01:09:32.659 3% is a stringent standard. Um The government probably 01:09:32.810 --> 01:09:36.100 the government wants stringent standards. 95 percentile 01:09:36.109 --> 01:09:39.819 as you pointed out. And I just wanna qualify this distinction 01:09:39.829 --> 01:09:42.539 and the weatherization standard was based on a zonal 01:09:42.548 --> 01:09:49.099 uh basis on a facility basis. Um And we, we appeared 01:09:49.108 --> 01:09:53.559 to kind of find a happy medium. That both the OEMs 01:09:53.688 --> 01:09:56.889 and the manufacturers producing these facilities. Could 01:09:56.898 --> 01:09:59.858 comply with as well as mitigation strategies that could 01:09:59.868 --> 01:10:03.139 be employed by our generation owners. So that was, 01:10:03.148 --> 01:10:05.538 that is a distinction between what we're talking about 01:10:05.547 --> 01:10:09.257 now, which is a system wide 3%. But that also gets 01:10:09.269 --> 01:10:12.229 to, to make those assumptions that much more important. 01:10:12.469 --> 01:10:15.238 How are you calculating for this? Is this a copper 01:10:15.248 --> 01:10:20.378 sheet system? Okay. You know. No, it's not. Um So how 01:10:20.390 --> 01:10:24.878 is that accounted for? So does it make sense? I'm just 01:10:24.890 --> 01:10:28.350 wondering um to get all the data that Commissioner 01:10:28.359 --> 01:10:30.470 McAdams is asking for the inputs and assumptions and 01:10:30.479 --> 01:10:32.048 then make a decision on the 3%? 01:10:33.958 --> 01:10:37.338 Well, she wants to. Well. Okay, Kristi. Can I lay out 01:10:37.350 --> 01:10:41.560 my memo? I, I'll do it fast. Yes. (item:28:Commissioner McAdams lays out his memo) Um so, so bottom line 01:10:41.569 --> 01:10:44.810 is the memo simply laid out questions on assumptions. 01:10:45.048 --> 01:10:49.930 That I hope will help inform um the market actually. 01:10:50.029 --> 01:10:54.850 Um because the market has technical uh data analytics 01:10:54.859 --> 01:10:58.458 capabilities that even we will not have. And they will 01:10:58.470 --> 01:11:01.750 be self interested to uh acquire those capabilities 01:11:01.759 --> 01:11:04.600 to do this type of uh analysis. And provide feedback 01:11:04.609 --> 01:11:09.680 to both ERCOT and the Commission. But um the, the assumptions 01:11:09.689 --> 01:11:12.079 and I won't go into detail on each of the questions. 01:11:12.088 --> 01:11:16.890 But help provide a more um better defined picture of 01:11:16.899 --> 01:11:22.899 how these models are um producing these outcomes. And 01:11:22.909 --> 01:11:28.640 uh ultimately, it was my intention and my desire. That 01:11:28.649 --> 01:11:31.250 ERCOT might be able to. Because ERCOT has heard these 01:11:31.259 --> 01:11:35.390 questions uh in private briefing. But I wanted to file 01:11:35.399 --> 01:11:37.750 it for the public. So that the public would know what 01:11:37.759 --> 01:11:40.699 they're being asked. And that ERCOT could produce responses 01:11:40.708 --> 01:11:44.539 to some degree before your proposed technical workshop. 01:11:44.628 --> 01:11:47.680 So that the stakeholders, the industry and the public 01:11:47.689 --> 01:11:52.859 could come in armed to ask questions. Uh that are more 01:11:52.869 --> 01:11:56.548 defined and more targeted of ERCOT. And then proposed 01:11:56.560 --> 01:11:59.939 suggested modifications to those assumptions. To give 01:11:59.949 --> 01:12:04.509 us a more comprehensive and universal picture of options 01:12:04.520 --> 01:12:08.338 and scenarios to compare. Um So that's a, a high level 01:12:08.350 --> 01:12:12.399 Madam Chair. And I think that speaks to 3% versus 5%. 01:12:12.409 --> 01:12:15.600 But to get to you Kristi. What's your vision of 01:12:15.609 --> 01:12:21.458 the workshop? And then how do you believe the interaction 01:12:21.470 --> 01:12:24.229 between you and stakeholders, ERCOT staff and stakeholders. 01:12:24.239 --> 01:12:28.250 Will inform the next narrowing of the cone, the funnel 01:12:28.259 --> 01:12:31.899 of options for us to consider. (item:28:Kristi Hobbs on vision for workshop) So I'm glad we're getting 01:12:31.909 --> 01:12:34.449 to have this discussion. Because we've um excuse me. 01:12:34.458 --> 01:12:36.838 Been debating internally about what's the best approach 01:12:36.850 --> 01:12:40.539 for that workshop. And so what I would envision is 01:12:40.548 --> 01:12:42.729 is just what she kind of laid out. We'd like to be 01:12:42.739 --> 01:12:45.628 able to put together this information to be able to 01:12:45.640 --> 01:12:47.750 walk through it. Um And so we'll be working with the 01:12:47.759 --> 01:12:49.859 vendor. We're gonna need their help on some of the 01:12:49.869 --> 01:12:53.500 inputs uh for the, the table read and the model inputs. 01:12:53.509 --> 01:12:56.069 And we would like to be able um to put that. I 01:12:56.079 --> 01:12:58.869 know we've also um got a meeting with Staff uh later 01:12:58.878 --> 01:13:01.064 today. Where we wanted to get their input as well. Uh 01:13:01.074 --> 01:13:03.935 My understanding is there may be some questions that 01:13:03.944 --> 01:13:05.904 come out from Staff. That they're interested in getting 01:13:05.914 --> 01:13:08.475 feedback on. And we could uh walk through those and 01:13:08.484 --> 01:13:10.904 and facilitate that discussion as well during the workshop. 01:13:12.244 --> 01:13:16.699 Okay. So. Where and where? Because I think a couple of studies 01:13:16.708 --> 01:13:19.909 are sort of foundational pieces of this reliability 01:13:19.918 --> 01:13:22.689 standard in some way or another VOLL. Where do we stand 01:13:22.699 --> 01:13:29.289 there? Right. (item:28:Krisit Hobbs on VOLL) Um so on VOLL. We are I know you, you're 01:13:29.298 --> 01:13:32.298 probably tired of hearing this. But we're very close 01:13:32.310 --> 01:13:36.930 to wrapping up um the the work with the vendor. To lock 01:13:36.939 --> 01:13:40.539 in the vendor that's going to help us do that uh study. 01:13:40.548 --> 01:13:43.279 And so what we uh envision there is kind of a two 01:13:43.289 --> 01:13:46.079 phased approach uh that'll be running concurrently. 01:13:46.088 --> 01:13:50.149 And so the first phase task will be doing the macro 01:13:50.159 --> 01:13:52.579 um the literature search. And so that's something that 01:13:52.588 --> 01:13:56.270 we think um, could definitely be um completed. I think 01:13:56.279 --> 01:13:58.430 by the end of the year. So we'll have that information 01:13:58.439 --> 01:14:02.128 back. So that will give us another information point. 01:14:02.390 --> 01:14:07.048 Um the, the piece that we're, we've been working 01:14:07.060 --> 01:14:09.979 back and forth in the statement of work with. Um, that's 01:14:09.989 --> 01:14:13.229 taken some time is because we were partnering with 01:14:13.239 --> 01:14:16.750 the lab. We've got a triangle of folks that we're trying 01:14:16.759 --> 01:14:19.369 to get to agreement on terms. And so we're very close 01:14:19.378 --> 01:14:23.378 on that. Um and the reason for that. Is uh we wanna 01:14:23.390 --> 01:14:27.779 be able to utilize uh the survey that the lab is using 01:14:27.789 --> 01:14:30.239 in the AEP area. So that we don't have to hit 01:14:30.250 --> 01:14:34.189 those customers twice. Um and so that's kind of the 01:14:34.199 --> 01:14:37.619 vision on that. I think if we're able to wrap up this 01:14:37.628 --> 01:14:41.390 statement of work, um in the near future. I think what 01:14:41.399 --> 01:14:43.079 we need to take to get through that we can be in 01:14:43.088 --> 01:14:44.838 a place by the end of the year. We know what that 01:14:44.850 --> 01:14:48.829 survey instrument is. Um we'll be uh looking for your 01:14:48.838 --> 01:14:52.899 help um to help us work with the TDUs. Um because 01:14:52.909 --> 01:14:54.798 we're gonna need to partner with them and getting the 01:14:54.810 --> 01:14:57.259 survey out to their customers. And that we could have 01:14:57.270 --> 01:15:01.369 that survey out at the beginning of the year. And you 01:15:01.378 --> 01:15:04.140 you mean you want us to tell them to cooperate with 01:15:04.149 --> 01:15:05.069 you. Um 01:15:06.909 --> 01:15:08.899 How are you gonna work with them? The nois 01:15:11.680 --> 01:15:14.770 as well. But I know, I know the, the nuance there. 01:15:14.779 --> 01:15:16.979 But we're, we're gonna be working on a communication 01:15:16.989 --> 01:15:20.588 plan on once we have secured the vendor on how we, 01:15:20.600 --> 01:15:23.159 we roll that out. So we have uniform participation. 01:15:23.750 --> 01:15:28.878 Got it. Where do we stand with the cone study? (item:28:Kristi Hobbs on cone study) Uh the timeline 01:15:28.890 --> 01:15:32.500 for that. So we've got the RFP went out um on September 01:15:32.509 --> 01:15:35.729 18. Um so we're in that period now of questions and 01:15:35.739 --> 01:15:39.798 proposals. Proposals are due on October 17. And then 01:15:39.810 --> 01:15:42.829 we uh our goal is to go through those and have a 01:15:42.838 --> 01:15:45.189 contract awarded that first week in November. 01:15:50.009 --> 01:15:54.039 And, and you're when you, when you hire the um independent 01:15:54.048 --> 01:15:57.770 consultant or vendor through this RFP process. ERCOT would 01:15:57.779 --> 01:16:01.418 then engage with the IMM on coming up with the cone study. 01:16:02.250 --> 01:16:02.509 Yes. Okay. 01:16:06.890 --> 01:16:10.529 So knowing all that, Commissioner Cobos. What are your 01:16:10.539 --> 01:16:13.909 thoughts on the 3% versus 5% exceedance and how that 01:16:13.918 --> 01:16:18.229 plays into this, this next iteration. Uh which may 01:16:18.239 --> 01:16:22.939 be informed by feedback to a degree. But I'm not sure. 01:16:24.810 --> 01:16:27.168 (item:28:Commissioner Cobos' remarks on probability of exceedance) I mean I, I get your point. Um I think I'm good 01:16:27.180 --> 01:16:29.829 with where you are. And, but I'm just wondering if you 01:16:29.838 --> 01:16:32.659 know, is there any value in doing the 3. You know 01:16:32.668 --> 01:16:35.159 the greater than 3% greater than 5. I, I don't know. 01:16:35.628 --> 01:16:37.989 Let me ask you, when's the next iteration of models 01:16:38.000 --> 01:16:40.310 gonna come back? Is it, will it be before our October 01:16:40.319 --> 01:16:42.729 12 Open Meeting? (item:28:Kristi Hobbs on iteration of models) It will not. Because we're gonna put the 01:16:42.739 --> 01:16:45.680 priority on getting this information out. So that we 01:16:45.689 --> 01:16:48.259 can get stakeholder, stakeholder comment and feedback. 01:16:48.270 --> 01:16:51.479 We want to keep that moving. Recognizing that, you 01:16:51.489 --> 01:16:54.279 know, you're not gonna likely make a decision on the 01:16:54.289 --> 01:16:56.509 reliability standard at your October meeting. So that's 01:16:56.520 --> 01:16:58.239 kind of how we prioritize the work. 01:17:00.060 --> 01:17:03.159 Yeah so, so I would, I would think um 01:17:07.939 --> 01:17:10.310 they're, they're taking stakeholder feedback. (item:28:Commissioner McAdams on ERCOT techincal workshop) The, 01:17:10.319 --> 01:17:15.140 the uh technical workshop will be productive. Probably 01:17:15.149 --> 01:17:17.759 um if it's similar to the other technical workshops 01:17:17.770 --> 01:17:21.579 that ERCOT is, is administering. Um they do take that 01:17:21.588 --> 01:17:25.029 feedback into account. And then refine their path forward 01:17:25.039 --> 01:17:29.239 after that is done. And so I don't know if we necessarily 01:17:29.250 --> 01:17:32.199 need to make the determination on 3 versus 5% yet 01:17:32.208 --> 01:17:36.000 is what I'm hearing. Because the market's gonna have 01:17:36.009 --> 01:17:37.668 an opinion on that. Right. Um 01:17:39.180 --> 01:17:42.140 so. I mean I think at the, at the end of the 01:17:42.149 --> 01:17:46.729 day, it's going to be our decision, right? And, and 01:17:46.739 --> 01:17:48.739 um I mean. (item:28:Chairwoman Jackson on ERCOT technical workshop) If your point is that you'd like to see 01:17:48.750 --> 01:17:51.359 some of these, some of the questions answered, which 01:17:51.369 --> 01:17:55.000 would give you a better feeling around the assumptions. 01:17:55.009 --> 01:17:59.338 And then that in turn will kind of give you more information. 01:17:59.350 --> 01:18:01.628 To kind of guide you towards the, whether, you know 01:18:01.640 --> 01:18:05.699 it's 3% or it's 5%. And as long as it doesn't slow 01:18:05.708 --> 01:18:09.958 down the process, right. Because we have an end goal 01:18:09.970 --> 01:18:12.159 and an end time and a schedule, right? (item:28:Kristi Hobbs on additional inverter based resource capacity mix) And I think 01:18:12.168 --> 01:18:15.229 what we can continue to do in parallel. Um it's my 01:18:15.239 --> 01:18:18.369 understanding to get to this, this third item. That 01:18:18.378 --> 01:18:20.458 we talked about, about the additional inverter based 01:18:20.470 --> 01:18:23.904 resource capacity mix. That takes several iterations and runs of 01:18:23.914 --> 01:18:27.064 the model. To get to determine the right level of those 01:18:27.074 --> 01:18:29.845 resources. So that's work that can be done in parallel 01:18:29.854 --> 01:18:33.664 um irrespective of the decision on the other parameters. 01:18:33.673 --> 01:18:36.923 So for clarity you, you would need the, the 3% or 01:18:36.935 --> 01:18:41.083 decision, 3 or 5% decision uh when? 01:18:43.470 --> 01:18:46.798 November 2? Yeah, that's probably that's fine. 01:18:49.989 --> 01:18:54.039 (item:28:Chairwoman Jackson's confirmation of any further questions for ERCOT) So getting back to your memo and the questions. Because 01:18:54.048 --> 01:18:59.060 this is a deliverable back from uh from ERCOT. Um were 01:18:59.069 --> 01:19:02.100 there any other questions that we wanted to have ERCOT 01:19:02.109 --> 01:19:04.060 potentially consider? 01:19:08.289 --> 01:19:10.449 In addition to the ones that you laid out in your memo? 01:19:13.479 --> 01:19:16.369 Just opening it up to the other Commissioners? I guess, you know 01:19:16.378 --> 01:19:20.979 I only have. (item:28:Commissioner Glotfelty on forced outage rates) Well, my question around uh forced outage rates. 01:19:20.989 --> 01:19:26.109 Um but I don't know that I have them totally um formulated 01:19:26.119 --> 01:19:28.708 in my head. I just, I don't understand in the model. 01:19:28.720 --> 01:19:32.588 How we take into consideration forced outage rates across 01:19:34.159 --> 01:19:41.159 different resource types. And where they are and maybe 01:19:41.168 --> 01:19:44.659 I can get a little feedback from you Kristi and figure 01:19:44.668 --> 01:19:47.229 that out. Before I see if there's a question that's 01:19:47.239 --> 01:19:49.779 in there that needs to be answered. Or it might be, 01:19:49.789 --> 01:19:51.770 it might already have a solution. Or it might already 01:19:51.779 --> 01:19:56.189 be in there. I just don't know. Forced outages, obviously 01:19:56.199 --> 01:19:58.829 um you know in these tail events. Are, can be a very 01:19:58.838 --> 01:20:03.520 big driver. Absolutely. But, but doesn't that, isn't that serve 01:20:03.548 --> 01:20:06.979 on account for that? It doesn't overly weight them. 01:20:06.989 --> 01:20:09.829 I don't know. In the tail events. (item:28:Commissioner Cobos on forced outage rates) I'd like to see what 01:20:09.838 --> 01:20:12.208 they're assuming for force outage rates. And, and if 01:20:12.220 --> 01:20:16.000 there's any geographic um sort of analysis. Like, you 01:20:16.009 --> 01:20:17.890 know, where are the forced outages, right? I mean, we 01:20:17.899 --> 01:20:20.140 just had a situation where we had a bunch of forced 01:20:20.149 --> 01:20:23.750 outages as you noted in the North zone. So, you know 01:20:23.759 --> 01:20:26.659 what is. This is just beyond just weatherization based force outages. 01:20:26.708 --> 01:20:29.079 Because. We're, we're kind of backing into that as ERCOT 01:20:29.159 --> 01:20:32.409 continues to refine that assumption. Unplanned force 01:20:32.548 --> 01:20:34.989 outages. Unplanned. (item:28:Commissioner Cobos on geographic diversity with forced outages) And maybe that's part of your request and 01:20:35.000 --> 01:20:39.060 the inputs and assumptions. Is to understand um to get 01:20:39.069 --> 01:20:43.180 information on what forced outage rate. Um Astrapé server 01:20:43.189 --> 01:20:49.180 model/ERCOT's analysis. Um is incorporating into their 01:20:49.189 --> 01:20:52.659 model runs. And if there's any geographic diversity 01:20:52.668 --> 01:20:56.229 associated um with those forced outages that are being 01:20:56.239 --> 01:20:58.649 assumed in the servant modeling. We can definitely 01:20:58.659 --> 01:21:00.798 document the assumptions on the forced outages and 01:21:00.810 --> 01:21:03.439 how it's accounted for in the model. Specifically on 01:21:03.449 --> 01:21:05.810 these runs for the reliability standards. Ok. So that's 01:21:05.819 --> 01:21:11.140 one more question to add to Will's questions so. Great. Okay. 01:21:11.149 --> 01:21:12.958 and we're, we've got agreement on when you're going 01:21:12.970 --> 01:21:15.838 to deliver back with that. And then you have um, what 01:21:15.850 --> 01:21:19.819 you need from us and we'll wait on the 3% until um 01:21:20.168 --> 01:21:25.020 in November. Okay. (item:28:Kristi Hobbs on takeaways for November Open Meeting) And we will work with Staff uh to 01:21:25.029 --> 01:21:27.810 select a date for the workshop. Um it's gonna be dependent 01:21:27.819 --> 01:21:30.918 on uh, we wanna make sure we have enough time for 01:21:30.930 --> 01:21:32.628 the work that needs to be done. To get the information 01:21:32.640 --> 01:21:35.119 out to the stakeholders and give them adequate time 01:21:35.128 --> 01:21:38.418 to review. And be prepared to respond and ask questions. 01:21:39.939 --> 01:21:42.470 Okay. Very good. So we'll be able to post that time for 01:21:42.479 --> 01:21:45.119 that workshop and get that information out to everyone 01:21:45.128 --> 01:21:49.479 that wants to um to participate. Thank you, Kristi. 01:21:49.890 --> 01:21:51.640 Thank you so much for being here today. 01:21:54.149 --> 01:21:58.289 Okay. I don't have anything for Item 29. Item 30 will 01:21:58.298 --> 01:22:03.289 not be taken up. (item:31:Chairwoman Jackson lays out Project No. 55421) Next up is Item No. 31. Project 01:22:03.298 --> 01:22:07.020 No. 55421. This is the Commission's project for 01:22:07.029 --> 01:22:10.649 the Texas Advanced Nuclear Reactor Working Group. Shelah, 01:22:10.659 --> 01:22:13.180 do we have anyone from the public sign to speak on 01:22:13.189 --> 01:22:17.119 Item No. 31? (item:31:Shelah Cisneros with Commission Counsel confirms there are no Public Comments) No, ma'am. Thank you. Uh Commissioner 01:22:17.628 --> 01:22:19.520 Glotfelty, would you like to provide us with an update? 01:22:19.529 --> 01:22:24.069 I would uh appreciate that uh opportunity. (item:31:Commissioner Glotfelty gives update on Nuclear Reactor Working Group) Um So we 01:22:24.079 --> 01:22:26.680 have the uh organizational meeting this afternoon. 01:22:26.689 --> 01:22:28.779 Or an informational meeting this afternoon at 2 o'clock 01:22:28.789 --> 01:22:32.819 in this room. To lay out a structure in a form that 01:22:32.829 --> 01:22:35.489 we want to get thoughts and comments on from the public. 01:22:35.539 --> 01:22:41.458 As we go about creating the work streams for this working 01:22:41.470 --> 01:22:44.619 group. Lay out the structure for the working group. 01:22:44.628 --> 01:22:48.819 We've gotten a lot of nominations through Project 55421. 01:22:50.069 --> 01:22:53.869 Although the deadline has passed, I'm still encouraging 01:22:53.878 --> 01:22:57.189 people to, if they want to be a part of this. To 01:22:57.199 --> 01:23:02.668 please be a part of this. The other is we wanted to 01:23:02.680 --> 01:23:05.759 make sure I wanted to make it clear. That while we have 01:23:05.770 --> 01:23:08.838 some specific individuals on a working group. This 01:23:08.850 --> 01:23:11.319 is going to be a larger effort than just a few people. 01:23:11.329 --> 01:23:14.449 Everybody is welcome to participate in this and has 01:23:14.458 --> 01:23:19.640 a voice. We just can't come to a language if we've 01:23:19.649 --> 01:23:24.119 got hundreds of people trying to write a report. So 01:23:24.128 --> 01:23:27.708 anyway, stick around 2 o'clock in this room. If y'all 01:23:27.720 --> 01:23:30.359 want to hear and talk anything nuclear or small 01:23:30.369 --> 01:23:33.119 modular reactors in the state. This is the kickoff 01:23:33.128 --> 01:23:36.199 and beginning of that. Thank you. Thank you and thanks 01:23:36.208 --> 01:23:40.048 for your leadership on this. Uh I don't have anything 01:23:40.060 --> 01:23:46.548 on item 32-36. (item:37:Chairwoman Jackson lays out Project No. 54446) Next up is Item No. 37. Project 01:23:46.560 --> 01:23:50.739 No. 54446. The Commission's project for calendar 01:23:50.750 --> 01:23:54.949 year 2023 Open Meeting Agenda Items without an associated 01:23:54.958 --> 01:23:57.270 control number. Shelah, do we have anyone from the 01:23:57.279 --> 01:24:00.119 public signed up to speak on Item No. 37. (item:37:Shelah Cisneros with Commission Counsel confirms there are no Public Comments) No, ma'am. 01:24:01.048 --> 01:24:05.699 Um PUC Staff filed a memo. Um Haley, will you please 01:24:05.708 --> 01:24:08.418 uh come on up and provide an overview of your memo. 01:24:15.310 --> 01:24:18.259 Thank you. (item:37:Hayley Hall with PUC Staff lays out Commission Staff's memo) Good morning, Commissioners. I have a memo 01:24:18.270 --> 01:24:22.939 requesting approval to transfer $38,000 in each year 01:24:22.949 --> 01:24:25.939 of this biennium. Fom our current operating budget 01:24:25.949 --> 01:24:28.979 into our capital budget. That requires the approval 01:24:28.989 --> 01:24:31.759 of an agency's governing body, the Legislative Budget 01:24:31.770 --> 01:24:35.109 Board and the Governor to do that. And we're just our 01:24:35.128 --> 01:24:38.199 current capital budget has money for laptops for our 01:24:38.208 --> 01:24:41.529 current Staff. We ask for and receive funding for additional 01:24:41.539 --> 01:24:44.418 Staff and equipment for them in the Legislative Session. 01:24:44.708 --> 01:24:46.560 And we just want to put that money with the other at 01:24:46.569 --> 01:24:50.128 least laptop money just for greater transparency. And 01:24:50.140 --> 01:24:51.850 it's just a little bit more correct to have it in that 01:24:51.859 --> 01:24:56.949 budget. Okay. (item:37:Motion to approve transfer of funds from agency's operating budget to capital budget) Well, I would move um to request approval 01:24:56.958 --> 01:25:00.109 for transfer of funds from the agency's operating budget 01:25:00.119 --> 01:25:03.970 to its capital budget. Do I have a second? Second. All in favor, 01:25:03.979 --> 01:25:08.708 say aye. Aye. Motion passes. Thank you. (item:38:Chairwoman Jackson lays out Project No. 54455) Thank you. Next, 01:25:08.720 --> 01:25:13.088 we will take up items 38 and 40 together. Item 38 is 01:25:13.100 --> 01:25:18.039 Project No. 54455. Our 2023 rulemaking calendar. 01:25:18.128 --> 01:25:23.298 (item:40:Chairwoman Jackson lays out Project No. 55156) And Item 40 is project 55156. Our 88th Legislative 01:25:23.310 --> 01:25:26.810 implementation activities. Item 39 will not be taken 01:25:26.819 --> 01:25:29.649 up. Uh Shelah, do we have anyone from the public signed 01:25:29.659 --> 01:25:35.418 up to speak on Items 38 or 40? (item:38:Shelah Cisneros with Commission Counsel confirms there are no Public Comments) (item:40:Shelah Cisneros with Commission Counsel confirms there are no Public Comments) No. Okay. Um after 01:25:35.430 --> 01:25:37.949 the July 20th Open Meeting, we approved Commission 01:25:37.958 --> 01:25:40.759 Staff priority rulemaking plan and directed Staff to 01:25:40.770 --> 01:25:44.140 provide a quarterly update at our meeting today. Uh 01:25:44.149 --> 01:25:48.220 PUC Staff filed a memo on September 25. We have uh 01:25:48.229 --> 01:25:51.659 Jess Heck and David Smeltzer here to provide an overview 01:25:51.798 --> 01:25:55.640 of the memo. So, um Jess and David, do you want to 01:25:55.680 --> 01:25:58.298 uh take us through and lay out your memo? Perfect. 01:25:58.310 --> 01:26:00.479 (item:40:Jess Heck, Director of Government Relations with PUC Staff on priority rulemaking quarterly update) Thank you Jess Heck, Director of Government Relations 01:26:00.489 --> 01:26:04.439 for the PUC. Um good morning, Commissioners. Um thank 01:26:04.449 --> 01:26:06.689 you for this opportunity alongside the Rules and Projects 01:26:06.699 --> 01:26:09.329 team. To present this priority rulemaking quarterly 01:26:09.338 --> 01:26:13.208 update. I am happy to report the that initial 01:26:13.220 --> 01:26:17.430 action has been taken on all 19 items. Additionally 01:26:17.439 --> 01:26:20.409 the Commission has held workshops on multiple matters. 01:26:20.418 --> 01:26:24.539 Including on September 21, relating to the PUC's implementation 01:26:24.649 --> 01:26:28.869 of programs established in SB 2627 the Texas Energy 01:26:28.878 --> 01:26:32.759 Fund. And on August 17, relating to the electric utilities 01:26:32.770 --> 01:26:36.159 filing of transmission and distribution system resiliency 01:26:36.168 --> 01:26:40.779 plan as prescribed in HB 2555. I want to take a moment 01:26:40.789 --> 01:26:43.100 to thank stakeholders for their continued involvement 01:26:43.109 --> 01:26:46.939 and input over the last few months. In the July 11 01:26:46.949 --> 01:26:50.048 Public Priority Workshop, a top priority identified 01:26:50.060 --> 01:26:53.039 by stakeholders other than implementing Legislation 01:26:53.140 --> 01:26:55.989 was reviewing the financial assurance provisions of 01:26:56.000 --> 01:26:58.588 the Commission's substantive water rules. Commission 01:26:58.600 --> 01:27:02.350 Staff is beginning to review that issue. This quarterly 01:27:02.359 --> 01:27:04.520 update has been distributed to our Legislative Committees 01:27:04.529 --> 01:27:07.180 of jurisdiction. And future updates will continue to 01:27:07.189 --> 01:27:11.680 be filed in Project No. 55156. We do expect to have 01:27:11.689 --> 01:27:14.270 another quarterly update before end of year. Thank 01:27:14.279 --> 01:27:15.310 you and happy to answer questions. 01:27:16.989 --> 01:27:21.319 Okay. Any thoughts on this one, any questions? (item:40:Commissioner McAdams thanks PUC Staff for their work and updates) Good work for 01:27:21.329 --> 01:27:23.859 Staff uh trying to organize these. There's many of 01:27:23.869 --> 01:27:27.810 them uh in queue. And uh glad these are underway. So, thanks 01:27:27.819 --> 01:27:31.338 for the updates guys. Appreciate the update. And seems 01:27:31.350 --> 01:27:33.859 like we're on track. So um, look forward to continuing 01:27:33.869 --> 01:27:37.539 to receive your progress reports. (item:38:Commissioner Glotfelty on a ancillary service study) Can, can I ask one 01:27:37.548 --> 01:27:41.909 question? Um So we have had this, uh um I don't know 01:27:41.918 --> 01:27:46.548 where it is on here. But we um can we get so 01:27:46.560 --> 01:27:49.588 so I'm thinking about an ancillary service study. That 01:27:49.600 --> 01:27:55.069 was required under uh, uh. Senate Bill 3. Senate, I'm sorry. 01:27:55.310 --> 01:28:00.489 Senate Bill 3. Three? Two Sessions ago. Yes sir. And um just don't know. Can 01:28:00.500 --> 01:28:04.128 you give me uh not right now. But an update or a 01:28:04.140 --> 01:28:07.619 discussion at the next meeting where we stand on how 01:28:07.628 --> 01:28:10.310 we might do that? I think we really need to do that. 01:28:10.458 --> 01:28:12.649 Uh we haven't done that as directed by the Legislature 01:28:12.659 --> 01:28:14.259 and it would be great to have that discussion at the 01:28:14.270 --> 01:28:16.588 next meeting. Is, is the Commission directed to do? 01:28:16.759 --> 01:28:20.319 Yes. It's the Commission? Yes. (item:38:Thomas Gleeson, PUC Executive Director on ancillary service study) Yes, in Section 14. 01:28:20.329 --> 01:28:22.418 That's right. O that bill. We were directed to conduct 01:28:22.430 --> 01:28:26.970 an ancillary services study. So it's not ERCOT it's us. That's correct. So I just 01:28:27.009 --> 01:28:28.560 teed that up for the next meeting. Absolutely. We'll bring 01:28:28.569 --> 01:28:29.628 that back to you at the next meeting. 01:28:31.359 --> 01:28:34.930 Uh Do we have anything else on the Legislative uh implementation 01:28:34.939 --> 01:28:38.088 Commissioner Cobos? (item:40:Commissioner Cobos on transmission build out in Permian Basin) Yes. Thank you, Chair Jackson. I just 01:28:38.100 --> 01:28:40.489 want to highlight that through the passage of House 01:28:40.500 --> 01:28:43.689 Bill 5066. The Legislature has made transmission build 01:28:43.699 --> 01:28:47.119 out for reliability in the Permian Basin a priority. 01:28:47.128 --> 01:28:50.289 By specifically requiring the Commission to direct 01:28:50.310 --> 01:28:52.958 ERCOT to develop a reliability plan for the Permian 01:28:52.970 --> 01:28:57.000 Basin region by January 30, 2024. I would like to 01:28:57.009 --> 01:29:00.119 act, act on giving ERCOT that directive sooner rather 01:29:00.128 --> 01:29:03.680 than later. Well, in advance of the January 30, 2024 01:29:03.689 --> 01:29:06.680 statutory deadline. So that ERCOT can start the process 01:29:06.689 --> 01:29:08.838 of developing the reliability plan for the Permian 01:29:08.850 --> 01:29:12.069 Basin region. Um The Permian Basin region, like other 01:29:12.079 --> 01:29:14.628 parts of the state is experiencing significant Load 01:29:14.640 --> 01:29:17.479 growth. And given the time it takes to build transmission. 01:29:17.878 --> 01:29:21.168 We must act in a steadfast and diligent manner. To ensure 01:29:21.180 --> 01:29:23.579 that transmission infrastructure development is keeping 01:29:23.588 --> 01:29:27.180 up with our growing state's needs. In the coming weeks 01:29:27.189 --> 01:29:30.500 I will be uh preparing and filing a memorandum and 01:29:30.509 --> 01:29:33.168 a proposed order for the Commission's consideration. 01:29:33.939 --> 01:29:36.489 That will direct ERCOT to develop a reliability plan 01:29:36.500 --> 01:29:39.180 for the Permian Basin region. The directive will set 01:29:39.189 --> 01:29:41.750 expectations and provide a timeline. To ensure that 01:29:41.770 --> 01:29:44.029 ERCOT provides a reliability plan for the Commission's 01:29:44.039 --> 01:29:46.640 review and consideration of approval in a timely and 01:29:46.649 --> 01:29:47.329 efficient manner. 01:29:49.609 --> 01:29:53.489 I'm totally supportive. Off and running. Okay, thank you. 01:29:54.310 --> 01:29:57.958 Okay. (item:41:Agency administrative issues) Next up is Item No. 41. Our standing item for 01:29:57.970 --> 01:30:01.509 agency administrative issues. Shelah, do we have anyone 01:30:01.520 --> 01:30:04.319 from the public signed up to speak on Item No. 41. 01:30:04.329 --> 01:30:06.689 (item:41:Shelah Cisneros with Commission Counsel confirms there are no Public Comments) No, ma'am. no one signed up. And Thomas, do you have an 01:30:06.699 --> 01:30:08.918 update for us? Yes, ma'am. (item:41:Thomas Gleeson, PUC Executive Director on Winter preparedness work session) Thank you, Madam Chair. 01:30:08.930 --> 01:30:11.949 Good morning Commissioners. Just one item this morning 01:30:12.088 --> 01:30:15.569 we are making preparations to a Winter preparedness 01:30:15.579 --> 01:30:17.939 work session. So, work session meaning very similar 01:30:17.949 --> 01:30:20.628 to what we did leading up to the market design. Where 01:30:20.640 --> 01:30:23.000 we would have invited testimony come, make presentations 01:30:23.009 --> 01:30:26.390 to you all and you could ask them questions. Um We 01:30:26.399 --> 01:30:28.859 don't have a date exactly nailed down. We're trying 01:30:28.869 --> 01:30:32.029 to navigate your busy schedules. But we're, we're targeting 01:30:32.039 --> 01:30:35.470 the end of October for that date. Um And I know Commissioner 01:30:35.479 --> 01:30:38.180 McAdams, this was uh really his vision. So I think 01:30:38.189 --> 01:30:40.039 he may have some more details on what he's looking 01:30:40.048 --> 01:30:42.509 for. (item:41:Commissoner McAdams on Winter preparedness work session) Uh Thank you Thomas and thanks for the work of 01:30:42.520 --> 01:30:45.970 Staff. I'm trying to nail down a date range. So um 01:30:45.979 --> 01:30:48.859 for about the, the 10 groups that I've talked to in 01:30:48.869 --> 01:30:52.088 the last 72 hours, October 26 is not the date. Uh 01:30:52.100 --> 01:30:56.750 so don't, don't take that to the bank. Um But I believe 01:30:56.759 --> 01:31:01.359 this work session is uh timely, it's important. Um because 01:31:01.369 --> 01:31:06.680 I believe it will allow us to um one bring ERCOT forward 01:31:06.689 --> 01:31:13.569 and begin to uh, uh articulate and demonstrate um near 01:31:13.579 --> 01:31:14.859 term uh 01:31:16.470 --> 01:31:20.958 modeling . For what we expect during the Winter season. 01:31:20.970 --> 01:31:25.259 In terms of both demand and supplies available to us. 01:31:25.298 --> 01:31:29.048 Um I think it will indicate that demand is going to 01:31:29.060 --> 01:31:33.039 continue to grow. And the system could be well served 01:31:33.048 --> 01:31:38.329 by evaluating increased capabilities to bring to bear 01:31:38.338 --> 01:31:42.088 for this season. And that includes enhanced demand response 01:31:42.100 --> 01:31:46.180 capabilities. Um We have a robust demand response, 01:31:46.189 --> 01:31:49.890 uh suite of products and services now. Uh between ancillaries 01:31:49.899 --> 01:31:54.029 and ERS uh as well as other uh tools that ERCOT 01:31:54.039 --> 01:31:58.109 uh could bring to bear. Um I believe this is an opportunity 01:31:58.119 --> 01:32:02.750 to call the market in uh in front of the public. To 01:32:02.759 --> 01:32:07.208 uh discuss how we may be able to augment and enhance 01:32:07.220 --> 01:32:12.048 our existing products and services. To overcome um 01:32:12.208 --> 01:32:15.729 the, the good challenge of a growing economy and booming 01:32:15.739 --> 01:32:18.949 population. Especially for the purposes of this season. 01:32:19.128 --> 01:32:22.009 And uh and also start describing where we might go 01:32:22.020 --> 01:32:26.399 in future seasons. Um I also think it's an opportunity 01:32:26.409 --> 01:32:30.399 to highlight and gain confirmation for the Commission's 01:32:30.409 --> 01:32:33.489 purposes on the work that has been performed and is 01:32:33.500 --> 01:32:36.520 being performed right now on facility weatherization. 01:32:36.708 --> 01:32:41.208 As well as go through some of the details on the firm 01:32:41.220 --> 01:32:44.189 fuel supply service. So the public can be better informed 01:32:44.199 --> 01:32:47.048 about what mechanisms we have available to meet the 01:32:47.060 --> 01:32:50.699 future needs. So talk about what we have available 01:32:50.708 --> 01:32:53.418 as well as what you know, the other tools in the toolbox. 01:32:53.430 --> 01:32:55.970 And if there in capabilities so that we can be prepared 01:32:55.979 --> 01:32:59.088 for the Winter going forward. Yeah, absolutely. (item:41:Commissioner Cobos on Winter preparedness work session) I mean 01:32:59.100 --> 01:33:04.569 since the 2021 Session, we have implemented really 01:33:04.579 --> 01:33:08.979 an arsenal of, of um actions and tools. To help build 01:33:08.989 --> 01:33:12.289 Winter reliability and resiliency through Phase 1, 01:33:12.298 --> 01:33:16.079 Phase 2 weatherization. Um Phase 1 and Phase 2 01:33:16.088 --> 01:33:21.449 of the firm fuel supply product, um critical Load designation. 01:33:21.979 --> 01:33:24.378 Um I mean, just a host that we've tightened our customer 01:33:24.390 --> 01:33:28.989 protection rules. To uh you know better, better protect 01:33:29.000 --> 01:33:31.168 consumers. There's, there's just been a lot of actions 01:33:31.180 --> 01:33:34.259 we've taken since Winter Storm Uri. That we have at our 01:33:34.270 --> 01:33:37.689 disposal at this time. But we're always looking to 01:33:37.699 --> 01:33:40.890 optimize and leverage those tools. To be better prepared 01:33:40.899 --> 01:33:43.640 in the future. And also to see what else we can harness 01:33:43.649 --> 01:33:47.060 in to help us with the reliability and resiliency for 01:33:47.069 --> 01:33:49.739 this upcoming Winter and Winters in the future. So 01:33:49.750 --> 01:33:51.890 so as a little bit of elaboration, I think Commissioner 01:33:52.409 --> 01:33:55.720 Glotfelty will happily dovetail in on this. (item:41:Commissioner McAdams follow-up on Winter preparedness work session) A criticism 01:33:55.729 --> 01:33:59.060 of our existing framework has been that there is a 01:33:59.208 --> 01:34:04.418 there is a limitation on the pool of uh consumer participants 01:34:04.430 --> 01:34:08.119 in our existing demand response programs. And so this 01:34:08.128 --> 01:34:12.500 workshop would provide a venue. To again uh advertise 01:34:12.509 --> 01:34:17.399 uh make aware and harness the energy of uh of a broader 01:34:17.579 --> 01:34:21.668 segment. Of not just industrial consumers but small 01:34:21.680 --> 01:34:26.069 commercial and industrial consumers. Um and, and again 01:34:26.079 --> 01:34:28.970 make them aware of how they can avail themselves of 01:34:28.979 --> 01:34:32.060 these programs. And lend a hand to the system in times 01:34:32.069 --> 01:34:35.168 of need. And ultimately, I, I think this is, this is 01:34:35.180 --> 01:34:38.689 an opportunity for us. (item:41:Commissioner Glotfelty on Winter preparedness work session) I, I'm totally supportive of 01:34:38.699 --> 01:34:42.009 this. And the, if we totally focus on the supply side 01:34:42.020 --> 01:34:45.029 uh our hands are tied. We have to focus on the supply 01:34:45.039 --> 01:34:47.958 And the, I'm sorry if we only focus on the supply side 01:34:48.048 --> 01:34:49.989 our hands are tied. We have to focus on the demand 01:34:50.000 --> 01:34:52.208 side as well. And that means all customer classes. 01:34:52.539 --> 01:34:56.259 I think that some newspaper, I don't remember which 01:34:56.270 --> 01:34:59.418 one it was. Said conservation calls are effectively 01:34:59.430 --> 01:35:02.918 free demand response. And if we really want to better 01:35:02.930 --> 01:35:07.909 understand how that can affect the system on a repetitive 01:35:07.918 --> 01:35:10.878 basis. Understanding what the costs are and how we 01:35:10.890 --> 01:35:12.989 can pay for that. Will give us a better understanding 01:35:13.000 --> 01:35:16.020 of the value of that going forward. And how it affects 01:35:16.029 --> 01:35:18.600 the system and the cost of the system and the reliability 01:35:18.609 --> 01:35:22.489 of the system. So I'm all for this effort. Yeah. (item:41:Chairman Jackson on Winter preparedness work session) So 01:35:22.500 --> 01:35:24.850 I look forward to getting um the update and having 01:35:24.859 --> 01:35:28.319 the opportunity to sit down in a uh work session with 01:35:28.329 --> 01:35:31.399 all of the Commissioners here. Get the invited testimony 01:35:31.409 --> 01:35:34.720 and kind of ask those questions. What tools can we 01:35:34.729 --> 01:35:37.100 kind of use moving forward to address the upcoming. 01:35:37.649 --> 01:35:39.939 (item:41:Thomas Gleeson on finalizing agenda topics) Yes, ma'am. So with that, we will continue to work 01:35:39.949 --> 01:35:42.909 with you all. To finalize agenda topics and reach out 01:35:42.918 --> 01:35:46.449 to presenters um for that day. And we will also open 01:35:46.458 --> 01:35:49.390 a new project so that those presenters can file their 01:35:49.399 --> 01:35:51.838 presentations there and we can also get comments from 01:35:51.850 --> 01:35:56.109 other parties. Great. Great. So to the market, please be watching 01:35:56.159 --> 01:36:00.918 Stay tuned. Very good. Uh I don't have anything for 01:36:00.930 --> 01:36:03.548 Item 42 or 43. 01:36:05.088 --> 01:36:08.409 There is nothing for closed session. (item:44:Chairwoman Jackson adjourns meeting) There being no 01:36:08.418 --> 01:36:10.609 further business to come before the Commission. This 01:36:10.619 --> 01:36:13.359 meeting of the Public Utility Commission of Texas is 01:36:13.369 --> 01:36:16.039 hereby adjourned at 11:14.