[00:00:01]
IS THE OCTOBER ATTACK MEETING.I'M GONNA TAKE THE REINS TODAY WITH CLIFF OUT.
[1. Antitrust Admonition]
THE ANTITRUST IS ON THE SCREEN.UM, TO AVOID RAISING CONCERNS ABOUT ANTITRUST LIABILITY, PARTICIPANTS IN ERCO ACTIVITY SHOULD REFRAIN FROM PROPOSING ANY ACTION OR MEASURE THAT WOULD EXCEED ERCOT AUTHORITY UNDER FEDERAL OR STATE LAW.
AND THERE'S MORE INFORMATION ON THE WEBSITE, UH, THE ALT REPS AND PROXIES.
UH, TODAY WE HAVE TWO ALT REPS, BOTH IN THE COOPERATIVE SEGMENT FOR CHRISTIAN POWELL, UH, PURELLI.
AND CLIFF LANGE HAS GIVEN HIS ALT REP TO JOHN PACKARD OF STACK, UM, FOR PROXIES IN THE CONSUMER SEGMENT.
GARRETT KENT HAS GIVEN HIS PROXY TO MIKE REED.
ALRIGHT, I DON'T SEE RICHARD, I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD.
IT SHOULD BE BILL SMITH AFTER ONE 15 FOR GARRETT KENT.
I WAS GONNA GO TO RICHARD FOR THE THEME OF THE DAY, BUT I DON'T SEE HIM HERE.
SO WE CAN, YOU KNOW, CIRCLE BACK TO OTHER BUSINESS AT THE END OF THE MEETING.
WE CAN GET STARTED ON OUR AGENDA.
[2. Approval of TAC Meeting Minutes (Vote)]
FIRST IS THE MINUTES, UM, THE SEPTEMBER 26TH, UH, MEETING MINUTES.I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY EDITS OR COMMENTS.
UH, CAN SOMEONE FROM ERCOT CONFIRM? I SEE SUSIE NODDING.
UM, IF THERE ARE NOT ANY OTHER EDITS OR COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS, I WOULD SUGGEST WE GO AHEAD AND PLACE THIS ON THE COMBO BALLOT.
I'LL GO WITH THE COMBO BALLOT FOR THE MINUTES, BUT I DID HAVE A REC SUGGESTION FOR THE AGENDA.
WANTED TO DISCUSS, UM, SOME SUSPECT SCED PRINTS FROM SUNDAY AND WHERE WE STAND WITH THE POTENTIAL PRICE CORRECTION.
HOPING WE CAN ADD THAT SOMEWHERE ON THE AGENDA.
UM, WE WERE PLANNING TO ADD, ADD THAT TO OTHER BUSINESS.
UNDER OTHER BUSINESS, I, I HAD REQUESTED TWO ITEMS AND I THINK WE'LL TAKE THEM UP AT THE TOP OF OTHER BUSINESS.
I WAS HOPING FOR SORT OF A, A STATUS UPDATE ON THE, THE RFP, JUST FOR EVERYBODY AT TAC TO KNOW KIND OF WHEN, WHEN THE REVISED ONE IS OUT.
UM, MAYBE A HIGH LEVEL SUMMARY OF THE, THE WORKSHOP, UH, FROM FRIDAY.
AND THEN THE SECOND ITEM WOULD BE THE, THE PRINTS ON SUNDAY.
I BELIEVE KENNAN AND VENKAT WILL BE HERE UNDER OTHER BUSINESS.
KENNAN, DID YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING NOW? NO.
UM, SO EVERYONE'S OKAY WITH THE MINUTES GOING ON THE COMBO BALLOT.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT.
[3. Meeting Updates]
WE CAN MOVE TO MEETING UPDATES.WE DID HAVE, UH, OCTOBER BOARD MEETING SINCE WE MET FOR SEPTEMBER TECH, UM, AND TWO OPEN MEETINGS SINCE SEPTEMBER TECH, THE OCTOBER BOARD APPROVED ALL REVISION REQUESTS AS RECOMMENDED BY TECH FOR NPRR 1186.
THE BOARD ALSO DIRECTED ORCO TO FILE THE PRIORITY NPRS IT.
IT IS GONNA BE ONE OR MORE TO STRENGTHEN THE COMPLIANCE AND FINANCIAL PENALTIES TO MITIGATE RELIABILITY RISK FROM NPR R 1186.
UM, WE WILL SEE THOSE FILED WITH PRS.
THEY WILL HAVE AUTOMATIC URGENCY, UM, AND GO TO PRS, I BELIEVE TAC CAN DIRECT THEM TO COME STRAIGHT HERE.
UM, AND, AND IF ANYBODY WANTS FURTHER COMMENT, I'LL DEFER TO ANNE, BUT WE WILL BE LOOKING FOR THOSE AUTOMATIC PRIORITY AND PRRS AT THE OCTOBER 12TH PUC OPEN MEETING.
THE COMMISSION APPROVED ALL REVISION REQUESTS IN FRONT OF THEM.
THAT'S A DIFFERENT SET OF REQUESTS.
IF YOU'LL REMEMBER, WE, WE NOW HAVE THE 30 DAY REQUIREMENTS.
SO THOSE REQUESTS IN FRONT OF THEM WERE FROM THE AUGUST OR COP BOARD MEETING.
UM, COMMISSIONER GLUT FELTY HAD FILED A MEMO WITH QUESTIONS ON REVISION REQUESTS, WHICH WERE DISCUSSED AND ANSWERED AT THE MEETING.
AND SO WE APPRECIATE THE ROBUST DISCUSSION THERE.
AND THEY DID APPROVE ALL, ALL OF THOSE NPR IN FRONT OF THEM, I BELIEVE FROM THE AUGUST OR COP BOARD MEETING.
I, ANY QUESTION OR COMMENT THERE? I SEE RICHARD IS BACK.
RICHARD, DID YOU HAVE A THEME OF THE MONTH? YOU KNOW, I KIND OF EXPECTED THIS.
YOU KNOW, WE, WE TALKED, WE HAD A MEETING EARLIER THIS MONTH, AND I DISCUSSED THAT YOU HAD TO BEGIN YOUR PHRASES WITH AB AND END THEM WITH A, A, B.
AND SOME PEOPLE IN SPP HAVE TROUBLE WITH THIS TOO, BUT IT'S A MONTH, YOU KNOW, AND IT HAS 30 DAYS, AND SO IT'S STILL THE SAME MONTH.
[00:05:02]
WHICH WAS WHAT, BEGIN YOUR PHRASES WITH A, B, A WORD THAT BEGINS WITH B.SEE, BEGIN YOUR PHRASES AND END THEM WITH A, A WORD THAT ENDS, THAT BEGINS WITH B OR SOME COMBINATION THEREOF.
IT'S A LITTLE, YEAH, BECAUSE WE ARE NOW DONE WITH THAT.
UM, WE, WE, WAIT, WAIT A MINUTE.
[4. TAC Structural and Procedural Review (Vote)]
WE CAN GO TO THE TAX, STRUCTURAL, AND PROCEDURAL REVIEW WHILE WE ALL THINK OF WORDS TO START WITH B.UM, SO ON THIS ITEM, YOU KNOW, JUST TO LAY IT OUT, WE, WE DON'T NEED A VOTE, BUT WE CAN ENDORSE THE FINDINGS.
UM, AND I WON'T GO THROUGH ALL THE DOCUMENTS, BUT THEY'RE, THEY'RE IN THE ZIP FILE.
UM, THERE'S KIND OF DOCUMENTS, UH, SUMMARIES OF, OF FEEDBACK FROM THE SUBCOMMITTEES AND TASK FORCES FOR EVERYTHING UNDER TECH, EVERYTHING UNDER WMS, EVERYTHING UNDER ROSS, UM, RMS, ET CETERA.
UM, AND SO I THINK WHAT WE FOUND IS THAT ALL THE SUBCOMMITTEES AND WORKING GROUPS AND TASK FORCES ARE STILL NECESSARY AND UNDER ARE DUPLICATIVE AND, AND NONE NEED TO BE, YOU KNOW, DONE AWAY WITH.
UM, SO OF NOTE THIS YEAR WE DID CREATE THE CREDIT FINANCE WORKING GROUP.
AND SO WE RETIRED THE MARKET CREDIT WORKING GROUP THAT WAS UNDER WMS, UH, UNDER ROSS, THE INVERTER BASED RESOURCE TASK FORCE WAS CHANGED TO A WORKING GROUP.
SO THE STANDING WAS KIND OF DIFFERENT.
UM, CURRENTLY UNDER TECH WE HAVE THREE GROUPS DIRECTLY UNDER TECH.
WE HAVE THE CREDIT FINANCE SUBGROUP, THE NEW RTC PLUS B TASK FORCE, AND THE LARGE FLEXIBLE LOAD TASK FORCE.
THE L-F-L-T-F, I THINK SAID THEY'RE ABOUT HALFWAY DONE WITH THEIR WORK, AND WE ARE EXPECTING A UPDATED SCOPE THERE ON MEETING EFFICIENCY.
UH, THERE'S A REALLY GREAT SPREADSHEET THAT ERCOT PUT TOGETHER, KIND OF NOTING THAT THE NUMBER OF MEETINGS, HOW OFTEN THEY WERE CANCELED, RESCHEDULED, AND, UH, FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEES AND COMMITTEES, THE ATTENDANCE FOR VIRTUAL AND IN PERSON, KIND OF A MIX OF RESULTS THERE.
SO FOR, FOR TAC THIS GROUP, WE HAVE MORE PEOPLE ATTENDING IN PERSON FOR ROSS, FOR EXAMPLE, MORE PEOPLE TURNING ATTENDING BY WEBEX.
BUT YOU CAN PULL THOSE DOCUMENTS AND TAKE A LOOK AT THAT IF YOU'D LIKE.
I THINK WE CAN GO TO THE SLIDE ON ALIGNMENT OF GOALS WITH THE STRATEGIC GOALS.
AND DID YOU WANNA TALK THROUGH THIS SLIDE? SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT COREY UPDATES EVERY MONTH.
UM, IT'S A SPREADSHEET THAT'S POSTED ON, UH, THE TAC PAGE.
THIS JUST PUTS IT INTO A POWERPOINT SLIDE.
THIS IS WHAT WE USUALLY PER, UH, PRESENT TO THE BOARD WILL BE PRESENTED TO, UM, R AND M NEXT MONTH OR IN DECEMBER.
AND IT JUST SHOWS EACH REVISION REQUEST AND WHICH ONE OF THE T GOALS THAT IT HITS.
UM, THE NEXT SLIDE, THIS IS MORE DETAILED, BUT THE NEXT SLIDE KIND OF GIVES YOU A PERCENTAGE OF WHERE THE REVISION REQUEST FALLS AND WHAT BUCKETS THEY'RE FALLING IN, UM, BASED ON THE STRATEGIC PLAN OBJECTIVES.
ALRIGHT, ANY DISCUSSION OR QUESTION OR COMMENT ON HERE? ALL RIGHT.
UM, I WASN'T ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE, IN THE STRUCTURAL AND GOAL REVIEW, UM, A WEEK LAST WEEK OR THE WEEK BEFORE.
SO I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT DISCUSSING THIS THEN.
BUT, UM, BUT, UM, LAST YEAR WHEN WE REVIEWED THE GOALS, YOU ALL INDULGED ME BY ADDING GOAL NUMBER 18, WHICH WAS TO LOOK AT ALL THE ELEMENTS THAT WE HAVE ADAPTED OR CHANGED IN OUR MARKET THROUGH WINTER STORM SINCE WINTER STORM URI AND, AND LOOK HOLISTICALLY AT OUR MARKET AND EVALUATE WHETHER WE'RE ON THE RIGHT TRACK.
AND, UM, WE HAD SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT GOAL AT THE TIME, AND I, I THINK IT'S CLEAR THAT WE, WE REALLY HAVEN'T TAKEN THE TIME TO FULFILL THIS GOAL.
SO I'M NOT GONNA ASK THAT IT BE ON NEXT YEAR'S LIST OF GOALS.
BUT I, I JUST WANNA POINT OUT THAT I THINK IT IS THE ROLE OF THIS BODY AND THE STAKEHOLDER COMMITTEES TO WHICH THAT REPORT TO IT, TO LOOK HOLISTICALLY AT THE EFFICIENCY OF OUR MARKET AND, AND STAY FOCUSED ON MARKETS.
I MEAN, FUNDAMENTALLY THAT IS WHAT PURIST SAID, THAT WE SHOULD LOOK FIRST
[00:10:01]
AT COMPETITIVE MARKET SOLUTIONS RATHER THAN REGULATORY SOLUTIONS.AND I THINK WE NEED TO MAINTAIN THAT FOCUS BECAUSE I DON'T THINK ANYBODY ELSE IS.
UM, LAST WEEK'S MEETING OF THE BOARD SHOWED THAT THE BOARD IS NOT IN ALIGNMENT ON, ON FOCUSING ON EFFICIENCY AND DELIVERING RELIABILITY IN THE MOST EFFICIENT MANNER, WHICH I BELIEVE IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY.
SO I WON'T ASK THAT THIS, UH, REMAIN ON THE, ON THE GOAL LIST, BUT I DO THINK WE NEED TO BE MINDFUL OF WHY WE'RE HERE.
AND THAT IS AS LONG AS WE HAVE THIS MARKET DESIGN TO DELIVER RELIABILITY IN THE MOST EFFICIENT AND LOW COST WAY POSSIBLE.
ANY THIS, I WAS WAITING FOR THIS BECAUSE BOB AND BILL START WITH B.
SO MY OTHER STRATEGY WAS GONNA BE JUST CALL ON BOB AND BILL THE ENTIRE MEETING.
NO, WAIT, THAT'S NOT THE THEME.
CANON
YEAH, NO, MARK, THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP.
I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT THING.
IT NEEDS TO STAY ON THE LIST AND I THINK IT'S A LITTLE PREMATURE TO COMPLETELY DO THE HOLISTIC 'CAUSE WE GOT A WHOLE LOT OF STUFF TO DO.
BUT THERE IS ONE PIECE OF THAT THAT ACTUALLY REMINDED ME OF, AND THAT'S THE LAST SENTENCE IN THAT GOAL.
AND THAT'S TAKING A PIECE OF IT EVERY MEETING AND GOING THROUGH IT.
THAT'S SOMETHING WE HAVEN'T REALLY BEEN DOING.
THAT'S SOMETHING MAYBE FOR 2024 WE MIGHT WANNA LOOK AT IS, SINCE WE DIDN'T DO IT THIS YEAR, IS PUTTING THAT SINCE WE HAVE IT AS A GOAL.
IF IT STAYS A GOAL, THEN WE PROBABLY OUGHT TO DO THAT FOR 2024 IS TAKE ONE PIECE EACH EACH MONTH AND TAKE A LOOK AT IT.
UM, WHEN YOU SAY TAKE A LOOK AT EACH PIECE, UM, I WAS HOPING YOU COULD CLARIFY IF YOU, IF, IF YOU MEANT THAT TO BE, UH, GIVEN THAT THE INTENT HERE IS TO HAVE A HOLISTIC REVIEW, AND I AGREE THERE'S STILL A, A LOT OF WOOD TO CHOP AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL BE ABLE TO CHOP THROUGH THAT QUICKLY.
US AND, UH, YOU KNOW, AND POLICY MAKERS FRANKLY, BECAUSE THERE'S, THERE'S A LOT THAT HAS TO BE YET TO BE DONE.
YOU KNOW, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE, WE ARE RESPECTING THAT HOLISTIC MM-HMM.
THAT WOULD BE THE BEST WANT TO BE.
MAY I RESPOND TO THAT REAL QUICK? KATELIN? YEAH.
AND ACTUALLY IT'S JUST REALLY THAT LAST SENTENCE OF, AND I BELIEVE IT'S MORE TO MAKE SURE THAT AS WE'RE DOING IT, IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT ALL THOSE IN AGGREGATE, LIKE YOU SAID, IN A HOLISTIC STANDPOINT, IT'S TO MAKE SURE THAT WE KNOW HOW IT'S WORKING AND THAT WE ALL HAVE A, A BASE UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IT IS AND WHAT IT'S DOING.
SO WHENEVER WE DO GET THE HOLISTIC, WE'RE NOT STARTING OFF AT DIFFERENT PLACES.
WE HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IT'S DOING.
I APPRECIATE THAT CLARIFICATION.
ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THAT POINT? I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN DISCUSS FURTHER AS WE DO 2024 GOALS.
I, I THINK THAT MIGHT BE A COUPLE SEPARATE GOALS.
MAYBE ONE RELATED TO MARKET EFFICIENCY AND THEN ONE RELATED TO REVIEWING, UM, EVERY EVERYTHING TO ENSURE, I DON'T KNOW IF MAYBE WE CAN JUST SAY CONSISTENT IF IT'S NOT HOLISTIC YET.
UM, BUT I, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD DISCUSSION TO KEEP HAVING AS WE WORK ON OUR 2024 GOALS.
ARE WE, AND DID YOU HAVE ANY MORE ON THIS SET OF SLIDES? ALL RIGHT.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON, ON THE GOALS? ALRIGHT, WE CAN MOVE TO THE OPEN ACTION ITEMS LIST AND THAT IS THE LAST ELEMENT UNDER THIS ONE.
SO I WILL KIND OF DEFER TO THE GROUP.
UM, AGAIN, AT THE END OF THIS SEGMENT, WE CAN TAKE A VOTE OR NOT, WE'RE NOT REQUIRED TO VOTE, BUT WE CAN VOTE TO EN ENDORSE THE STRUCTURAL REVIEW.
IF WE WOULD LIKE TO ON, ON THIS LIST OF ACTION ITEMS, THE HIGHLIGHTED ITEMS OR ACTUALLY ITEMS WE ARE PROPOSING TO GO AHEAD AND DELETE.
AND THEN THERE IS ONE ITEM KIND OF HALFWAY DOWN, I THINK, RELATED TO THE, THE EPA REGULATIONS THAT WE WOULD BE PROPOSING TO REVISE.
[00:15:01]
UM, SO WHAT'S THE WILL OF THE GROUP? DOES EVERYONE WANNA KIND OF GO LINE BY LINE OR DO YOU WANT TO REVIEW THE, THE HIGHLIGHTED ITEMS ON YOUR OWN TIME?I THINK THERE'S A NOTE WHERE WE WANTED TO REVISE.
SO ON THE, THE ITEM DATED 12 5 22, UM, I THINK WE WERE JUST GOING TO FLUSH THIS OUT A LITTLE BIT MORE.
UH, THE, THE PROPOSED SENTENCE I HAVE FOR DESKTOP EDITS IS TO CHANGE THAT TO REVIEW IMPACTS OF PROPOSED EPA REGULATIONS ON THE RELIABILITY OF THE ERCOT GRID AND THE FUTURE RESOURCE MIX.
SO YOU WON'T OFFEND ME IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT.
ALL RIGHT, EMILY JOLLY THANKS.
UM, AND APPRECIATE THE FOLLOW UP FROM CLIFF.
I THINK I WAS THE ONE THAT RAISED THIS FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION AND TWEAKING.
UM, I THINK THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH, UH, WHERE I INTENDED THAT EDIT TO GO.
UM, I, WE DIDN'T HAVE A LOT OF DISCUSSION OF ANY OF THE OTHER ONES, SO I THINK, GIVEN THAT THE MAJORITY OF THEM ARE SAYING THE SAME, I'M COMFORTABLE APPROVING TODAY IF THAT'S THE WILL OF ATTACK.
I JUST WANNA SECOND THE, THE DRAFT LANGUAGE THAT YOU READ OUT, CAITLIN.
COREY, DO YOU NEED THE LANGUAGE? YES, PLEASE.
IT'S, UH, REVIEW IMPACTS OF PROPOSED EPA REGULATIONS ON THE RELIABILITY OF THE ERCOT GRID AND THE FUTURE RESOURCE MIX.
AND I THINK WE CAN PUT THIS ON THE, OKAY, GO AHEAD KEVIN.
I GUESS, DO WE ALSO WANT TO, BEYOND RELI RELIABILITY OF THE MARKET PRICES? 'CAUSE AGAIN, AS WE SAW LAST SUMMER, THE, UH, SEASONAL KNOCK PRICES WERE QUITE EXPENSIVE.
AND IF THAT'S GONNA BE THE NEW FUTURE, MEAN, DO WE NEED TO CONSIDER THAT THESE DISCUSSIONS SO WELL AS WELL? ALL RIGHT.
UH, ERIC GUFF, WOULD IT BE WORTH SAYING, UH, IMPACTS OF NEW AND PROPOSED EPA REGULATIONS OR, OR, OR, OR EXISTING AND PROPOSED MAYBE TWO.
UM, I, I'VE WONDERED ABOUT THE INTERACTION OF THE EXISTING REGULATIONS, UM, ON, ON HOW SOME OF THE OLDER UNITS ARE RUNNING.
I THINK BOB WANTS TO RESPOND TO THAT.
NOT TO THAT I, I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY A PRETTY GOOD IDEA.
BUT I WAS GOING BACK TO WHAT KEVIN WAS SAYING, I THINK THE WAY THIS IS WORDED, IT, IT REALLY DOES, WE CAN INCLUDE THE PRICING IN THERE.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT THAT INCLUDES EVERYTHING, NOT JUST A CAPACITY LEVEL AND A AND A PERCENTAGE OF MIX.
BUT ALSO WHAT THAT WOULD DO IN THE MARKET FORCES.
YEAH, BECAUSE I'M THINKING, YOU KNOW, LAST SUMMER I THINK WE HIT WHAT, $50,000 A TON.
AND IF WE ARE GOING BACK THERE, ONCE THE, UH, COURT HAS DECIDED WHAT THE RULES ARE, THAT'S A HUGE PRICING IMPACT ON THE MARKET.
SO ARE WE FEELING LIKE THIS CAPTURES THAT ADDITIONAL MARKET DISCUSSION AS WELL? ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I HAD HAD WAS, YOU KNOW, CAPTURING ALSO IN DISCUSSION ANY SORT OF TOOLS IN THE TOOLBOX OR CO HAS TO, TO, YOU KNOW, REMEDY OR MITIGATE ANY IMPACT ON RELIABILITY.
UM, AND I THINK THAT IS CAPTURED IN HERE.
SO I THINK IT WOULD CAPTURE DISCUSSION ON MARKET AS WELL.
BUT, BUT OPEN TO SUGGESTIONS ON THAT.
BOB, ARE YOU STILL IN THE QUEUE? WHENEVER WE'RE DONE
[00:20:01]
BEFORE WE LEAVE THE TOPIC, ARE WE DONE WITH DISCUSSION ON THIS ONE? KEVIN, ARE YOU OKAY WITH THIS OR? I, I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK.DO WE NEED TO DO RE UH, RELIABILITY AND MARKET PRICING IS THE QUESTION NED? I WAS JUST GOING TO SUGGEST WHAT IF WE CHANGE IT TO EXISTING PROPOSED EPA REGULATIONS ON THE ERCOT MARKET AND THE RELIABILITY OF THE ERCOT GRID.
AND THAT WAY WE'RE NOT SPEC SPECIFYING PRICING, BUT WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT OTHER MARKET IMPACTS THE REGULATIONS MIGHT HAVE.
YEAH, I WAS GONNA HAVE A SIMILAR COMMENT.
UM, I THINK THAT GETS TO THE SAME OUTCOME THOUGH.
NO, I'M WAITING, YOU'RE WAITING UNTIL THE END OF THIS DISCUSSION.
THE END OF THE DISCUSSION AND THEN WE CAPTURED YOUR RESPONSE.
CAN I, BRITTANY, CAN I REQUEST THAT WE PUT, 'CAUSE I THINK WE'RE GETTING SOME OF THE NAMES IN THE ROOM ON THE LIST, BUT NOT ALL OF THEM.
AND SO I FEEL LIKE I'M GETTING OUT OF ORDER.
UH, I, I'LL CAPTURE AS QUICKLY AS I POSSIBLY CAN.
SOMETIMES CARD GOES UP AND YOU CALL THEM SOUNDS BEFORE I CAN EVEN ADD IT TO THE YEP.
SO WE ARE, ARE WE GOOD WITH THIS DISCUSSION? SO WE HAVE CHANGED THIS NOW.
IT NOW READS REVIEW IMPACTS OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED EPA REGULATIONS ON THE ERCOT MARKET AND RELIABILITY OF THE ERCOT GRID AND THE FUTURE RESOURCE MIX.
I THINK THAT CAPTURES EVERYTHING.
MARKET RELIABILITY AND RESOURCE MIX.
ALRIGHT, I THINK WE'RE ARE DONE WITH THIS ITEM.
SO BOB HILTON, THIS IS JUST OVERALL ON THE, LET ME RESTART THIS BEFORE I START MY COMMENTS.
I WANT TO APOLOGIZE TO ALL OF THE CHAIRS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEES FOR WHAT I'M ABOUT TO SAY.
SO YOU'VE GOT OCTOBER, NOVEMBER, DECEMBER AND LOOKING AT AN UPDATE ON WHERE WE STAND, ESPECIALLY THE 2022 STUFF, WHERE DO WE ACTUALLY STAND? 'CAUSE I'M A LITTLE, I'M NOT SURE THAT WE T UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHERE WE'RE AT ON THESE, SO IT MIGHT NOT BE A BAD IDEA FOR THOSE ASSIGNED TO COME BACK AND JUST GIVE US AN UPDATE TO START OUT 2024, WHERE ARE WE AT ON THESE AND WHAT ARE WE PLANNING TO DO FOR 'EM FOR 24? I MEAN, THAT'S WHY I WAS APOLOGIZING TO THE CHAIRS 'CAUSE GIVEN THEM MORE WORK.
I THINK THAT'S A GOOD SUGGESTION AND I, I THINK WE'VE PROBABLY DONE A LOT OF THE, THE LEGWORK.
WE, WE'VE HIGHLIGHTED ALL THE ONES THAT THE CHAIRS OF THOSE SUBCOMMITTEES GAVE INPUT ON.
SO I THINK THEY PROBABLY, I FIGURE THEY HAVE A REALLY GOOD HANDLE ON IT.
IT'S JUST THAT, JUST ASKING THAT THEY JUST DO A, OKAY, SO WE'LL, WE'LL ASK FOR THAT IN JANUARY.
AND I THINK I HEARD A SUGGESTION TO PUT THIS.
YEAH, JUST TO RESPOND TO BOB, UM, THE EXPERIENCE I'VE SEEN WITH, WITH WMS IS, YOU KNOW, WE TAKE THE ASSIGNMENTS AND THEN WE'VE TAKEN, WE'VE THEN ASSIGNED THOSE TO WORKING GROUPS MOSTLY WMWG.
AND UM, SO SOMETIMES WE'RE, WE'RE LIMITED IN, IN, IN THEIR MEETING ABILITIES AND WHETHER THEY HAVE PENDING, YOU KNOW, NPRS USUALLY IS WHAT, WHAT DRIVES THAT.
BUT I JUST WANT, I SAY I I TOTALLY AGREE THAT STAYING ON TOP OF THIS LIST, JIM AND I, AT LEAST AT WMS, I KNOW THE OTHERS, UH, DO AS WELL.
WE, WE TRY TO STAY ON TOP OF IT, BUT IT IS, IS REALLY A CHALLENGE.
AND SOMETIMES BY THE TIMES WE GET TO IT, IT'S BEEN A YEAR OR TWO LATER AND WE FORGET WHAT THE ISSUE WAS.
Y YEAH, THAT'S WHY I WANT TO GO DO THAT AND I CAN I RESPOND? YES, PLEASE DO.
AND ACTUALLY SAYING WE'VE GOT IT AT WMWG AND HERE'S WHAT THEY'RE DOING IS A COMPLETELY ACCEPTABLE ANSWER.
'CAUSE THEN THAT, THAT KIND OF PUTS IT BACK IN THE, THE WORKING GROUPS JUST TOP OF MIND.
ALRIGHT, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON, ON THIS DOCUMENT? I, I BELIEVE I HEARD A PROPOSAL TO GO AHEAD AND
[00:25:01]
ENDORSE THIS TODAY AND I THINK WE CAN PUT THAT ON THE COMBO BALLOT UNLESS ANYBODY OBJECTS TO THAT.COREY, CAN WE ADD ENDORSING? SO, SO WHAT I WAS TOLD WAS THAT WE DON'T NEED TO VOTE, BUT WE CAN VOTE TO ENDORSE THE FINDINGS PRESENTED IN THE 2023 TECH STRUCTURAL PROCEDURAL REVIEW.
SO IT WOULDN'T BE EVEN SPECIFICALLY THIS DOCUMENT, BUT I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE MOTION WOULD LOOK LIKE.
I SEE CORY FROWNING A LITTLE BIT, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE, WELL NO, I WAS FROWNING ON SPECIFICALLY THIS, BUT IF IT'S ROLLED INTO THE WHOLE PACKAGE OF EVERYTHING YOU'VE HEARD, THEN YES, THE TOTALLY, I'LL ADD THAT TO THE COMM BALLOT AND THAT STILL WORKS FOR EVERYBODY IN THE ROOM OR ONLINE.
SO THAT WOULD BE ON THE COMBO BALLOT AND IT WOULD BE ENDORSED THE FINDINGS PRESENTED IN THE 2023 TAX STRUCTURAL PROCEDURAL REVIEW.
[5. Review of ERCOT Market Impact Statements/Opinions and IMM Opinions]
ON A REVIEW OF ERCOT MARKET IMPACT STATEMENTS AND ERCOT OPINIONS AND IMM OPINIONS.UM, SO I THINK I WILL TURN THIS ERCOT PART OVER TO ANNE.
UM, ERCOT IS IN SUPPORT OF ALL OF THE REVISION REQUESTS THAT ARE BEING PRESENTED AT TAC TODAY.
UM, EXCEPT FOR NOGA 2 45 AND PGR 1 0 5, WHICH WE DID STATE LAST MONTH THAT WE'RE STILL NOT IN SUPPORT OF HOW ROSS RECOMMENDED THEM.
UM, BUT I BELIEVE THOSE TWO ITEMS ARE GONNA REMAIN TABLED THIS MONTH.
AND THEN IMM DID SU UM, SUBMIT THEIR OPINIONS? THEY ARE IN SUPPORT OF 1203, THE ASSOCIATED O BDRS 49 AND 50 11 72, 11 96, AND 2 45, AND NO OPINIONS ON THE OTHER ONES.
I DON'T KNOW IF CARRIE WANTS TO ADD ANYTHING.
UH, CARRIE BIVINS WITH POTOMAC ECONOMICS.
UM, I, AFTER WE SUBMITTED THESE OPINIONS, I, YOU KNOW, I'M AWARE THAT THERE WAS A LETTER FILED AROUND THE IMPLEMENTATION OF DRRS AND OF COURSE WE WOULD MUCH PREFER A STANDALONE PRODUCT FOR DRS.
WE'RE JUST RECOGNIZING THAT THERE'S A STATUTORY DEADLINE AND, AND, AND DISCUSSION WITH ER CUT AT THE WORKSHOP.
IT FEELS LIKE 1203 IS THE ONLY WAY TO MEET THAT DEADLINE.
BUT IF THAT DEADLINE BECOMES MOOT, WE CERTAINLY WOULD PREFER A STANDALONE PRODUCT THAT WOULD BETTER ADDRESS THE RELIABILITY NEED AND HAVE MORE ACCURATE PRICING.
UM, I GUESS SOME CONSIDERATIONS IN MY MIND ARE THAT IT COULD POTENTIALLY DELAY RTC, UM, IF IT WAS DONE PRIOR AS A STANDALONE ITEM PRIOR TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF RTC INSTEAD OF IT BEING ROLLED INTO.
SO AS Y'ALL ARE DISCUSSING THAT TODAY, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S ON MY MIND.
UM, AND SOME OTHER THINGS THAT ARE ON MY MIND IS THAT THE HOLISTIC REVIEW OF ANCILLARY SERVICES IS NOT YET COMPLETE.
WE STILL DON'T KNOW HOW DRS IS GONNA BE PROCURED OR DEPLOYED, AND THAT MORE DESIGN DISCUSSION WOULD BE NEEDED IF, UH, THIS BODY DECIDES TO GO WITH MORE OF A STANDALONE DRR APPROACH, DRS APPROACH, I THINK IT WOULD BE POSITIVE TO HAVE MORE DESIGN DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THAT.
AND I SEE A COUPLE OF PEOPLE IN THE QUEUE NOW.
UM, CARRIE WANTED TO RETURN TO THE DISCUSSION ON 1203.
UM, THAT'S TEED UP FOR US TODAY, UM, FOR APPROVAL.
UM, DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION ON PROCEDURALLY WHAT YOU'RE RECOMMENDING THAT TAC DO IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO MOVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS FORWARD ABOUT PRIORITIZATION AND WHETHER IT WOULD BE A STANDALONE PRODUCT? MY COMMENTS ARE RECOGNIZING THAT THERE'S A STATUTORY DEADLINE AND THAT WE'RE ALL STUCK WITH THAT.
I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT IF WE WOULD PREFER A STANDALONE PRODUCT, AND SO GIVEN THE FACT THAT SOME OF THE LEGISLATORS HAVE WOR WEIGHED IN, PERHAPS THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY, UM, TO MAKE A DIFFERENT CHOICE.
BUT WHERE WE ARE AT NOW, WE UNDERSTAND THAT 1203 IS THE, IS THE WAY THAT WE HAVE TO GO, BUT STANDALONE PRODUCT WOULD BE PREFERABLE.
AND THE, WE APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT ERCOT IS COMMITTED TO ROLLING DRS INTO THE RTC PROJECT.
EMILY, DID YOU WANNA RESPOND TO THAT? YOU GOOD? OKAY.
KENAN, I THINK YOU WANTED TO WEIGH IN ON 1203.
UM, BASICALLY WE ARE GOING TO ASK THAT 1203 BE TABLED AT TAC TODAY TO ALLOW FOR TIME TO CONSIDER THE, THE LETTER, UM, ACCOMPANYING THAT THE TWO BDRS WOULD ALSO, OUR, OUR REQUEST WOULD BE THAT THEY'RE TABLED.
UM, AND THIS WOULD GIVE I, I THINK THE COMMISSION TIME TO DIGEST, UH, THAT FILING.
FURTHERMORE, UH, WE CAN STILL MAKE THE DECEMBER BOARD, UH, THIS IS URGENT.
SO, UM, WE, I, I THINK THERE'S A
[00:30:01]
DECEMBER 4TH TAC MEETING, IF I REMEMBER RIGHT.AND, UM, WE COULD VOTE THAT, VOTE THOSE THREE ITEMS OUT THEN AND, UH, STILL MAKE THE DEADLINE, BUT POSSIBLY GET INSTRUCTION TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
SO THE ERCOT REQUEST THAT WE'LL GET TO LATER IS THAT WE WOULD TABLE 1203, UM, AND WE'D HAVE TIME TO BRING IT BACK TO THE DECEMBER 4TH TAC AND THEN IT WOULD GO TO DECEMBER BOARD.
UM, BUT WE WILL GET TO THAT DISCUSSION DURING NEXT ITEM.
UM, NEXT IN THE QUEUE ON THE ERCOT AND IMM OPINIONS, I SEE BRIAN SAMS, HEY, GOOD MORNING, CAITLYN.
GOOD TO SEE YOU BACK UP, UP HERE.
UM, THE, THIS HOLISTIC REVIEW, I MEAN, I LOVE IT, BUT I FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO HAVE THE DIRECTION ON A RELIABILITY STANDARD FIRST BECAUSE HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO SOLVE FOR UNTIL YOU HAVE THAT STANDARD SET? UM, AND TO ME THAT'S JUST A FOUNDATIONAL PIECE AND UNTIL WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION AND THAT DIRECTION, I DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH, UH, A DISCUSSION ON A HOLISTIC STANDARD.
UM, I, I MIGHT LET CARRIE RESPOND, BUT I BELIEVE WAS THE HOLISTIC ANCILLARY SERVICE REVIEW A REFERENCE TO THE, THE LEGISLATION FROM ON HAVING A ANCILLARY SERVICE STUDY FROM 20, FROM TWO SESSIONS AGO.
AND I BELIEVE THAT THAT'S A SEPARATE ITEM FROM THE RELIABILITY STANDARD AND CAN GO ON A DIFFERENT TRACK.
ALTHOUGH I ALSO SAW KAAN PUT UP HIS CARD, SO HE MIGHT HAVE SOMETHING ON THAT.
UM, SO I THINK WE CAN GO TO YES, PLEASE RESPOND.
OH, CANNAN WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND.
UM, YEAH, I, I THINK, UH, WE WOULD LOOK AT THE, THESE AS D SEPARATE OPERATIONAL RESERVES AND THE METHODOLOGY BY WHICH WE PROCURE THEM AND THE QUANTITIES IN OUR OPINION, UH, MIGHT, UH, PLAY INTO RESERVE MARGINS.
BUT THE REVIEW AND EXAMINATION OF THOSE THAT HAPPEN BOTH IN THE ANNUAL ANCILLARY SERVICE METHODOLOGY AND IN WHAT WAS REQUESTED, UH, BY THE LEGISLATURE, UH, DON'T DIRECTLY TIE INTO, UH, THE RESOURCE ADEQUACY MECHANISM FROM FROM ERCOT PERSPECTIVE.
IN OTHER WORDS, I STILL NEED TO MANAGE THE SINGLE LARGEST CONTINGENCY, UH, AND PROCURE, UH, UH, FREQUENCY RESPONSIVE RESERVE TO MANAGE THAT.
WHETHER THERE'S A REQUIREMENT FOR A RESERVE MARGIN, A PLANNING RESERVE MARGIN OF, UH, ANY AMOUNT, UH, I STILL NEED TO DO THAT WORK.
I, I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING FOR SOME OF THE ANCILLARY SERVICES, THAT THAT MIGHT BE TRUE FOR LIKE THE SINGLE LARGEST CONTINGENCY, BUT MAYBE NOT FOR EVERYTHING.
AND, UM, I'M SURE THIS WILL BE A CONTINUED JUST TOPIC OF DISCUSSION ALL NEXT YEAR.
SO MADAM CHAIR, DID YOU WANNA HOLD QUESTIONS ON 1203 UNTIL WE GET THERE? I HAD SOME QUESTIONS FOR CANAN BASED ON HIS COMMENTS ON IMPLEMENTATION.
UM, UNLESS IT RELATES TO, YOU KNOW, THE, THE DISCUSSION ON THE, THE IMM OPINION ON IT, I WOULD BE CURIOUS IF CARRIE'S OPINION CHANGES IF CHANGING DIRECTION ON IMPLEMENTING DRS CAUSES A MATERIAL DELAY IN RTC PLUS B, WHICH IS OUR PRIMARY CONCERN.
CARRIE, DO YOU WANNA RESPOND TO THAT? YES.
IF IT WAS A MATERIAL DELAY, I DO THINK THAT THERE SHOULD BE SOME CONSIDERATION OF THE PRIORITIZATION OF RTC OVER DRRS.
AND BILL
BOB HILTON, DID YOU HAVE A COMMENT? OKAY.
IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THE, THE ER AND IMM OPINIONS? AND WE WILL HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION ON, ON 1203, JUST HERE IN A SECOND.
[6. PRS Report (Vote)]
WE CAN GO TO THE PRS REPORT.MARTHA, IF YOU ARE READY, I THINK WE WILL PAUSE AFTER THE FIRST SLIDE, BUT WE MIGHT NEED TO TAKE EACH ITEM ON THE FIRST SLIDE SEPARATELY AS WELL.
UM, I BELIEVE IN ADDITION TO 1203 THERE, THERE'S ONE OTHER ONE THAT MAY NEED TO BE TABLED.
[00:35:01]
MAYBE WE'LL TAKE THESE EACH ONE AT A TIME AND THEN PAUSE AFTER THIS SLIDE AS WELL.MARTHA HENSON WITH ENCORE WITH THE PRS UPDATE.
SO THERE'S FIVE NPRS COMING TO TAC FROM PRS TODAY FOR CONSIDERATION, COREY, WHICH, UH, SCREEN WE IS ACTIVE.
UH, THE, THE FIRST TWO HERE ARE UNOPPOSED, AND BOTH OF THESE WERE SPONSORED BY ERCOT.
SO 1193 IS RELATED TO ERCOT EFFORTS TO MOVE THE OTHER BINDING DOCUMENTS INTO THE PROTOCOLS AND GUIDES.
UM, THE, THE EPS METERING DESIGN PROPOSAL FORM ITSELF IS MOVING FROM AN OBD INTO THE SMOG.
AND SO THE, THE PROTOCOL REFERENCE TO THAT FORM NEEDS TO SHOW THIS NEW LOCATION.
SO THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT THE NPRR IS DOING.
UM, AND THEN THERE'S THE RELATED SMUGGER THAT'S STILL AT, STILL PENDING AT WMS. SO THE RECOMMENDATION MIGHT BE TO, TO TABLE THIS ONE TO WAIT FOR THIS SMUGGER TO GET HERE.
1196 IS MODIFYING THE EQUATIONS USED TO DETERMINE ANCILLARY SERVICES FAILED QUANTITY CALCULATIONS FOR NON-CONTROLLABLE LOAD RESOURCES.
AND BOTH OF THESE FIRST TWO NPR WERE NO IMPACT, UH, GETTING INTO THE ONES THAT DID HAVE COST IMPACTS IN THE IAS.
1192 IS, IS ALSO RELATED TO THE EFFORT TO ELIMINATE OTHER BINDING DOCUMENTS THAT BRITTANY'S WORKING ON.
UM, IT'S ACTUALLY MOVING THE AGGREGATE LOAD RESOURCE PROCEDURE FROM AN OBD INTO THE PROTOCOLS.
UH, THE COST FOR THIS CHANGE IS LESS THAN 5,000 IN O AND M FOR ERCOT.
AND THEN LAST ON THIS SLIDE, WHICH HAS ALREADY BEEN DISCUSSED, SOME IS NPRR 1203, WHICH WAS SPONSORED BY ERCOT.
IT'S ESTABLISHING THE DISPATCHABLE RELIABILITY RESERVE SERVICE, UH, AS AN ANCILLARY SERVICE PRODUCT.
UH, IT WAS REQUIRED BY HB 1500 TO BE IMPLEMENTED BY THE END OF NEXT YEAR, AS PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY SAID, AND AS PROPOSED IN THIS NPRR, UH, DRS WOULD BE A SUBTYPE OF NONS SPIN.
SO PRS GRANTED URGENT STATUS TO THIS, UH, EARLIER THIS MONTH AND RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF IT WITH SOME COMMENTS THAT ERCOT FILED ON OCTOBER 12TH.
THOSE COMMENTS WERE BASICALLY EXPRESSING A COMMITMENT FROM ERCOT TO, UH, DEVELOP DRS AS A STANDALONE PRODUCT AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE, UH, BASICALLY IN A WAY THAT ALIGNS WITH THEIR OTHER OBLIGATIONS AND PRIORITIES THAT ARE ON THEIR PLATE.
UM, SINCE THE PRS MEETING, THERE WERE SOME COMMENTS SUBMITTED BY EVA ON FRIDAY, ALTHOUGH THOSE ARE NOT PROPOSING ANY RED LINE CHANGES TO 1203.
AND LAST, THE COST AS SHOWN IN THE IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR 1203 IS 1 MILLION TO ONE AND A HALF MILLION PRS ASSIGNED.
THIS A 2023 PRIORITY WITH THE RANK OF THREE 70.
AND THEN I THINK WE JUST HEARD FROM ANO A POTENTIAL REQUEST TO TABLE THIS TODAY.
LET'S, UM, SEE IF WE CAN TAKE THE FIRST THREE AND THEN IF THERE'S FURTHER DISCUSSION ON 1203, WE CAN TAKE THAT UP ON NPRR 1193.
THE REQUEST WOULD BE TO TABLE THIS BECAUSE WE ARE AWAITING ON THE, THE SMUGGER.
AND SO WE'D BE LOOKING TO PUT MAYBE ON THE COMBO BALLOT TABLE NPR 1193, UM, FOR 1196.
THE REQUEST WOULD BE RECOMMEND APPROVAL AS RECOMMENDED BY PRS IN THE 10 12 PRS REPORT.
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF NPR 1192 AS RECOMMENDED BY PRS IN THE 10 12 PRS REPORT.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THOSE FIRST THREE AND PRRS, OR CAN WE ADD THOSE ITEMS I LAID OUT TO THE COMBO BALLOT? I DON'T SEE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS THERE.
COREY, CAN WE DO THAT? ALL RIGHT.
UM, SO THEN 1203, WE WERE JUST DISCUSSING, DO WE HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS AT THIS TIME? ALRIGHT, I SEE.
I THINK KAN WAS FIRST AND THEN BILL BARNES.
UM, SO, UH, AS WE, UH, COMMUNICATED AT PRS, ERCOT IS COMMITTED TO PRO EVENTUALLY DELIVERING DRRS AS A STANDALONE SERVICE, UM, AND PUT LANGUAGE IN, UH, TO NPRR 1203.
ACCORDINGLY, SINCE WE FILED THOSE COMMENTS, THERE'S BEEN A LETTER, UH, FILED BY KEY LEGISLATORS ASKING THAT THE COMMISSION INSTRUCT US TO ONLY DO A STANDALONE SERVICE FOR DRRS.
[00:40:01]
THAT WOULD BE A, UH, BETTER PATH TO GO, BUT THE STATUTE EXISTS AS IT AS IT DOES.UM, SO WE'RE WORKING AND WANT TO PROVIDE THE COMMISSION THE LEEWAY TO CONSIDER THAT LETTER AND SEE WHAT IS, UH, FEASIBLE, UH, IN TERMS OF INSTRUCTIONS THAT THEY CAN GIVE US.
UM, WITH THAT IN MIND, I WOULD BE REQUESTING THAT TAC TABLE NPRR 1203 AND THE ACCOMPANYING OTHER BINDING DOCUMENT, UH, REVISIONS, UH, TO, UH, ALLOW US TO BOTH WORK WITH THE COMMISSION AND GIVE THE COMMISSION AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMUNICATE ITS INTERESTS.
UM, AND I THINK THERE'S AN OPEN MEETING COMING UP NEXT WEEK, AND THERE MIGHT BE ONE MORE BEFORE TAC MEETS IF, IF I'M REMEMBERING THE SCHEDULE RIGHT.
UM, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY, ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, I, I I CAN TRY AND ANSWER YOUR QUESTION BILL AROUND REAL-TIME CO-OP OPTIMIZATION, IF THAT'S STILL OUTSTANDING QUESTION.
SO THE GOING ASSUMPTION HERE IS IF WE DO CHANGE DIRECTION, ERCOT WILL HAVE TO DO WHATEVER THEY NEED TO DO TO BE, TO STILL MEET THE STATUTORY OBLIGATION.
AND THERE ISN'T AN OPTION HERE TO IGNORE THE LAW.
SO THAT MEANS YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO CHANGE THE PRIORITY ON A LOT OF THINGS TO BE ABLE TO ACCELERATE A STANDALONE DRS IMPLEMENTATION, AND THAT YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO MEET A DECEMBER 1ST, 2024 STATUTORY OBLIGATION THAT WOULD PUSH EVERYTHING ELSE BACK IN POTENTIALLY A MEANINGFUL WAY.
SO AS STAKEHOLDERS, WHEN WE COMPARE THE TWO, I THINK WE SEE MUCH MORE VALUE IN RTC PLUS B IN TERMS OF, UM, IMPACT TO CONSUMERS.
AND I THINK WE WOULD HAVE CONCERNS IF THAT, IF THE CHANGE IN DIRECTION ON DROS WOULD CHANGE THE IMPLEMENTATION AND PUSH THAT BACK SIGNIFICANTLY.
SO I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN YOUR INITIAL THOUGHTS ON HOW THIS MIGHT IMPACT RTC PLUS B.
YEAH, SO, UM, I I GUESS I'M GONNA START OFF WITH SAYING WE, WE DON'T NECESSARILY SEE THE ORDER I, LIKE YOU ARE DESCRIBING.
SO, UM, THE STATUTE, UH, INSTRUCTED THE PUC TO INSTRUCT US ON A DELIVERY DATE.
AND THE LETTER IS ASKING THE PUC TO INSTRUCT US TO ONLY DELIVER A STANDALONE SERVICE.
AND THERE IS, I, I MEAN, I'M, I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY, SO I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT OPTIONS THERE ARE, BUT I THINK WE ARE EXPLORING OPTIONS AROUND GOING PAST THE, UH, DELIVERY DATE, UH, OF DECEMBER 1ST, 2024.
WE, BEFORE WE STUDIED, AND THIS WAS IN THE, UH, INITIAL WORKSHOP THAT, THAT WE PUT TOGETHER, WE STUDIED EVERY WAY WE COULD THINK OF, OF A STANDALONE DRRS DELIVERED BY DECEMBER 1ST, 2024.
AND NONE OF THOSE WERE FEASIBLE.
AND THAT WAS THE FASTEST WAY WE, WE COULD DO, UH, DRRS AS A STANDALONE.
SO I, I DON'T SEE US BOTH BEING ABLE TO DO A STANDALONE SERVICE AND DELIVERING THAT DECEMBER 1ST, 2024.
I COULD PRI REPRIORITIZE, UH, AS, AS MUCH AS I WANTED.
UH, AND THERE'S JUST NOT ENOUGH TIME.
AND THE PRIMARY DRI, WELL, NOT THE PRIMARY, ONE OF MANY DRIVERS OF THAT IS AS A STANDALONE SERVICE, THERE WOULD BE MARKET TESTING REQUIRED THAT ADDS TIME TO THE OPTION WE'RE PROPOSING, WHICH IS NONS SPENT.
SO RICHARD, IF YOU DON'T MIND, I'M GONNA JUMP INTO WHAT WOULD DELAY OR NOT DELAY THINGS.
WANNA CLARIFY WHAT YOU JUST SAID PLEASE? WHAT I, WHAT I, WHAT I THINK I THOUGHT I UNDERSTOOD IT AND THEN I GOT CON GOT UNSURE.
WHAT I THINK YOU JUST SAID IN RESPONSE TO BILL'S CONCERN ABOUT RTC PLUS B WAS THAT EVEN IF YOU TOOK THAT OFF THE TABLE AND YOU FOCUSED ON DOING THE STANDALONE PRODUCT, YOU CAN'T MEET THE STATUTORY DEADLINE AND DO ALL THE STUFF THAT WE WERE REQUIRED TO DO THAT IN AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS.
AND SO SHUFFLING ALL THE PRIORITIES DOESN'T MEET, GET YOU TO MEET THAT DEADLINE ALONE.
AND SO THAT'S, THEY CUTTING IN A DELAY ALL OF BILL'S CONCERNS ABOUT SHUFFLING OF PRIORITIES.
IT, IT DOES MEAN THAT YOU CAN'T, CAN'T PUT THAT OFF AND MEET THAT.
[00:45:01]
SOMETHING ELSE HAS TO GIVE.WELL, I UNDERSTAND THAT TI TIME HAS, I HAVE TO, WELL, TIME YEAH.
HAVE 24 HOURS, FIVE HOURS IN A DAY AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF.
AND SO, SO THE BROADER DYNAMICS AROUND RTC, UM, IF WE GO WITH A STANDALONE SERVICE WITH A LITTLE BIT MORE OPEN-ENDED DELIVERY TIMELINE, THERE'S SOME TIME SAVINGS FRONT RELATIVE TO REAL-TIME CO-OP OPTIMIZATION IN THAT I DON'T HAVE TO GET IT THIS NPRR CODED AND DONE AND THEN WORK ON THE NEXT NPRR, WHICH WOULD BE A STANDALONE SERVICE ON THE BACKEND.
THERE COULD BE SOME RISK TO RTC FROM A STANDALONE SERVICE, BUT, SO THERE'S, THERE'S SOME SAVINGS UPFRONT.
I CAN BE A LITTLE BIT MORE FOCUSED ON REAL-TIME CO-OP OPTIMIZATION AND THE THINGS I NEED TO GET GET DONE, FINISHED ON THE BACKEND THERE, THERE COULD BE SOME CONVERGENCE AS I'M TRYING TO DELIVER, UH, STANDALONE DRRS AND REAL-TIME CO-OP OPTIMIZATION.
SO THE, WHAT YOU'RE REALLY FACING HERE IS THE ABILITY TO GET AN EXEMPTION OR SOME TYPE OF LEGAL COVER, UH, TO BE ABLE TO NOT ABIDE BY THE STATUTORY DEADLINE.
AND I, I AM NOT ABLE TO REALLY COMMENT ON THE VIABILITY OF ANY OPTIONS ON THAT FRONT.
ARE WE DONE WITH, FINISHED WITH THAT DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT.
YEAH, ACTUALLY THANKS A LOT FOR THAT DISCUSSION.
UH, BUT ONE THING THAT I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT IS THIS IS REALLY A POLY POLICY DECISION ON WHETHER TO DO STANDALONE OR WHETHER TO, TO GO BY WHAT WE NEED TO DO BY THE DATE OF THE STATUTE.
SO I THINK IF I'M OKAY WITH TABLING IT FOR ANOTHER MONTH, 'CAUSE WE DO HAVE ANOTHER MONTH FOR THE BOARD MEETING TO GET THERE, BUT IF WE DON'T HAVE A CLEAR ANSWER BY OUR NOVEMBER MEETING, I THINK THAT WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION AS TACT TO SAY, IF EVERYONE AGREES OF COURSE, OR ENOUGH AGREE TO SAY THAT BASED ON THE INFORMATION WE HAVE NOW OF A START DATE OF JANUARY THE FIRST 2024, THIS IS THE WAY TAC WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU HAVE TO DO IT BASED ON WHAT
I THINK WE'D HAVE TO DO THAT AND THEN LEAVE THAT TO THE BOARD FROM A POLICY STANDPOINT, WHICH HAS THE PUC THERE WITH THEM TO MAKE THAT POLICY CALL ON WHETHER TO DO IT THAT WAY OR TO MOVE IT ON TO, UH, STANDALONE.
BUT I THINK WE NEED TO KEEP THAT IN MIND THAT IT, WE STILL HAVE AN OBLIGATION THAT WE NEED TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING.
AND I MEAN, IF, IF THE DECEMBER BOARD WASN'T OUR TARGET, UH, IF, IF THE DATES HAD BEEN DIFFERENT, I DON'T THINK WE WOULD BE NECESSARILY THAT COMFORTABLE ASKING FOR A TABLE TODAY.
SO, UH, I THINK THE DYNAMICS ARE SUCH THAT WE NEED TO GIVE POLICY FOLKS TIME TO CONTEMPLATE WHAT'S FEASIBLE.
AND THEN WE HAVE THIS BEFORE YOU FOR THE DECEMBER FOUR TAC AND WE CAN MAKE A DECISION THEN.
AND JUST TO CLARIFY THAT TIMELINE, THERE ARE TWO OPEN MEETINGS BEFORE OUR NEXT TECH MEETING.
UM, THERE'S OPEN MEETINGS ON NOVEMBER 2ND AND NOVEMBER 30TH.
WE ACTUALLY DO NOT HAVE A TECH MEETING.
THE NOVEMBER, UM, IT OUR, WE'RE MEETING ON DECEMBER 4TH, KIND OF A NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER TAC MEETING.
THE, THE DECEMBER TAC MEETING WOULD BE SUFFICIENT TO GET IT TO THE BOARD IN TIME AND GET IT APPROVED.
SO NOW WE WILL GO TO JAY HARPO.
UH, I APPRECIATE THE, UH, UM, TABLING THAT KENON.
THAT'S, I THINK, I THINK THAT'S A, A GOOD IDEA TO GIVE THAT TIME FOR THE, UH, LEGISLATORS TO, TO WEIGH IN.
I DID HAVE A QUESTION ON, ON HOW IT'S WRITTEN CURRENTLY THOUGH.
UM, IN THE, IN THE NPRR, IT DOES SAY THAT A RESOURCE MUST BE OFFLINE.
UM, AND IN THE LEGISLATION THAT WAS WAS NOT IN THERE, UM, THOSE KIND OF FOUR WORDS THAT IT, WELL, TWO WORDS, I GUESS THAT IT MUST BE OFFLINE.
I'M WONDERING WHY THAT WAS, WAS ADDED AND IF THAT'S REALLY NECESSARY IN THIS NPRR.
DO YOU WANNA GO, GO AHEAD AND RESPOND.
UM, SO, UH, AND, AND, AND, UM, I KNOW IT'S A LONG TIME AGO, BUT WE, WE DID WALK THROUGH THAT IN THE WORKSHOP.
SO THE STATUTE DOES REQUIRE A ONE FOR ONE DECREASE IN RU UH, RUCK FOR CAPACITY.
AND IF A, IF THE UNIT'S ONLINE RUCK CONSIDERS IT AS ALREADY COMMITTED AND YOU WOULD NOT GET
[00:50:01]
A ONE FOR ONE DECREASE IN RUCK INSTRUCTION FROM ERCOT FOR A RESOURCE THAT'S ONLINE AND PROVIDING DRRS SO WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO MEET THE STATUTORY OBLIGATION WITH OUT THAT LANGUAGE.UM, ERIC GOFF WAS NEXT IN THE QUEUE.
I JUST WANTED TO ADD TO THE CONVERSATION BILL AND KANAN HAD, UM, I A HUNDRED PERCENT AGREE THAT WE DON'T WANT TO MATERIALLY DELAY RRTC.
UM, HOWEVER, I WOULD JUST NOTE AT THE LAST PRS MEETING, KANAN DESCRIBED A WORLD AT WHICH HE COULD DELIVER A STANDALONE RTC ABOUT THE STANDALONE DRRS ABOUT THE SAME TIME THAT, UH, RTC WAS DELIVERED WITHOUT HAVING MATERIAL DELAY ON D ON RTC.
SO I IMAGINE THAT IF THE COMMISSION, UM, AGREES WITH A STANDALONE PRODUCT THE WAY THE LEGISLATIVE LEGISLATIVE LETTER DESIRES, THAT WE COULD SEE A WORLD LIKE THAT.
IS THAT FAIR? KENAN? I'M GUESSING YOU WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND.
SO, UM, I, I BELIEVE AS LONG AS WE'RE NOT BEHOLDEN TO A SET DATE ON DRRS, AND YOU WILL LET ME SLIDE THAT EITHER BE BEFORE OR AFTER RTC BY I'M GUESSTIMATING SIX MONTHS.
MM-HMM
YOU KNOW, AND THAT'S, I KNOW NOTHING MORE ABOUT URGENT OTHER THINGS THAT COME IN, BUT RIGHT NOW THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT.
SO WITH THAT IN MIND, THAT REDUCES MY CONCERNS ABOUT THE IMPACTS OF A STANDALONE DRRS AND RTC AND I'M HOPEFUL THAT WE CAN HAVE THE WORLD THAT CAN NON DESCRIBE, UM, UM, THAT SAID, WE'LL KEEP AN EAGLE EYE ON ANY POTENTIAL DELAYS TO RTC, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THIS ONE, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO AVOID IT IF WE'RE CAUTIOUS AND PRUDENT.
KENNAN, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO RESPOND TO ON THAT ONE? ALRIGHT.
WE ARE NOW ON BRIAN SAMS, UM, I, I THINK THIS IS A SIMPLE QUESTION, BUT I I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND.
UH, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT STANDALONE, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT NOT A SUBSET OF, OF, UH, NONS SPIN.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M THINKING ABOUT STANDALONE AS SOME AS A PRODUCT THAT WOULD STILL BE CO OPTIMIZED AS PART OF RTC AND NOT SOMETHING OUTSIDE OF RTC OR IS THAT HOW YOU ALL ARE THINKING ABOUT IT? THAT, THAT'S A REALLY GOOD QUESTION.
IT IS NOT ACTUALLY AS SIMPLE AS YOU MIGHT IMAGINE.
UM, SO I THINK WE WOULD WANT TO EXAMINE THE PROS AND CONS OF DRRS BECAUSE IT'S A TWO HOUR LEAD TIME AND IT'S GONNA NEED TO BE TIED TO A RUCK RUN.
THERE ARE PROS AND CONS TO BOTH DAY AHEAD AND REAL TIME CO-OP OPTIMIZATION OF DRRS AND WE MIGHT ACTUALLY GET A BETTER UNCERTAINTY PRODUCT BY NOT CO-OP OPTIMIZING, UH, BOTH EITHER IN THE DAY AHEAD OR IN REAL TIME.
I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE WOULD WANNA BRING TO YOU TO TALK THROUGH AND AND DISCUSS.
BUT, UM, I THINK THE IMPORTANT THINGS ARE THAT WE ARE, UH, THE UNCERTAINTY PRODUCT REDUCES SYSTEM-WIDE RUCK, UM, AND IT HONORS THE, THE PARAMETERS THAT ARE IN THE STATUTE AROUND THE TWO HOUR LEAD TIME AND, AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THAT DESIGN.
I WOULD NOT ASSUME FROM THE OUTSET THERE, THERE WILL BE CO-OP OPTIMIZATION IN EITHER DAY AHEAD OR REAL TIME THAT PLAYS FAVORABLY TO, UM, DELIVERING REAL TIME CO-OP OPTIMIZATION ON, ON TIME.
SO THE CO-OP OPTIMIZATION OF THE DRS PRODUCT INTO RTC WOULD, IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT WOULD DELAY IMPLEMENTATION ON, ON RTC? THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD TAKE MORE IMPLEMENTATION TIME? NOT, NOT NECESSARILY.
NOT NECESSARILY, BUT UM, UH, IT JUST IS IS, UH, I, I, I THINK THE ISSUE MORE IS CAN WE ACHIEVE ALL OF THE OBJECTIVES AND GOALS AND WHAT'S THE BEST WAY FOR IT TO SIT? SO DO YOU WANT ME TO, IN EVERY FIVE MINUTES BE CO-OP, OPTIMIZING A TWO HOUR LEAD TIME PRODUCT THAT
[00:55:01]
ULTIMATELY REDUCES RUCK, HOW THAT'S GONNA WORK IS JUST GONNA NEED SOME DISCUSSION WITH ALL THE INTERESTED STAKEHOLDERS TO COME UP WITH THE RIGHT ANSWER.YEAH, I THINK TO THAT POINT AND WHAT, WHERE ERIC WAS GOING, I'D, I'D LIKE TO RESERVE JUDGMENT ON THE FINAL IMPACT ON WHAT'S GONNA BE ON RTC PLUS B AND HOW LONG THE DELAY IS.
UM, SO I MEAN, I, I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION AND, YOU KNOW, WEIGH THAT THAT'S A PRETTY BIG FACTOR IN THIS DECISION.
AND THEN, SO KANAN, I WANTED TO TOUCH ON JAY'S POINT A LITTLE BIT MORE, UM, OFFLINE VERSUS ONLINE, I THOUGHT THE RUCK ENGINE CONSIDERED, SO WHEN YOU'RE BUYING NONS SPEND, I'M GONNA COMPARE NONS SPIND, UH, TO DRS AS A STANDALONE PRODUCT.
THE WRECKAGE ENGINE, I BELIEVE CONSIDERS A FULL AMOUNT, NOT JUST WHAT'S OFFLINE, CORRECT? I BELIEVE THAT'S CORRECT.
SO WHY, WHY WOULD THAT NOT BE THE SAME FOR DRS IF WE ALLOW FOR ONLINE CAPACITY TO, TO PARTICIPATE? SO AGAIN, UM, THE IDEA IS THAT THAT CAPACITY, IF, IF YOU WANT A REDUCTION IN R THE RESOURCE HAS TO BE NOT COMMITTED.
OTHERWISE REMEMBER, UH, THE, THE FUNDAMENTAL, UH, PROBLEM THAT WE FACE IS KIND OF A DIFFERENCE IN OPINION AND FINANCIAL INCENTIVES ON THE COMMITMENT DECISION THAT THE RESOURCE OWNER HAS VERSUS WHAT ERCOT WOULD LIKE TO SEE.
AND TO BRIDGE THE DIFFERENCE, WE RUCK FOR CAPACITY.
IF YOU ARE SAYING, HEY, I'M ONLINE.
THERE, THERE ISN'T REALLY A, BUT THE R ENGINE, ITS OBJECTIVE IS TO COMMIT RESOURCES.
IF THERE'S RESOURCES HAVE ALREADY COMMITTED, THAT SHOULD BE A GOOD THING, RIGHT? THE WRECK ENG THE WRECK ENGINE SHOULD ACKNOWLEDGE THAT.
DO YOU WANT TO ANSWER THIS? I I THINK JEFF MIGHT NEED TO SUPPLEMENT MY ANSWER.
WELL, I I JUST WANTED TO ADD IT.
IT'S A LITTLE BIT WITH 1203, IT'S MOOT BECAUSE THOSE RESOURCES THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT CAN ALREADY PROVIDE NONS SPIND.
SO, AND THE WAY THAT 1203 IS SET UP, YOU'RE ADDING A SUBTYPE.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT CHANGING NONS SPIND OTHER THAN YOU'RE ADDING MORE RESOURCES THAT CAN, BUT YOU'RE NOT EXCLUDING ONES THAT ALREADY THAT CAN ALREADY PROVIDE NONS SPEND.
SO IT'S, IT'S MOOT THE FOR, FOR A STANDALONE.
I, I THINK THAT THERE ARE DETAILS WE STILL NEED TO WORK OUT AND I, I, I WOULD SAY LET'S SAVE THAT DISCUSSION FOR ANOTHER DAY.
AND THEN I'VE ASKED THIS QUESTION A FEW TIMES, I DON'T THINK I'VE GOT AN ANSWER YET.
HOW MUCH CAPACITY EXISTS IN THE MARKET THAT HAS A START TIME, LONGER THAN 30 MINUTES, BUT EQUAL TO OR LESS THAN TWO HOURS? HOW BIG IS THIS MARKET? THIS IS A, SO THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT A STANDALONE PRODUCT.
'CAUSE IF IT'S THIN, THIS IS JUST GONNA MAKE EVERYTHING MORE EXPENSIVE.
WELL, UH, SO YOU'VE, FIRST OF ALL, YOU'VE ASKED THIS MULTIPLE TIMES AND I'M SORRY, I, I, I THOUGHT WE HAD GOTTEN THAT TO YOU, BUT I, I'M PRETTY SURE I, I, I DON'T RECALL GETTING THAT TO THE STAKEHOLDERS OR IN ANY FORUM.
UM, SO I, I THINK YOU'RE KIND OF LOOKING AT OFFLINE COMBINED CYCLE CAPACITY IN THE TWO HOUR TIME PERIOD.
UM, IF YOU WANT TO GO PAST, YOU KNOW, BETWEEN TWO HOURS AND 30 MINUTES, THERE ARE CTS THAT, UH, HAVE LONGER THAN, UH, OR ARE CAPABLE OF BEING AROUND IN 30 MINUTES AFTER BEING OFF, UH, OFFLINE.
I, I THINK YOU'RE ALSO, THERE'S, I MEAN, I THINK THERE IS A LOT THAT WENT INTO THAT LEGISLATIVE INSTRUCTION AROUND DRRS.
AND I THINK IF YOU LISTEN TO THE, YOU KNOW, DISCUSSIONS ATTRACTING THESE, YOU KNOW, RESOURCES OR KEEPING THEM ONLINE WAS ALSO A, A GOAL.
SO I, I THINK THAT PLAYS INTO THE PRICING AND LONG TERM YOU COULD ATTRACT MORE OF THESE RESOURCES, UH, INTO THE MARKET AS WELL.
SO I, I THINK THAT'S, THAT THAT WAS A DYNAMIC THAT IT WAS AT LEAST DISCUSSED.
AND IN A STANDALONE PRODUCT, WOULD WE ALLOW ESRS TO PARTICIPATE? THE STANDALONE PRODUCT WOULD ALLOW DE SRS CAN BATTERIES PARTICIPATE IN THE STANDALONE FOR OUR PRODUCT? I THINK THAT'S A TO BE ANSWERED QUESTION AS WELL.
[01:00:01]
SOME INEFFICIENCIES OF THEM PARTICIPATING, BUT THERE COULD BE EFFICIENCIES AS ALSO, I MEAN, YOU'RE REALLY LEAVING BEHIND SOME OF THE, UH, WONDERFUL THINGS BATTERIES CAN DO, UH, WHEN, WHEN YOU DEPLOY THEM SLOWER.BUT I, I'D BE A LITTLE BIT WORRIED.
I MEAN, WE'D HAVE TO THINK THROUGH THE OTHER, OTHER SIDE OF IT, LIKE A BARRIER TO ENTRY OR THOSE TYPES OF THINGS WOULD NEED TO BE CONSIDERED ALSO.
HAVE TO, DO YOU NEED TO ADD ANYTHING TO THAT?
FEELS LIKE WE HAVE SOME FURTHER DISCUSSION.
IF WE WERE GONNA IMPLEMENT A STANDALONE PRODUCT FORWARD, FORWARD TO THAT.
WE ALWAYS, WE'RE GONNA HAVE THAT DISCUSSION, YOU KNOW, GIVEN THE COMMITMENTS THAT WE MADE ON 1203, THAT WAS GONNA HAPPEN ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
ARE WE GOOD THERE, BILL, IS THERE A FOLLOW UP OR ANYBODY ELSE? IS THERE A FOLLOW UP ITEM WE WANT, IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE TRYING TO DEFINE THE UNIVERSE OF WHAT WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR DRS UNDER 1203.
AND WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT MIGHT BE DIFFERENT SET OF RESOURCES IF WE DEVELOPED THIS AS A STANDALONE PRODUCT.
AND SO IT'S, IT'S STILL SOME UNKNOWNS.
YEAH, I THINK SOME OF THE ANSWERS WE GAVE FOR THIS BLENDED PRODUCT WOULD NEED TO BE RECONSIDERED.
AS A STANDALONE, INCLUDING, UH, BATTERIES.
AND DAVE, I SEE WE CAN REMOVE YOU.
UM, I ASSUMING CANAN MAYBE SAID WHAT YOU WERE GONNA SAY AND SO WE CAN GO TO BOB HILTON.
I THINK ALL MY QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ANSWERED.
UH, ERIC, ERIC GOFF, ARE YOU READY WITH THE B WORD? NO,
UM, I, I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION AROUND WHAT RESOURCES COULD QUALIFY.
I THINK SIERRA CLUB FILED COMMENTS ABOUT DEMAND RESPONSE.
IT'LL BE A BIG DISCUSSION, BUT I AGREE WE SHOULDN'T SIZE IT IN A WAY THAT IS INTENDED TO CREATE A HIGH PRICE, BUT WE STILL WANNA MEET THE LEGISLATOR'S GOALS.
UM, I SEE DAVID KEY STILL IN THE QUEUE.
AND THEN NED, UH, JUST A QUESTION ON, I GUESS BUDGET IS, WE SEE THIS AS ONE AND A ONE POINT A HALF MILLION.
UH, IS IT POSSIBLE TO BRING US ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IF THERE'S A WAY TO DELAY IT AND DO THE SINGLE, UM, I GUESS THE INDEPENDENT OR SINGLE I IMPLEMENTATION AND HAVE AN UPDATED NUMBER? KIND OF GIVE US MORE INSIGHT? I THINK IT'LL PROBABLY BE HELPFUL.
SO, SO HERE'S, HERE'S THE WAY I WAS THINKING THIS WOULD PLAY OUT AT THE NEXT TACK.
YOU EITHER HAVE INFORMATION THAT MOVES 1203 FORWARD OR NOT AT THAT MOMENT.
THIS IA IS THE RIGHT IA FOR 1203.
WHAT I WOULD DO IS THEN WHEN I FINISHED THE DESIGN OF THE STANDALONE PRODUCT, WHICH I'VE COMMITTED TO IN THE PREAMBLE TO THIS, AND WE WOULD HAVE OKRS FOR IT, I WOULD BRING YOU ANOTHER IA WITH THAT PROTOCOL.
THAT'S THE WAY I WAS SEEING HOW THIS ALL PLAY OUT.
UM, WE HAVEN'T MOVED THE DESIGN OF THE STANDALONE FORWARD ENOUGH TO BRING YOU AN IA AT THE, UM, DECEMBER, UH, TAC MEETING.
IS IS, I, I I ASSUME THAT'S OKAY BECAUSE THE REAL THING YOU'D BE DECIDING ON WOULD BE EITHER TO, LIKE ERCOT WOULD EITHER BE PULLING THIS OR ASKING THAT IT GO FORWARD, RIGHT? YEAH, I AGREE.
I THINK DAVID WAS THE QUESTION, MAYBE IF THIS IS GONNA BE, YOU KNOW, MAGNITUDES HIGHER FOR A STANDALONE PRODUCT, IF THAT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD KNOW, EVEN, EVEN WITHOUT AN IA, BUT IF WE THINK IT'S GONNA BE, YOU KNOW, THREE TIMES HIGHER TO IMPLEMENT A STANDALONE PRODUCT THAN YEAH, THAT'S PROBABLY WHERE I WAS HEADED.
JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE PLAN WAS FOR BRINGING AN UPDATED IA TO HELP US UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH HERE.
I YEAH, I NO, I I UNDERSTAND THE ASK.
I, I MEAN, UNTIL WE'VE WRITTEN THE PROTOCOLS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, I, I WOULD SAY, UM, UH, IT'S, IT'S REALLY HARD TO, HARD TO SPEAK TO THE COST.
UM, IT'S GONNA BE, I'M LOOSELY IN AND AROUND THIS PRICE, BUT, YOU KNOW, OKAY.
UH, THAT'S AS BEST AS I COULD SAY TODAY.
UH, BACK TO THE Q NED, BON NED
I WAS GONNA SAY THE WHOLE LAST NAME AND I THINK I CAN, BUT I PUT MYSELF ON THE SPOT.
[01:05:01]
BONKOWSKI IS THE LAST NAME AND IT ALSO STARTS WITH, IT STARTS WITH BI KNOW IF YOU, IF YOU SAY MR. BONKOWSKI, DOES THAT COUNT AS AB WORDMAYBE A FOUR LETTER WORD TO SOME.
THINK THAT'S, YOU KNOW, A, A PRUDENT THING TO DO TO GIVE THE, THE TIME FOR POLICYMAKERS TO, TO DELIBERATE.
UM, BUT ALSO AGREE WITH, YOU KNOW, IF, IF THERE IS STILL OPEN QUESTIONS AT THE END OF THAT, YOU KNOW, BY THE TIME WE COME BACK AS TAC IT IS, YOU KNOW, PRUDENT FOR US TO THEN ELEVATE IT TO THE BOARD AND GIVE THEM THE, THE CHO THE CHOICE ON HOW TO MOVE FORWARD.
AS BOB HAD RECOMMENDED, UM, I DID WANT TO, AND, AND I'LL PREFACE THIS BY SAYING DRRS WAS NOT SOMETHING, IT WAS NOT OUR IDEA.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE WERE, UH, YOU KNOW, NECESSARILY ADVOCATING FOR, UH, AS, AS OTHERS WERE.
BUT UM, YOU KNOW, TO THE EXTENT THAT WE ARE IN A PERIOD OF UNCERTAINTY, YOU KNOW, TALKING ABOUT THE UNCERTAINTY PRODUCT BUT WE'RE IN GENERAL, WE'RE IN A PERIOD OF UNCERTAINTY AND TRYING TO MOVE FORWARD ON A LARGE NUMBER OF MARKET POLICIES THAT HOPEFULLY AS WE, YOU KNOW, MOVE THROUGH THOSE, YOU'LL START TO CLEAR OUT THE, THAT THAT CLOUD OF UNCERTAINTY AND HELP GIVE, UH, YOU KNOW, RESOURCE INVESTORS MORE CLARITY ON WHAT THEY ARE LOOKING AT FROM, UH, YOU KNOW, MARKET OUTLOOK.
I CAN SEE SOME BENEFIT TO HAVING A FASTER IMPLEMENTATION.
UH, YOU KNOW, THE TEMPORARY IMPLEMENTATION IS PROBABLY HOW WE SHOULD, HOW WE, HOW WE SHOULD PHRASE IT AS, AS
JUST TO GIVE THE MARKET TIME TO DIGEST AND SEE HOW DRRS BEHAVES, HOW, YOU KNOW, DEPLOYMENT WORKS, WHICH RESOURCES ARE THERE TO BILL'S QUESTION.
UM, YOU KNOW, WHICH RESOURCES MIGHT, YOU KNOW, AS, AS A LOT OF FOLKS THAT ADVOCATED FOR DRSA, YOU KNOW, MIGHT INVEST IN THE MARKET IN ORDER TO PROVIDE THAT, THERE COULD BE SOME BENEFIT TO THAT.
I DON'T WANT TO, UM, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO DO, BUT I CAN SEE SOMETHING THERE, SO AT LEAST WANTED TO, TO AIR THAT OUT.
UM, AND THEN ON THE, I'VE HEARD A COUPLE, THE LAST POINT I'LL MAKE IS I'VE HEARD A COUPLE OF COMMENTS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WE SHOULDN'T BE PROCURING DRRS WITH A SPECIFIC, OR WE SHOULD BE PROCURING DRS WITH A SPECIFIC PRICE OUTCOME IN MIND.
BUT, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SPECIFIC PROCUREMENT REQUIREMENTS IN STATUTE THAT ERCOT WILL HAVE TO FOLLOW.
AND, YOU KNOW, I, I WOULD JUST SAY WE SHOULD FOLLOW WHATEVER THAT PROCESS SAYS AND NOT TRY TO, UH, YOU KNOW, COME TO A PREDETERMINED OUTCOME BASED ON OUR NORMATIVE ECONOMIC OUTLOOKS.
I SEE THE, THE QUEUE IS CLEAR ON THIS ONE.
UM, SO I THINK WE CAN PUT TABLING 1203 ON THE COMBO BALLOT.
I SEE SOME THUMBS UP AND HEAD NODS, SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO THAT.
ALL RIGHT, MARTHA, BACK TO YOU.
I THINK WE STILL HAVE ONE NPRR.
THIS IS THE ONLY NPRR TODAY THAT WAS, THAT HAD OPPOSING VOTES AT PRS.
UM, THE SPONSOR OF THIS WAS ACTUALLY NOT ERCOT.
IT WAS, UH, MOSTLY A GROUP OF CONSUMERS.
UH, SO THE RESIDENTIAL CONSUMER, OPEC, CITY OF EASTLAND, TIEC, AND THE STEEL MILLS AND 1172, AMONG OTHER THINGS IS REMOVING THE MITIGATED OFFER CAP MULTIPLIERS AND CREATING A HUNDRED PERCENT CLAWBACK FOR R OVERARCHING INTENT, OVERARCHING INTENT BEING TO, UM, YOU KNOW, HOPEFULLY INCURRED SELF-COMMITMENT OF GENERATION RESOURCES.
SO IN, UH, SEPTEMBER PRS RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF 1172 WITH SOME COMMENTS THAT CPS FILED.
AND ON THAT VOTE, THERE WERE FIVE OPPOSING TWO FROM THE CO-OP SEGMENT, TWO FROM THE GENERATOR SEGMENT, AND ONE MUNI.
AND THERE WERE ALSO NINE ABSTENTIONS IN SEPTEMBER ACROSS MULTIPLE SEGMENTS.
WE LOOKED AT THE IMPACT ANALYSIS IN OCTOBER, UH, AND AT THAT TIME VOTED FOR COMMENTS THAT ERCOT FILED ON OCTOBER 4TH.
AND ON THAT SECOND VOTE, THERE WERE THREE OPPOSING, UH, VOTES.
TWO FROM THE CO-OPS SEGMENT, ONE FROM THE GENERATOR SEGMENT, AND THEN THERE ARE ALSO TWO ABSTENTIONS ON THAT VOTE.
UH, SINCE THE OCTOBER PRSA REVISED IA HAS BEEN POSTED BY ERCOT, IT'S REFLECTING A TWO PHASE IMPLEMENTATION.
SO PHASE ONE BEING LESS THAN 5,000 O AND M, AND THEN FOR PHASE TWO, UH, A PROJECT 65 TO 85,000 IN COST WITH A PRIORITY OF 24 20 24 IN A RANK OF 40 70, RECOMMENDED BY PRS.
AND LAST, THERE WERE SOME JOINT COMMENTS FILED YESTERDAY FROM CONSTELLATION,
[01:10:02]
LUMINANT, CALPINE STACK GSEC, AND GREENVILLE ELECTRIC THAT WERE EXPRESSING OPPOSITION TO THIS NPRR.UH, I WANTED TO THANK W-M-S-N-P-R-S FOR RECOMMENDING THIS NPRR.
WE'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON IT, AND FUNDAMENTALLY WHAT IT DOES IS MAKE SURE THAT, UM, THE A GENERATOR THAT'S COMMITTED BY ERCOT, UH, THROUGH RUCK, WHICH WOULD HAVE NO DOWNSIDE RISK BECAUSE, UH, IT'S COST OR GUARANTEED, UH, CAN'T MAKE MONEY FROM THE RUCK.
UM, SO IT EN IT ENCOURAGES SELF COMMITMENT BECAUSE IN TODAY'S ENVIRONMENT, A GENERATOR, UM, THAT IS MARGINAL COULD TRADE SOME OF THEIR PROFITS IN EXCHANGE FOR A GUARANTEE THAT THEY WON'T LOSE ANY MONEY.
UM, THAT'S THE EASIEST WAY TO EXPLAIN THE POLICY CHANGE HERE.
UM, AND I WOULD MOVE APPROVAL.
IS THAT A MOTION RIGHT NOW? ALL RIGHT.
IS THERE A SECOND ON ERIC'S MOTION? KEVIN HANSON.
UM, AND, AND WE'LL TAKE DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION.
AND THAT'S A MOTION TO APPROVE AS RECOMMENDED BY PRS, CORRECT.
ERIC PRS AND THE 10 12 PRS REPORT AND 10 17 REVISED IMPACT ANALYSIS.
AND I, I SEE PEOPLE IN THE QUEUE, UH, LIKEWISE.
IT'S COME UP MANY TIMES BEFORE IN THE PAST, AND, UH, IT'S, YOU KNOW, PROBABLY GONNA COME UP AGAIN IN THE FUTURE.
UH, KENAN, I'VE GOT A QUESTION FOR YOU.
UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE, UH, GRID SWITCHING UNITS, THE QUICK STARTS, UH, AND THEY'RE OPERATING IN A SEPARATE MARKET, NOT BECAUSE THEY WANNA OPERATE THAT SEC MARKET, BUT THE SECOND MARKET HAS CALLED ON 'EM AND DONE IT, AND YOU'RE CALLING THOSE UNITS BACK AND WANNA R THEM TO ERCOT THROUGH THE RC RC AGREEMENT THAT DOES NOT, THIS PASSING, THIS WOULD NOT GIVE US THE ABILITY TO, UH, ACTUALLY, UH, OPT OUT OF THE R WE CAN'T MOVE OVER WITHOUT YOU GUYS CONFERRING WITH, UH, THE OTHER MARKET AND ALLOWING THEM TO RELEASE IT.
WE CERTAINLY WOULD WANT TO OPT OUT OF THE RUCK AS WE CURRENTLY DO TODAY.
UH, SO TALK TO ME HOW THAT WOULD WORK IF THIS THING PASSES KENAN.
SO I THINK THE RUCK OPT OPTOUT IS GOING TO BE, UH, ELIMINATED ANYWAY.
UM, SO WITH, I THINK AN EXCEPTION FOR AN HOUR BEFORE THE OPERATING HOUR, IF I, IF I REMEMBER RIGHT.
SO, UM, IT, IT SEEMS LIKE WE JUST USE THE RUCK INSTRUCTION TO BRING YOU OVER.
IF YOU HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT THE KIND OF COST CAPS AROUND RUCK, WE MIGHT NEED TO REEXAMINE THAT AND FILE SOMETHING, SOMETHING ELSE FOR THE SWITCHABLE RESOURCES, BECAUSE I BELIEVE RUCK HAS JUST USED TO MOVE YOU OVER.
BUT I WOULD WANNA DOUBLE CHECK THAT.
SO IT'S A REALLY GOOD QUESTION.
UH, WE WOULD NOT WANT TO CREATE BARRIERS TO RESOURCES MOVING OVER.
I'M NOT SURE THAT HAPPENS WITH THIS, BUT I, IF, IF YOU, IF YOU HAVE A STRONG OPINION ABOUT THAT, UM, I'M HAPPY TO EXPLORE THAT AND INVESTIGATE THAT FURTHER.
YEAH, WE REALLY, REALLY DO NEED TO, BECAUSE THIS IS SUBSTANTIAL AND SIGNIFICANT FOR CAPACITY IN, IN ERT, AS YOU WELL UNDERSTAND.
UH, AND, AND I APPRECIATE, AND THAT'S WHY I'M GONNA VOTE NO AGAINST IT.
I ENCOURAGE EVERYBODY TO VOTE NO UNTIL WE, UH, GET CLARIFICATION.
BUT I DO WANT CLARIFICATION ON QUICK START UNITS THAT ARE ACTUALLY, UH, IN ORCUTT.
I DON'T THINK YOU WANT US ON, I THINK YOU WANT US AVAILABLE, READY TO COME ON TO SUPPORT CAPACITY.
AND, UH, YOU KNOW, MANY OF OUR QUICK START UNITS AREN'T IN THE MONEY, BASICALLY.
THEY AREN'T IN THE MONEY MANY TIMES WITH THE HIGH O AND M COSTS WE HAVE, BUT WE STAND READY.
SO, I, I DON'T THINK YOU WANT US TO COME ON KAAN UNTIL YOU NEED US.
UH, AGAIN, I THINK IF YOU'RE, UH, THERE MIGHT BE TWO DIFFERENT ANSWERS HERE FOR THE SWITCH BALLS THAT, THAT I'D LIKE TO SPEND SOME TIME ON, BUT I'M NOT SEEING, I MEAN, I, I THINK THE INCENTIVES TO COME ON ARE STILL BROADLY THE SAME.
[01:15:01]
EXAMPLE OR, OR MISSING, MISSING WHERE YOU'RE TRYING TO GO.BUT, AND, AND I GUESS I CAN ASK ERIC THIS, I DON'T THINK ANY OF THESE CONCERN, UH, THESE CONCERNS THAT ARE BEING EXPRESSED, THIS IS INTENDING TO TAKE OFF THE TABLE, UH, AS, AS I UNDERSTOOD YOUR NPRR, WE MIGHT NEED TO CLARIFY THAT IN THE PROTOCOLS SOMEHOW, OR WITH A FOLLOW-UP PROTOCOL.
BUT I DON'T THINK THE CONCERNS BEING EXPRESSED ARE PART OF YOUR INTENT, UH, IN THIS NPRR AS I RECALL THAT.
I'M HAPPY TO HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT TWITCH BULL UNITS.
UM, ON THE SUBJECT OF, OF QUICK STARTS.
UH, QUICK START CAN BE COMMITTED THROUGH, UH, SC TODAY BASED ON ITS PRICE OR, AND THAT PRICE IS BASED ON ITS COSTS USUALLY.
UM, SO THIS ISN'T CHANGING THAT, UH, I DON'T THINK WE WANNA MARKET DESIGN WITH, THE ONLY WAY WE CAN MAKE QUICK STARTS IS THROUGH RUCK.
UM, WE WANT 'EM TO BE SELF COMMITTED OR COMMITTED BY THE DAY AHEAD MARKET OR A BILATERAL AGREEMENT.
BUT IF, IF OUR MARKET DESIGN LEADS TO QUICK STARTS ONLY BEING COMMITTED THROUGH R, THEN IT'S A FAILED MARKET DESIGN.
YEAH, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENS IN SP RIGHT NOW.
I DO NOT WANT THAT TO HAPPEN IN ERCOT, AND I KNOW THAT IT HAS, AND I DON'T WANT IT TO HAPPEN AGAIN.
I THINK WE'VE GOT SOME MORE WORK TO DO ON THIS.
AND CAN I, DO YOU WANNA YEAH, LEMME JUST INTRODUCE, I, I, I CHECKED WITH ENO, UM, THE, THIS WOULD NOT IMPACT SWITCHABLE RESOURCES, MIKE, THAT, YOU KNOW, I, I, I STILL AM TRYING TO GET MY HEAD AROUND YOUR SECOND EXAMPLE, BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT ON THE SWITCHABLE RESOURCES, THAT'S JUST THE METHOD TO BRING THEM OVER, NOT THE COMPENSATION OR CAP KIND OF METHOD METHODOLOGY, UH, THAT IS CORRECT, KENAN FOR SWITCHABLE GENERATION RESOURCES, UM, AS YOU SAID, WE USE ROCK TO BRING 'EM OVER, BUT ONCE THEY'RE HERE, WE WILL COME.
THEY CAN, THEY'LL BE ABLE TO KEEP THEIR REAL TIME REVENUES, WHATEVER THEY GENERATE AT, AND WE WILL COMPENSATE THEM FOR THE COST TO SWITCH.
BUT THERE'S NO ROCK FOR SETTLEMENT PURPOSES, NO CLAWBACKS AT ALL.
AND THIS QUESTION HAS COME UP BEFORE, UH, ESPECIALLY ON THIS NPR AND I, I ANSWERED THAT QUESTION TO THE PERSON THAT ASKED.
YOU KNOW, MIKE, DID YOU WANNA RESPOND OR, OR DOES THAT CLOSE OUT YOUR COMMENTS? NO, THAT'S FINE.
UH, WE COULD, WE COULD SPEND A LOT MORE TIME, BUT IT'S PROBABLY NOT, UH, UH, PRUDENT IN THIS, UH, IN THIS FORM.
I BELIEVE WE ARE BACK TO NED IN THE QUEUE.
AND I, UH, YOU KNOW, WON'T BELABOR THIS TOO LONG, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, I, I AGREE WITH MIKE'S CHARACTERIZATION.
I WILL BE VOTING, NO, I ENCOURAGE ANYONE, UH, THAT IS SYMPATHETIC TO RESOURCES, HAVING, UH, YOU KNOW, BEING EFFECTIVELY CO-OPTED BY, YOU KNOW, A IN MANY TERMS, MANY TIMES A LOAD FORECAST THAT IS IN EXCESS OF WHAT THE MARKET BELIEVES AND, UH, INCURRING COSTS THAT THEY MAY THEN HAVE SOME RECOVERY OF AND IDEALLY SHOULD HAVE FULL RECOVERY OF.
BUT, UH, OUR EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN THAT IS NOT ALWAYS THE CASE.
SO I FUNDAMENTALLY DISAGREE WITH ERIC'S ASSERTION IN THE LAYOUT THAT, UH, THERE IS NO DOWNSIDE RISK BECAUSE COSTS ARE GUARANTEED.
I THINK THAT THAT IS THE FUNDAMENTAL DISAGREEMENT THAT THE JOINT COMMENTERS HAVE WITH THIS NPRR, AND THAT IS A, A, A LONGER TERM WEEDY TOPIC.
BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, IT, I THINK MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS WITHOUT ADDRESSING ALL OF THOSE, UH, WITHOUT HAVING MORE FULLY ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES IS, IS A BAD POLICY.
IT'S A BAD COORDINATION OF POLICY.
AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THERMAL DISPATCHABLE RESOURCES, WHICH ARE THE KINDS THAT THE MARKET IS, WELL, NOT THE MARKET.
ERCOT IS CURRENTLY SCREAMING FOR HELP WITH, WITH THE RFP THAT THEY ISSUED EARLIER THIS MONTH.
SO I CAN'T, UH, TELL YOU HOW TO VOTE, BUT I CAN TELL YOU TO BE, YOU KNOW, CAUTIOUS WITH THE, UH, OR BE COGNIZANT OF THE POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCES OF YOUR VOTE.
UH, JUST TO CLOSE OUT, UM, WE HAVE IN THE PAST, UH, MADE CHANGES, UM, TO THE RUCK GUARANTEE BASED
[01:20:01]
ON EVIDENCE THAT GENERATORS ARE BOUGHT ABOUT WHEN IT IS NOT SUFFICIENT.UH, WE PASSED ONE OF THOSE RECENTLY THAT WAS SPONSORED, UH, BY CONSTELLATION.
IF THERE ARE OTHERS THAT, UM, IF THERE ARE OTHER EXAMPLES OF THE RUT GUARANTEE NOT COVERING THE, THE COST OF A GENERATOR, UH, I'D BE HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN THOSE.
BUT, UH, THERE AREN'T ANY PRESENTLY FILED ANYWHERE.
UM, SO I, I WOULD WELCOME THAT CONVERSATION IN THE FUTURE IF Y'ALL WANT TO HAVE IT.
BUT THAT DOESN'T CHANGE THE FUNDAMENTAL NATURE OF THE CHOICE THAT A GENERATOR CAN MAKE ABOUT, UM, HAVING THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE COMMITTED, UM, WITHOUT HAVING ANY RISK OF LOSING MONEY.
SO ARE WE READY TO VOTE? OKAY.
WE HAD THE MOTION IN THE SECOND, UM, TO APPROVE THE CO THE, THE RECOMMENDATION FROM PRS ON 10 12.
COREY TAKE AWAY, UH, BELIEVING IN TRANSPARENCY, I JUST WANTED TO PUT THE REVISED IA UP ON SCREEN FOR Y ALL TROY ALREADY PREVIEWED THIS FOR PRS AS PRS IS ZONING OUT THE LANGUAGE, THE COMMENTS THEY APPROVED WE'RE GONNA RESULT IN THE IA NEEDING TO BE REVISED UP BY ABOUT 20 K.
SO HERE'S THE IA THAT DOES EXACTLY THAT.
AND NOW WE WILL BEGIN UP WITH CONSUMERS WITH MARK.
THANK YOU, JOHN FOR CLIFF JOHN PACKER.
YOU WITH US? CAN ALSO TAKE YOUR VOTE IN CHAT IF YOU'RE HAVING AUDIO ISSUES.
ONTO OUR INDEPENDENT GENERATORS.
I'M SORRY I DIDN'T CATCH THAT.
MOTION CARRIES 82%, FOUR, 18% AGAINST, WITH TWO ABSTENTIONS.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM OR THE, THE PRS REPORT IN GENERAL? ALRIGHT, SCENE NONE.
I THINK WE CAN MOVE ON, UH, TO REVISION
[7. Revision Requests Tabled at TAC (Possible Vote)]
REQUEST TABLED AT TAC, THE FIRST IS O-B-D-R-R 46, UM, RELATED TO NPRR 1188, IMPLEMENT NODAL DISPATCH AND ENERGY SETTLEMENT FOR CLRS.THIS CAN REMAIN TABLED WITH NO ACTION NEEDED, UNLESS ANYBODY HAS A QUESTION, COMMENT, OR OTHER DESIRE ON IT, DON'T SEE ANYTHING.
UM, THE NEXT ONE IS NOUR 2 45.
UM, WE, WE HAD ROBUST DISCUSSION AT LAST TAC.
UM, SO, AND FOLLOWING THAT, WE HAVE HAD SEVERAL SETS OF COMMENTS, I BELIEVE SINCE THE LAST TAC MEETING.
WE, WE'VE SEEN ERCOT COMMENTS, TESLA COMMENTS, AND MORE ERCOT COMMENTS.
[01:25:01]
ERCOT HAS SENT OUT AN RFP RELATED TO THIS.IT CAN REMAIN TABLED WITH NO ACTION TODAY.
BUT DOES ERCOT OR ANYONE ELSE WANT TO COMMENT ON, ON NOER 2 45 TODAY? ALL RIGHT, I DON'T SEE ANYTHING.
SO WE, I THINK, OH, BOB'S
I WAS SURPRISED, BUT I WAS RUNNING WITH IT, SO, YEAH.
WELL, MY ONLY COMMENT WAS THAT I NOTICED THAT ERCOT DIDN'T RESPOND AT ALL, AND I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF THEY HAD ANY RESPONSE TO THE, UH, TO THE APA COMMENTS.
I KNOW THEY WERE JUST FILED YESTERDAY, BUT I WAS JUST CURIOUS TO SEE IF THERE WAS ANY THOUGHTS ON THAT.
YEAH, I MEAN, UH, I, I THINK WE'RE STILL WORKING THROUGH THOSE COMMENTS.
UM, UH, WE, I THINK WE HAD ALREADY ARRIVED AT A CONCLUSION THAT THIS WAS GONNA GET TABLED TODAY, RIGHT? YEAH.
SO WE GAVE SOME PEOPLE A BREAK SO THAT THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO WORK THROUGH THE NIGHT TO OKAY, SURE.
UH, I I'M SURE WE WILL RESPOND TIMELY, RIGHT? GOOD.
I MEAN, AND THANK YOU FOR, YEAH, THE POINT IS, IS WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE GETTING THE RESPONSES AT THE LEVEL YOU NEED, UH, IS WHAT THOSE COMMENTS IN MY MIND ARE REALLY LOOKING, TRYING TO INDICATE, AND THAT YOU DON'T JUST GET A HIGH LEVEL THAT'S NOT GONNA DO US A WHOLE LOT OF GOOD IN THE END.
I THINK THAT'S REALLY WHERE THEY'RE TRYING TO GO WITH THOSE COMMENTS.
SO JUST WANNA BRING THAT UP SINCE THERE'S NOBODY FROM APA HERE.
UM, YEAH, I MEAN, I THINK THERE'S, I GUESS I AM, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF FACTORS THAT ARE AT PLAY HERE, UM, THAT HAVE PEOPLE PRETTY FIRED UP AND, UM, UH, I THINK WE'RE TRYING TO WORK THROUGH ALL OF THOSE.
IT HASN'T BEEN AN EASY PROCESS TO START WITH.
IT, IT, IT'S, IT'S A CHALLENGE.
AND THANKS FOR BRINGING THAT UP.
I DON'T HAVE THE APA COMMENTS ON MY, MY LIST SINCE THEY WERE FILED, I GUESS YESTERDAY.
WELL, AND ERCOT KNOWS THAT THEY'RE THERE NOW TOO.
SO WE, UM, IF THERE'S NO OTHER DISCUSSION WANTED FROM ANYBODY WHO COMMENTED, SO WE, WE SAW TWO SETS OF ERCOT COMMENTS.
I BELIEVE THE FIRST WERE JUST SHOWING THE, THE MARKET WHAT THAT RFP WOULD BE, TESLA COMMENTS AND APA COMMENTS.
UM, IF, IF NOBODY WANTS TO SPEAK ON THOSE COMMENTS OR HAVE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION, I, I KNOW WE'LL BE HAVING A ROBUST DISCUSSION ON THAT DECEMBER 4TH TACK.
AND CAN SOMEBODY MAYBE REFRESH OUR, REFRESH US ON THE TIMELINE? IS THIS SOMETHING WE NEED TO GET TO DECEMBER BOARD? I THINK THAT'S A QUESTION FOR ERCOT.
SO, SO DO WE NEED TO VOTE ON THIS AT DECEMBER TAC, THE TIMELINE'S BEFORE THEN? UH, THE TIMELINE IS WHAT, NOVEMBER 7TH OR FOURTH? I FORGOT THE NUMBER FOR THE RFIS, RIGHT? THE, THE RFI? YES, BUT FOR, FOR VOTING ON THIS ITEM.
I, I DON'T HAVE A DEADLINE ON THAT.
AND I'M LOOKING DOWN THAT LOOKING AROUND AND I'M NOT SEEING ANYBODY.
HE SAYS YES ON DECEMBER BOARD.
STEVEN, ARE YOU ON? DO YOU, DO YOU WANNA COMMENT FURTHER? YEAH, UH, WE STILL HAVE URGENCY ON THIS, AND WE'RE TRYING TO GET THIS DONE AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE, UH, JUST DUE TO THE IMPORTANT RELIABILITY RISKS THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH.
AND SO THE INTENT IS FOR US TO GET THE INFORMATION FROM THE RFI RESULTS THAT ARE DUE NOVEMBER 6TH, AGGREGATE, SUBMIT A SET OF COMMENTS BEFORE DECEMBER TAC, AND THE GOAL WOULD BE TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD DECEMBER T SO THAT WE CAN MAKE THE DECEMBER BOARD.
THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR, JUST THE EXPECTATIONS FOR TAX.
SO WE WOULD HAVE THAT DISCUSSION AND, AND POSSIBLE VOTE AT THE DECEMBER 4TH TAC.
AND BEFORE THAT, THE RFI WILL BE DUE.
AND WE SHOULD SEE ERCOT COMMENTS AS WELL BEFORE THE, THE DECEMBER TAC AGGREGATING, THE KIND OF RESPONSES FROM THE RFIS.
ALRIGHT, ANYTHING ELSE ON GER 2 45? OKAY, I THINK THAT CAN STAY TABLED TILL DECEMBER.
I BELIEVE THIS CAN STAY TABLED TWO, SO NO ACTION NEEDED ON THAT.
[8. Other Binding Document Revision Requests (OBDRRs) (Vote)]
AND THEN WE HAVE, WE CAN NOW MOVE ON TO THE BDRS.ALL RIGHT, SO WE WILL TABLE OB DRR 49 AND OBDR 50.
[01:30:03]
UM, THOSE ARE BOTH RELATED TO 1203.OKAY, THOSE ARE THE TWO RELATED TO 1203, WHICH IS THE DRRS.
AND WE ARE WAITING FURTHER DISCUSSION FROM THE COMMISSION OR DIRECTION FROM THE COMMISSION.
[9. Break]
HAVE A BREAK ON HERE.UM, SO WE ARE GONNA TAKE A 20 MINUTE BREAK, BE BACK AT 11 20, 10 92 IS THE NUMBER OF THE NPRR THAT ELIMINATES THE BUYBACK.
ALL RIGHT, WE CAN GO AHEAD AND RESUME.
WE ARE BACK FROM BREAK, AND WE ARE ON AGENDA
[10. ROS Report (Vote)]
ITEM 10.THE ROSS REPORT IS CHASE OR KATIE AVAILABLE TO GIVE THIS? I SEE CHASE.
HI, KATIE, THIS IS CHASE SMITH OF R WEST CHAIR.
CAN YOU CONFIRM? YOU CAN HEAR ME? I CAN HEAR YOU.
I WILL BE HERE TODAY TO GIVE A QUICK ROS UPDATE.
UM, WE HAVE TWO VOTING ITEMS TODAY FOR TAX CONSIDERATION.
UH, THESE ARE BOTH NO IMPACT, UH, HAVE NO IMPACT IAS, AND WERE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL UNANIMOUSLY BY ROS.
UH, FIRST UP IS PR ONE 10, UM, WHICH REMOVES A, UH, PARAGRAPH OF THE PLANNING GUIDE TO ACCOMMODATE THE RELEASE OF STEADY STATE PLANNING MODELS, UM, IN A NODE BREAKER FORMAT.
AND, UM, THIS IS NEEDED IN ORDER TO, UH, TO ALIGN WITH RECENT CHANGES THAT RECA HAS MADE FOR, UH, MODELING OF DYNAMIC MODELS.
UM, FOR NUMBER 2 57, UH, REMOVAL OF REDUNDANT ERS REPORTING REQUIREMENT.
UH, THIS NOGA RESOLVE THE CONFLICT IN EMERGENCY RESPONSE SERVICE EVENT REPORTING TIMELINES, UM, BETWEEN THE NODAL OPERATING GUIDES AND THE PROTOCOLS.
AND IT, IT, UH, THE CHANGE IT PROPOSES IS TO STRIKE A REFERENCE TO A 90 DAY EVENT REPORTING REQUIREMENT IN THE NODAL OPERATING GUIDE.
AND, UM, THIS IS, UH, IN CONFLICT WITH THE NODAL PROTOCOLS.
UH, SECTION 8 1 3 1 4 REQUIRES THAT ERCOT PROVIDE AN ERS EVENT REPORT WITHIN 45 DAYS AFTER THE END OF AN ERS STANDARD CONTRACT TERM, IN WHICH ONE OR MORE ERS DEPLOYMENT EVENTS HAVE OCCURRED.
UH, AND LIKE I SAID, ROS RECOMMENDED UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF BOTH THESE REVISION REQUESTS, AND THEY ARE NO IMPACT IAS.
UM, RECENT ROS ACTIONS AT OUR MEETING EARLIER THIS MONTH, ROS DID APPROVE AN UPDATE TO THE DYNAMIC WORKING GROUP'S PROCEDURE MANUAL.
UM, THERE WERE A FEW CHANGES, UM, INCLUDED IN THE UPDATE.
UM, ONE WAS A REMOVAL OF REFERENCES TO AN OLDER VERSION OF THE PSSC, UH, SOFTWARE.
UM, AND THERE ALSO WAS, UM, SOME UPDATES TO LANGUAGE RELATED TO ACTIVE POWER REDUCTION AND VOLTAGE RIDE THROUGH TESTS, AND ALSO UPDATING LANGUAGE TO REFLECT A HIGH RENEWABLE MINIMUM LOAD CASE, UH, WHICH WILL REPLACE AN, UM, OLDER, UM, OLDER KIND OF METHODOLOGY CALLED THE HIGH WIN LOW LOAD CASE.
UM, JUST GOT THE REVISION REQUESTS UNDER ROS REVIEW, UM, WITH THE, IN, IN PARENTHESES ASSIGNMENT TO VARIOUS R OSS WORKING GROUPS JUST FOR TAX, UH, REFERENCE.
UM, DON'T HAVE ANY SPECIFIC UPDATES ON ANY OF THESE ITEMS AT THE MOMENT.
UM, BUT HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS IF THERE ARE ANY.
YEAH, THIS JUST CONTINUES THE, UM, THE PENDING REVISION REQUEST AT ROS NEXT SLIDE, AND A RECENT ROS DISCUSSION ITEM.
UM, THERE IS ONE, ONE ACTION ITEM THAT R OSS HAS HAD SOME DISCUSSIONS ON OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS, AND I'M HERE TODAY TO RECOMMEND THAT TACT CLOSE OUT.
THIS ACTION ITEM RELATES TO, UH, AN ECRS FOLLOW UP.
UH, THIS ACTION ITEM WAS ASSIGNED BY TACT TO ROS EARLIER THIS SUMMER, KIND OF FOLLOWING THE, THE, UM, ROLLOUT OF ECRS AND SOME OF THE INITIAL DEPLOYMENTS.
AND YOU CAN SEE THERE ARE A FEW QUESTIONS OR TOPICS THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THAT ASSIGNMENT.
SO EARLIER THIS SUMMER, ERCOT PROVIDED SOME INFORMATION ON SOME OF THOSE ABOVE ISSUES.
AND WE HAD A DISCUSSION AT ROS.
AND THEN, UM, YOU CAN SEE AT THE END OF THE, THE SUB-BULLETS, SOME OF THE RESPONSE TO THE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.
SO, UH, FIRST UP, SETTING APPROPRIATE VOLUMES.
UM, ERCOT DISCUSSED, BROUGHT BACK, UH, KINDA RESPONSE TO THIS, AND ROS AGREED THAT THIS COULD BE CONSIDERED JUST IN THE ONGOING ANNUAL ANCILLARY SERVICE METHODOLOGY PROCESS.
UH, THERE WERE SOME, UH, QUESTIONS BROUGHT UP ABOUT DURATION CONCERNS.
[01:35:01]
FOR EXAMPLE, UM, MAYBE HAD INSUFFICIENT CHARGE AND WERE DEPLOYED AND, UM, WERE NOT ABLE TO, TO FULLY DEPLOY THEIR, THEIR OBLIGATION.UM, ERCOT RESPONDENT SAID THEY BELIEVED THE INITIAL DEPLOYMENTS FOR ECRS FUNCTION AS ATTENDED.
UM, AND ONCE AGAIN, THE OVERALL MAKEUP OF ANCILLARY SERVICES AND PROCUREMENT VOLUMES CAN BE CONSIDERED IN THE ONGOING ANCILLARY SERVICE METHODOLOGY PROCESS.
UH, ONE OTHER ITEM WAS THE, THE REASONING FOR ECRS DEPLOYMENTS.
AND, UH, WE HAD A FEW DISCUSSIONS OVER A COUPLE MONTHS AT ROS ABOUT THIS, AND ERCOT CAME BACK AND SAID THAT THEIR PREFERENCE WOULD BE NOT TO TRY AND COMMUNICATE THAT INFORMATION IN REAL TIME.
UM, THE REASONING BEHIND THAT WAS JUST, IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT, UH, TO DO SO WHEN THERE MAY BE DIFFERENT REASONS FOR ISSUING A AN ECRS DEPLOYMENT, AND IT MAY NOT BE FULLY KNOWN, UM, AT THAT TIME AND OR, UM, YOU KNOW, JUST THE WANT WANTING THE ERCOT OPERATORS TO BE PRIMARILY FOCUSED ON, ON MANAGING THE SYSTEM VERSUS HAVING TO COMMUNICATE THAT INFORMATION IN A REAL TIME FASHION.
AND SO, AS AN ALTERNATIVE, ERCOT HAS STARTED TO COMMUNICATE THIS ECRS DEPLOYMENT INFORMATION IN THE OPERATION REPORT THAT IS PRESENTED TO ROS EVERY MONTH.
SO THERE IS A TABLE WITH IN FURTHER INFORMATION AMONG ECRS DEPLOYMENTS AND THE REASON FOR SUCH DEPLOYMENT.
I THINK SO FAR THE, THE LARGEST REASON HAS BEEN A FORECASTED INSUFFICIENT NET LOAD RAMP.
UM, BUT, UH, ANYONE CAN GO AND LOOK AT THE OPERATIONS REPORTS AND, UH, SEE THAT INFORMATION IF YOU ARE INTERESTED.
AND THEN FINALLY, PROVIDING DATA ON AGGREGATE.
UM, THEY'RE WAS, UH, ERCOT PRESENTED SOME INFORMATION ON JUST MARKET CLEARING INFORMATION THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR STAKEHOLDERS TO UNDERSTAND, UM, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH, WHAT RESOURCES ARE BEING OFFERED, VOLUMES OF RESOURCES AT WHAT PRICE, UH, FOR ECRS.
I THINK THAT'S, YEAH, OUR NEXT REGULAR SCHEDULED MEETING IS, UH, NOVEMBER 2ND, AND THAT FINISHES MY PRESENTATION, CAITLYN.
SO HAPPY TO, UM, IF ANYONE HAS ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ON EITHER THE VOTING ITEMS OR ANY OF THE OTHER ROS DISCUSSION TOPICS THAT, UM, PRESENTED TODAY.
UM, SO ON THE ECRS DISCUSSION, WE, WE ACTUALLY, IN THE SORT OF, UM, WHAT WE ENDORSED FROM THE STRUCTURAL REVIEW, THAT WHOLE PACKAGE, WE, WE DID HAVE THE VERSION WHERE WE HAD ALREADY GONE AHEAD AND ELIMINATED THAT ACTION ITEM.
SO I THINK THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT YOU'VE PRESENTED.
UM, THAT'S ON THE, THE HIGHLIGHTED LIST ON THE OPEN ACTION ITEMS, AND WE WENT AHEAD AND ENDORSE THAT PACKAGE OR HAVE THAT ON THE COMBO BALLOT FOR, FOR ENDORSING AT THE END OF THE DAY.
AND SO I THINK WE ARE GOOD THERE.
I DON'T SEE ANY CARDS OR ANYONE IN THE QUEUE.
WE DID HAVE THE TWO VOTING ITEMS FROM ROSS.
I ALREADY SAW A COMMENT ON ADDING THESE TO THE COMBO BALLOT, WHICH I THINK WE CAN, BUT THOSE TWO MOTIONS WOULD BE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF PIGGER ONE 10 AS RECOMMENDED BY ROSS IN THE TEN FIVE ROSS REPORT, AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF NOUR 2 57 AS RECOMMENDED BY ROSS IN THE TEN FIVE ROSS REPORT.
AND SO WE CAN GO AHEAD AND ADD THOSE TO THE COMBO BALLOT PER BRAND SAMS, UNLESS ANYBODY HAS OBJECTIONS.
WE CAN MOVE, UH, RIGHT ALONG, I THINK.
[11. WMS Report]
NEXT UP IS THE WMS REPORT.ERIC, ARE YOU READY TO GO ON THIS ONE? I'LL BE GIVING THAT ONE CAITLYN JIM OVER HERE.
BE ALL RIGHT WITH, I'LL STAY SEATED HERE.
UM, SO JIM LEE, UM, WITH, UH, THE WS UPDATE, UH, HIGHLIGHTS OF OUR OCTOBER 11TH MEETING, UM, WE HEARD FROM CARRIE, UM, ON THE, UH, IMMS, UM, THOUGHTS ON THE ANCILLARY SERVICE METHODOLOGY.
UH, A GOOD PRESENTATION, UH, POSTED.
UM, AND SHE HIGHLIGHTED, UH, SOME THOUGHTS ON ECRS AS WELL AS JUST YOUR GENERAL ANCILLARY SERVICE METHODOLOGY GOING INTO NEXT YEAR.
UM, DISCUSSION ITEMS THAT WE HAD, UH, OBVIOUSLY WE TALKED ABOUT THE SUBCOMMITTEE AND WORKING GROUP STRUCTURAL REVIEW, THAT'S, THAT MADE IT ONTO THE COMMON BALLOT TODAY.
UM, AND THEN WE ALSO, UH, GAVE, UM, SPONSORS OF, UH, SEVERAL OF THE REVISION REQUESTS, UM, A, A TIME FOR TO PREVIEW THE REVISION REQUEST WITH WMS PRIOR TO CLOSER TO THE MIC.
AND THE PREVIEW OF THE, UH, SOME OF THE REVISION REQUESTS PRIOR TO PRS CONSIDERATION, WHICH HAPPENED ON THE FOLLOWING DAY.
UM, NOTED THAT WMS DID NOT TAKE ANY ACTIONS ON
[01:40:01]
THIS.UM, BUT WE DID HEAR FROM NG ON NPR 11, 11 97, UM, EDF ON NPR 1198, AND, UM, ERCOT ON NPR 1203.
SO, UH, WE HAD, UH, SEVERAL PRS REFERRALS THAT WE CONSIDERED AS WELL.
UM, 1194 WAS TABLED AT, UM, WMS AS THERE WAS SOME POLICY ISSUES THAT WERE I IDENTIFIED.
UM, WITH THAT NPRR, UM, WE HAD REFERRED NPR 1195 OVER TO THE METERING WORKING GROUP AND, UH, RECOMMENDED APPROVAL FOR SCR 8 25.
AND SO 8 25, UM, WILL BE, UM, EVALUATED ALONGSIDE WITH NPR 1162, UM, AT THE, UH, WHIM WAVE WORKING GROUP.
WE ALSO HAD A SMOG GROUP 28, UM, WHICH WAS REFERRED TO, UH, THE METER AND WORKING GROUP AS WELL.
AND WE TOOK ACTION ON, UH, NPR 1181, WHICH WAS PREVIOUSLY TABLED, UM, AND ENDORSED THAT, UM, AS AMENDED BY THE SEPTEMBER 19TH LUMINANT COMMENTS.
UH, THIS SLIDE IS JUST, UH, GIVES A, UH, SUMMARY OF THE REVISION REQUESTS THAT ARE STILL UNDER WMS REVIEW, UM, AND THEN ALSO A NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL FOR THE V-C-M-R-R 0 37.
UM, THAT'S A SHORT AND SWEET WMS UPDATE, AND OUR NEXT MEETING IS NOVEMBER 1ST.
ANY QUESTIONS? I DON'T SEE ANYTHING IN THE QUEUE, AND WE DID NOT HAVE ANY VOTING ITEMS FROM THAT ONE.
[12. Credit Finance Sub Group (CFSG) Report]
UH, CREDIT FINANCE SUBGROUP.BRENDAN, ARE YOU ON? HEY, THIS IS BRENDAN.
CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? WE CAN HEAR YOU.
THIS IS FROM OUR MEETING, UH, LAST THURSDAY.
UH, THE ONLY VOTING MATTERS WERE NPRS, WHICH WE LOOKED AT AS OPERATIONAL.
THERE WERE SEVERAL DISCUSSION ITEMS ON, UM, SOME 11, UH, 11 84, 11 65, 11 75, A NEW INVOICE REPORT, AND, UH, SOME DISCUSSION ON BANK QUALIFICATIONS.
UH, WE'VE BEEN, UH, FOR YEARS DISCUSSING, UH, CHANGES TO THE EAL, UH, OF THE ESTIMATE AGGREGATE LIABILITY.
AND THERE WERE SOME, UM, SUBCHAPTER M UPDATES, UH, RELATED TO COMMUNICATIONS FROM ERCOT AND OUR REGULAR CREDIT EXPOSURE.
UH, WE LOOKED AT THESE THREE MPRS 1203 DISPATCH IMPLEMENTATION OF DISPATCHABLE RELIABILITY RESERVE SERVICE, UH, 1181, SUBMISSION OF SEASONAL IGNITE INVENTORY DECLARATION AND 1201 LIMITATIONS ON RESETTLEMENT TIMELINE AND DEFAULT UPLIFT EXPOSURE.
THESE WERE ALL CONSIDERED OPERATIONAL WITHOUT CREDIT IMPACTS.
UH, SO YOU HAD, UH, ERCOT STAFF UPDATED US ON 11 84, 11 65, AND 1175.
1175 COVERS BACKGROUND CHECKS, PROTECTED INFORMATION, AND ESTABLISHING, MAINTAINING, UH, ELIGIBILITY IN ERCOT.
UH, AT CFSG RECOMMENDED APPROVAL MANY MONTHS AGO ON OCTOBER 12TH, THE PUCT APPROVED IT AND ACCOMPANYING OUR CO MARKET IMPACT STATEMENT AS PRESENTED IN PROJECT 5 4 4 4 5, UM, REVIEW OF RULES ADOPTED BY INDEPENDENT ORGANIZATION.
THE ELIMINATION OF UNSECURED CREDIT CREDIT STAFF WILL BE, UH, SENDING OUT COMMUNICATIONS ON REQUIRED INDEPENDENCE AMOUNT SOON.
AND, UH, THERE IS A STANDING REQUIREMENT NOW TO KEEP A $5,000 PARENTAL GUARANTEE, UM, UNTIL APRIL 1ST FOR SOME KIND OF PARTIES.
UH, ERCOT STAFF HAS APPROVED AND PUBLISHED NEW FORMS FOR LETTERS OF CREDIT AND SURETY BONDS.
UH, THIS WAS RESULTING AGAIN FROM THE ELIMINATION OF UNSECURED CREDIT.
AND ON OCTOBER 12TH, PUCT APPROVED 1165 AND ACCOMPANYING ERCOT MARKET IMPACT STATEMENT.
UM, 1184 IS, UH, 10 ASCA BROUGHT UP, UH, A, A PREFERENCE TO, UH, HAVE THE MONTHLY INTEREST INVOICING ON COLLATERAL BALANCE BALANCES POSTED TO ERCOT.
UM, AND, UH, THE CREDIT GROUP INFORMED US THEY COULD IMPLEMENT THIS, UH, LATER, NEXT YEAR.
AND ON OCTOBER 17TH, THE ERCOT BOARD VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO IMP RECOMMEND APPROVAL 1184 AS RECOMMENDED BY TAC IN THE SEPTEMBER 26TH TECH REPORT.
UH, NRG REQUESTED AN INVOICE REPORT A FEW MONTHS AGO.
[01:45:01]
COVER BE PRODUCED DAILY AND WOULD JUST SHOW ALL THE INVOICES WHETHER THEY'VE BEEN PAID OR NOT.UM, ERCOT IS LOOKING AT THIS, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE'RE GONNA MOVE AHEAD WITH IT, BUT, UM, IT'S IN THE VERY EARLY STAGES AND THEY'RE WORKING ON AN IMPACT TEST, UH, ASSESSMENT AND TRYING TO DETERMINE THE TIMELINE AND COST.
OKAY, SO THE ESTIMATE, AGGREGATE LIABILITY CHANGES AND ANALYSIS.
SO WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS FOR YEARS.
UM, THE, UH, THERE WAS, UH, PROPOSAL FROM DC AND RAINBOW, UH, THAT, UH, WANTED TO CHANGE PARAMETERS, UH, DEFINING THE COLLATERAL OBLIGATION TO ERCOT, UH, THE ERCOT CREDIT STAFF RAN A BUNCH OF SCENARIOS.
SO, SO BASICALLY WHAT THIS DOES IS IT TAKES INVOICE EXPOSURE, EXTRAPOLATES IT OUT TO COVER, UM, A PERIOD FOR A, A DEFAULT SCENARIO IN A MIGRATION, AND THEN TAKES INTO ACCOUNT, UH, FORWARD PRICING TO, UH, UH, COVER, UH, TO, TO, IF, IF THERE'S A PRICING EVENT WHERE EXPOSURE INCREASES GREATLY, THEN, THEN THAT'S REFLECTED.
UM, SO THE ERCOT TEAM RAN TWO SCENARIOS AND PRESENTED THE PRELIMINARY, UH, ESTIMATE AGGREGATE LIABILITY AND TOTAL POTENTIAL EXPOSURE FINDINGS AT THE SEPTEMBER MEETING, UH, AND GAVE FURTHER ANALYSIS AT OUR LAST MEETING ON A GAP ANALYSIS, BASICALLY TAKING, CALCULATING THAT ACTUAL INVOICE EXPOSURE NUMBER AND LOOKING AT IT AGAINST, UM, THE VARIOUS SCENARIOS.
UH, OF, OF PARTICULAR CONCERN IS AREAS WHERE THERE'S, UM, WHERE THE COLLATERAL DOES NOT COVER THE EXPOSURE, BUT WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT CASES WHICH ARE FAR MORE FREQUENT, WHERE THE MARKET'S OVER COLLATERALIZED AS A RESULT OF THE, UH, OF THE CALCULATION.
SO THERE ARE TWO SCENARIOS PRESENTED.
WE HAD A TWO HOUR DISCUSSION ABOUT THEM.
UM, ONE INVOLVES APPLYING FORWARD ADJUSTMENT FACTORS AGAINST REAL-TIME LIABILITY AND REMOVING THE MAX FUNCTION.
SO THE WAY IT WORKS NOW IS YOU TAKE YOUR HIGHEST, UM, RATIO OF FORWARD TO, UH, REALIZED REAL-TIME PRICES AND APPLY IT AGAINST A 40 40 DAY HISTORY OF THE, UH, UH, REAL TIME LIABILITY EXTRAPOLATED.
UH, SO INSTEAD OF DOING THAT, THEY'RE LOOKING AT MAYBE TAKING THAT AND DO, DOING KIND OF A SUM PRODUCT OF THE FORWARD ADJUSTMENT FACTOR OVER THE EACH DAY'S, UH, MAX RTLE.
UH, AND SCENARIO THREE INVOLVES A COUNTERPARTY LEVEL, CUSTOMIZED FORWARD ADJUSTMENT FACTOR BASED ON A RATIO OF FORWARD AND SETTLE PRICES.
UH, THE GROUP, UH, WANTS TO SEE IF OUR COP CAN TAKE A LOOK AT A SETTLEMENT FROM REAL TIME AND DAY AHEAD, COMBINED IN THE CALCULATION.
AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO LOOK AT THIS, UH, BUT THIS IS GONNA BE A LONG ROAD.
UH, WE HAD AN UPDATE, UH, ON THE SUBCHAPTER M FUNDS.
ERCOT SENT A NOTICE ON OCTOBER 13TH THAT IT WAS INCREASING THE, UH, TOTAL SECURITIZATION DEFAULT CHARGE MONTHLY AMOUNT.
UH, THIS DEALT WITH TIMING OF TRUE OPS AND PAYING DOWN THE M FUNDS WITH THE FUNDS FROM THE BRAZOS BANKRUPTCY.
UH, MARKET PARTICIPANTS HAD QUESTIONS, UH, RELATED TO PAYMENT AMOUNTS, WHICH WERE, WHICH HAD FALLEN AND THEN INCREASED.
SO, AND GOING FORWARD, THESE ARE NOW EXPECTED TO SAY ABOUT, UH, 1.8 MILLION, AND THE ERCOT PRIORITY IS TO PAY DOWN THE DEBT OBLIGATION AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
SO YOU CAN SEE THE INITIAL STARTED AT, UM, 3.7 MILLION IN JANUARY, 2022, WENT DOWN TO A LOW OF 1.5 IN JANUARY 23, AND JUST HAD RECENTLY COME BACK UP IN SEPTEMBER.
SO WE'RE CAUGHT, UH, TOOK SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT.
UM, AND SO THESE ARE THE REGULAR HIGHLIGHTS.
UH, MARKET-WIDE AVERAGE TOTAL POTENTIAL EXPOSURE DECREASED FROM 3.66 BILLION TO 2.5 BILLION FROM AUGUST TO SEPTEMBER, MAINLY DUE TO LOWER REAL TIME AND DAY AHEAD.
SETTLEMENT POINT PRICES, UH, WE LOOK AT DISCRETIONARY COLLATERAL, UM, WHICH IS COLLATERAL IN EXCESS OF POTENTIAL EXPOSURE, CRR LOCKS AND, UH, DAY AHEAD MARKET EXPOSURE.
DISCRETIONARY COLLATERAL INCREASE FROM 4.91 BILLION IN AUGUST TO 5.04 BILLION IN SEPTEMBER.
INCREASE IN DISCRETIONARY COLLATERAL IS LARGELY DUE TO THE INCREASE IN SECURED COLLATERAL.
SO, UM, THERE WAS NO UNUSUAL CALLS.
SO YOU MAY RECALL, UH, ERCOT IN OCTOBER GOT RID OF, UM, UNSECURED CREDIT.
AND, UH, SO PEOPLE ARE STARTING TO POST, WHICH IS GOOD.
THAT'S WHAT THEY EXPECTED, AND THAT'S GOING WELL.
[01:50:01]
PLEASE.DIAGRAMMATICALLY, NOW YOU SEE THOSE GREEN BARS, YOU WON'T, YOU WON'T SEE THEM ANYMORE GOING FORWARD.
UH, FOLKS ARE STARTING TO REPLACE THOSE WITH LETTERS OF CREDIT AND CASH.
UH, YOU CAN SEE THE LARGEST AMOUNT OF, UM, LATERAL IS IN LETTERS OF CREDIT.
THERE'S ONGOING DISCUSSIONS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, CONCENTRATION LIMITS THAT ERCOT HAS, UM, AND, YOU KNOW, ACCOMMODATING, UH, MARKET PARTICIPANTS WHO ARE, YOU KNOW, HAVING TO WORK WITH THEIR BANKS TO ARRANGE FOR NEW CREDIT FACILITIES AND MAKING SURE THESE DON'T BUMP UP AGAINST ANY CONCENTRATION LIMITS.
UM, BUT, UH, YEAH, THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
AND HERE'S A LOOK AT, UH, THE LAST TWO MONTHS OF DISCRETIONARY COLLATERAL.
IT'S TRACKING WITH, UH, YOU KNOW, DAY AHEAD AND, UH, UM, THE, THE, UH, TOTAL POTENTIAL EXPOSURE.
NOPE, I DON'T SEE ANY, UH, QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.
[13. Large Flexible Load Task Force (LFLTF) Report]
NOW WE ARE GOING TO THE LARGE FLEXIBLE LOAD TASK FORCE REPORT.CAN YOU GUYS HEAR ME? WE CAN HEAR YOU BILL.
SO I DON'T HAVE ANY SLIDES TO UPDATE FOLKS ON, BUT I'LL JUST GIVE A VERBAL, UH, UPDATE ON.
SO WE MET, UM, I GUESS IT WAS PROBABLY HALF A DAY AND WE'RE DOING OUR FOCUSED, UM, MEETINGS NOW SINCE WE PUT OUT THE, UM, SET OF RULES THAT ERCOT PROPOSED, WHICH IS NPRR 1191, NORE 2 56, FIGURE ONE 11.
UH, YESTERDAY'S MEETING, UH, WAS FOCUSED ON THE INTERCONNECTION PROCESS, UH, AND THE COMMENTS THAT WERE RECEIVED ON THOSE, UH, RULES THAT WE SUBMITTED.
UM, I WOULD SAY THAT WE HAD, UM, A GOOD DISCUSSION ON ALL COMMENTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED AND, UM, WE'LL BE TAKING BACK THE DISCUSSIONS AND WORKING ON, UM, THE NEXT, UM, REVISION THAT WE COULD, UH, MAKE USING SOME OF THOSE.
UM, ULTIMATELY THE NEXT MEETING WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT, UM, A SEPARATE TOPIC, UH, WHICH WILL BE THIS NEW TYPE OF LOAD CALLED AN RCL REGISTERED CURTAIL TYPE LOAD.
AND, UM, HOW WE WOULD USE THOSE DURING, UM, LOAD SHED EVENTS, UM, HOW WE CALCULATE, UM, SEPARATELY BREAKING OUT KIND OF FROM THE TRADITIONAL LOAD THAT WE'VE ALWAYS HAD, UH, IN THOSE LOAD SHUT TABLES AND ALLOCATING THESE RCL, UM, TO BE A SEPARATE BUCKET THAT COULD BE USED.
SO THAT, THAT'LL BE THE NEXT MEETING THAT WE'LL WE'LL HAVE, UH, DISCUSSIONS ON, ON THAT TOPIC AND ANY COMMENTS THAT CAME IN THERE.
UM, AND THEN THE FOLLOWING MEETING, UH, IS WHERE WE'LL COME BACK AND ADDRESS THESE INTERCONNECTION COMMENTS THAT WE DISCUSSED YESTERDAY.
UM, AND THEN ULTIMATELY I WILL BE RE BRINGING THOSE TO TAC IF THERE'S ANY, UH, CONCEPTS THAT, UH, WE ENDORSE THAT WOULD BE REVISIONS TO WHAT OUR COT HAD ALREADY PROPOSED.
UM, I'LL BRING THAT IF THERE ARE ANY, UM, ISSUES WHERE WE DON'T HAVE CONSENSUS, UM, WE'LL BE ASKING INTACT FOR INPUT ON THOSE.
UM, AND THEN ONE LAST THING I WILL NOTE IS WE DID GET COMMENTS JUST GENERALLY REGARDED, UH, ERCOT AUTHORITY TO CREATE RULES, UM, FOR THESE LOAD RESOURCES.
AND, UH, WE DID HAVE AN UPDATE FROM ERCOT LEGAL THAT, UM, DESCRIBED OUR, OUR BASIS OR OUR UNDERSTANDING OF OUR AUTHORITY TO DO SO.
SO WE DID COVER THAT AS WELL YESTERDAY.
OUR NEXT MEETING WILL BE ON THE 20TH OF NOVEMBER, AND THAT'S WHERE WE'LL TAKE UP, UH, THE RCL TOPIC.
ANY, UH, QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THE LTFL TASK FORCE? ALRIGHT, NEXT UP
[14. RTC+B Task Force Report ]
WE HAVE THE RTC PLUS B TASK FORCE REPORT, AND DAVID KEY, I BELIEVE YOU'RE GIVING THIS ONE.UH, SO BEING THE VICE CHAIR, I'LL PROVIDE THE UPDATE ON BEHALF OF THE RTC PLUS B TASK FORCE, UH, FILLING IN FOR MATT MORENOS, WHO IS ON A WELL-DESERVED VACATION, FAR AWAY FROM HERE.
UH, THE UPDATE'S GONNA BE BRIEF AND YOU CAN SEE FROM OUR SINGLE SLIDE.
UM, OUR MEETINGS ARE FOCUSED ON THE STATE OF CHARGE FRAMEWORK, UM, THAT WE'RE GONNA BE USED TO IMPLEMENT ENERGY STORAGE IN THE RTC EFFORT.
UM, WE HAVE A TARGET DAY OF DECEMBER TO GET OUR CHANGES TO THE ERCOT BOARD, AND SO FAR WE'RE ON TRACK,
[01:55:01]
UH, TO DO SO.WE MET EARLY IN SEPTEMBER TO REVIEW THE STATE OF CHARGE WHITE PAPER.
AND THOSE DISCUSSIONS LED TO SUBSEQUENT DRAFT NPRR, UH, WHICH I BELIEVE NOW HAS NUMBER NPR 1204.
UM, DISCUSSIONS THAT INFORMED THE NPR INCLUDED HOW THE STATE OF CHARGE WOULD BE USED AND CONSIDERED, UH, FOR THE RUG AND SCED.
AND THERE WAS EVEN A CHANGE TO THE SCED DESIGN, UM, AND HOW BASE POINTS SHOULD BE DISPATCHED.
UM, SO THE GROUP IS DOING ITS JOB PRETTY WELL IN ACTUALLY VETTING THE DESIGN AND THINKING THROUGH HOW THINGS ARE GONNA WORK.
UM, THERE WAS DESIRE TO REVIEW MORE HIGH LEVEL DESCRIPTIONS, UM, AND ALSO OFFER ANY EXAMPLES OF ISSUES THAT ARE CONSIDERED.
UM, THAT'S SOMETHING ERCOT TOOK BACK AND WE'LL, WE'LL COME BACK WITH A, UH, SOME RESPONSES TO THAT REQUEST.
UM, I DID WANNA QUICKLY PLUG THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR COMMENTS TO THE NPR, SO THEY, THEY CAN BE CONSIDERED AT THE NOVEMBER 1ST, UH, MEETING, UH, THAT THAT'LL KEEP US ON PATH TO LEAD US THROUGH APRS IN NOVEMBER, UH, WITH CONSIDERATION AT THE DECEMBER ATTACK AND THE DECEMBER BOARD THAT, THAT'S, UH, MY QUICK UPDATE.
THAT CONCLUDES THE, UH, TASK FORCE AND SUBGROUP SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS.
[15. ERCOT Reports]
ARE ONTO THE ERCOT REPORTS.WE HAVE A MARKET PARTICIPANT IDENTITY MANAGEMENT UPDATE.
I HAVE A QUICK UPDATE ON MARKET PARTICIPANT IDENTITY MANAGEMENT.
UH, THIS TOPIC CAME UP AT PRSA COUPLE MONTHS AGO, AND SO, UH, WE HAD A QUICK REPORT AT THE MOST RECENT PRS MEETING TO DISCUSS.
THIS IS MAINLY JUST A HEADS UP THAT ERCOT IS PLANNING A SERIES OF PROJECTS IN THIS SPACE THAT WILL TAKE US TO THE NEXT GENERATION OF MARKET PARTICIPANT ACCESS.
MOST OF YOU'RE AWARE THAT DIGITAL CERTIFICATES ARE USED FOR INDIVIDUAL USER ACCESS TO OUR SYSTEMS. UM, THESE CHANGES ARE LIKELY TO REQUIRE SOME REVISION REQUESTS.
SO YOU'LL SEE THOSE COMING THROUGH WHEN THE TIME IS RIGHT.
THE SERIES OF PROJECTS WE HAVE IN MIND, WE, WE HAVE SOME TECH HEALTH WE HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF FIRST, YOU KNOW, KEEPING OUR HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE IN THIS SPACE UP TO DATE AND VENDOR SUPPORTED.
WE'LL THEN HAVE A PROJECT THAT HELPS US IDENTIFY WHAT IS THE FUTURE VISION GONNA LOOK LIKE, AND THEN THE FINAL PROJECT WOULD IMPLEMENT THAT.
SO THE DISCUSSION WILL BECOME, UH, PARTICULARLY RELEVANT NEXT YEAR WHEN THE TIMING IS RIGHT TO GET A, A REVISION REQUEST INTO THE QUEUE AT PRS.
AND I'LL HELP CO COORDINATE THAT THROUGH MY USUAL REPORTING THERE, ASSUMING A FOUR TO SIX MONTH TIMEFRAME FOR THAT.
IF WE CAN GET THAT TAKEN CARE OF BY THE END OF NEXT YEAR, THAT WILL TEE UP NICELY WITH AN IMPLEMENTATION PROJECT.
SO, JUST A HEADS UP FOR FUTURE ACTIVITY AND MARKET PARTICIPANT ACCESS TO ERCOT SYSTEMS. ALRIGHT, ANY QUESTIONS? RAINIER, I SEE, UH, LOOKS LIKE BILL BARNES HAS A QUESTION.
WHAT ENHANCED FEATURES AND IMPROVEMENTS CAN WE LOOK FORWARD TO? TROY? MUCH OF THAT IS TBD, ALTHOUGH THE PAIN POINTS AROUND DIGITAL CERTIFICATES SHOULD REDUCE GREATLY.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S ONE TO HEAR ABOUT THAT THAT'S LOW HANGING FOR YOU.
I KNOW THEY'RE NOT GOING AWAY.
BUT THE VISION THAT I KIND OF HAVE HAD IN MIND IS THAT WHILE WE'RE GONNA HAVE DIGITAL CERTIFICATES, THAT THIS IS GONNA BE LIKE MY CREDIT UNION ACCOUNT TO WHERE I HAVE MY MEMBER NUMBER AND THEN I HAVE ALL OF MY ACCOUNTS UNDER THAT AND I GO TO MY MAIN ACCOUNT AND I TIE IN ALL THOSE OTHERS IS, AM I THINKING RIGHT, THERE'S A LOT TO BE DETERMINED, OF COURSE, FROM THIS EARLY STATE.
NOW, I, I MAY HAVE AN EXPERT ON THE PHONE THAT WOULD LIKE TO CHIME IN.
ARE YOU WITH US, LEO? YEAH, I MEANT TO ASK LEO, BUT I FORGOT.
I CAN SERIOUSLY GENERALLY FOLLOW UP, YOU KNOW, WHENEVER WE UPCOMING PRS MEETING.
THAT'S KIND OF THE VISION I WAS LOOKING AT, SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE STILL KIND OF ON THAT TRACK OR IF WE'RE NOT, WHAT IT'S GONNA LOOK LIKE.
WELL, ONE NOTE THAT CAME OUT AT THE LAST MEETING IS ONE OF THE SUB-BULLETS THERE THAT DIGITAL CERTS WILL STILL BE USED FOR MACHINE TO MACHINE ACCESS.
SO WE'RE TALKING MORE ABOUT, UH, ACTUAL USERS AND THEIR INTERACTION WITH THE SYSTEM.
THAT COULD BE MORE OF A MULTIFACTOR AUTHENTICATION LIKE YOU PROBABLY HAVE WITH ANY NUMBER OF, UM, YEAH.
SO WEBSITES, YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WANNA FULLY UNDERSTAND TO MAKE SURE WE'RE GETTING ALL THE BANG FOR OUR BUCK.
I THINK, UH, JOSE IS IN THE QUEUE.
UH, BOB COVERED, UH, SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT I WANTED
[02:00:01]
TO MAKE, BUT, UM, WILL, HOW WILL THIS INFORMATION BE RELAYED TO THIRD PARTY SOFTWARE COMPANIES THAT HANDLE, UM, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE SCHEDULING SOFTWARE THAT COMMUNICATES WITH DIGITAL CERTIFICATES WITH OUR CUT, UM, SO THAT WE'RE READY FOR THAT CHANGE IN 2025? WELL, THE, THE THIRD PROJECT YOU SEE ON THIS, SORRY ABOUT THAT.THE THIRD PROJECT YOU SEE ON THIS SLIDE WILL INVOLVE EXTENSIVE OUTREACH WITH ALL TYPES OF ENTITIES THAT CURRENTLY ACCESS OUR SYSTEM SYSTEM SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A SMOOTH TRANSITION.
SO, UM, WHEN WE GET TO 2025, YOU CAN EXPECT TO BE HEARING FROM US AS WE GET INTO THIS PROCESS.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR TROY? I DON'T SEE ANY.
I WANTED TO DO KIND OF A TIME CHECK ANNOUNCEMENT.
SO WE DO HAVE THE, THE NPR 1199 WORKSHOP THIS AFTERNOON.
UM, THAT, THAT WORKSHOP PAGE SAYS 1:00 PM OR AN HOUR AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF TECH, IF WE'RE AFTER NOON.
AND ANN AND I DID CONFIRM THAT IT'LL BE THAT HOUR.
UM, SO UNLESS WE WRAP UP IN, IN FOUR MINUTES, IT'LL BE STARTING AN HOUR AFTER, WHENEVER TECH CONCLUDES.
JUST TRYING TO HELP KENAN OUT WITH, WITH TIME FOR HIS, UH, UPDATES.
[16. Other Business]
ARE ON OTHER BUSINESS.I WAS GONNA START WITH THE, THE MARKET ITEMS, BUT WE CAN DO THOSE AT THE END.
DO YOU HAVE A PREFERENCE? I KNOW KON DOES HAVE A HARD STOP AT, AT ONE, CORRECT? CORRECT.
SO MAYBE WE, WE CAN START WITH JONATHAN.
I HAVE THIS, SEE THIS PULLED UP ALREADY, AND IF WE'RE NOT TO THE SUNDAY EVENT BY 1230, MAYBE STOP AND DO THAT.
GOOD MORNING, JOHN LEVINE, UH, ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL FOR ERCOT.
I ACTUALLY HAVE A COUPLE OF ISSUES ON THE AGENDA TODAY.
THE FIRST ONE HAS TO DO WITH AN ITEM IN THE PROTOCOLS THAT WE IDENTIFIED AS BEING LEFT OVER FROM, UH, THE PRIOR BOARD STRUCTURE.
AND I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT, THAT WE'VE IDENTIFIED THAT.
UM, AND SO HERE'S THE ISSUE STATEMENT.
UM, PROTOCOL SECTION 25 DEALS WITH, UH, MARKET SUSPENSION AND RESTART.
AND WE'RE TAKING A HOLISTIC LOOK AT THAT SECTION AND EXPECT TO PREPARE AN NPRR PROPOSING, UH, SOME UPDATES.
BUT THIS PARTICULAR SECTION I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT BECAUSE WE NEED FEEDBACK FROM THE MEMBERSHIP ON WHAT TO DO HERE.
SO HERE'S THE CURRENT LANGUAGE IN SECTION 25.3, PARAGRAPH SIX, AND IF YOU'LL LOOK, UM, THERE ARE REFERENCES IN PARAGRAPH SIX B ONE AND TWO TO MARKET SEGMENT DIRECTORS IN SEGMENT ALTERNATES.
UM, THAT OBVIOUSLY IS NO LONGER PART OF THE BOARD.
SO, UM, WE NEED TO THINK OF AN ALTERNATIVE TO THAT LANGUAGE.
NOW, THE INTENT OF THIS LANGUAGE FROM, UH, WHAT I CAN DISCERN FROM LOOKING BACK AT THE NPRR THAT INSERTED IT INTO THE, INTO THE PROTOCOLS WAS TO MAKE SURE THAT BEFORE, UH, ERCOT RESTARTS A MARKET, THE MARKET ITSELF IS READY, THE MARKET PARTICIPANTS.
AND SO BACK WHEN WE HAD SEGMENTS SITTING ON THE BOARD, THE BOARD WAS A GOOD PROXY FOR GETTING THAT, UM, THAT GREEN LIGHT.
UH, SO THE PROCESS THAT, UH, WAS PUT IN PLACE WOULD, UM, CALL FOR THE BOARD TO HAVE, UH, THE BOARD TO APPROVE THE, THE RESTART.
AND THEN AS AN ALTERNATIVE, IF THE BOARD COULD NOT MEET INSUFFICIENT TIME, UH, DUE TO PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS, UH, THERE WAS THIS ALTERNATIVE WHERE, UH, THE CEO OR GENERAL COUNSEL CAN APPROVE A RESTART, BUT THEY HAVE TO CONSULT WITH THE SEGMENT DIRECTORS AND SEGMENT ALTERNATES BEFORE AND GET SIGN OFF FROM, UH, A MAJORITY OF THEM.
AND SO OBVIOUSLY NOW WITH THE SHIFT IN THE BOARD STRUCTURE AND MARKET SEGMENTS, NO LONGER SITTING ON THE BOARD, JUST GETTING THE BOARD'S APPROVAL IS NO LONGER, YOU KNOW, A SIGNAL, A PROXY FOR THE MARKET BEING READY TO RESTART.
SO, UM, WE WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THIS ISSUE AND START TO, UH, BRAINSTORM WITH YOU ABOUT WHAT YOU THINK WOULD BE A GOOD ALTERNATIVE TO THE CURRENT PROCESS.
AND HERE ARE A FEW CONSIDERATIONS.
AND SO OBVIOUSLY WE DON'T HAVE SEGMENT DIRECTORS AND SEGMENT ALTERNATES,
[02:05:01]
AND THAT TAKES AWAY KIND OF THAT SINGLE POINT OF CONTACT FOR EACH SEGMENT.THERE'S NO PERSON WHO CAN ACT AS A SPOKESPERSON.
SO THAT'S THE ISSUE IN A NUTSHELL.
UM, AND WE JUST WANTED TO BRING IT TO YOUR ATTENTION AND START TO HEAR YOUR THOUGHTS ON WHAT MIGHT BE A GOOD ALTERNATIVE.
'CAUSE YOU KNOW, WE ARE PLANNING TO SPONSOR AN NPRR, UM, BUT THIS LANGUAGE REALLY IS MORE IMPACTING ON THE MARKET, UH, ON THE MARKET SEGMENTS.
UM, SO WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WHATEVER WE PROPOSE IS GOOD WITH ALL, ALL OF YOU.
SO YOU WERE LOOKING FOR FEEDBACK, UM, FOR YOUR FUTURE NPRR ON HOW TO GET KIND OF MAR MARKET FEEDBACK OR, OR MARKET NOTICE BEFORE THE THE MARKET RESTART? EXACTLY.
AND, YOU KNOW, I HAVEN'T EVEN GOTTEN AS FAR AS THINKING ABOUT HOW, HOW, HOW WE MIGHT COLLECT THAT FEEDBACK.
I DID PUT TOGETHER, YOU KNOW, JUST SOME THOUGHTS ON, ON POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS.
AND AGAIN, ERCOT I THINK IS RELATIVELY AGNOSTIC ON THIS, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, I DIDN'T WANNA COME IN EMPTY HANDED, SO I JUST THREW SOME IDEAS OUT THERE.
BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WHATEVER WE, WHATEVER WE COME UP WITH, IT'S UM, THAT, THAT YOU ARE COMFORTABLE WITH IT, THE, THE THE MEMBER POPULATION.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO TALK THROUGH THESE OR, OR GO TO THE QUEUE NOW? UM, I'M HAPPY TO GO TO THE QUEUE, TALK THROUGH IT.
I LEAVE THAT UP TO YOU IF YOU HAVE A PREFERENCE.
UM, SO WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS ONE.
UM, AND UM, OUR PERSPECTIVE ON THIS IS, UM, SOMETHING LIKE, UM, OPTION ONE, UM, BUT, UM, ACCOMMODATIONS MAYBE ONE AND TWO.
SO IT SEEMS LIKE IT MIGHT BE A REASONABLE AND EFFICIENT APPROACH IF, UH, AS PART OF THE ANNUAL TACK ELECTION, THE SEGMENT ALSO CHOSE A, UM, REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE RESTART PROCESS.
UM, IT'S IMPORTANT, ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF SB TWO, THAT THE BOARD PLAY A SIGNIFICANT ROLE IN, UM, DECISION MAKING.
AND ALSO IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO EXPLAIN, UM, WHY THE BOARD WASN'T INVOLVED IN SUCH A DECISION.
YOU KNOW, IF WE WERE IN A SITUATION THAT HAD A MARKET MARKET RESTART, SO MAYBE TO, TO EASE THAT PROCESS AND NOT REQUIRE A BOARD MEETING, YOU COULD JUST RECEIVE COMMUNICATION FROM A SUBSET OF BOARD MEMBERS SUCH AS THE BOARD CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR AND, UH, THE CHAIR OF THE RMC, FOR EXAMPLE.
YEAH, AND JUST ONE THING I GUESS I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T, UM, SAY BEFORE, AND UH, I'LL CLARIFY NOW, IS THAT I, WE DO INTEND TO KEEP THE BOARD AS PART OF THE PROCESS.
I THINK THE BOARD WANTS TO BE, UH, INVOLVED.
UM, AND SO I THINK YOUR POINT IS, IS CORRECT.
I THINK WE DO NEED SOME SORT OF ALTERNATIVE LIKE WE USED TO HAVE IN CASE THE BOARD CAN'T MEET, BUT THEN WE ALSO NEED THE MEMBER GREEN LIGHT AND PERHAPS A BACKUP FOR TAC IF THAT, IF TAC IS THE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE AVENUE FOR GETTING THAT GREEN LIGHT.
SO ON THIS FIRST SOLUTION, THE TECH APPROVAL, IT SAYS TECH CAN TAKE ACTION WITHOUT MEETING.
SO THAT WOULD JUST LOOK LIKE A FULL EMAIL VOTE FOR APPROVAL.
I, YOU KNOW, I'VE A LITTLE BIT RUSTY ON TAC PROCESS AND STUFF, BUT I TECH CAN ACT, UH, VIA EMAIL VOTE, ISN'T THAT, YEAH.
SO I, IF TAC COULDN'T MEET FOR SOME REASON AND THERE WAS A WAY TO DO IT VIA O VOTE WHERE TAC MEMBERS WERE COMFORTABLE WITH IT, THAT THAT MIGHT BE, UH, SOMETHING THAT COULD BE DONE.
ROY SAID WE COULD TAKE HIM OUT OF THE QUEUE.
UM, IS THAT STILL GOOD ROY, OR DO YOU, DO YOU WANT TO ADD, ADD ANYTHING? OH, THANKS.
UM, JOHN, I'M, I'M, I'M JUST KIND OF CURIOUS, IS THE OVERALL OBJECTIVE TO BE ABLE TO, UH, MOVE
[02:10:01]
WITHOUT HINDRANCE ON A MARKET RESTART IF AND WHEN NEEDED? IS THE, THE POINT YOU RAISE IS A, IS A GOOD ONE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE BOARD NEEDING TO, UM, YOU KNOW, HAVE A MEETING TO ACT AND, AND SO THINKING ABOUT TIMELINES AROUND THAT AND, UM, JUST TRYING TO THINK OF WHAT THE, WHAT THE OVERALL OBJECTIVE, UH, WE SHOULD BE CIRCLING AROUND HERE IS MM-HMM,I'M NOT, I'M NOT SURE I CAN ANSWER THAT.
UM, THIS IS SUCH A, I DON'T KNOW, THEORETICAL SECTION OF THE PROTOCOLS.
IT'S ONE THAT WE OBVIOUSLY HOPE WE'LL NEVER HAVE TO USE.
UM, SO IT'S HARD TO KIND OF ENVISION WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IF WE'RE IN A SITUATION WHERE THE MARKET'S BEEN SUSPENDED AND WE NEED TO RESTART IT, RIGHT? UM, I, I DO THINK THAT THERE'S A VERY REALISTIC CHANCE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT A PRETTY TIGHT TIMELINE THERE.
UM, YOU KNOW, AND IF STAFF IS READY TO RESTART THE MARKET, THEY'RE NOT GONNA WANNA WAIT TO, YOU KNOW, CALL A REGULAR BOARD MEETING.
THERE ARE PROVISIONS IN THE PROTOCOLS, UH, SORRY, THE PROTOCOLS, THE BYLAWS THAT ALLOW THE BOARD TO MEET, UH, ON SHORT NOTICE FOR URGENT MATTERS, AND THEY CAN MEET VIA TELECONFERENCE IN THOSE SITUATIONS TOO.
NOTICE CAN BE AS SHORT AS ONE HOUR.
SO I DON'T THINK THAT THE BOARD'S APPROVAL IS A, A BIG, BIG HURDLE.
I THINK THAT THERE IS A SITUATION THOUGH, IF, YOU KNOW, JUST TRYING TO, TRYING TO USE MY IMAGINATION HERE.
UM, IF THIS ALL IS HAPPENING VERY QUICKLY AND WE CAN'T EVEN GET THE BOARD TOGETHER, A QUORUM OF THE BOARD TOGETHER ON AN EMERGENCY CALL, AS ERIC NOTED, MAYBE THERE'S SOME OTHER PROCESS THAT PEOPLE WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT WOULD SERVE AS THAT APPROVAL FROM ERCOT AND THAT WE'RE READY TO RESTART.
SO THAT, THAT HELPS ANSWER, I THINK THE, THE GIST OF MY QUESTION WAS, ARE YOU LOOKING AT A SEVEN DAY NOTICE TIME FRAME TIMING? AND SO IF, IF THE BOARD CAN MEET FOR URGENT MATTERS ON AS LITTLE AS ONE HOUR NOTICE, THAT THAT PROBABLY ABSOLVES SOME OF THAT CONCERN.
UM, UH, A DIFFERENT QUESTION IS, YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE ARE OTHER, YOU'RE, YOU'RE TAKING A MORE HOLISTIC REVIEW OF THE MARKET RESTORE PRO RESTART PROCESS.
UM, DO YOU ANTICIPATE THAT ANY OF THE OTHER CHANGES MIGHT INFLUENCE THE, JUST THE COMPLEXITY OF, UH, A RESTART DECISION? I, I, I WILL, UH, HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT.
I'LL CONFESS, THIS IS ACTUALLY THE ONE SECTION OF THIS PROCESS THAT I'M WORKING ON, THE BROADER REVIEWS BEING HANDLED BY ANOTHER ATTORNEY.
SO, UM, I'M NOT REALLY NOT REALLY SURE HOW TO ANSWER THAT, BUT I COULD TRY TO FIND OUT FOR YOU.
AND IS, IS, UM, IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WHERE YOU'RE LOOKING FOR DEFINITIVE FEEDBACK TODAY, OR CAN WE HAVE A LITTLE TIME TO CONSIDER AND, AND NO, WE DON'T NEED DEFINITIVE FEEDBACK TODAY AT ALL.
AND THIS LANGUAGE HAS BEEN SITTING THERE AS IS.
IF, YOU KNOW, WE ENTERED INTO A CRISIS A WEEK AGO, WE WOULD'VE HAD TO DEAL WITH THIS PROBLEM, AND I'M SURE WE WOULD'VE, YOU KNOW, COME UP WITH A PRACTICAL SOLUTION.
UM, THAT SAID, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE GOOD TO FIX IT AS, YOU KNOW, REASONABLY QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
SO WE, YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS WHAT EXPECTATIONS ARE IF WE WERE TO END UP IN THIS VERY UNLIKELY BUT PRETTY BAD SITUATION,
I THINK THAT'S, UH, THAT'S WORTH CONSIDERING IF THAT HELPS, YOU KNOW, BE NIMBLE AND, AND RESPONSIVE.
BUT I'D, I'D LIKE A LITTLE MORE TIME TO, TO THINK THROUGH IT.
ONE THING WE COULD DO IS, UH, BETWEEN NOW AND THE NEXT TAC MEETING, WE COULD KIND OF THINK THROUGH THIS A LITTLE FURTHER AND MAYBE PUT A LITTLE MEAT, MORE MEAT ON THE BONES AND TRY TO COME BACK WITH, YOU KNOW, A LITTLE BIT MORE CONCRETE OF A PROPOSAL OF WHAT THAT KIND OF HYBRID APPROACH MIGHT LOOK LIKE.
DOES THAT WORK? YEAH, THAT DOES.
YEAH, JONATHAN, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, AS YOU MENTIONED THAT UNTIL WE GET THIS CLEANED UP, WE DO HAVE A FAIL SAFE IF SOMETHING, SOMETHING HAPPENS BETWEEN NOW AND, AND WE CHANGES THIS LANGUAGE.
UM, I'M NOT SURE I AM THE RIGHT SPOKESPERSON FOR THIS.
WHAT I'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO SAY IS THAT THE WAY THE PROTOCOLS READ TODAY, YOU WOULD NEED THE BOARD SIGN OFF, AND I THINK ERCOT WOULD UNDERSTAND THAT JUST GETTING THE BOARD SIGN OFF WOULD NOT BE, WOULD NOT BE SUFFICIENT, BECAUSE AGAIN, IT DOESN'T, IT DOESN'T ADDRESS THE CONCERNS THAT LED TO THE ADOPTION OF THE LANGUAGE.
[02:15:01]
SO MY INSTINCTS WANNA SAY THAT IF THIS WERE TO HAPPEN TODAY, THE DIRECTION FROM THE BOARD AND FROM PABLO, ET CETERA, WOULD BE TO FIND A WAY TO GET THE MARKETS.BEFORE WE RESTART, EVEN THOUGH THE PROTOCOLS DON'T REQUIRE IT, I'M KANA I'M SURE THAT YOU AGREE WITH ME ON THAT, RIGHT? I, WE'RE NOT JUST GONNA GO ROGUE AND, UM, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF THE TECHNICALITY AND THE PROTOCOLS JUST ALLOWS BOARD APPROVAL.
THAT'S, UH, I, I, I WOULD AGREE.
UM, BUT THERE ARE SOME SCENARIOS HERE WHERE WE MIGHT HAVE TO MOVE REALLY QUICKLY.
UM, SO THAT MAKES THIS INITIATIVE REALLY IMPORTANT.
SAMS I'LL, I'LL GIVE YOU A HOT TAKE.
UH, I PREFER OPTION ONE, UH, OF THE THREE OPTIONS.
UM, I THINK THAT IN THE EVENT OF A MARKET RESTART, THE IDEA THAT I'M GONNA BE COORDINATING WITH OTHER COMPANIES, UH, POSITION, IT'S GONNA BE EXTREMELY CHALLENGING.
UM, AND BY HAVING ALL OF TECH PARTICIPATE, UM, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE DIVERSE POINTS OF VIEW, UH, THROUGH THAT REGULAR PROCESS ANYWAY.
UM, AND IT STILL PROVIDES AN OPPORTUNITY, A STRUCTURAL OPPORTUNITY THAT ALREADY EXISTS FOR, FOR, UM, MARKET FEEDBACK TO THE BOARD.
UH, RANDY JONES? RANDY, YOU ON? YEAH.
YOU OKAY? UH, YEAH, WE'VE, YOU KNOW, YEARS AGO WE HAD THIS, THIS SIMILAR DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT IT TAKES TO, TO RESTART THE MARKET.
AND, UH, ALTHOUGH CHECKING WITH, UH, YOU KNOW, A QUORUM OF THE BOARD OR SOME NUMBER OF AVAILABLE TAC MEMBERS ISN'T A BAD IDEA, BUT, UH, I, I THINK IT HAS TO, IT HAS TO BEGIN WITH UNDERSTANDING.
IF YOU HAVE CRITICAL MASS OF, UH, QUEASY WITH LOADING GENERATION WHO ARE READY TO RESTART, UH, THE MARKET, IF THEIR SYSTEMS, UH, HAD DIFFICULTY FOR ONE REASON OR ANOTHER, YOU WANNA MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE A MARKET TO START.
SO YOU NEED TO HAVE THAT CRITICAL MASS OF, UH, OF QUEASY ALONG WITH, UH, SOME REPRESENTATION THAT YOU CAN SHOW, HEY, WE CHECK WITH A, YOU KNOW, A REQUIRED NUMBER OF BOARD MEMBERS, OR WE, WE CHECKED WITH, UH, AVAILABLE TAC MEMBERS.
BUT, UH, YEAH, THE CRITICAL MASS OF QUEASY IS IMPORTANT TOO.
AND WE, WE HAD DISCUSSED THAT IN THE PAST.
I THINK HE BROUGHT HIS OWN CARD.
UH, THE CARDS UP HERE WERE APPARENTLY THROWN ON THE FLOOR BEFORE I GOT UP HERE.
UM, JONATHAN, MY THOUGHTS ON THIS ARE ACTUALLY THAT THIS STEP SHOULD BE VERY THOUGHTFUL AND SLOW AND DELIBERATE AND WOULD ACTUALLY NOT REQUIRE A VERY QUICK MOVE.
UM, THE, THE CONCEPT OF THIS IS THAT WE HAVE, WE HAVE GOTTEN THE PHYSICAL GRID BACK TO A STEADY STATE.
UM, THE, THE NUMBER OF TEXANS THAT CAN RECEIVE POWER HAS BEEN MAXIMIZED AT THAT POINT, UM, TO WHAT WERE AVAILABLE.
WE'RE BACK TO A SINGLE ISLAND, UM, IF THERE WAS OUTAGES, ET CETERA.
AND AT THIS POINT, ERCOT IS RELINQUISHING SOME OF THE CONTROLS THAT THEY HAVE UNDER MARKET RESTART BACK TO MARKET PARTICIPANTS.
UM, AND BECAUSE OF THAT, I THINK, UH, A TAC MEETINGS ARE SO WIDELY KNOWN OF THAT LEVERAGING TAC AS A WHOLE IS VERY IMPORTANT, UM, BECAUSE OF WHAT RANDY AND BRIAN SAID.
YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE MARKET PARTICIPANTS, THAT YOU'RE ABOUT TO RELINQUISH SOME OF THAT CONTROL BACK TO ARE READY TO TAKE THAT, AND THAT WE DON'T CAUSE A SECONDARY ISSUE.
UM, GOOD FEEDBACK AND NO DOUBT THAT THAT'S AN IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION.
I THINK THAT'S WHY ERCOT WAS BEHIND THIS CONCEPT WHEN IT WAS PUT INTO THE PROTOCOLS.
UM, I WASN'T INVOLVED IN THAT NPRR, SO I DON'T REMEMBER MUCH ABOUT IT.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT, I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WAS INVOLVED IN THE POLICY CONSIDERATIONS, BUT OBVIOUSLY THE OUTCOME DID ALLOW FOR, UH, YOU KNOW, A BYPASSING OF THE MORE DELIBERATIVE PROCESS IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES.
AND THERE MUST HAVE BEEN A DECISION, YOU KNOW, TO DO THAT.
AND AGAIN, I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHAT
[02:20:01]
THE, THE REASONS WERE BACK THEN.UM, I WAS QUITE INVOLVED IN THIS ONE, AND THE BIGGEST ONE WAS, UM, TRYING TO GIVE FLEXIBILITY TO ERCOT AND THE MARKET.
THAT'S WOULD'VE BEEN MY GUESS.
SO WHAT'S NEXT STEPS ON THIS IS YOU'LL BE BACK AT DECEMBER 4TH TAC WITH, WITH MAYBE A, A MORE FLESHED OUT PROPOSAL ALONG THE LINES OF DISCUSSION.
I THINK LEVERAGING TAC WAS A, A BIG THEME.
I THINK, UH, WHAT I CAN DO IS COME UP WITH, YOU KNOW, A, A A, A BETTER, MORE DETAILED PROPOSAL ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT ERIC SUGGESTED, MAYBE WITH A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT OPTIONS.
SOUNDS LIKE SOME PEOPLE HAD DIFFERENT THOUGHTS.
UM, AND IN THE MEANTIME, IF ANYONE HAS ANY FURTHER FEEDBACK THEY WANT TO OFFER, UH, YOU KNOW, FEEL FREE TO EMAIL ME, JAYLEVINE@ERCOT.COM, OR, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN GET IN TOUCH WITH ME THROUGH ANN OR SOMEONE.
WELL, YOU ARE ON THE NEXT AGENDA.
I, I BELIEVE RIGHT, THE, THE DECEMBER ERCOT ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP MEETING, AND I, I CAN HELP YOU TEE THIS ONE UP.
I, I BELIEVE THE, THE BOARD AND ERCOT LEADERSHIP HAS REQUESTED THAT WE, WE HAVE A COUPLE OF MEMBER, UM, ERCOT MEMBER, TECH MEMBER SPEAKERS AT THE, THE ANNUAL MEETING.
AND SO CLIFF AND I HAD A DISCUSSION WITH, WITH ERCOT ABOUT SOME IDEAS ON THAT.
BUT I THINK WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, A, AS WE GO THROUGH THE YEARS THAT WE HAVE KIND OF A, A REPRESENTATION OF THE DIFFERENT SEGMENTS SPEAKING.
AND SO THIS YEAR, IF WE DO TECH LEADERSHIP, WHICH WAS ONE OF THE IDEAS, THEN, THEN WE HAVE A WAY FOR FUTURE YEARS TO MAKE SURE WE ARE GETTING, HITTING KIND OF ALL THE SEGMENTS AND HEARING A DIVERSITY OF VOICES.
UM, THAT, THAT SAID, I THINK WE'RE OPEN TO HOW, HOWEVER TAC THINKS WE SHOULD GO ABOUT FINDING THOSE SPEAKERS.
UM, AND THEN ON TOPICS, I, I THINK WE'RE OPEN TO, I THINK ONE OF THE IDEAS WAS KIND OF SHOWING THE, THE VALUE OF MEMBERSHIP AND, AND MAYBE DOING THAT THROUGH THE, THE OPEN ACTION ITEMS AND THE GOALS WE LOOKED AT TODAY.
MAYBE SHOWING HOW THOSE ALIGN WITH THE ERCOT STRATEGIC GOALS, SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES.
UM, BUT, BUT JONATHAN, I'LL, I'LL LET YOU ADD, OR FROM THERE, UH, YOU TEED IT UP, YOU TEED IT UP PRETTY WELL.
SO THE BOARD, UM, THE BOARD ANNOUNCED THEIR PLANS FOR THE ANNUAL MEETING AT, AT THEIR LAST MEETING.
UM, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY, UH, MENTIONED IN THE PRESENTATION WAS THE DESIRE TO HAVE MEMBERSHIP REPRESENTATION AS PART OF THE GUEST SPEAKING.
UH, SO, YOU KNOW, THEIR IDEA WAS MAYBE TWO DIFFERENT MEMBERS.
AND, UH, AS CAITLYN NOTED, YOU KNOW, MAYBE ROTATE THROUGH THE SEGMENTS OVER THE YEARS SO YOU'RE NOT JUST HEARING FROM THE SAME PEOPLE AND EVERYBODY HAS A CHANCE TO SPEAK.
BUT, YOU KNOW, WITH THAT SAID, I DON'T THINK, I DON'T THINK THE BOARD WANTS TO BE IN THE POSITION OF DICTATING WHO THESE PEOPLE SHOULD BE.
UM, SO THEY, THEY, YOU KNOW, THOUGHT IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO ENGAGE YOU TO SEE WHAT YOUR THOUGHTS ARE OVERALL ON THAT.
AND MAYBE, YOU KNOW, LEAVE IT TO TAC OR, YOU KNOW, THE MEMBERSHIP I GUESS, TO, UM, COME UP WITH IT TO IDENTIFY THE PEOPLE.
AND AS FAR AS TOPICS, I THINK YOU, YOU GOT IT PRETTY MUCH, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT THE, THE VALUE OF MEMBERSHIP, THE VALUE OF THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS, TECH GOALS AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS.
UM, YOU KNOW, I SUPPOSE IF IT WERE A SEGMENT THAT WAS SPEAKING, IF THERE'S A, YOU KNOW, AN ISSUE OR TWO ISSUES THAT ARE REALLY IMPORTANT TO THAT SEGMENT, IT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT THEY COULD TOUCH ON.
UM, BUT JUST A COUPLE OF THOUGHTS.
IS THERE ANY FEEDBACK ON, ON SPEAKERS, UM, FOR THIS YEAR AND, AND IN THE FUTURE AND TOPICS AS WELL? OKAY.
I GUESS, UM, IN THE ABSENCE OF FURTHER FEEDBACK, MAYBE YOU AND CLIFF AND I CAN TALK AGAIN AND SEE IF WE WANT TO PROCEED THAT THAT'S WHAT I WAS GONNA SUGGEST.
YOU KNOW, I, I THINK CLIFF, CLIFF AND I CAN FOLLOW UP WITH YOU, UM, IF IT SURE.
AND THAT GIVES, THAT GIVES US TIME TO GIVE IT MORE THOUGHT BETWEEN NOW AND 2025.
AND THIS IS OBVIOUSLY NOT A LOT OF TIME BETWEEN NOW AND WHEN THE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE MEETING IS.
SO WE KIND OF SPRINGING THIS ON YOU LATE IN THE LATE IN THE GAME.
BUT IF YOU, NOW THAT YOU KNOW THAT THAT'S AN EXPECTATION FOR 2025, IT GIVES EVERYONE TIME TO THINK ABOUT WHAT THEY MIGHT WANT TO DO NEXT TIME.
CHRIS, DID YOU WANNA COMMENT? UH, YEAH, I GUESS ONE COMMENT, ONE QUICK QUESTION.
SO I KNOW SOME OF THE OTHER ISOS HAVE LIKE A, A WAY TO KIND OF HANDLE THAT A LITTLE BIT BETTER AND MORE TIME.
SO I GUESS THE SECOND PART OF THAT QUESTION IS HOW, WHAT LENGTH OF TIME DO WE THINK WILL BE ALLOCATED FROM AN AGENDA STANDPOINT? I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MAYBE 15, 20 MINUTES FOR EACH OF THE MEMBER SPEAKERS.
[02:25:01]
MINUTES.SO, I MEAN, SO MAYBE IT'S JUST KIND OF ROTATE THROUGH.
YOU KIND OF THINK ABOUT THAT SO THAT EVERY, YOU KNOW, SO MANY YEARS, HOWEVER MANY WE HAVE, YOU KIND OF ROTATE THROUGH TWO PEOPLE EACH YEAR OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
SO MAYBE FOR THE, AFTER THIS YEAR, WE, WE START THAT PROCESS SUMMER, SPRING, MAYBE SIX MONTHS OUT.
AND I, I DON'T KNOW HOW THE OTHER ISOS HANDLE THAT.
SO MAYBE IF YOU COULD OFFLINE HELP, HELP ME, HELP ME OUT WITH THAT, THAT ONE WE CAN, WE CAN FOLLOW UP OFFLINE TOO.
THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING WE CAN DO TOO, IS REACH OUT TO SOME OF THE OTHER ISOS AND GET FEEDBACK ON THAT.
'CAUSE AGAIN, THIS IS KIND OF JUST GOT SPRUNG ON US, BUT I HADN'T THOUGHT ABOUT DOING THAT.
THAT MIGHT BE A GOOD THING FOR US TO DO.
SO WE CAN, CLIFF AND I CAN FOLLOW UP WITH YOU OFFLINE, JONATHAN.
SOUNDS LIKE MAYBE WE SAFEST TO GO WITH LEADERSHIP THIS YEAR ON THE SHORT TIMEFRAME AND THEN START A PROCESS NEXT SPRING OR SUMMER FOR, YOU KNOW, UH, ELECTING OR HOW, HOWEVER APPOINTING FINDING VOLUNTEERS OR VOLUNT HOLDING PEOPLE TO, TO SPEAK IN THE FUTURE.
UM, SUSIE, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK ON THE 2024 MEMBERSHIP SEGMENT ELECTIONS? YES, CAITLIN, THANK YOU.
JUST A REMINDER, UH, WE'VE BEEN KIND OF GETTING THIS NOTICE OUT ON OCTOBER 9TH, UH, MEMBERSHIP SERVICES SENT A NOTICE OUT FOR RENEWAL OF MEMBERSHIP FOR 2024, UH, THAT YOU SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED.
IT'S JUST A REMINDER TO GET THOSE ITEMS IN TIMELY.
THIS IS A NEW PORTAL THIS YEAR THAT MEMBERSHIP IS USING.
AND, UM, YOU NEED TO ALLOW A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO GET THAT REGISTRATION DONE AND TO GET THOSE FEES PAID, UH, ON THE ONLINE PORTAL.
AND THEN THE DATE OF RECORD IS FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 17TH.
AND SO YOU NEED THAT APPLICATION AND FEES PAID BY THAT DATE.
AND THEN THE ELECTION PROCESS FOR THE 2024 TAC AND SUBCOMMITTEES WILL START THE FOLLOWING WEEK AFTER.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT PROCESS? I, I DO HAVE A QUESTION, SUSIE.
UM, I KNOW LAST YEAR, AND I THINK MAYBE ANOTHER YEARS, WE, WE ALSO HAD TO HAVE SOME KIND OF LETTER FROM, FROM EMPLOYERS SAYING, YOU KNOW, WE, WE HAVE AUTHORITY OR WHATEVER TO BE ON, ON TAC.
IS THAT SAME THING REQUIRED? AND WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO SEND AN EXAMPLE AND REMIND US OF WHAT'S NEEDED AND WHEN? YES.
UH, THE TAC AFFIRMATION LETTER IS WHAT IS REQUIRED FOR, UH, THOSE NOMINATIONS FOR TAC NOMINATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT IT.
AND THEN WE ALSO NEED THE LETTERS OF EMPLOYMENT OR LETTERS OF AGENCY FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEES.
AND AGAIN, THOSE LETTERS ARE REQUIRED IN ORDER TO ACCEPT THE NOMINATION.
AND SO WE WILL SEND OUT COPIES OF THAT LETTER WITH THE ELECTION NOTICE THAT GOES OUT THAT VERY FIRST WEEK.
SO THE DEADLINE ON THOSE LETTERS IS NOT THE DATE OF RECORD, BUT THE ELECTIONS CORRECT.
WITH THE, ONCE WE START THE ELECTION PROCESS.
AND IF YOU NOT, IF YOU ARE NOT ALREADY SUBSCRIBED TO YOUR SEGMENT LISTSERV, I WOULD RECOMMEND DOING THAT BECAUSE YOU'LL BE GETTING THE NOTICES IN THAT MANNER AND THAT WILL TELL YOU WHAT YOUR SEGMENT ELECTION PROCESS IS.
'CAUSE EACH ONE OF THOSE ARE DIFFERENT AND CONFIDENTIAL.
AND SO YOU'LL GET THAT INFORMATION AND HOW THE PROCESS IS GOING TO WORK AND THE REQUIREMENTS ALL THROUGH THAT SEGMENT LIST, SIR.
UH, BILL, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION ON THE SIDE, SUSIE? I KNOW THE, THE, THE WHOLE MEMBERSHIP PROCESS HAS CHANGED TO BE AN ONLINE PORTAL, BUT WE'RE STILL GONNA GET LETTERS TOO OR 'CAUSE IT A LOT OF THE, A LOT OF THE CONTENTS OF THE FORMER APPLICATION IS ACTUALLY ON THE PORTAL ITSELF.
SO THEN NONE OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS HAVE MOVED INTO THE PORTAL FOR THE LETTER PROCESS? THAT'S CORRECT.
ONE IS DOING YOUR MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION, AND THAT'S THROUGH THE PORTABLE PORTAL AND THEN HAVING YOUR FEES PAID.
AND THAT GETS YOU TO BE A 2024 MEMBER.
AND THE SECOND PIECE OF THAT IS WE'RE STARTING THE ELECTION PROCESS THE WEEK AFTER THE DATE OF RECORD, WHICH IS NOVEMBER 17TH.
SO THAT CONCLUDES YOUR MEMBERSHIP PART.
THEN WE'RE STARTING WITH THE ELECTION PROCESS AND THEN THE LISTERV IS HOW YOU'RE GOING TO GET THE DETAILS OF WHAT YOUR SEGMENT, THE STEPS ARE IN THE ELECTION PROCESS FOR YOUR SEGMENT.
BUT THE TTAC AFFIRMATION LETTER AND THE LETTER OF EMPLOYMENT OR AGENCY FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEES IS REQUIRED WITH THE NOMINATIONS WHEN WE START THE ELECTION PROCESS.
BUT THAT PROCESS HASN'T CHANGED NOT FROM LAST YEAR.
LAST YEAR WAS THE FIRST YEAR WE DID THE TAC AFFIRMATION LETTERS.
AND BOB, YOU QUESTION JUST REAL QUICKLY ON, ON THE PORTAL PROCESS.
YOU KNOW, I'VE, I'VE SENT THAT PART IN, YOU KNOW, FILLED ALL THAT OUT.
NOW IS THERE A WAY TO PRINT THAT FORM
[02:30:01]
THAT I'VE DONE THROUGH THE PORTAL? AND THE REASON I'M ASKING THAT IS, YOU KNOW, BEFORE WE FILLED OUT THE FORM, SENT IT IN, THAT WAS MY INVOICE TO GO GET IT PAID.SO I'M CURIOUS, NOW THAT I'VE SENT THAT IN
OH, DID YOU? I WAS GONNA SAY, I, I AM NOT, YOU KNOW, MEMBERSHIP SERVICES ACTUALLY MANAGES THAT AND I, AND SO I'M NOT AS FAMILIAR AS I COULD BE.
I COULD FIND THAT ANSWER OUT FOR YOU, BUT I THINK IAN HALEY HAS COMPLETED THIS PROJECT BECAUSE HE WAS THE ONE THAT ALERTED ME TO SOME OF THE CHALLENGES WITH IT.
YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S WHY'S THE CHALLENGE I'M RUNNING TO, THAT'S TO INCLUDE THAT INTO THE REMINDERS.
YOU CAN DO PRINT, YOU CAN PRINT AND GO BACK IN AFTER I'VE ALREADY DID IT.
I CAN GO BACK IN AND DO THAT ON THE, WELL, I HADN'T SUBMITTED IN THE PORTAL YET, BUT I HAD, I HAD THE FORM I WENT TO PRINT, I PRINTED IT AS APDF.
AND THEREFORE IT SAVED IT ALL OUT AND THAT WAS MY WAY TO SEND IT TO LEGAL.
I'M JUST CURIOUS IF I COULD GET TO IT NOW THAT IT'S SUBMITTED TO, TO PRINT THAT.
AND I CAN FOLLOW UP WITH MEMBERSHIP SERVICES AND ASK FOR YOU, BOB.
THAT WAS BILL SMITH'S QUESTION AS WELL, SO MAYBE WE COULD SEND THAT OUT WHEN WE HAVE AN ANSWER ON HOW TO PRINT THE, THE FORM.
UM, BILL, DID YOU WANNA ADD ANYTHING? YES, I NEEDED A PRINT OF THE COMPLETED FORM, NOT A, A PRINT OF THE BLANK FORM.
MY ACCOUNT'S VARIABLE IS ASKING THE SAME QUESTION.
OR ERCOT WILL TRACK THAT DOWN, UM, AND SEND IT OUT TO, TO TAC.
KEVIN HANSSEN, DO WE NEED TO, UH, SUBMIT THE SAME FORM FOR EACH SUBCOMMITTEE WE'RE APPROACHING? OR IS IT ONE OVERALL? I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTOOD YOUR QUESTION.
KEVIN, CAN YOU SAY THAT AGAIN? SO THE, THE, THE LETTER, DO WE HAVE TO DO FILE THE SAME LETTER FOR EACH SUBCOMMITTEE WE'RE, UM, LOOKING TOWARDS NO, JUST ONE.
BECAUSE ONCE WE HAVE IT ON FILE YEAH.
THEN, THEN WE'RE GOOD WITH THE ADDITIONAL SARAH GO, WELL CAN YOU TAKE THIS UP AND JUST, WE'LL JUST MAIL IT NEXT TIME WE GO TO THE POST OFFICE.
SET ON THE TABLE BECAUSE YOU'RE GONE.
HEY JOEL, WE CAN HEAR YOUR CONVERSATION QUESTION FROM JAY.
WE HAVE, I GUESS, TWO DIFFERENT PEOPLE KIND OF WITHIN THE OFFICE COMPLETING THINGS.
IS THERE, IS IT VISIBLE? SO ONCE WE FILL OUT THE FORM AND MADE THE PAYMENT, IS IT VISIBLE IN THE PORTAL THAT, THAT ERCOT HAS RECEIVED THE PAYMENTS? THERE'S SOME SORT OF CONFIRMATION AT THE, AT THE END.
UM, JAY, I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT PROCESS.
I, WE'LL GET WITH, UM, MEMBERSHIP SERVICES, WHICH IS UNDER LEGAL AND WE'LL SEE IF WE CAN GET THEM TO FORWARD SOMETHING OUT TO THE TAC LISTSERV TO JUST KIND OF COVER, UH, HOW TO PRINT AND HOW TO GET CONFIRMATION OF THAT.
SO WE'LL LOOK FOR THAT NED, SORRY IF THIS IS, UH, THIS IS REDUNDANT, BUT FOR THE, THE ELIGIBILITY LETTER, UM, IF THERE, IF YOU ALREADY HAVE AN EXISTING ONE, YOU NEED IT RESUBMITTED FOR 2024 IF YOU HAVE AN EXISTING ONE RIGHT NOW THAT'S FOR 2023.
SO WE NEED A NEW LETTER FOR 2024 FOR THE TAC AFFIRMATION OR FOR THE LETTER OF EMPLOYMENT OR LETTER OF AGENCY FOR 2024.
SO WE'LL, WE'LL GET THE INSTRUCTIONS ON PRINTING THE COMPLETED FORM.
I SAW IT UP AND THEN I SAW IT DOWN.
I THOUGHT BRITTANY HAD, UH, JUST GOTTEN ME IN THE QUEUE.
SO, UM, SO THE SMALL COMMERCIAL CONSUMER SEGMENT IS THE LARGEST MEMBERSHIP SEGMENT IN ERCOT.
UM, MANY OF THESE ARE VERY SMALL CITIES THAT FOLLOW, YOU KNOW, KIND OF TRADITIONAL PROCESSES IN HOUSE FOR MANAGING, UH, MEMBERSHIPS AND CUTTING CHECKS.
AND, UM, I'M JUST AFRAID THAT BY CREATING A NEW PROCESS WITH A PORTAL, WITHOUT A BACKUP PROCESS THAT ALLOWS THEM TO FOLLOW A TRADITIONAL METHOD OF CUTTING A CHECK AND DELIVERING IT, THAT WE MAY LOSE A LARGE NUMBER OF SMALL COMMERCIAL CONSUMERS FROM ERCOT.
AND I JUST POINT OUT THESE CONSUMERS ARE VALUE, THESE MEMBERS OF ERCOT ARE VALUABLE.
IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE THEM.
THEY HAVE BEEN, UH, PARTICIPATING MEMBERS OF ERCOT FOR YEARS AND YEARS, AND IT WOULD BE A SHAME IF WE
[02:35:01]
LOSE THEM JUST BECAUSE WE HAD A PROCESS CHANGE.UM, MY TEAM IS WORKING ACTIVELY WITH THEM TO, UH, EXPLAIN THE NEW PROCESS, UH, TRY AND WORK THROUGH THEIR PAYMENT ISSUES.
BUT IN THE PAST WE HAVE HAD MANY OF THEM WHO WERE, UH, VERY LIMITED BY THEIR PROCESS AND HAD TO, UH, CUT PHYSICAL CHECKS, ET CETERA.
SO, UH, IT WOULD BE TROUBLING IF THE, THE ONE AND ONLY PROCESS LIMITS THE NUMBER OF MEMBERS WE HAVE.
ALRIGHT, COREY, I SAW YOU PULL UP THE BALLOT, BUT I, WE HAD ADDED A COUPLE OF, UM, OTHER BUSINESS ITEMS, NAMELY THE, A KIND OF REVIEW, OR, OR I KNOW PEOPLE WANTED A FORM FOR QUESTIONS ON THE, THE EVENTS AND SUBMISSION PROBLEMS THAT WE WERE HAVING ON SUNDAY.
KENAN, I THINK YOU, YOU AND VENKAT ARE HERE TO, TO SPEAK ON THAT.
BROADLY, UM, THE ISSUE THAT WE'VE HAD TO DEAL WITH IS THAT THERE IS, UM, AN INTEGER FIELD THAT TRACKS, UH, SUBMISSIONS, UH, THROUGH OUR SYSTEMS, AND THAT THERE'S A UNIQUE IDENTIFIER FOR EACH SUBMISSION.
SO THAT HAS TO MOVE THROUGH A VARIETY OF SYSTEMS. AND IT HAD A LIMIT OF 2,147 MILLION AND, AND SOME CHANGE.
UM, AND THAT LIMIT WAS EXCEEDED.
UM, SO WHAT HAPPENED IS, AT THAT POINT, UH, SUBMISSIONS STARTED BEING, UH, REJECTED.
UM, THIS HAD BOTH REAL TIME AND DAY AHEAD IMPLICATIONS.
WE SAW, UM, A PRICE SPIKE IN THE REAL TIME, UM, UH, BETWEEN A LITTLE BIT AFTER 12 TO A LITTLE BIT AFTER, UH, ONE, UH, PM.
UM, THERE WAS ALSO, UH, A SERIES OF OFFERS INTO THE DAY AHEAD, UH, THOSE TYPES OF SUBMISSIONS THAT WOULD NOT GO THROUGH.
UM, ULTIMATELY WE WERE ABLE TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE BY FREEING UP SOME OF THIS NUMBER AND LETTING, UH, FOLKS RESUBMIT.
UM, AT WHICH POINT, UH, WE WERE ABLE TO CLEAR THE DAY AHEAD MARKET, ALTHOUGH, UH, LATE, UM, UH, BUT WITHIN THE, WITHIN THE TIMEFRAME AND, UM, UH, WE WERE ABLE TO KIND OF MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT.
UM, I THINK THE TEAM IS WORKING ON A MORE EXTENSIVE FIX ON THIS GOING FORWARD.
UM, BUT, BUT THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE ACTUAL EFFECT OR, OR THE DRIVER OF WHAT HAPPENED ON SUNDAY.
UH, VANCAT, IF YOU'RE ON, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO SUPPLEMENT OR ADD ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO.
WELL, WHILE WE WAIT FOR THAT, UM, HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
HE'S HAPPY AS ALWAYS TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
SO THE 2,000,000,400, WHATEVER NUMBER IS AN ERCOT SYSTEM, ERCOT INTEGER, WHATEVER YOU TRY TO DESCRIBE IT AS.
THE MAIN THING WE WANNA KNOW IS THE PRICE IS GONNA BE CORRECTED.
'CAUSE IT, IT CLEARLY THOSE PRICES WEREN'T INDICATIVE OF WHAT WAS OKAY.
SO, UM, GOING ON IN THE SYSTEM AT THE TIME.
LET ME, LEMME SPEND SOME TIME, MORE TIME ON THAT.
I'M GLAD YOU, UH, FOLLOWED UP.
SO, UM, WE ARE INVESTIGATING PRICES.
UH, THERE'S, UH, ABSOLUTELY, UH, A ISSUE IN THE ERCOT SYSTEM, BUT REMEMBER, A PRICE CORRECTION MEANS, UH, HAS TWO REQUIREMENTS ON IT.
IT HAS TO KINDA MEET THE, UH, ERCOT BASED ERROR KIND OF QUALIFICATIONS, UM, THAT ARE DETAILED IN THE PROTOCOLS, AND THEN WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO CALCULATE THE OTHER PRICE.
UM, SO, UH, WE'RE, WE'RE WORKING THROUGH THAT.
THE OTHER AVENUE THAT IS BEING CONSIDERED IS THAT FOR REAL TIME, THERE COULD BE, UH, THIS COULD BE LOOKED AT AS POSSIBLY A SCED FAILURE, AND WE WOULD, UH, BE ABLE TO MAYBE HOLD PRICES FROM BEFORE WHEN THIS HAPPENED.
SO THOSE ARE THE TWO THINGS, THOSE ARE THE THINGS WE'RE LOOKING AT.
UH, AGAIN, I JUST WANNA CAUTION YOU THAT THE STANDARD ABOUT A PRICE CORRECTION AND THE PROTOCOL IS TWOFOLD AND NOT JUST,
[02:40:01]
YOU KNOW, UH, SOMETHING HAPPENED.YEAH, I I THOUGHT PART OF THE PROCESS WAS IF YOU COULDN'T CALCULATE THE PRICE, YOU JUST HOLD THE, THE LAST GOOD PRINT CONSTANT, UM, THROUGH THE EVENT.
UH, SO THAT, THAT IS A, THAT IS A OTHER PART OF, UH, THAT, THAT'S MORE ASSOCIATED WITH SCED FAILURE THAN, THAN THAN ERCOT DATA, UH, ERROR OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT DRIVES OTHER PRICE CORRECTIONS WITH THE, LIKE, THE POINT BEING, THIS WASN'T A, I SEE BRIAN HAD, HAS CONVENIENTLY LEFT THE ROOM, BUT, UM, A FEW YEARS AGO, A MARKET PARTICIPANT
LET, LET ME JUST SUBMITTED SOME BAD TELEMETRY.
THIS, THIS WAS NOT BAD TELEMETRY.
THIS WAS A ISSUE ON THE ERCOT END.
IT IS A PARAMETER THAT DATES BACK TO, UH, NODAL GO LIVE.
UM, AND, UH, I THINK IT, IT WAS NOT ENVISIONED THAT WE WOULD EXCEED THAT NUMBER.
CAITLIN, NED, I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT THE CAP IS, DID YOU JUST REMOVE THE CAP OR DID YOU JUST TAKE OUT THE PROGRAMMING OR HOW, WHAT DID YOU HAVE TO DO? SO, UM, WHAT WE DID WAS, UH, SO THESE UNIQUE IDENTIFIERS WERE BEING GENERATED SINCE NODAL GO LIVE.
SO WE FREED UP A, A CHUNK OF THE OLD ONES, RINNI VAS, IF HE'S ON, HE CAN WALK YOU THROUGH THAT BETTER THAN I CAN.
BUT THE IDEA WAS TO, UM, TO, UH, FREE UP, UH, INTEGERS THAT COULD BE, COULD BE SUBMITTED THAT COULD THEN GET A, ITS UNIQUE IDENTIFIER TO TRACK ALL THE WAY THROUGH.
BECAUSE THE THING IS LIKE, IF YOU OVERRIDE THAT, THEN THE SYSTEM DOESN'T KNOW WHAT'S BEING HANDED OFF EITHER S UH, IF YOU'RE ON, PLEASE WEIGH IN.
CAN I, CAN I INTERRUPT THEN? WELL, WE HAVE, WE HAVE A QUEUE FORMING.
BUT, UM, I WANTED TO ADD, ARE WE WAITING? I'M WONDERING IF WE'RE WAITING FOR ERCOT OR NOT.
NED, THANK YOU CANAN FOR, UH, FOR COMING IN AND GIVING US THE, THE BACKGROUND ON THIS.
AND I, I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION ABOUT THE INTEGERS.
UM, AND I THINK YOU'VE ALREADY ADDRESSED IT, AND NED IT IS A CUMULATIVE, I THINK A UNIQUE RECORD ID IS, IS WHAT I'M HEARING.
AND SO THAT'S WHY IT, YOU KNOW, IT HAD IT ADDED UP OVER TIME.
UM, I'M IN MY, MY UNDERSTANDING FROM YOUR RESPONSE TO ERIC'S QUESTION IS THAT THE CAP HAS NOT BEEN RAISED OR REMOVED, BUT RATHER YOU'RE RECYCLING SOME OF THE, UH, THE OLDER, UH, UNIQUE IDS.
AND I'M, I'M GUESSING THAT'S, THAT WORKS OUT FINE BECAUSE THOSE ARE ASSOCIATED WITH, UH, YOU KNOW, OFFER SUBMISSIONS THAT WERE, YOU KNOW, ANCIENT HISTORY AND IT NOT GOING TO BE, UH, NOT NEED TO BE RE REFERENCED AGAIN.
UM, SO IS, IS YOUR PLAN TO GOING FORWARD, UH, CHANGE THE CAP AND, AND, YOU KNOW, RESET THAT AND THEN, YOU KNOW, KEEP ACCUMULATING? OR WILL THERE BE KIND OF A, A GLOBAL RESET? UM, SO I, I DON'T THINK THERE WOULD, WE WOULD WANNA DO A GLOBAL RESET, UH, BASED ON THE NEED TO PRESERVE, UH, SOME OF THIS DATA.
UM, BUT, UH, I DO THINK THAT, UH, ULTIMATELY WE WOULD NEED TO CHANGE THAT CAP.
HOWEVER, THE PROCESS BY WHICH THAT WOULD HAPPEN AND THE TESTING AND OTHER ACTIVITY THAT NEEDS TO TAKE PLACE, UH, WAS NOT ALIGNED WITH TRYING TO CLEAR DAM ON TIME ON SUNDAY.
SO THE, I I WOULD DESCRIBE THIS AS A INTERIM, UH, FIX THAT WE WILL CONTINUE TO WORK ON, UH, GOING FORWARD.
AND SO F FOLLOW UP QUESTION THEN IS WITH US IN AN INTERIM PROCESS, HOW MUCH OF THE, UH, HOW MUCH OF THE CHUNK THAT HAS BEEN RECYCLED IS STILL AVAILABLE? HOW MUCH RUNWAY DO WE HAVE? UH, I WAS THINKING YOU WERE GONNA ASK THAT, AND I DON'T KNOW
[02:45:01]
THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.UM, AND I'M, I'M, I AM TRYING TO GET, GET AN ANSWER.
WELL, I APPRECIATE YOU COMING HERE AND I APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, ERCOT TEAMS PUT IN ON SUNDAY TO, TO, YOU KNOW, FIREFIGHT THIS ISSUE.
NOTHING LIKE A, UH,
YEAH, IT WAS A, IT WAS A BUSY SUNDAY FOR FOLKS.
BOB, DID WE GET YOUR QUESTION TOO? THAT PRETTY MUCH ANSWERED MOST THINGS.
THE FOLLOW-UP PIECE WAS, COULD THIS HAPPEN AGAIN? THE ANSWER IS YES.
I, I THINK WE WOULD OWE THE STAKEHOLDERS A, UH, PRESENTATION OR AN UPDATE ON THE LONGER TERM FIX ON THIS.
UM, SO THAT'S A, THAT'S A TAKEAWAY, UH, THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO COME BACK TO YOU AND DESCRIBE THE MORE PERMANENT FIX.
WHAT, WHAT'S THE TIMEFRAME FOR A MORE PERMANENT FIX? BECAUSE THAT SEEMS LIKE THIS COULD HAPPEN AGAIN UNTIL THERE'S A MORE PERMANENT FIX.
UH, IT SOUNDS LIKE UNIVA MIGHT BE ON.
CAN I, THIS SCREEN WORK? YEAH.
SO, UH, FOR THE QUESTION, UH, WHETHER THIS WOULD HAPPEN AGAIN, UH, WITH THE CHANGE THAT WE IMPLEMENTED, UM, CORRECTING THE DATA, UM, WITH IDS, UH, THAT WOULD TAKE US, UM, NEXT PROBABLY FIVE, SIX YEARS BEFORE THIS, THIS ISSUE WOULD HAPPEN AGAIN.
UM, MEANWHILE, UM, WE ARE WORKING WITH A VENDOR TO GET APPLICATION CHANGES, UM, AND ALSO WE ARE ALSO IMPLEMENTING, UM, A CHANGE THAT WOULD REDUCE THE GROWTH OF THAT ID, UH, UH, SIGNIFICANTLY SO.
SO CURRENTLY WITH THE CHANGE THAT WE IMPLEMENTED, SO THIS SHOULD ISSUE SHOULD NOT HAPPEN NEXT SEVERAL YEARS, BUT IN NEXT, UH, FEW MONTHS WE WILL BE IMPLEMENTING APPLICANT CHANGES TO HANDLE MUCH BIGGER IDS AND ALSO, UH, LESS THAN THE INCREASE OF THAT IT.
IS THERE ANY, UH, I, I CAN FOLLOW UP, BUT, UM, UH, THE, I THINK I GOT SOME, UH, CURIOUS LOOKS WHEN WE SAID LESSEN THE IMPACT.
SO, UM, THERE ARE WAYS TO KIND OF GIVE THINGS UNIQUE IDENTIFIERS RELATIVE TO, UH, THE DAY IT HAPPENED OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT THEN LETS YOU REUSE OTHER PORTIONS OF THE ITEM.
SO THEY'RE LOOKING AT THAT TYPE OF THING AS WELL AS EXPANDING THE 2 BILLION.
UM, THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY, UH, TO APPROACH THIS FROM BOTH SIDES.
SO THEY WILL PICK WHAT WOULD BE KIND OF THE OPTIMAL, UH, APPROACH TO GO FORWARD.
I'M STILL SEEING THE CONFUSED LOOKS, BUT LET'S, LET'S MOVE ON IN THE QUEUE AND THEN WE'LL, WE'LL CONTINUE TO HAVE QUESTIONS FOR, FOR YOU GUYS.
UM, I JUST WANT TO CLEAR UP SOMETHING.
YOU, YOU SUGGESTED THAT IT MIGHT BE A PRICE CORRECTION, IT MIGHT BE A SCED FAILURE, BUT YOU DIDN'T DEFINITIVELY SAY IT WOULD BE ONE OR THE OTHER.
IS THERE A POSSIBILITY THAT IT WON'T BE CORRECTED AND IT'S STILL UNKNOWN? YES.
I MEAN, I, I THINK WE HAVEN'T FINISHED THE INVESTIGATION.
THERE ARE, SO LET, LET'S JUST TALK, TALK ABOUT THE PRICE CORRECTION SIDE OF IT.
THERE WERE RESOURCES THAT REACTED TO THAT, TO THAT PRICE AND DISPATCHED ON THAT PRICE.
UM, THERE ARE, UH, UH, AND, AND THE, AND THE GENESIS OF THE PROBLEM IS THE FACT THAT BECAUSE THESE UNIQUE IDENTIFIERS THAT THERE, THAT THERE WASN'T, THERE WAS ESSENTIALLY LESS, UH, ENERGY AVAILABLE TO SCED.
SO SCED JUST STARTS MOVING UP THE KIND OF MERIT ORDER.
UM, SO THE EXACT REPRICING, UM, WOULD, UH, REQUIRE SOME KIND OF BEHAVIORAL ASSUMPTIONS THAT MAY BE PROBLEMATIC, MAY NOT BE, BUT M MIGHT BE PROBLEMATIC.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S, UH, THE TYPE OF THING THAT COULD INHIBIT US FROM GOING DOWN THE PRICE CORRECTION ROUTE.
THE SCED FAILURE IS, IS MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD, WHICH
[02:50:01]
IS YOU JUST LOOK AT THE LAST GOOD SCED PRINT, AND THEN THERE ARE SOME MAKE WHOLE PROVISIONS AND OTHER THINGS, UH, TO FOLLOW UP WITH THAT.BUT, YOU KNOW, THE, I GUESS THE BEST WAY I COULD SAY THIS RIGHT NOW IS THERE ARE, UH, IS VERY PARTICULAR LANGUAGE AROUND, YOU KNOW, WHAT A SCED FAILURE IS, AND WHETHER THAT APPLIES TO THIS EXACTLY OR NOT IS STILL BEING DEBATED.
UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY UPDATES TO THE TIMELINE THAT WAS IDENTIFIED IN THE LAST OPS MESSAGE? ARE WE STILL ANTICIPATING THE RESULTS OF THAT INVESTIGATION BEING KNOWN BY FOUR O'CLOCK TODAY? SO, UH, THAT IS ALWAYS, THAT, THAT'S, UH, USUALLY WE HAVE TWO, UH, TWO DAYS, I GUESS IT IS TO, OR 48 HOURS TO KIND OF, UH, DO A PRICE CORRECTION ON OUR OWN.
SO THAT'S OUR, UH, FIRST GOAL.
UM, I THINK THIS IS GETTING TO A SLIGHTLY MORE COMPLEX AREA WHERE WE MIGHT GO PAST THE FOUR O'CLOCK TODAY, WE CAN SEND OUT SOMETHING SAYING THE INVESTIGATION'S CONTINUING OR, OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES, IF THAT'S HELPFUL.
AND I, I CAN FOLLOW UP WITH MY TEAM ON THAT.
UM, MY QUESTION IS ABOUT AROUND THE PURGING OF THE INTEGERS TO FREE UP SPACE.
IS THAT GONNA IMPACT ANY DATA OR INTEGRITY ON HISTORICAL INFORMATION? SO, SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS NO, I AM NOT THE EXPERT ON THIS, BUT IF YOU THINK ABOUT THESE NUMBERS, THE FACT THAT THEY'VE BEEN ACCUMULATING SINCE 2010 AND, UM, OUR RECORDS RETENTION AND THINGS LIKE THAT ARE SEVEN YEARS.
THERE WAS A POOL THAT DID NOT FALL IN OUR RECORD RETENTION THAT WAS RELATIVELY LARGE.
AND I THINK, UH, SRIVAS ALLUDED TO THE FACT THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE FIVE YEARS OF, UH, WIGGLE ROOM TO WORK WITH, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WAY TO DESCRIBE IT.
SO, UM, WE DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH THERE WITH THAT SINCE EVERYTHING ELSE IS, IS ALIGNED.
SO WHAT I'M HEARING FROM YOU IS THAT THE TRANCHE OF DATA THAT WAS PURGED EXCEEDED THEIR RECORD RETENTION POLICY THAT ERCOT IS ADHERED TO.
AND I WOULDN'T, I WOULDN'T SAY THAT WE PURGED ALL THE DATA.
WHAT I WOULD SAY IS WE PURGED OR MADE AVAILABLE, AGAIN, A SET OF UNIQUE IDENTIFIERS THAT WERE OLD, OLD, AND SO THERE IS OTHER UNDERLYING DATA AROUND THAT OR AROUND TRANSACTIONS THAT I WOULDN'T SAY IS PURGED.
IT'S ONLY THIS UNIQUE IDENTIFIER THAT, THAT WE TRIED TO FREE UP SPACE ON.
BUT YOU NOW HAVE TWO DATA POINTS POINTING TO THAT UNIQUE IDENTIFIER, RIGHT? THE OLD ONE AND THE NEW ONE.
I, I THINK THERE'S STILL JUST ONE, BUT THAT'S A, I THAT'S NOT, I I'M NOT ABLE TO ANSWER THAT.
I OWN RIVA, DO YOU HAVE ANY INSIGHT INTO THAT QUESTION? YEAH, CAN, SO I CAN ADD TO IT.
I'M NOT SURE IF IT ANSWER THE QUESTION COMPLETELY, BUT LIKE WE SAID, CAN, LIKE WE DID NOT PUDGE DATA, WE RESET THE IDS FOR THE PARENT AND CHILD TABLES, SO THAT GETS REPLICATED AND WHEN THE REPORTS ARE RUN, UM, OR WHEN YOU QUERY DATA, YOU STILL SHOULD BE ABLE TO QUERY IT AND REPORTS SHOULD BE ABLE TO BE PUBLISHED.
BUT WE'LL GO BACK AND CHECK ONE MORE TIME.
SO, SO REALLY WE DID NOT PURGE ANY DATA.
SO THE, THE OLD DATA IS STILL THERE, BUT THERE'S ADDITIONAL FIELDS THAT HELP YOU EXACTLY.
I'LL JUST GET MYSELF IN CONTROL.
I THINK I SUB BILL'S CARD UP FIRST.
KNOM, YOU, YOU MADE COMMENTS ABOUT, UM, IMPACT TO MARKET PARTICIPANTS FACTORING INTO YOUR DECISION WHETHER THEY'RE CORRECT PRICES OR NOT.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT'S CLEAR THAT THAT GOES BOTH WAYS, RIGHT? AB AB ABSOLUTELY HIGH PRICES, PEOPLE WILL RESPOND JUST LIKE PEOPLE WILL SAY, THESE PRICES DON'T MAKE ANY SENSE.
[02:55:01]
NOT GONNA DO ANYTHING.SO I JUST, THAT'S TO ME, LIKE THE ULTIMATE OBJECTIVE IN PRINCIPLE SHOULD BE WE WANT PRICES TO REFLECT MARKET CONDITIONS.
I THINK THERE IS A REQUIREMENT THAT WE BE ABLE TO CALCULATE A PRICE.
IT GETS TO BE A MIXED BAG WHEN THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT BEHAVIORAL ISSUES THAT I AM TRYING TO EITHER INCLUDE OR EXCLUDE IN, IN A CALCULATION.
BUT DOES, DOES BEHAVIOR THAT YOU SEE AND THAT YOU DON'T SEE, I JUST, IT'S, THERE'S ALL, ANY SITUATION LIKE THIS IS, WAS GONNA BE BOTH SIDES OF IT.
SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S ACKNOWLEDGED.
I THINK THE ISSUE MORE IS COMING UP WITH A, A, A VALID PRICE.
JENNIFER? UH, I HAD A VERY SIMILAR POINT, WHICH WAS, UH, THE STATUS QUO CUTS A CERTAIN WAY ALREADY.
AND SO I THINK THAT BY LEAVING THE STATUS QUO, THERE WOULD BE A DECISION THERE ON WHAT PRICING WAS ACCEPTABLE.
UH, I, AGAIN, I ACCEPT THAT POINT.
I THINK THE PROTOCOLS TELL US WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DO, BUT THAT DOES NOT DIMINISH YOUR POINT IN ANY WAY.
IT'S JUST WHAT'S FEASIBLE FOR US TO CALCULATE WITHIN THE RULES.
ERIC F UH, I MADE A COMMENT IN THE CHAT ABOUT DATABASE ADMINISTRATION IF ANYONE WANTS TO READ IT.
I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT IT, BUT I WAS ALSO WONDERING IF WE CAN VOTE ON OUR COMBO BALLOT.
CAN I TAKE KEVIN HANSEN'S COMMENT FIRST? I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR HIS TWO MINUTE CONVERSATION WITH KORAN.
WELL THIS IS GONNA BE OUR LAST, UH, COMMENT FOR KAN.
'CAUSE KAN NEEDS TO GO AND ERIC NEEDS TO VOTE ON THE, THE COMBO BALLOT.
JUST A REAL QUICK THOUGHT HERE IS SINCE THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT UNIQUE IDENTIFIERS FOR EACH RESOURCE OR ES EACH PIECE THERE WAS, IT RANDOMLY SELECTED THE UNIQUE RESOURCES IN THE SCD FOR EACH SCD BASED ON IF YOU'RE LUCKY ENOUGH TO GET A UNIQUE IDENTIFIER THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE RUN.
UH, I THINK RINNI BUSS IS GONNA HAVE TO ANSWER THAT ONE ALSO.
UM, YEAH, SO WE, WE LOOKED AT ALL THE, UH, RESOURCE, UM, UNIQUE IDENTIFIERS, RESOURCE SUBMISSION, UNIQUE, I MEAN UNIQUE IDENTIFIERS THAT CAME IN TO SYSTEM GREATER THAN THAT MAX VALUE.
SO IF I CAN FOLLOW UP ON WHAT KEVIN WAS SAYING, WHETHER YOU GOT TO BE PART OF THAT, UH, THAT MARKET OR NOT, WAS SOMEWHAT RANDOMLY, UH, UH, OCCURRED AND YOU MIGHT HAVE BEEN EXCLUDED OR INCLUDED JUST ON, UH, SOME RANDOM FACTORS, UH, WHICH IS I THINK THE POINT YOU'RE TRYING TO MAKE IS, YEAH, I COULD HAVE BEEN TRYING REALLY HARD TO CORRECT YES.
DO SOMETHING AND JUST WAS NOT ABLE TO BECAUSE OF RANDOMNESS.
I, I ACCEPT THAT POINT AS WELL AS PART OF THE ARGUMENT.
I KANAN I KNOW YOU'RE TRYING TO GET OUT OF HERE.
THERE'S, THERE'S ANOTHER COMMENT, UM, IN THE, THE CHAT AND THEN I WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE SORT OF CLEAR ON NEXT STEPS FOR INFORMATION.
I, I KNOW THERE IS A REQUEST FOR AT LEAST A, A MARKET NOTICE WHEN WE GET TO THE NORMAL 48 HOUR TIME.
UM, I'M A LITTLE, I'M INTERESTED IN THE DISCUSSION THAT, THAT BILL AND JENNIFER WERE HAVING AN I I DON'T KNOW IF ERCOT AND THEIR NEXT PRESENTATION CAN MAYBE POINT TO THE PROTOCOLS.
UM, AND THE, THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE, THOSE TWO THINGS YOU NEED FOR THE PRICE CORRECTION AND THEN THE, THE SCED FAILURE, I THINK THAT'S A DIFFERENT SECTION OF THE, THE PROTOCOLS.
UM, SO IF WE COULD GET A PRESENTATION THAT, THAT LAYS THOSE THINGS OUT AT WHATEVER THE NEXT DISCUSSION IS, THAT THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
AND, AND I WOULD LIKE TO PLEASE DO PATRICK'S QUESTION 'CAUSE I THINK THAT'S MATERIAL.
UM, SO, UH, THE HIGH PRICE PRINT DID CREATE A HIGHER CREDIT COLLATERAL REQUIREMENT AS WELL IN THE MARKET THAT IS, UM, UNDER CURRENT PROTOCOLS, NOT SOMETHING WE ADJUST FOR.
UM, SO THAT CREDIT COLLATERAL REQUIREMENTS THAT PRINTED FROM THAT CONTINUE, THAT MAY BE A SUBJECT OF SOMETHING WE NEED TO DELVE INTO FURTHER.
WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT, YOU KNOW, BY THE TIME I COME UP WITH A,
[03:00:02]
A ADJUSTED PRICE, I DON'T KNOW HOW IMPACTFUL AT THAT TIME IT WILL BE ON CREDIT AND COLLATERAL.UM, BUT I THINK THAT'S A REALLY GOOD POINT THAT HE HAS MADE THAT, THAT DID, UH, CONTINUE ON THROUGH AND IMPACT CREDIT COLLATERAL REQUIREMENTS.
AND I'M, I THINK I ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION, UH, PATRICK, BUT IF THERE'S SOME OTHER POINT THAT I'M MISSING, I'M HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN A FOLLOW UP.
UM, YEAH, SO, HI, THIS IS PATRICK.
UM, I WAS ACTUALLY AN ACTIVE FOR, I TRIED TO BE IN ACTIVE COMMUNICATION WITH ERCOT.
UM, I WROTE EMAILS, TRIED TO CALL LEFT MESSAGE WITH THE CREDIT GROUP.
I, UH, TALKED OR TRIED TO LEFT MESSAGES AND EMAILS WITH CLIENT SERVICES, AND I CALLED INTO THE SERVICE DESK AND SEVERAL TIMES, UM, CREATED A TICKET, ET CETERA.
AND IT BOTHERED ME THAT KEL WAS OBVIOUSLY AWARE OF THIS PROBLEM AND, AND THEY JUST DIDN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.
AND THEY SHUT DOWN THE MARKETING, YOU KNOW, RIGHT IN MY FACE.
UM, HAVING BEEN SITTING HERE, SITTING HERE SINCE EARLY MORNING WAITING WHEN I COULD FINALLY SUBMIT.
SO THE WHOLE COMMUNICATION ABOUT THIS EVENT, UH, I WAS, IT WAS VERY FRUSTRATING.
UM, WE HAD NO IDEA WHAT WAS GOING ON WHEN IT WAS GONNA FIX, AND THEN THERE WERE MESSAGES THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE FIXED.
BUT FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, IT WASN'T FIXED AT ALL BECAUSE EVERY SUBMITTAL I DID EVERY FIVE 10 MINUTES WAS REFUSED.
UM, AND YEAH, SO, UH, I I'M NOT SURE THERE, THERE'S A LOT THAT COULD BE IMPROVED.
UM, I ALSO DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW AN SCHEDULED BUILT ENTERPRISE OF 5,000, A COUPLE PRINTS ON SUNDAY, UH, WHICH I BARELY HAD A POSITION ON, WOULD AFFECT MY BID FOR THE NEXT DAY.
THAT, THAT GOES ALSO BEYOND ME.
UM, SO ALL, ALL THESE THINGS, I HOPE THAT YOU COULD COME UP WITH ANSWERS AT SOME POINT IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS.
UH, UH, I ACCEPT THAT FEEDBACK.
SO ARE WE LOOKING AT THAT FOR NEXT TAC CANON OR WE BRING THAT TO A, A WORKING GROUP OR SUBCOMMITTEE? I HONESTLY THINK THIS WOULD BE BETTER.
I, I, I DON'T WANT TO TELL TAC HOW TO DO, YOU KNOW, CONDUCT ITS BUSINESS, BUT USUALLY THE DETAIL THAT I THINK WE WOULD BE WANTING TO TALK ABOUT IS, UM, MORE SUITED FOR A SUB, A SUBCOMMITTEE OR A TASK FORCE, PROBABLY OF WMS. BUT, UM, AGAIN, THAT'S CALL, THAT'S FINE WITH ME.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE PEOPLE KNOW WHERE THOSE DISCUSSIONS ARE HAPPENING.
I'M, I'M JUST SAYING IT SEEMS LIKE THE DETAIL LEVEL IS GONNA GO BEYOND TAC, BUT I THINK YOU GET TO CHOOSE WHERE YOU WANT US TO COME AND TALK TO.
I'LL CATCH, I'LL, I'LL TOUCH BASE WITH YOU OFFLINE AND SEE WHERE THAT, WHEN THAT'S READY AND WHERE WE'LL, WE'LL BRING IT.
[17. Combo Ballot (Vote)]
IS THAT A MOTION ERIC GOFF? YES.WHERE? WHO WAS THE SECOND? PERFECT.
ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE A, A MOTION SECOND.
COREY HAS THE ITEMS ON THE, THE COMBO BALLOT ON THE SCREEN.
BEGINNING AS WE DO ON OUR COMBINED BALLOT UP WITH THE CONSUMERS, START WITH MARK.
ONTO OUR INDEPENDENT GENERATORS.
UNDER IOUS, UH, I BELIEVE KEITH, KEITH HAS
[03:05:01]
GIVEN HIS ALTERNATE TO STACEY.STACEY, WERE KEITH WITH US? YES.
UM, I BELIEVE THE, THE WORKSHOP ON 1199 WILL NOW START AT 2:00 PM AND WE CAN, UH, ADJOURN TECH NOW.