* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.
          [00:00:01]
          OKAY, GOOD AFTERNOON, MEMBERS OF THE RELIABILITY AND 
          [1.
Call General Session to Order]
MARKETS COMMITTEE AND GUESTS, THIS IS BOB FLEXON, COMMITTEE CHAIR. 
          WELCOME TO THE AUGUST 19TH, 2024 RELIABILITY AND MARKETS COMMITTEE MEETING. 
          I'VE CONFIRMED A QUORUM AND IS PRESENT IN PERSON. 
          HEREBY CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER COMMITTEE MEMBER JULIE ENGLAND IS ATTENDING TODAY'S MEETING VIA WEBEX. 
          AND I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT WE DO NOT HAVE, UH, AN OPEC DIRECTOR FOR THIS MEETING CYCLE, AND THEREFORE WE ARE A COMMITTEE OF THREE TODAY. 
          THIS MEETING IS BEING WEBCAST LIVE TO THE PUBLIC ON OTTS WEBSITE. 
          BEFORE WE BEGIN, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK PUC CHAIR THOMAS GLEASON, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO CALL AN ORDER AN OPEN MEETING OF THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF TEXAS. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. 
          THIS MEETING OF THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF TEXAS WILL COME TO ORDER TO CONSIDER MATTERS THAT HAVE BEEN DULY POSTED WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR AUGUST 19TH, 2024. 
          THANK YOU. 
          BEFORE MOVING ON TO TODAY'S BUSINESS, I'D LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT THAT THE ANTITRUST ADMONITION AND SECURITY MAP ARE INCLUDED WITH POSTED MEETING MATERIALS. 
          THE FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS ON TODAY'S AGENDA IS AGENDA ITEM TWO, NOTICE OF PUBLIC COMMENT, IF ANY. 
          TODAY'S MEETING AGENDA WAS POSTED PUBLICLY ON AUGUST 12TH, 2024, AND PROVIDES INSTRUCTIONS TO THE PUBLIC FOR COMMENTING IN PERSON. 
          TO DATE, NO ONE HAS EXPRESSED INTEREST IN COMMENTING. 
          IS THAT STILL THE CASE, CHAD? THAT IS CORRECT. 
          NEXT IS AGENDA ITEM 
          [3.
June 17, 2024 General Session Meeting Minutes]
THREE, THE JUNE 17TH, 2024. 
          GENERAL SESSION MEETING MINUTES. 
          THERE IS A DRAFT IN THE MEETING MATERIALS. 
          DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR WISH TO MAKE A MOTION MOVED BY CARLOS? SECOND, JULIE? UH, JULIE, DID YOU SECOND? SECOND. 
          A. 
          THERE WE GO. 
          ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? AYE. 
          ANY ABSTENTIONS MINUTES ARE PASSED? NEXT UP IS 
          [4.
Staff Response to Independent Market Monitor (IMM) 2023 State of the Market Report for the ERCOT Electricity Markets]
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FOUR. 
          KEITH COLLINS WILL PRESENT THE STAFF RESPONSE TO THE IMM 2023 STATE OF THE MARKET REPORT FOR THE ERCOT ELECTRICITY MARKETS. 
          THE IMM PRESENTED THEIR REPORT TO THE FULL BOARD OF DIRECTORS IN JUNE AND TODAY THE R AND M COMMITTEE WILL HEAR THE STAFF'S RESPONSE. 
          KEITH? ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. 
          I WILL SAY THAT, UM, UH, WE'VE HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE IMM STATE OF THE MARKETS REPORT. 
          UH, IT WAS, IT IS QUITE GOOD FOR FOLKS THAT HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO READ IT. 
          UH, FOR MYSELF BEING NEW TO THE ERCOT REGION, UM, IT WAS REALLY HELPFUL IN, IN LEARNING ABOUT, ABOUT SOME OF THE NUANCES AND HOW THE MARKET PERFORMED OVER THE LAST YEAR. 
          SO FOR FOLKS THAT HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW IT, IT'S, IT'S A NICE READ. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, THE, SO AGAIN, THE PURPOSE OF, OF TODAY'S PRESENTATION IS, IS TO REALLY FOCUS ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          THERE WERE A SET OF, UH, NEW RECOMMENDATIONS AS WELL AS EXISTING RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE REPORT. 
          AND, AND MY PRESENTATION COVERS THE, UH, UM, THE ERCOT RESPONSE TO THAT. 
          AND I THINK, UH, THE KEY TAKEAWAYS ON THIS IS THAT, UH, A LOT OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE, ARE, ARE EITHER IN FLIGHT, SOME OF THEM HAVE ACTUALLY ALREADY BEEN, BEEN WORKED ON. 
          AND, AND WE'LL DISCUSS THOSE. 
          UH, AND THEN THERE ARE OTHERS THAT, UM, ARE STILL REQUIRING, UH, DISCUSSION. 
          UH, I WILL NOTE THAT, UM, IN THE PRESENTATION TODAY, THERE IS A DISCUSSION ABOUT, UH, THE RTC PLUS B, UM, UH, COMMENTS. 
          I THINK FOR FOLKS I DID, THERE WERE SOME CONFUSION FROM SOME FOLKS ABOUT THEY READ THE REPORT AND, UM, THEY WERE CONFUSED BY, UH, THE REPORT DIDN'T SAY, UM, WHAT, WHAT SOME OF MY COMMENTS ARE GONNA SAY TODAY. 
          AND, AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS THAT THEY WEREN'T IN THE REPORT. 
          AND SO I'M COVERING SOME THINGS THAT WERE NOT EXCLUSIVELY IN THE REPORT, UH, BUT, UH, HAVE BEEN, UH, SOME UPDATES WE RECEIVED, UH, THROUGH COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE IMM AND I'LL COVER THEM AT THE END OF THE PRESENTATION. 
          SO THERE WERE THREE PRIMARY ELEMENTS THAT, UH, THE IMM CALLED OUT IN THEIR STATE OF THE MARKETS REPORT AS, AS SORT OF KEY AREAS FOR MARKET IMPROVEMENT. 
          UH, ONE IS REAL REALTIME CO-OP OPTIMIZATION THROUGH THE RTC PLUS B PROJECT. 
          UH, THAT'S ALL OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING THAT WE AGREE WITH. 
          UH, THEY, THEY CALL UNCERTAINTY RESERVE PRODUCT AS SOMETHING, AND THAT CONNECTS WITH OUR DISPATCHABLE RE RELIABILITY RESERVE SERVICE. 
          AND AGAIN, ANOTHER THING THAT WE SEE IS, UH, A HIGH IMPORTANT PROJECT, SOMETHING THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY INVOLVED AND ENGAGED WITH, UH, RIGHT NOW. 
          AND THEN THE FINAL ONE IS MULTI INTERVAL, REAL-TIME OPTIMIZATION. 
          AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S PRESENTLY UNDER REVIEW. 
          SO, SO WHEN WE TALK, WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT THEIR, THEIR AREAS OF KEY MARKET IMPROVEMENTS, UH, WE AS ERCOT STAFF AGREE THAT THESE ARE, ARE DEFINITELY AREAS THAT, THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO US WE ARE ENGAGED WITH. 
          AND, UM, ARE ARE CURRENTLY EITHER UNDER REVIEW OR DEVELOPMENT OR IN THE, THE CASE OF, UH, REALTIME CO OPTIMIZATION 
          [00:05:01]
IS SOMETHING THAT'S, UH, CURRENTLY UNDER IMPLEMENTATION, UH, RIGHT NOW. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          LET'S, LET'S NOW FOCUS ON, UH, THEY HAD FOUR RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE REPORT THAT WERE NEW. 
          UM, AND THE WAY I'VE ORGANIZED THIS ARE, THERE ARE AREAS THAT ARE EITHER WHERE WE ARE IN GENERAL AGREEMENT WITH THEM, THERE ARE AREAS THAT, THAT REQUIRE PERHAPS SOME, SOME FURTHER DISCUSSION. 
          AND, UH, THE FINAL ONE, WHICH I THINK WE'RE WE'RE MOST FAMILIAR WITH, WHICH IS ECRS. 
          UM, WE, WE AGREED THAT YEAH, THERE'S SOME IMPROVEMENT, BUT PERHAPS DIFFERENT IN, IN TERMS OF APPROACH. 
          SO THE FIRST ONE IS INCREASING THE SHADOW PRICE CAP IN REAL TIME. 
          UH, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS ACTUALLY COMING BEFORE THE BOARD, UH, WHICH IS, UH, NPRR, UH, 1230. 
          AND SO THIS IS SOMETHING WHERE THERE IS ACTUALLY, UH, YOU KNOW, SIGNIFICANT ALIGNMENT BETWEEN, UH, THE ERCOT POSITION AND THE IMM POSITION. 
          AND THAT IS IN THE, UH, IN THAT PARTICULAR REVISION REQUEST. 
          SO, UH, WE, WE BOTH AGREE THAT THERE ARE TIMES AND CONDITIONS WHERE THE SHADOW PRICE CAP SHOULD BE HIGHER AND REAL TIME. 
          AND, UH, AGAIN, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S COMING BEFORE THE BOARD. 
          SO THAT'S, THAT'S EXCELLENT. 
          IN TERMS OF WARRANTS FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION, UH, THERE WERE TWO RECOMMENDATIONS THEY MADE. 
          ONE WAS TO MODIFY THE PROXY OFFER CAP FOR RENEWABLES. 
          AND JUST QUICKLY, THIS IS, UH, THERE ARE RENEWABLES THAT HAVE, UH, WHEN THEY COME INTO THE MARKET, THEY DO NOT HAVE A, AN OFFER, UH, FOR THEIR RESOURCE. 
          AND SO THERE IS A DEFAULT OFFER THAT IS SUBMITTED FOR THEM. 
          UH, THE IMM HAS CONCERNS WITH THE CONSTRUCT OF THAT DEFAULT OFFER. 
          UH, AND, AND AGAIN, THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT, UH, WE HAVE ANY CONCERN WITH THEIR RECOMMENDATION, THEY ACTUALLY RAISE A PRETTY GOOD POINT GIVEN THE FACT THAT IT'S RATHER, UH, EXTREME, UH, ON THE LOW END AND THE HIGH END. 
          AND SO, UM, THESE ARE CHANGES. 
          WE'VE MADE CHANGES LIKE THIS IN THE ERCOT REGION BEFORE AND DEFINITELY WARRANTS FURTHER DISCUSSION ON HOW THAT OFFER CAT COULD BE CONSTRUCTED. 
          UH, THE NEXT, UH, RECOMMENDATION THEY HAD WAS WITH RESPECT TO C CAN I INTERRUPT YOU FOR JUST A SECOND? YEP. 
          WHEN IT'S, WHEN YOU GET TO AN ITEM LIKE THAT, WHAT THAT WARRANTS FURTHER DISCUSSION, COULD YOU DESCRIBE WHAT ARE THE POTENTIAL PATHWAYS FOR HOW THAT WOULD MOVE FORWARD SURE. 
          IN A FOR AND WHAT THAT MEANS THAT WARRANTS FURTHER DISCUSSION? YEAH. 
          AND, AND AGAIN, SO REALLY THE, THE ELEMENT THAT WARRANTS FOR DISCUSSION ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM IS WHAT EXACTLY SHOULD THE SHAPE OF THAT OFFER CURVE BE? AND SO THEY WERE NOT PRESCRIPTIVE AS TO THE PARTICULAR SHAPE OR, OR NATURE OF WHAT THAT CURVE IS. 
          AND SO, UH, IT'S A GOOD QUESTION AS TO WHAT THAT MIGHT BE. 
          UH, THEY OFFERED THAT IT COULD BE ZERO, IT COULD BE ZERO, UM, INSTEAD OF MINUS TWO 50, UH, FOR INSTANCE. 
          AND, AND IT COULD BE. 
          AND SO A DISCUSSION ON WHAT THE NATURE OF THAT SHAPE MAY BE IN THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS IS KIND OF WHERE THAT FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION WOULD OCCUR. 
          OKAY. 
          AND SO ON THE, ON THE NEXT ONE, UH, WITH RESPECT TO THE FIRM FUEL SUPPLY SERVICE, THERE'S SORT OF KIND OF TWO PIECES TO THIS ONE IN TERMS OF WHAT, WHAT FURTHER DISCUSSION MAY, MAY BE HERE. 
          UM, THE FIRST ONE IS, UH, THE CONCERN IS THERE'S SORT OF TWO CONCERNS. 
          THE FIRST CONCERN IS, UM, IS THE FIRM FUEL SUPPLY RESOURCE, WOULD IT HAVE BEEN GENERATING, UH, OR NOT? AND, UH, THE, UH, THE IMMS POSITION IS, IS THAT IT PROBABLY WOULD BE. 
          AND SO, UM, AGAIN, THAT'S ONE ELEMENT THAT WOULD REQUIRE FURTHER DISCUSSION IS DO WE THINK THAT THAT IS TRUE? UM, AND IF IT IS, THAT MAY REQUIRE US TO GO DOWN ONE PATH VERSUS ANOTHER PATH. 
          AND HOW THAT AFFECTS THE ORDC. 
          THE SECOND ITEM, UM, HAS TO DO WITH, UM, WHAT ARE THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE, THE FIRM FUEL SUPPLY SERVICE, UH, THE RESOURCES. 
          AND, UH, THE SENSE HERE IS THAT, UM, UH, WE MAY BE UNDERREPRESENTING WHAT THOSE COSTS ARE. 
          AND SO THESE RESOURCES ARE GETTING PERHAPS DISPATCHED A LITTLE, A LITTLE MORE FREQUENTLY THAN THAN ONE MIGHT ANTICIPATE. 
          SO THOSE ARE ESSENTIALLY THE TWO ELEMENTS. 
          AND HOW TO ADDRESS THOSE TWO ELEMENTS WOULD REQUIRE SOME FURTHER DISCUSSION IN THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS ON, ON HOW TO APPROACH THOSE. 
          AND THEN THE FINAL ITEM, UH, I'M, I'M NOT GONNA SPEND MUCH TIME ON, WAS THE, UM, ECRS, THE ERCOT CONTINGENCY RESERVE SERVICE. 
          THAT WAS OBVIOUSLY A, AN ELEMENT OF, OF DISCUSSION AT THE LAST BOARD AND AT THE, THE, THE PUC MEETING BACK IN, IN JULY. 
          SO, UH, AGAIN, JUST THERE THAT IN THIS CASE, UH, WE, WE BOTH SAW A NEED FOR CHANGE, UH, ALTHOUGH WE HAD SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES ON WHAT THOSE CHANGES WOULD BE. 
          SO THOSE ARE THE FOUR NEW RECOMMENDATIONS THEY HAD IN THE REPORT. 
          THEY DID HAVE A SERIES OF EXISTING RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, 
          [00:10:01]
IN THEIR, IN THEIR REPORT. 
          UH, I DON'T, I DON'T NECESSARILY PLAN TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THESE ONE BY ONE INDIVIDUALLY, BUT I THINK THE KEY TAKEAWAY ON THIS SLIDE IS THAT, UH, IN, IN, IN SOME CASES THERE HAVE BEEN, UH, NPRS THAT HAVE, HAVE ALREADY HAPPENED. 
          SO IN OUR MIND, FOR THE FIRST ONE, FOR INSTANCE, UH, THE ALLOW THE TRANSMISSION RECONFIGURATIONS, NPRR, UH, 1198, UH, IS, IS RELATED TO THAT ITEM. 
          SO WE THINK THERE'S, UH, AN ALIGNMENT, UH, EFFECTIVELY WITH THAT NPRR AND THAT RECOMMENDATION. 
          UM, AND, AND, AND THE NEXT RECOMMENDATION. 
          FOR INSTANCE, THERE WAS, UH, ANOTHER NPRR 10 0 6 THAT, UM, IT COVERED A PIECE OF THE, UH, IMM RECOMMENDATION. 
          THEY, THEY WANTED TO IT TO GO A LITTLE FURTHER THAN THE NPRR DID, BUT I THINK WE, WE FELT THAT THE, UM, THAT THE NPR 10 10 0 6 DID COVER, UH, A PIECE OF THE RECOMMENDATION EVEN THOUGH THE, IT MAY NOT HAVE GONE COMPLETELY THE WAY THE IMM HAD HAD HOPED FOR. 
          AND THEN, AND THEN, AS YOU CAN SEE, THAT A LOT OF THESE OTHER ONES ARE EITHER UNDER EVALUATION IN THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS. 
          IT QUITE LITERALLY MEANS THAT IT IS BEING DISCUSSED IN THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS. 
          UH, FOR INSTANCE, THE SMALLER LOAD ZONES OR THE POINT-TO-POINT OBLIGATION, UH, THERE ARE SOME THAT EITHER ARE FUTURE CONSIDERATION OR WAITING PRIORITIZATION. 
          THEY MAY, THEY MAY BE A GOOD RECOMMENDATION, BUT GIVEN THE SUITE OF RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH, THERE'S A LOT OF ITEMS THAT, THAT ARE UNDER CONSIDERATION. 
          AND, AND AGAIN, THIS, THIS MAY BE, UH, A NICE TO HAVE, UH, BUT, UH, COMPARED TO OTHERS IT MAY NOT BE A NEED TO HAVE. 
          AND THEN THERE WERE TWO RECOMMENDATIONS THEY HAD, WHICH FELL A LITTLE MORE IN THE, THE AVENUE OF THE PUC. 
          AND FOR INSTANCE, THE, UH, THEY RECOMMENDED ELIMINATING THE SMALL FISH RULE. 
          AND REALLY WHAT THAT IS, IS IT HAS TO DO WITH WHO QUALIFIES FOR MITIGATION. 
          AND THEIR RECOMMENDATION IS TO BASICALLY LIMIT THE NUMBER OF RESOURCES AND SAY, IF YOU'RE SMALL, THEN THEN WE DON'T HAVE TO CONSIDER YOU FOR MITIGATION. 
          AGAIN, THAT MAY NOT BE SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE CONTROL OVER IN TERMS OF OUR STAKEHOLDER PROCESS MAY BE SOMETHING BETTER LEFT TO THE PUC AND, AND HAVING THEM DEAL WITH. 
          SO, SO AGAIN, I THINK THE REAL KEY HERE IS A LOT OF THESE ARE, ARE, UH, UNDER DEVELOPMENT. 
          WE'RE, WE'RE LOOKING AT THEM, THERE'S DISCUSSIONS OR THERE'S BEEN N PRRS. 
          AND SO WE, WE TAKE THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS, OBVIOUSLY VERY SERIOUSLY AND, AND CONSIDER THEM AS AS THEY MAKE THEM. 
          AND SO THAT, THAT BRINGS US WITH THE NEXT STEPS FOR, FOR THE, THE, FOR, FOR THE RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          WE'LL, WE'LL EXCLUDE RTC, UH, AT THE MOMENT, UH, ON THAT ONE. 
          BUT, BUT AGAIN, REALLY IN THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS, IT'S EITHER DISCUSS, EVALUATE, PRIORITIZE, IN SOME CASES, DRAFT REVISION REQUESTS OR, OR MOVE THE, THE REVISIONS ARRESTS RE MOVE ALONG, REVISION REQUESTS THAT HAVE BEEN, HAVE BEEN CREATED, AND SOME OF THEM HAVE ARE, ARE BEFORE THE BOARD TODAY EVEN OR TOMORROW. 
          SO, UM, THAT'S WHERE WE SIT WITH REGARDS TO, UM, THE MAJORITY OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE REPORT. 
          I'LL JUST, JUST QUICKLY PAUSE BEFORE I MOVE INTO THE RTC AS THAT'S SORT OF A DIFFERENT, DIFFERENT PIECE AND A DIFFERENT RECOMMENDATION. 
          OKAY. 
          WE'RE HEARING NONE. 
          I WILL MOVE TO, UH, A DESCRIPTION OF THE TWO ITEMS OF CONCERN, AND I'LL SORT OF DESCRIBE AS WELL HOW THIS CAME ABOUT. 
          SO, AGAIN, AS I NOTED AT THE BEGINNING OF MY PRESENTATION, THAT, UH, IF YOU READ THE IMM REPORT, YOU, YOU WON'T GET A SENSE OF ANY ISSUES WITH THE RTC. 
          WE HAD, UH, BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THE IMM AS THEY WERE DOING THEIR ANALYSIS OF THE ECRS. 
          UH, WE HAVE PROVIDED THEM SOME, SOME INFORMATION AND AN ANALYSIS FROM OUR END. 
          AND AS PART OF THAT EVALUATION, UH, THEY BECAME CONCERNED THAT THE REAL-TIME CO-OP OPTIMIZATION MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN WHAT THEY HAD ANTICIPATED IT TO BE, UH, BASED ON, UH, THIS INFORMATION THAT THEY RECEIVED. 
          AND FROM THAT CAME TWO CONCERNS THAT THEY'VE, UH, THAT WE'VE HAD, UH, DISCUSSION WITH THEIR STAFF. 
          SO, UM, I, I DON'T NECESSARILY FEEL LIKE I NEED TO SPEAK FOR THE IMM, BUT I, I, YOU KNOW, MY DISCUSSION HERE TODAY IS, IS OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THEIR, THEIR CONCERNS. 
          AND SO THE FIRST CONCERN IS RELATED TO THE SHAPE OF THE DEMAND CURVES, THE ANCILLARY SURFACES, DEMAND CURVES THAT ARE USED BY THE OPTIMIZATION ITSELF. 
          AND THE CONCERN IS, IS RELATED TO WHAT THEY'VE DESCRIBED AS A LACK OF RAMP IN OF THE SCARCITY VALUES. 
          AND REALLY WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT THERE'S A BIT OF A JUMP BETWEEN WHEN YOU'RE NOT SCARCE TO BEING SCARCE, IT GOES FROM ESSENTIALLY ZERO, YOU'RE GOING FROM ZERO TO A HIGH NUMBER AND ONCE, ONCE YOU BECOME SCARCE. 
          AND, AND THEIR RECOMMENDATION IS THAT AS YOU 
          [00:15:01]
INCREASE IN YOUR LEVEL OF SCARCITY, IT SHOULD INCREASE IN THE LEVEL OF, OF PRICING. 
          AND SO YOU MIGHT, YOU MIGHT GO FROM ZERO TO A HUNDRED TO 200 TO 300, ET CETERA, RATHER THAN FROM ZERO TO 900. 
          SO THEIR, THEIR CONCEPT IS TO RAMP IN THE CURVE. 
          NOW, WE HAVEN'T SEEN THE SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS THEY HAVE ON HOW THEY WOULD DO THAT, BUT THEY HAVE INDICATED THAT THEY BELIEVE THAT THAT RAMP IN IS SOMETHING THAT THEY THINK IS IMPORTANT. 
          NOW, I WILL NOTE, UH, VERY EXPLICITLY THAT THIS WAS SOMETHING DISCUSSED IN THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS, UH, WHEN THE RTC WAS BEING DEVELOPED, UH, BACK IN THE 20 19, 20 20 PERIOD. 
          UM, AND THERE WAS A, A TAC VOTE, UH, EXPLICITLY ON, ON THIS ITEM. 
          UH, AND THERE WERE MULTIPLE, THERE WERE COMPETING PROPOSALS. 
          UH, AND, UH, THE ONE THAT IS IN THE DESIGN RIGHT NOW IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT HAD PASSED THE TAC BACK IN 2019, UH, IN TERMS OF WHAT THIS COULD MEAN FOR THE PROJECT OR THE DELAY, UH, MY, MY SENSE ON THIS IS THAT THIS TYPE OF THING IS, IS SOMETHING THAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE, UM, UH, ADDRESSED, UH, AS THE DEVELOPMENT IS GOING ON, IT'S, IT'S KIND OF LIKE YOU'RE DOING A KITCHEN REMODEL AND, AND YOU WANNA CHANGE THE COLOR OF THE CABINETS. 
          THAT'S PROBABLY SOMETHING WE COULD DO. 
          UM, BUT IT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE AND WHAT THE, THE CHANGES WOULD BE. 
          AND THEN IT WOULD GO INTO OUR, OUR PROCESS. 
          SO, UH, ERCOT HAS A, A PROJECT MANAGEMENT, CHANGE MANAGEMENT PROCESS AND, AND, AND BE EVALUATED THROUGH THAT PROCESS. 
          SO WE WOULD EXPECT THAT THAT WOULD GO THROUGH ANY, ANY CONCERNS OR RECOMMENDATIONS WOULD GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS. 
          AND IT IS A ROBUST PROCESS AS WELL. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          UH, THAT IS CONCERN NUMBER ONE. 
          CONCERN NUMBER TWO IS A BIT MORE FUNDAMENTAL AND, AND REALLY GETS AT THE UNDERLYING DESIGN OF THE ANCILLARY SERVICE MARKET ITSELF. 
          IT WOULD AFFECT DAY AHEAD AS WELL AS REAL TIME DESIGN. 
          AND, UM, I WILL COVER IT, UH, JUST AT A HIGH LEVEL HERE. 
          UM, BUT REALLY THERE IS, UH, WHEN, WHEN YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THE OTHER MARKETS, WHETHER IT'S NEW YORK, MISO, UH, CALIFORNIA, SPP, UH, THEIR RESERVE PRODUCTS WERE DESIGNED IN A WAY THAT IT IS, UM, IS HIERARCHICAL, MEANING THAT YOU HAVE ONE PRODUCT AT THE TOP, GENERALLY IT'S REGULATION, AND THEN BENEATH THAT IS SPINNING RESERVES, AND THEN BENEATH THAT IS NON SPINNING. 
          AND THEN BENEATH THAT IS, UH, SUPPLEMENTAL. 
          AND SO THEY BECOME RATHER SUBSTITUTABLE BECAUSE OF HOW THOSE PRODUCTS ARE DESIGNED AND DEFINED. 
          AND THAT'S KNOWN AS NESTED OR CASCADING. 
          AND, AND SO IF YOU'RE SHORT OF SPIN, YOU CAN USE REGULATION TO MEET THE SPIN AND THE ERCOT DESIGN OF ITS ANCILLARY SERVICES, UH, THE PRODUCTS ARE NOT NECESSARILY DEFINED AS SUBSTITUTABLE. 
          AND, AND SO YOU CAN'T NECESSARILY TAKE A REGULATION RESERVE AND REPLACE IT WITH A NON SPINNING RESERVE OR, OR, OR REGULATION DOES NOT EQUAL NONS SPIN, LET'S SAY. 
          UH, AND, AND SO THE DESIGN THAT WAS CHOSEN, AND THIS THIS GOES BACK 15 PLUS YEARS, IS TO, TO HAVE A LINKED APPROACH ON HOW, UH, THE ANCILLARY SERVICES ARE, ARE PROCURED. 
          AND THAT THAT IS TRUE IN HOW THE RTC OPTIMIZATION WOULD DO, WHERE, UH, IF A RESOURCE CAN QUALIFY FOR MULTIPLE TYPES OF RESERVES, ONE OFFER IS PUT IN, UH, IN TERMS OF THE QUANTITY, AND THEN THE OPTIMIZATION WILL DECIDE HOW TO BEST UTILIZE THAT QUALITY. 
          UH, AND, AND AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S ONE DESIGN VERSUS ANOTHER DESIGN. 
          UM, IT, THIS IS AN UNDERSTOOD MARKET DESIGN IN, IN THE ERCOT REGION. 
          UM, AGAIN, THIS GOES BACK 15 PLUS YEARS TO WHEN THE NODAL MARKET WAS DESIGNED AND HOW THIS PARTICULAR CONSTRUCT WAS DEVELOPED, UH, AS WE DISCUSSED IN IN THE MEETING, UH, THE EARLIER DISCUSSION TODAY, UH, THAT, UH, THIS WOULD POTENTIALLY COULD POTENTIALLY REQUIRE, UH, A MUCH MORE SIGNIFICANT DISCUSSION, UH, AND, AND COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE, HAVE A DELAY IN THE PROJECT. 
          BUT I THINK, AGAIN, AS I SAID, WITH THE OTHER CONCERN, IT'S BEST TO HAVE THIS CONCERN EVALUATED IN, IN A, IN A PROJECT MANAGEMENT, CHANGE MANAGEMENT PROCESS, AGAIN, THAT CAN BETTER EVALUATE WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT CAN OR SHOULD BE DONE NOW, UM, AGAIN, JUST BECAUSE THE DESIGN IS DIFFERENT DOES NOT MEAN AS BAD. 
          UM, AND, AND AGAIN, WE WOULD HOPE THAT THAT WOULD, UH, EFFECTIVELY GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS AND STAKEHOLDERS BEFORE ANY, ANY MAJOR CHANGES WERE, WERE MADE AND, AND, BUT AT LEAST WE CAN CONSIDER THEM IN THE PROCESS. 
          WELL, I'LL PAUSE THERE AND SEE IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS. 
          KEITH, AS FAR AS YOUR SECOND TO LAST BULLET THERE SIGNIFICANT DELAY, CAN YOU 
          [00:20:01]
QUANTIFY THAT IN ON A TIMELINE? IS THAT SIX MONTHS? IS THAT A YEAR? IS IT MULTIPLE YEARS? WHAT DOES SIGNIFICANT MEAN? I THINK WHAT'S, WHAT'S DIFFICULT TO ASSESS IS THAT WE, WE ARE ONLY ASSUMING WHAT WE THINK ALL THE MARKET MONITOR'S CONCERNS WOULD BE, BUT BASED ON THE INFORMATION WE DO HAVE NOW, WE WOULD ANTICIPATE THAT IT WOULD LIKELY BE A MULTI-YEAR, PERHAPS TWO, TWO TO THREE YEAR DELAY, BECAUSE, PARTICULARLY BECAUSE IT WOULD ALSO AFFECT THE DAY AHEAD. 
          SO IF YOU'RE GONNA DO THE REAL TIME, YOU'D ALSO WANNA REDESIGN A DAY AHEAD, AND THAT HAS ITS OWN IMPLICATION. 
          SO IT'S, IT'D BE MULTI-YEAR. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          JULIE, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YES. 
          I DON'T THINK YOU CAN SEE ME RAISING MY HAND ON WEBEX. 
          UH, THANK YOU, KEITH. 
          THIS, THIS IS A REALLY GOOD, UM, LIKE OVERVIEW OF WHAT THE IMM SAID. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          LET'S TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS. 
          THE, THE IMMS INCLUDED RIGHT? IN THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS? OH, ABSOLUTELY, YES. 
          THE IMM HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN THE PAST AND THEY'RE INCLUDED NOW. 
          ABSOLUTELY. 
          SO WAS THE IMM AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO UNDERSTAND THE CURRENT ROTC DESIGN PRIOR TO RAISING THESE ISSUES? AND HOW FAR BACK IN TIME WAS HE INVOLVED IN THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS FOR ROTC? UH, WELL, AGAIN, MY, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THERE HAVE BEEN, UM, MULTIPLE, UM, IMM STAFF INVOLVED IN THE DISCUSSIONS OF THIS, UH, GOING, GOING BACK SEVERAL YEARS. 
          AND SO, UM, ESPECIALLY WHEN SOME OF THE KEY VOTES WERE TAKEN, WE ALSO HAVE THEIR, UH, STATE OF THE MARKETS REPORTS, UH, AND IN, IN NONE OF THEM, DID WE EVER IDENTIFY THIS CONCERN HIGHLIGHTED IN, IN THOSE REPORTS AT ALL? SO THE, THE IMM HAS AS, AS, AS WE KNOW, THE IMM HAS BEEN ENGAGED IN THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS THROUGHOUT IT. 
          WELL, I, I CONFUSING GLAD THE IMM PARTICIPATES IN THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS. 
          THAT'S KEY TO OUR CHANGE MANAGEMENT APPROACH. 
          AND WE CAN ALWAYS TAKE THESE NEW COMMENTS AND, AND INCORPORATE THEM INTO THE NEXT VERSION OF RTC THROUGH THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS. 
          THE WAY I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. 
          YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. 
          YOU KNOW, IT CAN BE CONSIDERED AND, BUT WE DON'T KNOW HOW THAT MAY END UP, BUT IT CAN OBVIOUSLY BE CONSIDERED FOR SURE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          SO KEITH, HOW DO YOU MOVE FORWARD FROM HERE THOUGH? I MEAN, ARE WE CONTINUING TO GO DOWN THE PATH AS WE'VE DESIGNED IT OR IS THINGS ON HOLD TILL THIS IS RESOLVED? OR HOW DO YOU BREAK THE LOG JAM? YEAH, WE ARE, WE ARE CONTINUING, UH, FULL STEAM AHEAD. 
          UH, FOR NOW. 
          I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD, WE, WE OBVIOUSLY KNOW WHAT THEIR CONCERNS ARE. 
          UH, WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY SOLUTIONS PRESENTED AT THIS TIME, AND OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE NOT HAD ANY SORT OF STAKEHOLDER DISCUSSION. 
          I BELIEVE THIS MAY BE THE FIRST PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF THESE CONCERNS, UM, TO DATE. 
          SO, UM, AND I UNDERSTAND THEY'RE STILL PERFORMING SOME ANALYSIS TO DETERMINE THE EXTENT OF, OF THE ISSUE, UH, AND, AND, UH, FURTHER REFINE POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS. 
          SO IT'S, IT'S, IT'S HARD TO SAY NOW, BUT GOING FORWARD, AND I THINK THAT KIND OF GETS MY NEXT SLIDE IS, YOU KNOW, KIND OF UNDERSTAND WHAT THOSE RAMIFICATIONS ARE AND, UM, AND, AND, AND GET THEM EVALUATED. 
          YEAH. 
          KEITH, BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD, I JUST HAVE SOME QUESTIONS, UM, SORT OF PROCESS AND SUBSTANCE. 
          SO RIGHT NOW IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT ERCOT IS ON TRACK TO IMPLEMENT RTC BY THE END OF 2025? THAT IS CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          SO MY UNDERSTANDING BASED ON MY, MY BRIEFING FROM ERCOT IS THAT, UM, ERCOT WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE ANCILLARY SERVICE DEMAND CURVES, UM, DEFINED THIS FALL SO THAT MARKET TRIALS AND TESTING CAN START THIS SPRING MM-HMM, , AND THEN THE BACK END OF THE IMPLEMENTATION CAN STAY ON TRACK WITH RESPECT TO THE I'S CURRENT, UH, OR CONCERN NUMBER ONE ON THE, I GUESS THE RAMP IN ON THE SCARCITY VALUES AND HOW THE DEMAND CURVE SHOULD WORK. 
          CAN YOU COMPARE AND CONTRAST WHAT THE IMM IS ASKING FOR VERSUS WHAT ERCOT CURRENTLY HAS IN THE ANCILLARY SERVICE DEMAND CURVE SHAPE RIGHT NOW? OR MECHANICS, UH, COMPARED TO THE CURRENT APPROACH? I, I WILL SAY OFF OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I, I DON'T THINK I CAN ANSWER THAT. 
          I KNOW WE CAN GET, GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT, BUT I THINK THE, THE KEY HERE IS THE DESIGN OF THE RTC AS IT WAS INTENDED IN, IN THE RTC CO-OP OPTIMIZATION VERSUS THE IMM, UH, UH, SORT OF PREFERRED APPROACH. 
          AND, AND IT'S, IT'S DIFFERENT. 
          UM, BUT, BUT AGAIN, IT, IT, AND IT'S, IT'S DIFFERENT IN THE SENSE THAT THERE MIGHT BE MULTIPLE POINTS THAT START AT A LOWER LEVEL VERSUS THE CURRENT DESIGN, WHICH GOES FROM ZERO TO A HIGHER LEVEL MM-HMM. 
          , UH, RATHER QUICKLY. 
          AND SO, UM, IN TERMS OF AN IMPLEMENTATION, IT, IT'S, IT'S NOT AS DIFFICULT 'CAUSE YOU JUST SORT OF SHIFT AT WHAT POINTS IT BEGINS AT. 
          BUT I'M, I'M SURE THAT THERE MAY BE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF DEBATE IN 
          [00:25:01]
THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S APPROPRIATE OR NOT. 
          MM-HMM, , YEAH, JUST TRY TO UNDERSTAND HOW THE REASONING BEHIND GOING FROM, YOU KNOW, ZERO TO WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, THE THEFT INCREASE THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. 
          MM-HMM. 
           THAT'S SIGNIFICANT THAT THE IMM IS CONCERNED ABOUT. 
          JUST TO, JUST TO TRY TO UNPACK WHAT, WHERE THE DIFFERENCES REALLY ARE THERE AND WHY. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          UM, YOU SAID THAT THE CURRENT SHAPE OF THE ANCILLARY DEMAND CURVES WERE PART OF A DISCUSSION THAT HAPPENED IN 2019. 
          OBVIOUSLY A LOT HAS HAPPENED SINCE 2019. 
          AND, AND SO I'M WONDERING WHETHER, YOU KNOW, ONCE YOU GO BACK, I GUESS, TO THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS, IS THAT WHAT THE NEXT ONE OF THE NEXT STEPS WOULD BE? WHETHER, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE CONSENSUS WOULD BE AROUND THOSE ANCILLARY SERVICE DEMAND CURVES AT THAT TIME BECAUSE THEIR LOT HAS CHANGED, OR CAUGHTS OPERATIONAL POSTURE, THE, JUST A LOT HAS HAPPENED IN THE MARKET THAT COULD NECESSITATE FURTHER DISCUSSION, UM, TO UPDATE THE DISCUSSION FROM 2019. 
          I, I DON'T WANNA DELAY RTC OR ANYTHING, BUT I'M JUST WONDERING HOW ALL OF THE MARKET CHANGES ARE GOING TO IMPACT THAT 2019 DISCUSSION. 
          AND, AND, AND TO BE QUITE HONEST, THE IMM IS NOT THE ONLY STAKEHOLDER WE'VE HEARD FROM WITH REGARDS TO CONCERNS. 
          AND WE, AGAIN, SOME, SOME OF THEM MAY GO UP, SOME OF THEM MAY GO DOWN. 
          UM, IT DEPENDS ON THE PARTICULAR, UM, STAKEHOLDER THAT WE'VE TALKED TO. 
          BUT IT'S DEFINITELY BEEN, UM, CLEARLY CONCERNS ABOUT, UM, THAT THE WORLD HAS CHANGED A LITTLE AND, AND MAY NEED TO BE RECONSIDERED AGAIN. 
          THAT'S, UM, WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO THAT, BUT, BUT AGAIN, THERE'S A, THERE'S A TIMING AS WELL. 
          AND, AND MATT, DO YOU WANNA JUST SORT OF MAKE A QUICK, QUICK COMMENT? YEAH. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, MATT MARINE ERCOT AND CHAIR OF THE RTCB TASK FORCE. 
          SO, UM, WHAT WE LOOKED AT BACK IN 2019 WAS ERCOT HAD INTRODUCED THE CONCEPT OF THE DEMAND CURVE. 
          SO WE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THIS BACK IN THE APRIL R AND M MEETING, AND THE IDEA WAS WHETHER OR NOT WE TAKE THE CURVES AND STACK THEM, BUT THEN KIND OF SLICE THE POWER BALANCE PENALTY CURVE INTO GIVING LITTLE RAMPS FOR EACH OF THESE. 
          SO KIND OF AN INTERSPERSING OF THEM. 
          BUT WHAT WAS VOTED ON BY TAC WAS TO TAKE A STRAIGHT UP SLICE, LIKE REGULATION GETS THE FIRST SLICE FOLLOWED BY RESPONSIVE, FOLLOWED BY ECRS, FOLLOWED BY NONS SPIND. 
          SO THOSE CREATED THE VERTICAL RAMPS OF PRICING FORMATION THAT WOULD CONFIRM. 
          SO THAT'S WHAT'S IN PROTOCOLS, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE PREPARED TO IMPLEMENT THAT WE DID HIGHLIGHT AT THE TASK FORCE. 
          WE HAVE A STANDING AGENDA ITEM TO TALK ABOUT AS DEMAND CURVES. 
          AND IT'S GOTTEN VERY QUIET. 
          I THINK IT'S QUIET BECAUSE THEY WANT TO SEE THE RTC SIMULATOR START TO RUN WHERE ERCOT WILL IN-HOUSE DO HISTORICAL OPERATING DAYS WITH THESE DIFFERENT DEMAND CURVES TO SEE THE PRICE FORMATION. 
          BUT WE WOULD STILL LIKE TO KEEP THE IMPLEMENTATION SIMPLE, NOT TO OVERLY COMPLICATE THINGS, BUT THE SLICING AND DICING OF CURVES IS SOMETHING THAT CAN BE CHANGED EASIER THAN RIPPING OR REPLACING ENGINES ON OUR SYSTEM. 
          SO THE IDEA IS THAT IF THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ENOUGH CHANGE, WE CAN STAY NIMBLE ENOUGH TO THOSE CHANGES TO TRY AND GET THE RIGHT CURVES IN PLACE, BUT WE WOULD LIKE THE POLICY DECISION TO BE ENGAGED TO GET TO A SOLUTION SO WE'RE NOT WINGING IT AS WE GET READY TO GO INTO MARKET TRIALS NEXT MAY. 
          SO NOW'S THE RIGHT TIME TO DISCUSS THAT FROM A TASK FORCE PERSPECTIVE. 
          GREAT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THAT'S VERY HELPFUL TO UNDERSTAND. 
          I, I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT AT LEAST TO TRY TO GET THE BEST VERSION OF THOSE ANCILLARY DEMAND CURVES UP AND GOING WITH THAT FIRST INITIAL REITERATION OF RTC WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY CAN BE TWEAKED ALONG THE WAY, I GUESS IF NECESSARY AS YOU GET MORE EXPERIENCE WITH RTC IMPLEMENTATION. 
          THE, THE SECOND CONCERN, UM, AND JUST TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND, AND WE DON'T HAVE TO GET INTO COMPLETE TECHNICAL DISCUSSION ON THIS ISSUE RIGHT NOW, BUT THE LINK VERSUS NESTED AND CASCADING APPROACH, UM, REALLY TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT, WHY OTHER MARKETS, I KNOW I, WHY OTHER MARKETS USE A NESTED AND CASCADING APPROACH, UM, AND WHAT LINKED MEANS AND, YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE THESE TWO APPROACHES MEAN? I THINK IT'S JUST HELPFUL TO UNDERSTAND WE CAN, IF I CAN GET THEM OFFLINE BRIEFING ON THAT, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY ERCO IS, HAS THEIR BASIS FOR USING LINK, BUT I'D JUST LIKE TO GET A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION ON, ON THE TWO APPROACHES AND, AND WHY LINK IS BETTER. 
          OKAY. 
          WE'RE HAPPY TO FOLLOW UP WITH YOU ON THAT. 
          ABSOLUTELY. 
          AND KEITH, I KNOW WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT THE, IM IMM IN THIRD PERSON, I KNOW JEFF MCDONALD IS HERE. 
          I DUNNO IF JEFF WANTS TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS, UH, ON THIS. 
          HI, YES, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK. 
          UH, I'M JEFF MCDONALD, DIRECTOR OF IMM, UH, FOR THE ERCO MARKET. 
          SO, UM, I'VE BEEN WORKING AND TALKING QUITE A BIT WITH KEITH ABOUT BOTH OF THESE CONCERNS, BOTH FROM A PROCESS AND FROM A MARKET MECHANICS PERSPECTIVE FOR, UH, WEEKS NOW. 
          UH, AND MY TEAM HAS BEEN WORKING WITH ERCOT TEAM, 
          [00:30:01]
UH, PRETTY CLOSELY TO TRY AND UNDERSTAND BETTER THE HISTORY. 
          UH, I WOULD LIKE TO ACTUALLY COMMENT ON THE HISTORY FOR JUST A MOMENT. 
          SO, UM, I'M NOT NECESSARILY PULLING THE NEW CARD, UH, BUT, BUT WE DID GO BACK AND LOOK, UH, TO SEE TO WHAT EXTENT IMM STAFF WERE INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS IN 2019 AND 2020. 
          UM, I COULDN'T FIND MUCH INFORMATION ON THAT. 
          SO FROM A PROCESS PERSPECTIVE, I'M A LITTLE BLIND ON, UM, YOU KNOW, FIVE YEARS AGO, BUT REGARDING WHERE WE ARE NOW, UH, I AGREE WITH KEITH'S ASSESSMENT FROM A, UH, RAMP IN PERSPECTIVE, I THINK THAT'S AN EASIER CHANGE. 
          AND IT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, KEITH NOTED THAT WE IDENTIFIED OUR ISSUE BUT DID NOT PRESCRIBE A SOLUTION. 
          UM, I THINK WE ARE IN A POSITION WHERE WE COULD, UH, WITH A COUPLE WEEKS WORTH OF WORK, UH, BE MORE PRESCRIPTIVE ABOUT ONE POTENTIAL, UH, ALTERNATIVE FOR A SOLUTION WITH RESPECT TO THE SECOND MATTER, THE, UH, YOU KNOW, NESTED OR CASCADING VERSUS LINKED, UH, THAT'S AN ISSUE WHERE WE'RE SPENDING MORE TIME EVALUATING TO WHAT EXTENT, UH, NESTED RESULTS IN PRICE FORMATION THAT IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE BELIEVE SHOULD BE IN A NESTED, UH, EXCUSE ME, LINKED RESULTS IN, IN A PRICE FORMATION, DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WE WOULD EXPECT TO SEE IN A NESTED, UM, OR CASCADING SPACE. 
          AND TO WHAT EXTENT, YOU KNOW, SO IT'S PERHAPS A LITTLE BIT MORE OF AN EMPIRICAL ISSUE, UM, WITH A THEORETICAL UNDERPINNING. 
          SO WE'RE, WE'RE LOOKING AT THE EMPIRICAL SIDE OF IT TO DETERMINE TO WHAT EXTENT, UM, PRICE FORMATION IS, UM, OBSCURED BASED ON, YOU KNOW, HOW WE THINK IT SHOULD BE IN A, IN A CASCADING WORLD. 
          UM, KEITH ALSO MENTIONED SOMETHING ELSE THAT, THAT I AGREE WITH, WHICH IS IN, IN ERCOT THE RESERVES ARE DEFINED SOMEWHAT DIFFERENTLY AND CAN HAVE MULTIPLE PURPOSES OR, UM, LESS, OR THAT CAN BE LESS THAN PERFECT SUBSTITUTES FOR ONE ANOTHER. 
          AND THAT FACTORS INTO HOW WE LOOK AT THE SUBSTITUTE ABILITY OF RESOURCES AND THE PRICE FORM, UM, EXCUSE ME, RESERVE SERVICES AND PRICE FORMATION AS WELL. 
          SO THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE'RE WORKING THROUGH. 
          UM, AS I MENTIONED, UH, ERCOT STAFF HAVE BEEN EXTREMELY HELPFUL, UH, AND GOOD TO WORK WITH ON THIS. 
          I WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE PROBABLY THREE OR FOUR WEEKS OUT FROM, FROM PROVIDING SOMETHING MUCH MORE CONCRETE IN TERMS OF, UH, A POSITION AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU THINK CARLOS HAS A QUESTION? YEAH. 
          ONE MAIN CONCERN IS, IS TIMING AND NOT ACTING IN RTC. 
          IT'S A VERY LONG PROCESS, AS WE ALL KNOW, UM, AND, UH, IMPLEMENTATION OF AS OF 26. 
          IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR A GOOD WHILE. 
          SO, UH, WITH THAT, UM, IN AS A REFERENCE, DO YOU THINK IT'S WORTH PROCEEDING WITH THIS AND THEN ADJUSTING AS WE GO OR DELAYING IMPLEMENTATION FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS? UM, SO I THINK THERE'S A COUPLE OF LAYERS TO THAT. 
          UH, AS KEITH MENTIONED, IF, IF ONE OF THESE TWO ISSUES CAN BE RESOLVED BY CHANGING THE CURVES, BUT THE ENGINE THAT THAT DEALS WITH THOSE CURVES AND THE PRICE FORMATION PROCESS DOESN'T NEED TO BE CHANGED, YOU KNOW, THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED, UH, THAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED EARLIER ON. 
          I'M, I, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT IN A POSITION TO MAKE PRESCRIPTIONS OVER, OVER, YOU KNOW, DELAYING OR HOW MUCH OF A DELAY THIS, THIS TYPE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE LINKED VERSUS NESTED WOULD CAUSE. 
          UM, AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'D HAVE TO TALK ABOUT AND, AND AS I SAID, OUR OUR ASSESSMENT OF THAT WILL BE SOMEWHAT EMPIRICAL. 
          UH, AND IF IT LOOKS LIKE THE LINKED BID APPROACH COMES CLOSE ENOUGH TO WHAT WE WOULD EXPECT IN A CASCADING FRAMEWORK, THEN MAYBE THAT'S A PHASE TWO. 
          IF IT DOESN'T AND IT LOOKS EXTREMELY SEVERE, THEN THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE, WE WOULD HOPE WOULD BE TALKED ABOUT, UH, FOR, UH, NEXT PHASE IMPLEMENTATION. 
          BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE JEFF, YOU'RE GONNA KNOW THE MUCH BETTER ANSWER WITHIN TWO MONTHS WHEN YOUR ANALYSIS OF THE EMPIRICAL DATA IS MUCH FURTHER ALONG. 
          YEAH, AND, AND, AND YOU KNOW, I'VE TALKED WITH MY STAFF. 
          I MEAN, WE ARE, WE'RE LOOKING TO TRY AND HAVE OUR ANALYSIS AND OUR POSITION WRAPPED UP IN ONE MONTH BECAUSE WE UNDERSTAND THE TIMING OF THIS PROJECT. 
          UM, SO, SO I, I'D, I'D LOOK FOR THAT, UH, A MONTH FROM NOW AND THEN WE CAN DISCUSS MORE, I THINK MORE PUBLICLY. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL I THINK HAVING THE ONE MONTH TIMETABLE IS HELPFUL. 
          OKAY, GOOD. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          THANK YOU KEITH. 
          ANYTHING ELSE BEFORE WE CONTINUE ON WITH THIS? NOPE, NO, NOTHING ELSE. 
          WELL, THANK YOU, UH, FOR THE PRESENTATION. 
          THANKS VERY MUCH FOR THAT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          SO WE'LL NOW TAKE UP AGENDA ITEM 
          [00:35:01]
NUMBER FIVE, WHICH WHICH IS A BOARD TABLE REVISION REQUEST. 
          THERE IS ONE BOARD TABLE 
          [Items 5.1 & 5.1.1]
REVISION REQUEST TO VOTE ON TODAY, WHICH IS ITEM 5.1, WHICH IS NORE 2 45, INVERTER BASED RESEARCHES RESOURCE, SORRY, RIDE THROUGH REQUIREMENTS URGENT IN JUNE, THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF NORE 2 45 AND FOLLOWING COMMENTS DURING THE R AND M COMMITTEE MEETING, THE BOARD TABLED NORE 2 45 FOR FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF CONSENSUS AMONG ERCOT STAFF AND CERTAIN STAKEHOLDERS THAT HAD CONCERN WITH THE NOER. 
          CHAD, ALONG WITH WOODY RICKSON AND DAN WOODFIN ARE IN ATTENDANCE TODAY TO UPDATE THE COMMITTEE ON THE PROGRESS, BEGINNING WITH AGENDA ITEM 5.1. 
          ERCOT COMMENTS ON NO 2 45, I SEE THAT ERCOT HAS FILED TWO SETS OF COMMENTS IN THE LAST WEEK. 
          ONE SET ON AUGUST 12TH AND ONE SET ON AUGUST 16TH. 
          SO HOPEFULLY ERCOT STAFF CAN EXPLAIN THOSE DEVELOPMENTS AS WELL, INCLUDING WHETHER THE JOINT COMMENTERS WHO PREVIOUSLY RAISED CONCERNS ON THE NOER ARE SUPPORTIVE OF THESE COMMENTS. 
          OKAY, THANKS BOB. 
          AND LIKE I SAID, WE, WE SUBMITTED TWO SETS OF COMMENTS WITHIN THE LAST WEEK AND WE HAVE A POWERPOINT PRESENTATION THAT I'M GONNA ASK AND TO GO THROUGH IN A SECOND, BUT JUST TO HELP FRAME IT UP FOR EVERYONE. 
          UM, SINCE JUNE WE'VE BEEN SPENDING A LOT OF TIME WITH THE JOINT COMMENTERS KIND OF WORKING THROUGH SOME OF THEIR CONCERNS THAT THEY HAD HIGHLIGHTED AT THE R AND M COMMITTEE IN JUNE. 
          UH, I'M HERE TODAY TO SAY THAT WE DO HAVE A VERSION IN WHICH THE JOINT COMMENTERS DO NOT OBJECT TO. 
          SO, AND THEY FILED COMMENTS ON, ON FRIDAY INDICATING THAT WE OBVIOUSLY REFERENCED THAT IN OUR, UH, COMMENTS ON FRIDAY THAT WE SUBMITTED AS WELL. 
          UM, WE KNOW THAT THERE'S STILL A LOT OF WORK THAT STILL NEEDS TO BE DONE WITH NOT ONLY JUNK COMMENTERS, BUT BUT THE STAKEHOLDERS AS WELL. 
          AND ANOTHER SUBSEQUENT REVISION REQUEST THAT I'LL TALK ABOUT HERE IN A FEW MINUTES, BUT THE, THE VERSION THAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF THE COMMITTEE FOR CONSIDERATION IS THE VERSION THAT WE SUBMITTED ON FRIDAY. 
          THERE WERE TWO MAJOR DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE VERSION THAT WAS SUBMITTED ON THE 12TH AND THE 16TH. 
          OTHERWISE THEY'RE EXACTLY THE SAME. 
          AND SO IF THE COMMITTEE WANTS TO MOVE FORWARD, WE'D BE RECOMMENDING THE AUGUST 16TH VERSION. 
          ANDY WILL TALK ABOUT THOSE TWO DIFFERENCES THAT WERE DEVELOPMENTS THAT CAME UP AFTER WE SUBMITTED OUR AUGUST 12TH VERSION. 
          I THINK IT'S HELPFUL FOR ANDY TO GO THROUGH A COUPLE OF THE SLIDES, NOT SO MUCH THE BACKGROUND. 
          I THINK THE COMMITTEE IS WELL AWARE OF THE BACKGROUND THAT GOT US TO JUNE AND, UH, YOU KNOW, WHAT HAS CHANGED SINCE JUNE AND NOW WITH THE VERSION THAT'S IN FRONT OF THE COMMITTEE FOR THE CONSIDERATION FOR THE BOARD APPROVAL TOMORROW. 
          SO WITH THAT, LET ME TURN IT OVER TO ANDY GALLO, WHO'S THE ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL FOR ERCOT, WHO'S SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON THIS ISSUE FOR THE LAST 18 MONTHS, KIND OF WORKING WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS, INCLUDING THE JOINT COMMENTERS TO GET US TO A VERSION THAT'S IN FRONT OF YOUR CONSIDERATION TODAY. 
          THANK YOU, CHAD. 
          UH, SO AS CHAD WAS SAYING, AND YOU DID A VERY GOOD JOB OF, OF SETTING FORTH THE BACKGROUND, SO I CAN COMPLETELY SKIP THAT SLIDE. 
          UM, SO SINCE THE JUNE TAC RECOMMENDATION, WE'VE WORKED, UM, A LOT WITH THE JOINT COMMENTERS AND, UH, THE GOAL WAS TO RETAIN SOME OF THE NEAR TERM BENEFITS OF THE TAC RECOMMENDED VERSION OF NOVA 2 45 AND THEN REMOVE SOME OF THE DETAILS AND CRITERIA, UH, SURROUNDING THE EXEMPTION PROCESS THAT WAS IN THAT TAC RECOMMENDED VERSION AND MOVE THOSE OFF TO A SUBSEQUENT NOER AND THEN TO PROVIDE SOME CLARIFICATIONS, REMOVE SOME REDUNDANCY, AND CORRECT SOME ERRORS IN ALL OF THE FLURRY OF WORK THAT WAS DONE ON NOGA 2 45. 
          UH, RIGHT BEFORE THE JUNE DEADLINE. 
          UH, WE DID GO BACK AFTERWARD AND REALIZE THERE WERE SOME THINGS LIKE LITERALLY TYPOS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          SO THIS ACTUALLY GAVE US AN OPPORTUNITY TO CLEAN UP SOME OF THAT AS WELL. 
          UH, SO DURING OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH THE JOINT COMMENTERS, UH, WE HAVE MOVED TO, UM, BIFURCATE THIS NOER AND WE'RE GOING TO BE TAKING, OR WE'RE PROPOSING TO TAKE OUT THE EXEMPTION PROCESS AND THE EXEMPTION CRITERIA, UH, WHICH WERE IN THE TAC RECOMMENDED VERSION. 
          UH, WE ARE ASKING THAT THOSE BE MOVED INTO WHAT WE'RE KIND OF REFERRING TO AS PHASE TWO OF THE NOER, ALTHOUGH IT WOULD IN FACT BE A NEW NOER, BUT WE'RE THINKING OF IT AS PHASE TWO OF, OF THIS ONE. 
          UM, BASICALLY ALL NEW, UH, INVERTER BASED RESOURCES AFTER 8 1 20 24 THAT HAD STANDARD GENERATION INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENTS THAT WERE DATED AFTER 8 1 24 WOULD HAVE TO MEET THE IEEE 2,800 REQUIREMENTS, WHICH IS SORT OF THE STATE OF THE ART AT THIS POINT, UM, FOR, UH, INVERTER BASED RESOURCES RIDING THROUGH, UM, SYSTEM EVENTS AND THEN WHAT WE REFER TO AS THE LEGACY IBR AND TYPE ONE AND TYPE TWO WIND GENERATION RESOURCES AND LEGACY BEING THOSE WITH STANDARD GENERATION INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENTS BEFORE 8 1 24, 
          [00:40:01]
THEY WOULD HAVE TO MAXIMIZE THEIR SOFTWARE FIRMWARE SETTINGS AND PARAMETERIZATION, UH, BUT NOT HAVE TO DO HARDWARE UPGRADES, WHICH WAS SORT OF THE, THE MAIN ISSUE THAT CAME OUT OF THE JUNE, UH, TAC RECOMMENDED VERSION. 
          UH, THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO DO HARDWARE UH, UPGRADES EXCEPT FOR MINOR UPGRADES ASSOCIATED WITH INCREASING MEMORY. 
          FOR EXAMPLE, IF THEY WERE GOING TO UPGRADE THEIR SOFTWARE AND ALSO HAD TO MAYBE PUT IN ANOTHER MEMORY CARD, UH, TO ACCOMMODATE THAT SOFTWARE CHANGE, IF IT'S A RELATIVELY MINOR, UH, HARDWARE UPGRADE THAT WOULD BE INCLUDED. 
          UM, SO THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO MAXIMIZE THEIR SOFTWARE FIRMWARE SETTINGS AND PARAMETERIZATION TO THE FULLEST EXTENT THEIR EQUIPMENT ALLOWS, AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO THAT BY DECEMBER 31ST, 2025. 
          AND THEN THIS IS PROBABLY THE MOST IMPORTANT PART AND THE PART THAT'S REALLY GOOD ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE WERE ABLE TO KEEP NORE 2 45 FROM BEING APPEALED, AND THAT IS BY APRIL 1ST OF NEXT YEAR, RESOURCE ENTITIES WOULD HAVE TO SUBMIT A NOTICE OF INTENT TO REQUEST AN EXEMPTION IF THEY CANNOT MEET THE NEW REQUIREMENTS. 
          AND THEN THEY WOULD HAVE TO PROVIDE ERCOT WHAT WE'RE CALLING THE INITIAL FREQUENCY RIDE THROUGH OR INITIAL VOLTAGE RIDE THROUGH CAPABILITY REPORT. 
          AND THAT WOULD BE, BASICALLY, IT WOULD HAVE TO, THEY WOULD HAVE TO EXPLAIN WHAT IS, WHAT ARE THE CAPABILITIES OF THEIR RESOURCES, UH, VIS-A-VIS FREE FREQUENCY RIDE THROUGH OR VOLTAGE RIDE THROUGH. 
          UM, THEY WOULD ALSO HAVE TO PROVIDE US ACCURATE MODELS BY APRIL 1ST, 2025. 
          AND THEN ER I COULD THEN START TAKING THAT, UH, THOSE MODELS AND DOING ITS SYSTEM MODELS TO SEE HOW THE, IN THE VARIOUS, UH, UH, RESOURCES AFFECT GRID STABILITY. 
          SO ANNIE, GO BACK TO THAT SLIDE FOR A SECOND. 
          SO SURE. 
          JUST, UH, THE TWO CHANGES FROM THE PREVIOUS VERSION WE SUBMITTED ON THE 12TH TO THE 16TH ARE HIGHLIGHTED HERE, AND IT, IT WAS A CLARIFICATION AROUND THIS MEMORY CARD ISSUE. 
          SO THAT WAS A CHANGE FROM EARLIER IN THE WEEK TO FRIDAY. 
          AND THIS TERMINOLOGY CHANGE OF NOTICE OF INTENT TO REQUEST AN EXEMPTION, UH, WHICH IS VERY SIMILAR TO HOW THE TEXAS ENERGY FUND IS KIND OF SET UP, WHERE IF YOU WANTED TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION TO THE COMMISSION, YOU HAD TO SUBMIT A NOTICE OF INTENT FIRST. 
          SO WORKING WITH THE JOINT COMMENTERS, WE KIND OF REPLACED THIS CONCEPT OF SUBMITTING YOUR EXEMPTION REQUEST IN THIS PHASE ONE. 
          SO YOU MUST SUBMIT THE NOTICE OF INTENT THAT YOU'RE GOING TO REQUEST AN EXEMPTION UNDER THE PHASE TWO REQUIREMENTS. 
          IF YOU DON'T GIVE US THESE REPORTS ALONG WITH YOUR NOTICE OF INTENT, THEN YOU'RE NOT ELIGIBLE TO SUBMIT THAT RE THAT EXEMPTION REQUEST UNDER PHASE TWO. 
          AND SO THAT'S, THOSE ARE THE TWO MAIN THINGS I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT CHANGED FROM THE VERSION THAT WAS SUBMITTED EARLY ON THE WEEK TO THE ONE THAT WAS SUBMITTED ON FRIDAY. 
          YEAH, THANKS CHAD. 
          AND THAT'S ACTUALLY AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION WITH THE NOTICE OF INTENT TO REQUEST AN EXEMPTION. 
          PREVIOUSLY IT HAD SAID THEY HAD TO ACTUALLY REQUEST TO THE EXEMPTION BY APRIL 1ST, UM, BUT WE DID MAKE SURE THAT WE PUT IN LANGUAGE THAT SAID, ONCE THEY PUT IN A NOTICE OF INTENT TO REQUEST, THEY COULDN'T THEN DECREASE THEIR RIDE THROUGH CAPABILITIES. 
          THEY WERE, THEY COULD, THEY COULD, THEY WOULD ALWAYS HAVE TO AT LEAST MEET THE LEVEL THAT THEY DESCRIBED IN THAT CAPABILITY REPORT. 
          THAT ALSO HAS TO BE FILED ON APRIL 1ST, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          UM, NEXT STEP IS IF A RESOURCE CAN MEET THE NEW REQUIREMENTS BUT CAN'T DO SO BY THAT DECEMBER 31ST DEADLINE, THEN THEY'LL BE, THEY WOULD HAVE TO REQUEST AN EXTENSION TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT. 
          AND FOR THE LEGACY RESOURCES OR THE PRE 8 1 24 RESOURCES, EXTENSIONS CAN'T GO PAST 1231 OF 27. 
          AND THEN FOR, UH, RESOURCES WITH, UH, DATES AFTER 8 1 24, THEIR EXTENSIONS COULD NOT GO PAST 1231 OF 28. 
          AND THEN YOU'LL NOTICE THE LAST RISK THERE. 
          UM, IN APPENDIX B TO THE SLIDES, UH, WE HAVE A SYNAP SYNOPSIS OF THE WHOLE NOER 2 45 PROCESS AS IT CURRENTLY EXISTS, UH, IN THE, IN THE VERSION THAT WE'RE ASKING TO BE APPROVED. 
          UM, SO I WON'T GO THROUGH ALL OF THAT, BUT IT IS THERE IF YOU WANNA LOOK AT IT. 
          THIS NEXT SLIDE IS A RECAP OF ALL OF THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE. 
          UH, WELL, ACTUALLY I SHOULD GO BACK. 
          THE NEXT THING IS, UH, ERCOT COMMENTS, THE ONES FILED ON THE 12TH AND THE 16TH, UH, IDENTIFY SPECIFIC REASONS FOR EACH CHANGE TO THE TAC RECOMMENDED VERSION. 
          SO BASICALLY THESE ARE ALL OF THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE AFTER THE JUNE 7TH VERSION OF THE NOER THAT TAC RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF, AND THAT GOT TABLED TO THE BOARD. 
          SO THE, THERE'S FOUR BUCKETS OF THESE KINDS OF CHANGES, AND I ALLUDED TO THEM SOMEWHAT EARLIER IN THE PRESENTATION. 
          THERE'S THOSE THAT ARE JUST TO CLARIFY INFORMATION THAT WE FELT COULD USE SOME CLARIFICATION. 
          AND, 
          [00:45:01]
UH, IN THE SAME BUCKET IS ONES THAT CHANGES THAT WERE MADE TO ADDRESS CONCERNS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP BY THE JOINT COMMENTERS DURING THE COURSE OF THE NEGOTIATIONS OR THE DISCUSSIONS. 
          UM, THE SECOND IS THIS BIFURCATION PART. 
          THE, WE TOOK OUT SECTIONS OF THE CURRENT OR OF THE TAC RECOMMENDED VERSION THAT WERE MOVING INTO, UM, UH, WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO AS THE PHASE TWO. 
          THEN THERE WERE CORRECTIONS. 
          AS I POINTED OUT EARLIER, THERE WERE SOME THINGS JUST LIKE TYPOS THAT NEEDED TO BE FIXED. 
          AND THEN ALSO AS WE WENT THROUGH, WE REALIZED THAT SOME SECTIONS COULD BE PULLED OUT BECAUSE THEY WERE ACTUALLY DUPLICATIVE OR REDUNDANT. 
          UM, FOR EXAMPLE, IEEE 2,800 EXPLAINED OR HAD A CERTAIN TABLE IN IT. 
          WE HAD THE SAME TABLE IN THE, IN THE, IN THE NOER. 
          WE THOUGHT, WELL, THERE'S REALLY NO REASON TO REPEAT THE TABLE IN THE NOER. 
          SO FOR EXAMPLE, WE PULLED OUT A TABLE. 
          UM, SO THOSE ARE EXAMPLES OF SORT OF DUPLICATION OR REDUNDANCY. 
          IT JUST MAKES IT CLEANER EASIER TO, EASIER TO READ. 
          SO THIS SLIDE ACTUALLY SHOWS ALL OF THE DIFFERENT CHANGES THAT WERE IN ONE OF THOSE FOUR BUCKETS, RIGHT? SO I TALKED ABOUT THE FOUR DIFFERENT CATEGORIES OF TYPES OF CHANGES. 
          UM, IT LOOKS LIKE A LOT AND IT KIND OF IS A LOT, BUT ALL OF THEM HAVE A REASON. 
          AND AS INDICATED THERE BY THE ASTERISK, UH, THE FOOTNOTE ON THE PAGE, THE DETAILS OF EVERY ONE OF THESE CHANGES, UH, ARE PROVIDED IN APPENDIX A. 
          SO IF YOU WANTED TO SEE WHY DID WE MAKE A CHANGE TO ANY ONE OF THOSE SECTIONS OR SUBSECTIONS, THIS IS JUST SORT OF A, I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF WE CAPTURED EVERYTHING ON ONE PAGE TO SHOW Y'ALL THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE. 
          SO WITH THAT, UM, AS CHAD SAID, THE JOINT COMMENTERS HAVE REPRESENTED TO ERCOT THAT THEY DON'T OPPOSE THIS VERSION, WHICH I THINK IS A, A, A, A GOOD THING FOR ALL OF US AT THIS POINT WHO HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF. 
          UM, AND SO WE ARE ASKING THE R AND M COMMITTEE TO RECOMMEND THAT THE BOARD APPROVE NORE 2 45 AS REV REVISED BY ERCOT 8 16 24 COMMENTS, UH, AND DESIGNATE A SUBSEQUENT NOER, UH, AS A BOARD PRIORITY REVISION REQUEST TO BECOME EFFECTIVE ON APRIL 1ST, 2025, WHICH WOULD COINCIDE WITH THE DEADLINE FOR SUBMITTING, SUBMITTING THOSE NOTICES OF INTENT TO REQUEST AN EXEMPTION. 
          SO WE WOULD KIND OF HAVE THEM ALL MESHED, UH, AT THE SAME TIME. 
          AND THEN, UH, IF THE COMMISSION, UH, APPROVES NOGA 2 45, UH, ERCOT IS GOING TO FILE THE PHASE TWO NOER, UH, TO DEVELOP THAT EXEMPTION PROCESS AND THOSE EXEMPTION CRITERIA AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. 
          AND I DO WANNA MAKE SURE I POINT OUT THAT WE HAVE ALREADY STARTED WORK ON THAT. 
          WE'VE, WE'VE CIRCULATED DIVERSION INTERNALLY. 
          WE'RE NOT SITTING ON OUR LAURELS JUST WAITING FOR APPROVAL. 
          WE WANT TO, ESPECIALLY SINCE THERE'S AN APRIL ONE DEADLINE OR WE'RE ASKING FOR AN APRIL ONE DEADLINE, WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GOT THIS, THIS MOVING AS QUICKLY AS WE COULD. 
          UM, SO WITH THAT, UM, THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR MY PRESENTATION AND I GUESS IF I'D OPEN THE FLOOR TO ANY QUESTIONS, WE HAD A COUPLE MORE COMMENTS. 
          SO LAST WEEK WE ALSO HOSTED AN ERCOT WEBEX FOR STAKEHOLDERS. 
          AND YOU KNOW, I TALKED ABOUT THIS IN JUNE, THAT IT'S OBVIOUSLY NOT THE NORMAL WAY WHERE THE BOARD TABLES SOMETHING AND THEN WE GO OFF AND WORK WITH A PARTY THAT HAS RAISED OBJECTIONS. 
          BUT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT, UH, ALL STAKEHOLDERS HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SEE OUR RED LINES THAT WE'D GONE OFF FOR THE LAST SIX WEEKS. 
          AND SO WE HOSTED THAT WORKSHOP ON, UH, THURSDAY, AND ANDY WENT THROUGH IN, IN MORE DETAIL OF ALL THE CHANGES THAT FALL WITHIN THOSE FOUR CATEGORIES SO THAT STAKEHOLDERS COULD VOICE ANY CONCERNS. 
          UH, WE DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING, SO WE FELT LIKE, AGAIN, FUNDAMENTALLY THE PRINCIPLES ARE STILL THE SAME THAT WERE IN THE JUNE TAC RECOMMENDED VERSION. 
          THE MAIN ISSUE RAISED BY THE JOINT COMMENTERS WAS KIND OF THE BIFURCATION PROCESS AND THE HARDWARE ISSUE THAT WE HAVE DECOUPLED, AND WE'LL HAVE, UH, ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO WORK WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS THROUGH THIS SUBSEQUENT NOER ON THIS SLIDE, THE LAST SLIDE HERE, IT'S NOT SO MUCH ABOUT IT BECOMING EFFECTIVE APRIL 1ST BECAUSE, UH, THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT OBVIOUSLY THE, THE BOARD, UH, DOESN'T HAVE CONTROL ON. 
          IT'S MORE ABOUT GETTING THE SECOND REVISION REQUEST TO THE BOARD FOR ITS FEBRUARY CONSIDERATION SO THAT IT, IT IS CLOSE IN TIME TO WHEN WE EXPECT THOSE REPORTS TO BE COMING IN ON APRIL 1ST. 
          SO REALLY THE ASK IS FOR THE COMMITTEE AND THE BOARD TO DESIGNATE IT AS A PRIORITY REVISION REQUEST TO BE BACK NO LATER THAN THE FEBRUARY BOARD CYCLE OF 2025, SO THAT WE'RE DOING ALL THE WORK THAT IS NECESSARY IN THAT SECOND PHASE THAT'S COMPLIMENTARY TO WHAT THE INITIATIVES ARE IN THIS FIRST PHASE. 
          UM, AND THEN, AND AFTER, IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS, WE WILL WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR THIS ONE VERSUS THE TAC VERSION BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME CHANGES TO THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND I'LL BRING 
          [00:50:01]
UP ANOTHER ERCOT STAFF INDIVIDUAL TALK ABOUT THAT IN A, IN A FEW MINUTES. 
          JULIE, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YES, I, I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. 
          I REALLY APPRECIATE ALL THE HUNDREDS OF MAN HOURS, MAYBE THOUSANDS OF MAN HOURS THAT WENT INTO THIS CHANGE MY QUESTION'S MORE AT THE LIKE ENTERPRISE GRID LEVEL. 
          WE'RE DOING THIS TO MANAGE RISK TO GRID OPERATIONS. 
          AND WHAT MY QUESTION IS, IS WILL WE BE TRACKING AT THE BOARD LEVEL COMPLIANCE TO THESE CHANGES IN TERMS OF THE REGISTERED INVERTER BASED RESOURCES THAT ARE IN COMPLIANCE, BOTH THE QUANTITY AND THE MEGAWATTS, THEY'RE CONTRIBUTING TO THE GRID AS WELL AS TRACKING THE EXEMPTIONS IN TERMS OF QUANTITY OF IBS AND TOTAL MEGAWATTS OF IIBR RESOURCES THAT ARE EXEMPT? YES, WE CAN DEFINITELY PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION TO THE COMMITTEE. 
          UH, OBVIOUSLY RESPECTING CONFIDENTIALITY, BUT THE BENEFIT THAT WE'LL GET UNDER NO 2 45 IS THAT WE WILL UNDERSTAND THE UNIVERS OF THE LEGACY ASSETS THAT AREN'T ABLE TO MEET THE, THE CURRENT REQUIREMENTS. 
          AND SO WE CAN DEFINITELY BRING THAT INFORMATION FORWARD TO THE, TO THE COMMITTEE AND HELP THEM UNDERSTAND THAT RISK PROFILE AND ALSO TRACK, YOU KNOW, THE, THOSE THAT ARE SEEKING EXTENSIONS THAT ARE GONNA GET TO THAT CAPABILITY AND IEEE GOING FORWARD. 
          SO WE CAN DEFINITELY DO THAT WORK. 
          UM, ULTIMATELY THE SECOND NOER IS ABOUT THE EXEMPTION PROCESS AND ONCE WE'RE ABLE TO GET THAT DEVELOPED, I THINK THERE'LL BE OPPORTUNITIES TO BRING INFORMATION BACK TO THE COMMITTEE FOR THAT AS WELL. 
          THANK YOU. 
          I, I WANNA STRESS THAT WE, WE NEED TO BE ATIVE IN MEASURING THESE CHANGES THAT WE'RE MAKING AND HOW WE'RE REDUCING THE RISK TO GRID OPERATIONS QUANTITATIVELY WITH DATA. 
          YEP, THAT'S A GOOD POINT. 
          JULIE, CHAD, DO YOU WANNA GO AND TALK ABOUT THE IMPACT ANALYSIS AT THIS POINT? YES. 
          I'M GONNA TURN OVER TO TROY ANDERSON. 
          AND THIS IS OBVIOUSLY ANOTHER KIND OF UNIQUE THING THAT NORMALLY THE PRIORITY IN RANK IS KIND OF DECIDED AT THE STAKEHOLDER LEVEL AND, BUT WHEN OBVIOUSLY THE, THE COMMITTEE AND THE BOARD CAN DO THIS, WHEN THERE IS A CHANGE TO THE IA, THEN THE COMMITTEE AND THE BOARD WILL HAVE TO DECIDE THE PRIORITY RANK. 
          SO I'LL LET TROY TALK ABOUT THE ERCOT COMMENTS AND THE IMPACT TO THE PREVIOUSLY PUBLISHED IMPACT ASSESSMENT. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU CHAD. 
          THIS IS TROY ANDERSON WITH ERCOT PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT. 
          UM, AS, AS YOU KNOW, WHEN A REVISION REQUEST COMES THROUGH THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS, WE ASSESS IT FOR ANY POTENTIAL CHANGES TO COMPUTER SYSTEMS AND STAFFING. 
          AND SO THAT'S BEEN TAKING PLACE WITH THE VARIOUS ITERATIONS OF NORE 2 45. 
          UH, THE MOST RECENT POSTING THAT'S OUT ON HERCU.COM HAS A 150 K TO 250 K PROJECT, WHICH IS TO UPDATE THE RIO SYSTEM WHERE RESOURCE ATTRIBUTES ARE MAINTAINED. 
          THERE'S ALL, THERE WAS ALSO A SEVEN TO EIGHT FTE IMPACT OF ALL THE LABOR THAT WOULD BE INVOLVED IN ALL THE PROCESSES. 
          SO IF THE ERCOT COMMENTS ARE APPROVED, UH, THE ONLY CHANGES TO THE IA OR AN INCREASE IN THE FTE POTENTIAL FROM SEVEN TO EIGHT BEFORE TO SEVEN TO 10, NOW WE HAVE THE SAME PROJECT COST OF 150 TO 250 K. 
          THE ONLY TWEAK IS THAT INCREASE IN POTENTIAL FTE NEED TO COVER THE RELATED LABOR. 
          NOW YOU MAY THINK, OKAY, WE'VE REMOVED THE EXEMPTION PROCESS, HOW DID WE ADD STAFF? WELL, THE ANSWER THERE IS THE VERSION OF THE NOER WITH THE EXEMPTION IN IT HAD AS MUCH RISK REDUCTION AS WE COULD FELT LIKE WE COULD ACCOMPLISH IN THAT LANGUAGE. 
          AND SO BACKING THAT OUT HAS INHERENTLY ADDED SOME MORE RISK OF LABOR WITHIN THE VARIOUS PROCESSES. 
          HOWEVER, WHEN THE SECOND NOER COMES THROUGH, WE WILL ASSESS IT SIMILARLY AND WE MAY BE ABLE TO REPORT THAT THAT OVERALL FTE RISK IS BACK DOWN TO THE SEVEN TO EIGHT. 
          SO, BUT THAT'LL DEPEND ON THAT LANGUAGE. 
          SO THAT, THAT'S THE CHANGE TO THE IA BASED ON THE ERCOT COMMENTS THAT ARE BEFORE YOU. 
          ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT BEFORE I TALK ABOUT PRIORITY AND RANK? OKAY. 
          UM, THE WAY THAT WE TRY TO MANAGE PROJECTS IN OUR PORTFOLIO IS WITH TWO DIFFERENT VALUES, A PRIORITY AND A RANK. 
          THE PRIORITY IS THE TARGET YEAR. 
          WE'D LIKE TO START THE PROJECT WORK AND THE RANK IS ESSENTIALLY A RELATIVE VALUE TO HELP US KNOW WHETHER AN ITEM IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN ANOTHER. 
          SO WHEN A NEW ITEM COMES INTO THE SYSTEM, WE LOOK AT HOW MUCH WORK, WHAT SYSTEMS DOES IT IMPACT, AND THEN COMPARE IT TO OTHER SY OTHER PROJECTS IN THE QUEUE THAT IMPACTS SIMILAR SYSTEMS. SO IN THE CASE OF NOER 2 45, UM, I'VE 
          [00:55:01]
ALREADY MENTIONED THAT IT HAS RIO SYSTEM IMPACTS. 
          WE BELIEVE WE'D LIKE TO START THAT WORK IN 2025. 
          THE REASON BEING, THERE'S SOME RIO WORK ALREADY IN THE QUEUE THAT GOES LIVE IN DECEMBER. 
          SO THIS COULD BE THE NEXT THING WE WORK ON AFTER THAT. 
          AND SINCE WE THINK WE NEED TO WORK ON IT NEXT, UM, I'M SUGGESTING A RANK THAT PUTS IT AHEAD OF SOME OTHER ITEMS IN OUR QUEUE THAT ALSO IMPACT THE RIO SYSTEM. 
          THINGS LIKE RIGOR 28, P 91 AND UH, NPRR 1077. 
          THEY ALL HAVE RIO IMPACTS, BUT WE THINK WE SHOULD WORK ON NOER 45 2 45 FIRST. 
          IN ORDER TO PUT THIS AHEAD OF THOSE, I'D SUGGEST A RANK OF 35 15. 
          THAT'S JUST A SEQUENTIAL NUMBER WITHIN OUR RANKING SYSTEM. 
          BUT THE IMPORTANT THING FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND IS THAT RANK WOULD PUT IT AHEAD OF SOME OTHER ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY THE BOARD AND COMMISSION. 
          SO ONCE AGAIN, A PRIORITY IS THE YEAR WE'D LIKE TO START 2025 AND THEN THAT RANK WOULD PUT IT AHEAD OF OTHER RIO THINGS SO WE COULD WORK ON THIS IN THE NEXT, UH, RIO PROJECT. 
          I CAN TAKE QUESTIONS ON THAT. 
          TYPICALLY, WE DON'T HAVE TO GET INTO THOSE WEEDS HERE, BUT LIKE CHAD DESCRIBED EARLY VERSIONS OF THIS, NOER DIDN'T EVEN HAVE A PROJECT IMPACT, BUT THAT HAS DEVELOPED OVER TIME AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY PRIORITY AND RANK, UH, DIDN'T REALLY COME UP UNTIL HERE TODAY. 
          ALRIGHT, THANKS TROY. 
          ANY QUESTIONS FOR TROY OR, OR THE TOPIC IN GENERAL BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD WITH A MOTION? OKAY. 
          WITH THAT I'LL ENTERTAIN A, A MOVE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF NORE 2 45 AS RECOMMENDED BY TAC IN THE 6 7 24 TAC REPORT AS AMENDED BY THE 8 16 24 ERCOT COMMENTS WITH A RECOMMENDED PRIORITY OF 2025 IN RANK OF 35 15 CARLOS MOVES. 
          JULIE, DO YOU SECOND? SECOND. 
          ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. 
          AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED OR ABSTENTIONS? CONSIDER PAST? I THINK IT WAS GREAT WORK TO GET IT TO THIS POINT. 
          WELL DONE. 
          AND AGAIN, I THINK TOMORROW, UM, FOR THE BOARD AS PART OF YOUR REPORT, UM, HAVING THE BOARD DESIGNATE THE SUBSEQUENT NOWHERE AS A BOARD PRIORITY TO GET BACK IN FEBRUARY. 
          AND ALSO ANOTHER, ANOTHER COMMENT THAT WE, I'VE TALKED TO KAITLYN AND COLIN ABOUT IS THESE ARE DIFFICULT POLICY ISSUES FOR THE STAKEHOLDERS. 
          AND THERE, THERE ARE OBVIOUSLY I THINK SOME LESSONS LEARNED OUT OF NOGA 2 45 AND IT'LL BE JUST AS DIFFICULT AS A POLICY DISCUSSION WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS TO TALK ABOUT THE EXEMPTION PROCESS AND, AND HARDWARE. 
          BUT, UM, MAKING SURE THAT THE COMMITTEE AND THE BOARD GETS UPDATES IN THE INTERIM PROCESS OF WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE SUBSEQUENT NOVA. 
          SO THAT THE COMMITTEE AND THE BOARD IS BETTER INFORMED OF THOSE PRESSURE POINTS BE BEFORE, UM, ASSUMING THE BOARD WANTS TO DESIGNATE IT AS A PRIORITY AND HAVE IT BACK IN FEBRUARY SO THAT, THAT YOU'RE GETTING THE BEST INFORMATION THROUGHOUT THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS THAT IS IDENTIFYING THOSE KEY ISSUES THAT ARE DIFFICULT BETWEEN ERCOT STAFF AND, AND THE STAKEHOLDERS. 
          GREAT. 
          AND CERTAINLY, AGAIN, GLAD TO SEE IT FOR THE THINGS WE AGREE UPON, WE GET THEM IN IMPLEMENTED AND GO TO WORK ON A PART TWO. 
          SO, AND I'LL TAKE UP AGENDA ITEM 
          [5.2 TAC Report regarding R&M Committee-Charter Revision Requests]
5.2, WHICH IS THE TAC REPORT REGARDING R AND M COMMITTEE CHARTER REVISION REQUESTS. 
          THERE ARE FOUR REVISION REQUESTS. 
          NOTICE ON THE AGENDA FOR TODAY. 
          FOR VOTES, T CHAIR CAITLIN SMITH WILL PRESENT THE TAC REPORT. 
          CAITLYN, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE BEGIN YOUR REPORT WITH ANY GENERAL TAC UPDATES AND AGENDA ITEM 5.2 0.1 NPR 1 1 1 9 0 HIGH DISPATCH LIMIT OVERRIDE PROVISION FOR INCREASED LOAD SERVING ENTITY COSTS. 
          AND AFTER CAITLYN'S DISCUSSION ON NPRR 1190, WE'LL ENTERTAIN ANY COMMENTS. 
          ASK ERCOT STAFF TO SPEAK TO THEIR COMMENTS ON EACH REVISION REQUEST SUBMITTED TO THE COMMITTEE AND THE BOARD, AND POSSIBLY A VOTE BY THE COMMITTEE BEFORE I INTRODUCE THE NEXT REVISION REQUEST ON THE AGENDA. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          AND YOU, YOU GAVE ME AN OPENING FOR THE GENERAL TECH UPDATES. 
          I, I WILL SAY REGARDING NORE 2 45, THAT IS A, A VERY QUICK TIMELINE. 
          UM, WE'LL, WE'LL COME REPORT TO YOU, BUT I THINK SOME INPUT FROM THIS COMMITTEE AND THE BOARD WHEN WE DO THOSE REPORTS WOULD BE HELPFUL. 
          I, I WILL TELL YOU RIGHT NOW THAT THERE WILL BE SOME STICKING POINTS. 
          I, I THINK THERE'LL BE STICKING POINTS AROUND DEFINING THE PROCESS OF EXEMPTIONS, UM, HOW REQUIREMENTS FOR HARDWARE WILL APPLY AFTER MAXIMIZATION. 
          I THINK THERE'S SOME FUNDAMENTAL DISAGREEMENTS ABOUT WHETHER FOR HARDWARE REQUIREMENTS WE'RE LOOKING AT RISKS ON A SYSTEM-WIDE BASIS OR PER RESOURCE. 
          AND THIS HAS ALL COME UP, YOU KNOW, WE HAD NO GR 2 45 ATTACK FOR ALMOST A YEAR, SO I CAN TELL YOU THESE CONVERSATIONS WILL COME UP AND SO HAPPY TO COME AND GIVE YOU DETAILED REPORTS, BUT I THINK IT 
          [01:00:01]
WOULD BE HELPFUL TO GET SOME FEEDBACK SO THAT TAC CAN KIND OF PROCESS THAT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE'S TWO BOARD MEETINGS BEFORE FEBRUARY AND TO MEET THAT TIMELINE, YOU KNOW, WE'LL DO OUR BEST, BUT I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO GET SOME INPUT TO, TO GUIDE US TOO. 
          YEAH, AND HAPPY TO GIVE YOU MORE INFORMATION, BUT I, I THINK THERE'S A RECORD AND I'M HAPPY TO, TO FILL PEOPLE IN. 
          BUT THERE WILL BE SOME HARD CONVERSATIONS AROUND THE PROCESS FOR EXEMPTIONS AND THE, THE HARDWARE. 
          AND I THINK THAT'S BASED ON SOME FUNDAMENTAL DISAGREEMENTS AS I LAID OUT. 
          OKAY. 
          SO I AM ALSO COVERING OR MOSTLY COVERING, UH, THE TWO MEETINGS WE HAD. 
          UM, SINCE THE LAST BOARD MEETING. 
          WE HAD A JUNE 24TH TAC AND A JULY 31ST TAC NPR 1190 AND NPR 1215 WERE CONSIDERED AT THE JUNE 24TH. 
          TNPR 1190 HAD OPPOSING VOTES. 
          UH, NPRR 1215 IS HERE, NOT BECAUSE OF OPPOSING VOTES, BUT BECAUSE THERE WERE ERCOT COMMENTS TO CLEAN UP SOME LANGUAGE AFTER TACK. 
          NPR 1219 AND 1230 WERE BOTH CONSIDERED AT THE JULY 31ST T MEETING. 
          AND BOTH OF THOSE DID HAVE OPPOSING VOTES. 
          NPR 
          [5.2.1NPRR1190, High Dispatch Limit Override Provision for Increased Load Serving Entity Costs ( Part 1 of 2 )]
1190 REGARDING HIGH DISPATCH LIMIT OVERRIDE PROVISION FOR INCREASED LOAD SERVING ENTITY COSTS. 
          THIS NPR ADDS A PROVISION FOR RECOVERY OF, UH, DEMONSTR DEMONSTRABLE FINANCIAL LOSS ARISING FROM A MANUAL HIGH DISPATCH LIMIT OVERRIDE TO REDUCE REAL POWER OUTPUT IN THE CASE WHEN THAT OUTPUT IS INTENDED TO MEET QSC LOAD OBLIGATIONS. 
          UH, THE REASONING HERE IS THE CURRENT PROTOCOL LANGUAGE ALLOWS FOR COMPENSATION FOR LOSSES ON DAY AHEAD MARKET OBLIGATIONS, AND ON BILATERAL CONTRACTS THAT WERE AFFECTED BY HDL OVERRIDE. 
          BUT NOE'S ARE BOUND BY OBLIGATIONS TO SERVE LOAD WITHIN THEIR SERVICE TERRITORY AND GENERATION SUPPORTS THIS OBLIGATION AND AN ARRANGEMENT AKIN TO SELF ARRANGEMENT. 
          WHEN SCED DISPATCH GENERATION WOULD OFFSET NOE LOAD AND A MANUAL HDL OVERRIDE REDUCES GENERAL OUT GENERATION OUTPUT, THE NOE INCURS A CONCRETE REALIZED LOSS, WHICH IS NOT OPPORTUNITY COST. 
          AND SO THE REVISED LANGUAGE IN THIS NPRR WOULD ALLOW COMPENSATION FOR SUCH A LOSS. 
          TECH VOTED ON THIS ON JUNE 24TH. 
          UM, THERE WERE SIX OPPOSING VOTES FROM THE CONSUMER SEGMENT, ONE ABSTENTION FROM THE INDEPENDENT RETAILER SEGMENT. 
          THE OPPOSING VOTES FELT THIS PROPOSAL WAS CONTRARY TO THE DESIGN OF THE NODAL MARKET BECAUSE GENERATORS SHOULD BE PAID BASED OFF HIGHER LOW PRICES. 
          THEY ALSO FELT THIS NPRR WOULD RE REWARD OVER-SCHEDULING OF POWER THAT CANNOT BE DELIVERED AND WOULD BE COUNTER TO PROPER INCENTIVES FOR DISPATCHING EXISTING UNITS THAT COULD DELIVER POWER AT THE THE TIME AND FOR CITING NEW GENERATION. 
          SHOULD I PAUSE ON THIS ONE? YES. 
          I SAY IF YOUR, THEY'RE ALL YOUR COMMENTS IN 1190. 
          YES. 
          YEAH. 
          KEITH, DID YOU WANT TO PRESENT A, YOUR COMMENTS OR, OH, ACTUALLY, AUSTIN, I THINK, DO YOU WANNA, DO YOU WANT ME TO HANDLE IT TO TALK ABOUT THIS, KEITH? YEAH, WHY, WHY DON'T YOU GO? THANKS. 
          THIS IS 1215, RIGHT? THAT YOU I THINK 1111, NO, 1190 IS, OKAY. 
          SO THERE ANY ERCOT COMMENTS ON 1190? UH, YEAH, WE FILED SOME COMMENTS, MAINLY JUST TO GIVE YOU DATA AND CONTEXT TO HELP YOU MAKE YOUR DECISION. 
          ERCOT SUPPORTED 1190. 
          THAT WAS THE VERSION THAT WAS APPROVED BY T AND AND OUR POSITION HASN'T CHANGED, BUT WE DID PROVIDE SOME COMMENTS TO DISCUSS THE BACKGROUND A LITTLE BIT AND TO SHOW THE, UH, THE HISTORICAL HDL OVERRIDE PAYMENTS AND JUST THE HISTORICAL HDL OVERRIDES THAT DID NOT RESULT IN PAYMENTS. 
          JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF THE FREQUENCY OF THE, OF THE SITUATION. 
          OKAY. 
          SO THEN ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THIS ONE? SO IF NOT, I WANNA ATTAIN A MOTION THAT THE RM COMMITTEE RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF NPRR 1190 AS RECOMMENDED BY TAC CARLOS IF WE MOVE THAT CONCERN ABOUT THE SIX OPPOSING VOTES. 
          UM, SO THAT'S MY MAIN CONCERN. 
          NO. 
          SO IF CARLOS IS NOT GONNA MOVE IT, WE'RE NOT GONNA, WE CAN'T APPROVE IT. 
          WELL, MY QUESTION IS, DOES DO OUR PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSIONERS SITTING IN IN THIS COMMITTEE HAVE ANY COMMENTS THEY WANT TO SHARE? I DON'T. 
          LORI, I DO NOT AT THIS TIME. 
          [01:05:02]
I DO NOT. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL, LOOKS LIKE WE'RE GONNA GO ON TO, UH, 1215, 
          [5.2.2
NPRR1215, Clarifications to the Day-Ahead Market (DAM) Energy-Only Offer Calculation]
I THINK IS NEXT. 
          OKAY. 
          NPR 1215 CLARIFICATION TO THE DAY AHEAD MARKET ENERGY ONLY OFFER CALCULATION. 
          THIS NPR CLARIFIES THAT THE DAY AHEAD MARKET ENERGY ONLY OFFER CREDIT EXPOSURE CALCULATION ZEROS OUT NEGATIVE VALUES. 
          AND IT CLARIFIES THAT THE ABSOLUTE VALUE OF NEGATIVE PRICES IS USED TO INCREASE EXPOSURE WHEN PRICES ARE NEGATIVE. 
          THIS MPR WAS UNANIMOUS AT TAC, BUT THERE ARE ERCOT COMMENTS FILED ON AUGUST ONE TO CORRECT A FORMULA ERROR. 
          ERCOT CAME TO THE TAC MEETING ON JULY 31ST TO DISCUSS THEIR PLAN TO FILE COMMENTS, AND, AND THERE WERE NO CONCERNS BY ATTACK MEMBERS ON THIS PLAN. 
          OKAY. 
          AND DOES 
          [5.2.2.1
ERCOT Comments on NPRR1215]
AUSTIN HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON 1215? I THINK SHE COVERED IT WELL. 
          WE JUST DIDN'T WANT TO. 
          THE VERSION OF THE NPR WAS TO CAPTURE AN AS-BUILT, AND NOT TO INTRODUCE ANY POLICY CHANGE. 
          THERE WAS AN ERROR IN THE, ONE OF THE FORMULAS THAT INADVERTENTLY CREATED A FORMULA CHANGE AND A POLICY CHANGE. 
          SO, AND THAT WAS DISCOVERED AFTER TAC VOTED. 
          SO INSTEAD OF TRYING TO GET YOU ALL TO EVALUATE THE CORRECTION, UM, AND VOTE ON A VERSION THAT TAC HAD NOT HAD A CHANCE TO VOTE ON, WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE BEST TO JUST REQUEST YOU ALL SEND IT BACK TO, TO T TO HAVE A SECOND LOOK. 
          SO WITH THAT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTIONS. 
          THE R AND M COMMITTEE RECOMMEND THE BOARD RE REMAIN NPRR 1215 TO TAC. 
          SO I NEED A MOTION ON THAT, CARLOS? YEAH. 
          MOVES. 
          AND JULIE, DO YOU SECOND? JULIE, DO YOU SECOND? MAYBE 1190. 
          YOU'LL KNOCK HER OUT. 
          JULIE, IF YOU'RE THERE, YOU'RE ON MUTE OR, OH, WE SEEM TO HAVE LOST JULIE. 
          WE'LL HAVE TO COME BACK TO THAT ONE. 
          CA WHY DON'T WE GO TO, I'M, I'M, OH, I'M BACK. 
          YOU'RE OKAY. 
          YOU SECOND THAT, JULIE, OR DO I NEED TO READ IT AGAIN? NO, I SECOND IT. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. 
          AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED OR ABSTENTIONS? HEARING NONE. 
          UH, 1215 IS APPROVED. 
          SO NOW WE WILL GO TO AGENDA ITEM 5.2. 
          YES. 
          WAS THE VOTE ON THAT TO REMAND IT BACK TO TAC? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, SO NOW WE'RE 
          [5.2.3
NPRR1219, Methodology Revisions and New Definitions for the Report on Capacity, Demand and Reserves in the ERCOT Region (CDR) – URGENT]
GONNA GO TO 5.2 0.3, WHICH IS NPRR 1219, THE METHODOLOGY REVISIONS AND NEW DEFINITIONS FOR THE REPORT ON THE CDR IN THE REGION. 
          AND THAT IS CONSIDERED URGENT, CAITLIN. 
          OKAY. 
          THIS NPRR CHANGES THE METHODOLOGIES FOR PREPARATION OF THE CDR. 
          IT INCORPORATES A REPORT RELEASE SCHEDULE. 
          IT ALSO INCLUDES A CHANGE TO REQUIRE SWITCHABLE GENERATION RESOURCE OWNERS TO PROVIDE INFORMATION ON UNAVAILABLE SWITCHABLE UNITS FOR ALL SEASONS. 
          PREVIOUSLY, IT WAS JUST SUMMER AND WINTER. 
          THIS HAS BEEN PART OF A, A LONG EFFORT TO UPDATE OUR CDR SINCE WINTER STORM URI. 
          MANY OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE CDR, SUCH AS A SWITCH TO ECCS AND REPORTING OF LOADS AND RESOURCES DURING THE FORECASTED PEAK NET LOAD HOUR INSTEAD OF JUST PEAK LOAD, ARE CONSISTENT WITH DIRECTION FROM THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION AND WERE SUPPORTED BY MARKET PARTICIPANTS AND DISCUSSION. 
          THERE WERE TWO OPPOSING VOTES FROM THE CONSUMER SEGMENT AND FOUR ABSTENTIONS. 
          THOSE ABSTENTIONS WERE FROM THE CONSUMER INDEPENDENT GENERATOR AND INDEPENDENT POWER MARKETER SEGMENTS ON THE OPPOSING VOTES FOR THIS ONE. 
          THE EXPLANATIONS CAME IN A LITTLE BIT LATE, UM, BUT THEY WERE BASICALLY THAT THEY HAD WANTED TO SEE THIS TABLE TO REVIEW THE ECCS AND, AND JUST MORE TIME GIVEN THE PO POLICY IMPLICATIONS AROUND DISCUSSIONS AT THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION AND THE LEGISLATURE AS WELL. 
          I WILL SAY THERE WAS A, A VERY ROBUST DISCUSSION AT TAC REGARDING THIS. 
          STAKEHOLDERS I THINK WERE SUPPORTIVE OF THE IMPROVEMENTS AND OF HAVING THEM IMPLEMENTED FOR THE DECEMBER CDR, WHICH IS THE ASSOCIATED URGENCY. 
          BUT THERE IS A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE APPLICATION OF ECCS TO DIFFERENT TECHNOLOGIES AND THE FREQUENCY WITH WHICH THOSE ECCS ARE CALCULATED AS WELL AS HARMONIZING THIS WITH THE LOAD FORECASTS. 
          AND THEN A ROBUST POLICY DISCUSSION ON HOW THIS WILL HARMONIZE WITH THE, THE RELIABILITY STANDARD THAT IS UNDER DISCUSSION OF THE PUC. 
          SO THERE WAS 
          [01:10:01]
SOME SUPPORT, UM, AT THE PRS BEFORE TAX AS WELL AS IN THOSE OPPOSING VOTES TO TABLE THIS AND HAVE MORE TIME FOR THE POLICY DISCUSSIONS. 
          BUT, UH, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THIS NEEDED TO, TO BE VOTED ON THIS MONTH TO APPLY TO THE DECEMBER CDR AND STAKEHOLDERS WERE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, IS CHRIS HERE TO, OH, THERE YOU'RE COMMENT ON THIS? SURE. 
          SO WE SUPPORT, UH, OF COURSE MOVING THIS FORWARD, UM, WITH THE EVOLVING GRID, TRYING TO GET THE BETTER INFORMATION INTO THE CDR TO MAKE IT MORE PUBLIC, UH, FOR EVERYONE. 
          AND, UH, AS CAITLIN NOTED, THIS HAS BEEN UNDER DISCUSSION AT THE COMMISSION IN VARIOUS WORKSHOPS FOR SOME TIME NOW, SO THIS ALIGNS WITH THAT METHODOLOGY AS WELL. 
          OKAY. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THIS? COMMISSIONER COBOS? YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          I JUST HAVE A QUESTION. 
          WHAT, WHAT WAS THE DEBATE OVER THE APPLICATION OF THE ELCC SPECIFICALLY? THERE WAS, UM, A COMMENT MADE ON THE FACT THAT THEY APPLIED TO, TO RENEWABLES, BUT NOT TO THERMAL GENERATION. 
          AND THEN AGAIN, THE OPPOSING EXPLANATION I DIDN'T GET UNTIL TODAY, BUT I THINK IT WAS JUST AROUND THE COMPLEXITY OF THE CALCULATIONS AND, AND HAVING MORE TIME FOR TECH TO REVIEW THE, THE CALCULATIONS THERE, CHRISTIE, OR, UM, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT Y'ALL CAN CONTINUE TO LOOK AT AS YOU GET MORE, I GUESS? ABSOLUTELY. 
          I MEAN, WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS ON THE DEVELOPMENT AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE MAKING IMPROVEMENTS TO KEEP THE CDR MOVING FORWARD. 
          UM, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE CAN'T CONTINUE TO UPDATE AND CHANGE OUR PROCESSES AS WE GET ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. 
          AND, AND JUST TO COMMENT THAT, I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT FOR ERCOT TO CAPTURE THE AVAILABILITY OF SWITCHABLE GENERATION IN THE CDR REPORTS, UM, BECAUSE AS MARKETS SURROUNDING ERCOT, UM, SPECIFICALLY SPP THAT I SIT ON THE REGIONAL STATE COMMITTEE ON, UM, IMPLEMENT PRMS PLANNING RESERVE MARGIN REQUIREMENTS FOR THE WINTER AND IN, AND INCREASED, UM, THE PLANET RESERVE MARGIN CARBON FOR THE SUMMER AND ULTIMATELY THE WINTER. 
          IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH SWITCHABLE GENERATION IS ACTUALLY GOING TO POTENTIALLY BE AVAILABLE IN THE WINTER. 
          UM, AND ALL SEASONS REALLY FOR, FOR ERCOT. 
          BUT, UM, I, I THINK THAT'S A GREAT STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION TO JUST GET A YEAR ROUND PERSPECTIVE ON, ON THE SWITCHABLE. 
          AGREED. 
          AND ANOTHER BONUS OF SOME OF THESE CHANGES, AS YOU MAY ALL RECUR, ARE REMEMBER FROM BRIEFINGS THAT YOU'VE HAD AS WE ROLLED OUT CDRS IN THE PAST, IS ACCOUNTING FOR BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE, WHICH TODAY THEIR CONTRIBUTION IS LISTED AS ZERO AND WE CONTINUE TO SEE ADDITIONAL MEGAWATTS ADDED TO THE SYSTEM. 
          AND SO WE NEED TO PROPERLY REFLECT THAT AS WELL. 
          MM-HMM,  ALSO A GREAT STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION AS WE'RE GETTING SO MANY BATTERIES IN THE MARKET, BUT THANK YOU. 
          THAT'S ALL I HAVE. 
          THANK YOU, CARLOS. 
          MOVE IT. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, AND THEN I'LL MAKE A MOTION OR RECOMMEND THAT WE, UH, APPROVE NPRR 1219 AS RECOMMENDED BY TAC CARLOS. 
          YEP. 
          I HAVE A MOTION. 
          JULIE, DO YOU? SECOND? SECOND. 
          ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. 
          AYE. 
          ANY ABSTENTIONS ARE OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. 
          IT'S APPROVED. 
          SO I THINK, UM, WELL, WE'VE GOT ONE MORE HERE, CAITLIN. 
          YES. 
          ONE MORE. 
          [5.2.4
NPRR1230, Methodology for Setting Transmission Shadow Price Caps for an IROL in SCED – URGENT]
YES. 
          WE'VE GOT, UH, AGENDA ITEM 5.2 0.4, WHICH IS THE METHODOLOGY OF FOR SETTING TRANSMISSION SHADOW PRICE CAPS FOR AN INTERCONNECTION, RELIABILITY OPERATING LIMIT, AND SECURITY CONSTRAINED ECONOMIC DISPATCH, WHICH WAS DEEMED URGENT. 
          OKAY. 
          YEP. 
          THIS IS NPRR 1230. 
          UH, THIS NPR WILL ENABLE ERCOT TO MANAGE POWER FLOWS WITHIN IOLS USING EXISTING OPERATIONAL AND MARKET TOOLS. 
          INSTEAD OF RELYING ON MANUAL INTERVENTION BY ERCOT OPERATORS. 
          THE MANUAL INTERVENTION METHODS CURRENTLY BEING USED INTRODUCED OPERATIONAL RISK DURING PERIODS OF STRESS SYSTEM CONDITIONS. 
          I BELIEVE THIS WAS THE, AN ISSUE DURING THE SEPTEMBER 6TH EEA EVENT. 
          THIS WAS INITIALLY PROPOSED TO BE IN PLACE FOR THIS SUMMER, BUT IT WAS TABLED OUT OF CONCERNS FOR KIND OF UPENDING MARKET REGULATORY CERTAINTY AND NOT KNOWING THE, THE CLEAR EFFECTS. 
          SO STAKEHOLDERS AND ERCOT WORKED TOGETHER ON THIS ONE. 
          ERCOT PROVIDED US ALL THE INFORMATION. 
          WE ASKED FOR, UH, A RE REQUESTED ANALYSIS, AND WE WERE ABLE TO RECOMMEND THIS. 
          AND, UH, MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT'LL BE IMPLEMENTED FOR USE NEXT SUMMER OR BEFORE NEXT SUMMER. 
          UM, THERE WERE TWO OPPOSING VOTES FROM THE COOPERATIVE AND MUNICIPAL SEGMENTS FOR ABSTENTIONS FROM THE COOPERATIVE AND INDEPENDENT RETAIL PROVIDER SEGMENTS. 
          THE OPPOSING VOTES WERE, UM, DUE TO THE COST THAT WAS SHOWN IN ERCOT ANALYSIS WHEN OPPOSING VOTES CITED THAT ERCOT BACKCAST 
          [01:15:01]
SHOWED THAT THE MARKET COST FOR LOAD WOULD'VE INCREASED BETWEEN 0.5 BILLION AND 1.6 BILLION OVER 20 OPERATING DAYS. 
          AND THEY BELIEVE THAT COST WAS NOT JUSTIFIED. 
          THEY FURTHER CITED THAT ERCOT HAS OUTLINED A SOUTH TEXAS EXPORT GTC EXIT STRATEGY THAT INDICATES THAT TRANSMISSION SOLUTIONS WILL RESOLVE THIS ISSUE AND BE IN SERVICE STARTING IN 2027. 
          SO THEY BASICALLY THOUGHT THE THE COSTS WERE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE RESOLVED. 
          WHAT WAS TOO HIGH WHEN THERE WAS A MANUAL SOLUTION THAT'S BEEN USED AND THE OTHER OPPOSING VOTER, OPPOSING VOTER CITED THE INCREASED COSTS, UM, TO SPECIFIC LOAD ZONES. 
          KEITH OR DAN, ANY COMMENTS FROM THE AIR COMPOSITION ON THIS? WELL, I'D, FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT 1230, THE IMPLEMENTATION OF 1230 WOULD ACTUALLY MAKE HIGH DISPATCH LIMIT OVERRIDES IN 1190, LESS LIKELY. 
          SO IT MITIGATES 1190. 
          SO 1230 WOULD MAKE DIS HIGH DISPATCH LESS LIKELY TO OCCUR. 
          SO IT TAKES WHAT OPERATORS HAVE TO DO AND PUTS IT IN SC SO IT WOULD BECOME PART OF THE MARKET PROCESS. 
          THE, THE, THE, THE EMS ITSELF WOULD OVERRIDE THOSE DISPATCH LIMITS INSTEAD OF AN OPERATOR DOING IT BY CHANGING, BY GIVING THE, THE, UH, THE SETTING OF THAT SHADOW PROCESS ACTUALLY GIVES, UM, SCAD MORE ROOM TO, TO, UH, TO WORK WITH, UH, WITHIN THE SHADOW PRICES. 
          AND SO THAT'S A, IT MITIGATES 1190. 
          THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE FIRST THING. 
          UM, I DON'T KNOW IF, DAN, IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANNA TALK ABOUT AS FAR AS THE, UH, THE, THE IROL? WELL, I, I THINK CAITLIN BASICALLY SAID WHAT THE INTENT IS, WHICH IS RATHER THAN OPERATORS HAVING TO TAKE MANUAL ACTIONS THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, MAY NOT BE THE MOST EFFICIENT WAY TO TRY TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM, THAT THIS USES THE MARKET MECHANISM TO TRY TO RESOLVE THAT OVERLOAD IN A WAY THAT'S MARKET BASED AND, UH, AND AS EFFICIENT AS POSSIBLE. 
          AND, UM, I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S THE REASON WE SUPPORTED IT. 
          I THINK THE IMM SUPPORTS THIS AS WELL. 
          OKAY. 
          ANY OTHER DISCUSSION WITH THAT? I WOULD, UH, RECOMMEND THAT THE RNM COMMITTEE RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF NPR 1230 AS RECOMMENDED BY T CARLY GIVES THE MOTION TO APPROVE. 
          UH, SECOND JULIE? YES. 
          SECOND. 
          ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? THEIR ABSTENTIONS HEARING? NONE. 
          WE'LL CONSIDER THAT APPROVED. 
          SO WE GOT 'EM ALL DONE EXCEPT FOR 1190. 
          [5.2.1NPRR1190, High Dispatch Limit Override Provision for Increased Load Serving Entity Costs ( Part 2 of 2 )]
BOB, MAYBE WE COULD GO BACK TO 11. 
          YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          MAYBE WE COULD GO BACK TO 1190. 
          'CAUSE I THINK THERE WAS SOME ADDITIONAL COMMENTS. 
          YEAH, KIM WAS GONNA BRING THIS POINT UP THAT I THINK THERE MAY BE SOME ADDITIONAL INPUT THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION PRIOR TO, UM, TO WHATEVER DISPOSITION YEP. 
          TO TAKE WITH THIS. 
          AND THEN FROM A DISPOSITION POINT OF VIEW, THE COMMITTEE CAN APPROVE, IT, CAN TABLE IT CAN REJECT IT. 
          IT WOULD BE GOOD TO TAKE AN ACTION ON IT FOR THE PURPOSE OF, UM, RECOMMENDATION FOR THE BOARD TOMORROW. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN FROM A GOVERNANCE BYLAWS RULE, THE, UM, ANY ONE OF THESE MOTIONS CAN BE PUT FORWARD. 
          YOU CAN PUT FORWARD A MOTION AND IT CAN BE, UM, SECONDED AND APPROVED BY, WITH 50% OF THE COMMITTEE, UH, WOULD, WOULD CONSIDER PASSING IT BECAUSE THERE'S THREE COMMITTEE MEMBERS HERE, SO IT DOESN'T REQUIRE ALL THREE IN ORDER TO PASS WITH THE THREE MEMBER STRUCTURE WE HAVE, JUST SO THAT YOU'RE AWARE OF THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          YEP. 
          SO IF THE, IT'D BE HELPFUL PERHAPS WITH THE COMMITTEE, UH, KEITH CAN ADD A LITTLE BIT MORE COLOR TO 1190 BEFORE WE TAKE, UH, A NEXT, UH, KIND OF PERSPECTIVE ON THAT. 
          AND I MAKE SURE WE ADDRESS CARLOS'S SPECIFIC CONCERN FOR THOSE THAT WERE AGAINST IT. 
          I KNOW. 
          HOW, HOW DOES, HOW DO WE RESOLVE THAT? JUST, JUST TO CLARIFY BEFORE WE GO BACK, BOB, ARE YOU TAKING BACK UP, UH, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 5.2 0.1? YES. 
          A PR 1190? YES. 
          BEFORE WE LEAVE THIS SECTION, I WANTED TO GO BACK TO THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          SO, UM, GOING BACK TO 1190, SOME OF THE, THE CONCERNS THERE WERE, UH, RELATED TO THE FACT THAT WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS ELIMINATE, UH, THE MAKE WHOLE PAYMENTS, UH, THESE SORT OF OUT MARKET PAYMENTS. 
          AND, AND THAT'S KIND OF GETS TO WOODY'S POINT IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TRYING AS MUCH AS WE CAN TO ELIMINATE THE NEED TO HAVE THESE OUTTA MARKET PAYMENTS. 
          BUT EVEN THEN YOU MIGHT END UP WITH A, A SMALL NUMBER OF TIMES WHERE, WHERE THAT BECOMES TRUE. 
          AND SO SOME OF THE FOLKS, SO ORIGINALLY, UM, THERE WAS A VERY NARROW BAND IN IN TERMS OF WHO, WHO COULD QUALIFY FOR THIS. 
          AND WHAT 1190 DOES IS IT, IT OPENS THE, THE BAND A LITTLE BIT, A LITTLE BIT WIDER. 
          AND THE CONCERN 
          [01:20:01]
THAT SOME OF THE FOLKS THAT, THAT WERE IN OUR POSITION KIND OF FELT THAT, WELL, WAIT A SECOND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE KIND OF SLIDING BACKWARDS A LITTLE BIT IN TERMS OF ALLOWING MORE OUT OF MARKET PAYMENTS. 
          AND, AND EVEN IN THEIR COMMENTS THEY SAID, WELL, GEEZ, WOULDN'T IT BE BETTER JUST TO ELIMINATE THIS COMPLETELY? UM, BUT, BUT I THINK OUR CON WHERE, WHERE WE LOOKED AT AT THAT, UM, I THINK THE NUMBERS ARE, ARE REALLY SMALL. 
          UH, AS WE THINK ABOUT 1230, THE, THE NUMBERS ARE PROBABLY GONNA GET A LITTLE SMALLER, BUT, UM, IF WHAT 11 8 90 DOES IS IT ALLOWS FOR THAT INCREASE IN ELIGIBILITY. 
          AND THERE WERE CONCERNS THAT INCREASING THE ELIGIBILITY WAS AN APPROPRIATE, AND THAT MAYBE JUST THE CHARGE IN GENERAL WAS NOT APPROPRIATE EITHER. 
          SO IT'S SORT OF OPENING UP THE WHOLE QUESTION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THESE CHARGES WERE WERE APPROPRIATE, UH, OR NOT. 
          AND, AND SORT OF OPPOSE THAT. 
          UM, I'LL, I'LL LOOK TO AUSTIN TO SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING ADDITIONAL, BUT, BUT THAT'S HOW I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS. 
          UM, IT WAS, IT WAS DEFINITELY, UH, CONCERNED MORE BROADLY ABOUT THE OUT OF OUT MARKET PAYMENTS, UM, AND THE FACT THAT WE'RE NOW INCREASING THE DEFINITION AS TO WHO WOULD, WHO WOULD APPLY FOR THOSE, UM, PARTICULAR REQUIREMENTS. 
          CAN WE QUANTIFY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IN ANY WAY IN TERMS OF NUMBER OF MEMBERS OR NUMBER OF MEGAWATTS IMPACTED, OR HOW DO WE TRANSFER THIS INTO SOME DATA AND FACTS? SO WE, WE DID HAVE THE, UH, THE ERCOT COMMENTS ON 1190 THAT DID COME OUT. 
          AND WHAT WE DID IS WE DID QUANTIFY, UM, THE NUMBER OF RESOURCES THAT HISTORICALLY WERE ELIGIBLE IN A NUMBER OF DAYS. 
          AND, UM, UH, AND SO WE'RE LOOKING AT A, A REALLY, WHERE IS THAT IN THE PACKET PLEASE? YEAH. 
          SO IT IS, THERE IS, UH, IN THE PACKET, IT, I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHERE IN THE PACKET, BUT THERE IS A, UM, WITH REGARDS TO 1190 ERCOT RESPONSE ON HIGH DISPATCH, LIMIT OVERRIDE PROVISION. 
          UH, AND THERE ARE A COUPLE TABLES THAT HIGHLIGHT EXACTLY THE QUESTIONS THAT I THINK YOU'RE ASKING. 
          CAN YOU SUMMARIZE THAT? OKAY. 
          SO YEAH, JUST THE SUMMARY IS IN TERMS OF THE, THE NUMBER OF, UH, INSTANCES VERSUS THE NUMBER OF TIMES WHAT WE, WE ARE LOOKING AT 1, 2, 3, 4, 12 DAYS, UH, OVER A PERIOD OF ABOUT 10 YEARS, UH, WHERE RESOURCES HAVE HAVE BEEN ELIGIBLE. 
          AND, UM, HISTORICALLY, UH, MOST OF THE, THERE WAS A FAIR AMOUNT DURING THE FEBRUARY 21 EVENT. 
          UH, AND IN THAT CASE, MOST OF THOSE RESOURCES THAT, UM, QUALIFIED RECEIVED, UH, RECEIVED THE MACO PAYMENTS FOR THAT. 
          UH, AND THEN IN LAST YEAR, THERE WERE A TOTAL OF FIVE DAYS. 
          UM, AND, UH, THERE WERE THREE RESOURCES THAT RECEIVED IT AND THERE WERE, UH, PROBABLY, UH, YEAH, I'D SEE THAT, YEAH. 
          OR YOU'RE SEEING THAT IT'S, THERE'S UP TO 37 RESOURCES ON ONE DAY THAT WERE ELIGIBLE OR THAT HAD THE CONDITION, BUT WERE NOT NECESSARILY ELIGIBLE FOR A REQUIREMENT. 
          UH, AND SO, UM, I THINK JUST, JUST BECAUSE, UM, YOU HAVE RESOURCES THAT NOW HAVE ADDITIONAL RESOURCES, YOU HAVE THE POTENTIAL, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE IT, IT EQUALS THE TOTAL EITHER. 
          SO IF IT WAS 37 RESOURCES, I DON'T THINK THIS, THIS NPPR ARE RESULTS NECESSARILY IN ALL OF THOSE RESOURCES NOW BEING ELIGIBLE, BUT A SUBSET OF THEM ARE NOW ELIGIBLE WHERE THEY WERE NOT ELIGIBLE BEFORE THE MAY I JUST SAY ONE THING. 
          WELL, UH, THIS IS KIM RAINWATER, JULIE, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ABOUT WHERE THE COMMENTS ARE IN THE PACKET, THEY'RE ON PAGE THREE 90 AND FOR THE PUBLIC, THEY'RE ON AGENDA ITEM 5.2 0.1 IN A ZIP FOLDER ON THE COMMITTEE MEETING PAGE. 
          YES. 
          THANKS, KIM. 
          I'M LOOKING AT THAT. 
          SO, CAN ERCOT TALK ABOUT WHAT'S THE DOWNSIDE IF WE DON'T APPROVE THIS? I MEAN, WHAT'S THE RISK IN TERMS OF THE SYSTEM? I MEAN, WHY DO WE NEED THIS NOW? AND YOU'RE SAYING IT'S NOT EVEN FOR THIS SUMMER, IT'S NEXT SUMMER. 
          SO WHY, SORRY ABOUT THAT. 
          UH, THIS, THIS IS A SITUATION WHERE WITH, WHEN YOU THINK OF OUTTA MARKET PAYMENTS, YOU WANT, YOU WANT PEOPLE TO FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS YOU GIVE THEM. 
          UM, AND TO THE EXTENT THAT ERCOT IS TAKING ACTIONS THAT CAN HARM A PARTICIPANT, UH, UH, AGAIN, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT SIGNIFICANT NUMBERS, BUT DURING THOSE INSTANCES, 
          [01:25:01]
WHEN THAT'S OCCURRING, UM, YOU WANT, YOU WANT RESOURCES TO FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS. 
          YOU WANT TO ENSURE THAT THOSE RESOURCES ARE, UH, NOT HARMED BY THE ACTIONS THAT ARE CAUGHT, UH, ARE TAKING. 
          THIS IS JUST, UH, A FURTHER WAY OF, OF ENSURING THAT, THAT, THAT IS, UM, OCCURRING. 
          NOW, ON THE FLIP SIDE, WE ARE INCREASING THE QUALIFICATION OF THOSE RESOURCES VERSUS HISTORICALLY. 
          UM, UM, AND SO IT'S, IT'S, IT'S ONE OF THOSE WHERE, UM, THE, IN THE PAST THESE RESOURCES DID NOT QUALIFY AND THERE MAY HAVE BEEN SOME ACO PAYMENTS THAT WERE NOT GIVEN. 
          UM, BUT I THINK IN THIS CASE, IT, UM, THE INCREASED QUALIFICATION, THE INCREASED QUALIFICATIONS ALLOW THOSE RESOURCES, UH, TO RECEIVE THOSE MONIES. 
          NOW, IN GENERAL, WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT, UM, UH, THE, THE DAYS THAT WE'RE SEEING, WE'RE NOT SEEING EXTRAORDINARILY HIGH VAL VOLUMES OF DOLLARS. 
          BUT WHEN YOU GO BACK TO, UH, THE, THE FEBRUARY 21 INSTANCES, THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF VALUE. 
          SO GENERALLY WE SEE IT'S NOT A LOT OF MONEY, BUT THERE ARE INSTANCES AND DAYS WHERE IT COULD BE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY. 
          I, I THINK TO MOVE FORWARD ON THIS ITEM, I WOULD RECOMMEND WE TABLE IT AND BRING IT BACK, UH, IN OCTOBER. 
          SOUNDS LIKE IF WE DO IT IN OCTOBER, WE'RE STILL, WE WEREN'T GOING TO IMPLEMENT IT THIS SUMMER, RIGHT? I MEAN, THIS SUMMER'S WELL UNDERWAY. 
          SO CARLOS AND JULIE, I MEAN, I WOULD MOVE THAT WE RECOMMEND A MOTION TO TABLE THIS, UH, AND COME BACK IN OCTOBER WITH A MORE THOROUGH UNDERSTANDING OF THIS FOR THE COMMITTEE. 
          SEE SECOND. 
          SO MOVED. 
          YEAH. 
          CARLOS MOVES. 
          JULIE, YOU SECOND? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. 
          AYE. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WE'LL GO FORWARD FROM THERE. 
          UM, SO NEXT. 
          THANKS, CAITLIN. 
          TROUBLEMAKER. 
          [6.
Recommendation regarding Oncor Temple Area Regional Planning Group (RPG) Project]
NEXT UP FOR VOTE IS AGENDA ITEM SIX, RECOMMENDATION REGARDING THE ENCORE TEMPLE AREA REGIONAL PLANNING GROUP PROJECT. 
          CHRISTIE HOBBES WILL PRESENT THE RPG PROJECT AND THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. 
          CHRISTIE. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE. 
          WE HAVE ANOTHER REGIONAL PLANNING GROUP TRANSMISSION PROJECT, UH, THAT ARCOT STAFF IS ENDORSING AND SEEKING YOUR ENDORSEMENT TO THE BOARD SO THE PROJECT CAN CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD. 
          SO JUST A REMINDER, UM, PROJECTS THAT ARE OVER A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS MUST COME THROUGH THIS PROCESS FOR ENDORSEMENT BY THE BOARD. 
          AND TO YOUR POINT, CHAIRMAN GLEE. 
          AND WE ARE TAKING A LOOK, UM, AND DRAFTING A REVISION REQUEST TO LOOK AT THAT REQUIREMENT FOR GOING FORWARD. 
          TO SUMMARIZE, THE ENCORE TEMPLE AREA PROJECT WAS ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED BY ENCORE EARLIER THIS YEAR. 
          THE PROJECT WAS ORIGINALLY INTENDED TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE RELIABILITY NEEDS IN THE TEMPLE AREA. 
          ONCE WE PERFORMED OUR INDEPENDENT REVIEW, WE DID, UM, IDENTIFY ADDITIONAL NEEDS IN THAT REGION THAT WERE NEEDED ON THE WESTERN PART OF THE COUNTY THAT WEREN'T PART OF THE ORIGINAL SUBMISSION. 
          IT IS A PART OF OUR RECOMMENDED ENDORSED PROJECT, BUT WE'RE LOOKING TO DO, UH, IS TO ADDRESS THE RELIABILITY NEEDS OF THERMAL OVERLOADS ON 18 MILES OF TRANSMISSION LINES TO TRANSFORMERS, AS WELL AS 31 VOLTAGE VIOLATIONS IN THE BELL COUNTY AREA. 
          THIS PROJECT WAS TAKEN TO THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AT THE END OF JULY, AND THEY ALSO UNANIMOUSLY ENDORSED THE OPTION FIVE A, WHICH IS BEFORE YOU TODAY. 
          SPECIFICALLY, THE CHANGES THAT ARE RECOMMENDED FOR THIS PROJECT LOOK AT TWO OF THE CRITERIA. 
          ONE IS A LOSS OF A TRANSFORMER FOLLOWED BY A SINGLE TRANSMISSION ELEMENT, AND THE OTHER IS A CONTINGENCY LOSS OF A SINGLE TRANSFORMER FOLLOWED BY A SINGLE TRANSMISSION ELEMENT OR A COMMON TOWER OUTAGE. 
          SO TODAY, WHAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND TO YOU, UH, FOR RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD, WE WOULD REQUEST THAT YOU ENDORSE THE NEED FOR THIS ENCORE TEMPLE AREA PROJECT OPTION FIVE EIGHT BASED ON BOTH THE NERC AND ERCOT PLANNING CRITERIA. 
          YES, SIR. 
          UM, YOU CITE THE, THE COST OF FIVE EIGHT. 
          DO YOU HAVE THE COST OF THE OTHER OPTIONS, THE THREE THAT YOU HAD, THE FINALISTS? YES. 
          I SEVEN. 
          I DON'T THINK I HAVE IT IN THE PRESENTATION, BUT IT WAS IN THE, THE PDF DOCUMENT, UM, THAT CAME WITH IT. 
          LEMME SEE IF I CAN GET TO THAT QUICKLY 
          [01:30:05]
OR DO OF MAGNITUDE. 
          ARE THEY'RE ALL VERY CLOSE. 
          'CAUSE THEY, THEY LOOK VERY SIMILAR. 
          IS THAT RIGHT? AND THIS WAS THE LEASE COST OPTION, AND IT HAD SEVERAL REASONS FOR US CHOOSING IT. 
          UM, AND NOT ONLY HIT THE PROJECT NEEDS AND THE CRITERIUM, IT IMPROVED LONG TERM, UH, LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY COMPARED TO THE OTHER OPTIONS. 
          UM, AS WELL, IT WAS THE LEAST COST SOLUTION AND IT ALSO REQUIRED THE LEAST AMOUNT OF RIGHT OF AWAYS, NEW RIGHT OF AWAYS NEEDED TO GO THROUGH THE CCN PROCESS. 
          UM, BUT IF YOU WANT THOSE NUMBERS, I COULD GET THEM FOR YOU. 
          THAT'S OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR CHRISTIE? NO, NO. 
          THANK YOU CHRISTIE. 
          UM, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECOMMEND THE BOARD ENDORSE THE NEED FOR THE TIER ONE ENCORE TEMPORARY RPG PROJECT, OPTION FIVE A, WHICH ERCOT STAFF IS INDEPENDENTLY REVIEWED, AND WHICH T HAS VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO ENDORSE BASED ON NERC AND ERCOT RELIABILITY PLANNING CRITERIA. 
          YEP. 
          CARLOS MOVES. 
          JULIE, DO YOU SECOND? SECOND. 
          ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED OR ABSTENTIONS? HEARING NONE WILL CONSIDER THAT APPROVED. 
          THANK YOU, CHRISTINE. 
          ALRIGHT, NEXT UP IS THE 
          [7.
Independent Market Monitor (IMM) Report]
WELCOME BACK, UH, TO THE IMM, UH, DIRECTOR JEFF MCDONALD, WHO WILL PRESENT AGENDA ITEM SEVEN, THE INDEPENDENT MARKET MONITOR REPORT. 
          HELLO AGAIN. 
          UH, I'LL GIVE YOU A BRIEF, UH, UPDATE ON MARKET ACTIVITY. 
          UH, THE REPORT I I SUBMITTED COVERS, UH, JUNE AND JULY OF THIS YEAR. 
          AND, UH, YOU KNOW, ASIDE FROM, UH, YOU KNOW, ELECTRICAL ISSUES, UH, RESULTING FROM THE HURRICANE IN JULY, UH, THE, THE REMAINDER OF THE TIME WAS FAIRLY UNINTERESTING, I WOULD SAY FROM, FROM A ERCOT WHOLESALE MARKET STANDARD. 
          SO, UH, WE HAD A VERY MILD JULY, AND THAT'LL BE EVIDENT IN, UH, SOME OF THE SLIDES. 
          SO JUST LOOKING AT PRICE, WHOLESALE ENERGY PRICE WAS FAIRLY LOW FOR JUNE AND JULY. 
          IF WE LOOK BACK OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS, 2022 AND 2023, UH, YOU CAN SEE THAT JUNE AND JULY THIS YEAR WERE, UH, PRODUCED MUCH LOWER PRICES. 
          UH, PART OF THAT IS FROM MILD TEMPERATURES. 
          UH, AND ANOTHER PART OF THAT RESULTS FROM LOWER, UH, NATURAL GAS PRICES. 
          SO NATURAL GAS PRICES WERE DOWN ABOUT 14% COMPARED TO 2023. 
          UM, AND WE DID SEE A MUCH MORE SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION IN WHOLESALE ENERGY PRICE IN 2023. 
          FOR THESE TWO MONTHS, THAT WAS ABOUT 50%, A LITTLE OVER 50% REDUCTION. 
          SO IN, IN A PRIOR DISCUSSION I MENTIONED LAST SUMMER, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE SAW WAS HIGHER, UH, WHOLESALE ELECTRICITY PRICES RESULTING FROM SOME, UH, RESERVE DEPLOYMENT ISSUES THAT HAVE SINCE BEEN, UH, MODIFIED. 
          SO, SO NORMALLY WE WOULD SEE NOT A ONE-TO-ONE CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN NATURAL GAS PRICE AND WHOLESALE ELECTRICITY PRICE, BUT SOMETHING MUCH CLOSER. 
          LAST SUMMER, WE SAW, UH, ELECTRICITY PRICE NOT FOLLOW GAS PRICE CLOSELY AT ALL. 
          UH, THIS SUMMER HAS BEEN THE SAME, BUT, BUT WHEN WE COMPARE TO LAST YEAR, WE HAD, UH, SOME, YOU KNOW, SOMEWHAT ANOMALOUS, UH, EFFECTS IN WHOLESALE PRICES FOR ELECTRICITY THAT WEREN'T RESIDENT THIS YEAR. 
          SO YOU HAVE A COUPLE OF MOVING PARTS THAT, THAT, UM, COMPRISE, UH, THE DIFFERENCE THAT WE SEE. 
          BUT AS I SAID, NATURAL GAS PRICE WAS DOWN ABOUT 14%, AND WHOLESALE ELECTRICITY PRICES WERE DOWN MUCH MORE THAN THAT. 
          53% ARE, YOU KNOW, AND THAT DELTA REFLECTING, YOU KNOW, LARGELY A DIFFERENCE IN USE OF ECRS OR, OR THE NEED TO USE ECRS THIS SUMMER BECAUSE, BECAUSE THE, UM, THE TEMPERATURES IN IN JULY WERE CONSIDERABLY MORE MILD THAN IN PRIOR YEARS AND CERTAINLY COMPARED TO LAST YEAR. 
          OH, I DO NOTE IN HERE, UH, WE HAVE VERY LITTLE CONGESTION BETWEEN ZONES. 
          YOU KNOW, WE, WE LOOK AT THE AVERAGE MONTHLY AVERAGE PRICE BETWEEN ZONES TO GAUGE WHETHER OR NOT CONGESTION IS BECOMING MORE OF AN ISSUE BETWEEN ZONES AND, AND THE MONTHLY AVERAGE PRICES ACROSS ZONES WE'RE, WE'RE VERY COMPARABLE, UH, INDICATING VERY LOW CONGESTION BETWEEN ZONES. 
          SO THIS CHART SHOWS YOU, UH, LOADS IN, IN, YOU KNOW, I'VE HIGHLIGHTED JULY HERE IN PARTICULAR. 
          SO THE BAR COLORS ARE 20 22, 20 23 IS BLUE, AND 2024 IS ORANGE. 
          AND YOU CAN SEE, UH, THAT IN 2024 IN JULY, WE, WE HAD MUCH LOWER, UH, LOAD THAN IN THE PRIOR, I MEAN, MUCH LOWER FROM A LOAD PERSPECTIVE THAN IN THE PRIOR 
          [01:35:01]
TWO YEARS, JULY. 
          UM, AND, AND A LARGE PART OF THAT WAS JUST DUE TO MUCH MORE MILD TEMPERATURES. 
          SO, AND, AND THIS IS MY FIRST, UH, TEXAS SUMMER AND, UH, GOING THROUGH JULY, UH, WAS A BREEZE COMPARED TO WHAT PEOPLE TOLD ME TO EXPECT. 
          AND, AND HERE WE ARE IN A HUNDRED DEGREES. 
          SO, SO I THINK WHEN I COME BACK TO REPORT IN TWO MORE MONTHS, UH, I THINK WE'LL HAVE A MORE INTERESTING MARKET STORY, UM, INCLUDING AUGUST AS FAR AS THE ANCILLARY SERVICE COSTS GO, UH, YOU KNOW, ANCILLARY SERVICE COSTS OFTEN MOVE WITH ELECTRICITY PRICES BECAUSE THEY REFLECT THE OPPORTUNITY COST OF NOT PROVIDING ELECTRICITY. 
          SO WE DO SEE LOWER ANCILLARY SERVICE COSTS AND IN JULY AND JUNE, UH, OF THIS YEAR COMPARED TO LAST YEAR. 
          AND, AND A LARGE PART OF THAT IS JUST THE, THE LOWER ENERGY, UH, COST RESULTING IN A LOWER OPPORTUNITY COST TO PROVIDE RESERVES, UH, RESOURCE MIX. 
          YOU KNOW, I, I INCLUDED THIS BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE VERY INTERESTED IN HOW, UH, THE RESOURCE MIX IN TEXAS AND IN OTHER REGIONS IN THE COUNTRY ARE CHANGING OVER TIME. 
          UM, AND I JUST THOUGHT IT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO SEE, UH, JUNE, JULY OF THIS YEAR COMPARED TO THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS. 
          AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT MORE, UM, GENERATION FROM WIND. 
          UH, THAT WOULD BE THE RED BAR AT THE TOP, THE RED BAR SEGMENT, EXCUSE ME. 
          UM, SO THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT MORE OUTPUT FROM WIND, BUT OTHERWISE THE, THE PRODUCTION MIX, UH, DIDN'T CHANGE MUCH YEAR OVER YEAR OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS. 
          THOSE CHANGES, OF COURSE, ARE OBVIOUSLY MUCH MORE EVIDENT WHEN YOU LOOK OVER A LONGER PERIOD, LIKE FIVE YEARS OR 10 YEARS. 
          SO, SO, WE'LL, I'M SURE WE'LL BE SEEING THIS CHART, YOU KNOW, WE WILL, EXCUSE ME, WE'LL, UH, WE'LL EXPAND IT TO COVER MORE YEARS SO THAT, SO THAT, UH, THOSE CHANGES ARE A LITTLE MORE EVIDENT LOOKING AT CONGESTION COSTS. 
          AND I INCLUDED THESE, THESE BLUE BRACKETS SO THAT YOU CAN MORE EASILY SPOT JUNE AND JULY FROM THE PRIOR YEARS. 
          UM, AND, AND CONGESTION COSTS ALSO FOLLOW ENERGY PRICE, UH, PRETTY CLOSELY IN TERMS, YOU KNOW, IF, IF YOU HAVE THE SAME CONGESTION YEAR TO YEAR, BUT DIFFERENT ENERGY PRICES, YOU'LL, YOU'LL SEE THE CONGESTION COSTS, UH, FOLLOW ENERGY PRICE. 
          UM, AND WE SAW LOWER ENERGY PRICES THIS LAST JUNE AND JULY, COMPARED TO THE TWO PRIOR YEARS. 
          IT WAS ACTUALLY SOMEWHAT CLOSE TO 2023, BUT SIGNIFICANTLY BELOW WHAT WE SAW IN 2022. 
          UH, SOME OF THAT IS DUE TO LOWER CONGESTION, AND AGAIN, SOME OF IT IS JUST DUE TO LOWER ENERGY COSTS. 
          AND THAT, UH, THAT CONCLUDES THE, THE COUPLE OF HIGHLIGHT SLIDES THAT I WANTED TO SHARE WITH YOU. 
          I'D BE, I'D BE HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU LIKE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          JEFF. 
          ANY QUESTIONS FOR JEFF? NO. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          SAY WITH THAT. 
          NOW, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE TAKE A 10 MINUTE BREAK, SO WE'LL RECONVENE AT TWO 20. 
          SO THIS HERE, MEETING'S HEREBY RESISTANCE ALL THAT TIME. 
          ALL RIGHT, WELL, THIS IS BOB FLEX AND RR AND M COMMITTEE CHAIR. 
          THE R AND M COMMITTEE MEETING IS HEREBY RECONVENED. 
          WE'LL NOW TAKE UP AGENDA ITEM EIGHT COMMITTEE BRIEFS AND CHRISTIE HOBBS PRESENTATION OF THE SYSTEM PLANNING AND WEATHERIZATION UPDATE. 
          IT'S AGENDA ITEM 8.1. 
          [8.1
System Planning and Weatherization Update]
SO WE'RE READY FOR YOU, CHRISTIE, AS SOON AS WE FIND CHRISTIE. 
          IT IS TWO 20 . 
          ALL RIGHT, MY APOLOGIES. 
          I WAS GETTING LAST MINUTE LATE BREAKING INFORMATION TO INCLUDE HERE. 
          UM, JUST WANTED TO CIRCLE BACK, UH, TO CARLOS'S QUESTION EARLIER ABOUT THE COSTS FOR THE OTHER OPTIONS ON THE, UH, TRANSMISSION PROJECT. 
          SO WE HAD, UM, SEVERAL DIFFERENT OPTIONS THAT WE LOOKED AT, AND THEN WE SHORTLISTED THEM TO THREE DIFFERENT OPTIONS. 
          THERE WAS ONE THAT WAS SLIGHTLY LOWER, BUT WE COULD NOT CONSIDER IT BECAUSE IT DID NOT HELP US TO MEET THE NERC AND THE ERCOT PLANNING CRITERIA. 
          SO WE HAD TO TAKE THAT ONE OUT. 
          THAT LEFT US WITH TWO OPTIONS, WHICH WAS THE ONE THAT YOU RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL, WHICH WAS AT 272 MILLION, AND THEN ONE THAT WAS AT 329 MILLION. 
          BUT THAT MIDDLE ONE THAT YOU ENDORSED, IT CHECKED ALL THE BOXES FOR NOT ONLY MEETING THE CRITERIA, GETTING MORE RIDE OR LESS RIDE OF WAY NEEDED, AS WELL AS MORE, UH, LONG-TERM LOAD CARRYING CAPABILITY. 
          [01:40:01]
OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT, SO NOW WE'LL SWITCH GEARS AND WANNA GIVE YOU SOME UPDATES ON THE VARIOUS AREAS IN MY ORGANIZATION AND SOME OF THE WORK THAT THEY'VE BEEN DOING SINCE WE LAST MET. 
          WE ARE, WELL, UH, OVER HALFWAY ON OUR SUMMER INSPECTION PROGRAM. 
          WE HAD SET OUT A GOAL AT THE BEGINNING OF THE SUMMER TO HIT 300 GENERATION RESOURCES AS WELL AS 300 TRANSMISSION SERVICE PROVIDER FACILITIES. 
          UM, AT THIS POINT, UH, WHERE WE ARE, MID-AUGUST, WE'VE HIT, UH, 288 RESOURCES IN OVER 247 TRANSMISSION FACILITIES, UM, FOR 535 TOTAL. 
          WE'VE STILL GOT THE REST OF THIS MONTH AS WELL AS SEPTEMBER. 
          WITH ALL OF THOSE INSPECTIONS THAT HAVE GONE ON, WE ARE WELL PAST WHAT WAS REQUIRED IN THE PUC RULE, WHICH IS THEN WE NEEDED TO HIT ALL OF THE RESOURCES AND A PERCENTAGE OF THE TRANSMISSION ELEMENTS WITHIN A THREE YEAR PERIOD. 
          UH, SO THE TEAM HAS REALLY DONE WELL, ESPECIALLY SINCE WE'VE ADDED A LOT OF NEW RESOURCES SINCE THAT INITIAL RULE WENT IN. 
          AND SO THAT'S BEEN A PART OF OUR PLANNING IS TO MAKE SURE WE HIT THOSE NEW RESOURCES AS THEY'RE ADDED TO THE SYSTEM. 
          WANTED TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON THE PERMIAN BASIN RELIABILITY PLAN THAT WE FILED WITH THE COMMISSION AT THE END OF JULY. 
          AS A REMINDER, UH, LATE LAST YEAR, THE COMMISSION DIRECTED US TO, UH, FILE A PLAN FOR THE PERMIAN BASIN REGION. 
          BY THE END OF JULY, WE WORKED WITH THE TSPS IN STUDYING THE LOAD FORECAST. 
          WHAT YOU'LL SEE ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE IS KIND OF A DEPICTION OF WHAT WE WORKED WITH FROM S AND P GLOBAL LOAD FORECAST FOR THE OIL AND GAS LOAD IN THE AREA. 
          AND I KNOW IT'S KIND OF HARD TO SEE UP ON THE CHART, BUT WHAT I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT AS WE THINK ABOUT THE PLAN AND HOW IT EVOLVED, YOU SEE THAT THE DOTS THAT ARE IN FARTHER WEST TEXAS, THAT'S WHERE WE'RE SEEING A LOT OF THE, UH, LOAD GROWTH FROM THE OIL AND GAS COMMUNITY THAT'S A PART OF OUR STATE THAT'S TRADITIONALLY NOT HAD A LOT OF TRANSMISSION BUILD OUT. 
          SO AS WE GET INTO THE PLAN AND YOU SEE THAT, UH, THE VOLUME OF TRANSMISSION NEEDS, THAT'S WHAT'S DRIVING A LOT OF IT'S BECAUSE WE'RE SEEING THAT DEVELOPMENT FURTHER WEST. 
          WE FILED THAT PLAN, UH, WITH THE COMMISSION ON JULY 25TH. 
          IT INCLUDED A SUBSET OF PROJECTS, UM, THAT WE'VE KIND OF DUBBED THE NO REGRETS PROJECTS. 
          SO THERE'S LOCAL TRANSMISSION NEEDS IN THE AREA, AGAIN, TO BUILD UP THAT REGION, TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THEM WITH A SERVICE THAT THEY NEED. 
          THAT COST OF THOSE PROJECTS IS FOUR POINT OR $4.02 BILLION. 
          UM, I'M NOT GONNA GO THROUGH THE LIST OF SUMMARY HERE OF THE TRANSMISSION PROJECTS, BUT YOU CAN SEE THERE ARE QUITE A NUMBER OF MILES OF NEW DOUBLE CIRCUIT TRANSMISSION LINES, UPGRADES TO EXISTING LINES. 
          UM, THE ADDITIONS OF SUBSTATIONS, TRANSFORMERS, UH, AS WELL AS A VARIETY OF OTHER UPGRADES FOR REACTIVE POWER DEVICES. 
          THAT IS JUST FOR THE LOCAL NEEDS. 
          HISTORICALLY, THERE'S ALSO NOT BEEN A LOT OF CONVENTIONAL GENERATION THAT'S LOCATED IN THE PERMIAN REGION, OKAY? WHICH MEANS TO GET POWER GENERATION TO SERVE THE COMMUNITY, YOU ALSO HAVE TO HAVE IMPORT PASS TO MOVE POWER ACROSS THE STATE. 
          SO WE LOOKED AT DIFFERING OPTIONS ON HOW TO BEST SERVE THOSE NEEDS FOR THAT PROJECT DEMAND. 
          WE LOOKED AT THE TRADITIONAL 3 45 IMPORT PATH. 
          WE ALSO LOOKED AT GOING TO A HIGHER VOLTAGE, AND WE'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT AND THE WHY, UM, WHEN I GET TO ONE OF MY FUTURE SLIDES. 
          BUT I THINK WHAT YOU CAN SEE, JUST FROM THE DEPICTION HERE, I KNOW THERE WAS A LOT OF UNCERTAINTY ABOUT, WELL, WHAT WILL IT MEAN TO GO TO EHB? AND WHAT WE'LL BE SEEING IS BECAUSE OF THE LOAD CARRYING CAPABILITY OF THOSE HIGHER VOLTAGE LINES, IT MEANS WE NEED LESS MILES. 
          IT MEANS LESS RIGHT OF WAY IMPACT TO THE CONSUMERS OF TEXAS, AND THE COSTS AREN'T THAT MUCH MORE FOR GOING TO A HIGHER VOLTAGE. 
          SO THE TOTAL COST, WHICH INCLUDES THOSE COMMON LOCAL UPGRADES, IF WE STAYED WITH A 3 45 OPTION, THE COST OF THAT PLAN IS JUST UNDER $13 BILLION, 500. 
          IT GOES UP TO OVER 15. 
          AND A 7 65 OPTION WOULD BE, UH, JUST UNDER 14 BILLION. 
          SO WHERE WE'RE AT, UH, WE'LL BE WORKING WITH COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSION STAFF, AS WELL AS STAKEHOLDERS. 
          THE COMMISSION'S HOLDING A WORKSHOP LATER THIS WEEK, UM, TO TAKE FINAL COMMENTS, UM, AND REVIEW WITH THE STAKEHOLDER COMMUNITY. 
          THEN IT'LL BE BEFORE THE COMMISSION TO 
          [01:45:01]
CONSIDER WHICH OPTIONS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH, UH, FOR PROVIDING A PERMIAN BASIN RELIABILITY PLAN. 
          ONCE THE COMMISSION HAS MADE THEIR DECISIONS, THEN THE NEXT STEPS WOULD BE THE IMPACTED TRANSMISSION SERVICE PROVIDERS STARTING THEIR PROCESS TO WORK THROUGH THE APPROPRIATE CCNS THAT THEY'LL NEED TO GET THE RIGHT OF WAYS FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE PERMIAN BASIN AREA. 
          BUT BEFORE I MOVE ON, I JUST WANT TO GIVE A SPECIAL THANKS, UM, TO OUR TRANSMISSION PLANNING TEAM AT ERCOT. 
          UM, THAT WAS DEDICATED, PUT IN A LONG EXTRA HOURS TO MOVE ON. 
          A VERY QUICK TIMELINE. 
          AS YOU MAY RECALL. 
          LIKE I SAID, THE COMMISSION DIRECTED US TO DO THIS. 
          AT THE END OF DECEMBER, WE STARTED WORKING WITH THE TRANSMISSION SERVICE PROVIDERS IMMEDIATELY, BUT IT WASN'T UNTIL THE FEBRUARY TIMEFRAME WHEN WE HAD THE LOADS AND THE LOAD FORECAST AND THE PLACEMENTS OF THOSE LOADS, SO WE COULD START THE TRANSMISSION PLANNING PROCESS. 
          AND SO WE WERE DOWN TO ONLY A COUPLE MONTHS TO WORK ON PUTTING THE RELIABILITY PLAN TOGETHER. 
          SO I WANT TO THANK THEM FOR THEIR EXTRAORDINARY WORK TO GET THAT OUT IN A SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME. 
          ALSO, WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE WORK THAT THE TEAM HAS ALSO ENGAGED IN LOOKING AT EHB CONSIDERATIONS. 
          AS THE GRID HAS CONTINUED EVOLVE, WE'VE CONTINUED TO SEE THE GENERATION MIX CHANGE. 
          HISTORICALLY, YOU HAD, UM, MAYBE NATURAL GAS COAL DISPATCHABLE TYPE UNITS, AND THE POWER BASICALLY FLOW FLOWED FROM ONE AREA TO ANOTHER. 
          NOW, AS YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT WE EXPERIENCE EVERY EVENING WHEN THE SOLAR GOES DOWN, SOLAR'S PREDOMINANTLY IN THE WEST, THEN WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT A CHANGING POWER FLOW AS WE CONTINUE TO ADD LARGE LOADS TO THE SYSTEM. 
          UH, AS WE'RE WORKING THROUGH OUR 2024 ANNUAL REGIONAL TRANSMISSION PLAN, WE NOT ONLY SEE THE SIGNIFICANT LOAD GROWTH IN THE PERMIAN AREA, BUT WE SEE THAT LOAD GROWTH IN THE DALLAS AREA, THE VALLEY, OR EXCUSE ME, THE THE CORPUS AREA, AS WELL AS ACROSS THE STATE. 
          AND SO HOW DO WE BEST MOVE POWER FROM WHERE THOSE NEW LOADS ARE LOCATING FROM WHERE GENERATION IS IN OUR PLAN, WE ARE LOOKING AT DIFFERENT OPTIONS AS WELL AS THE HISTORICAL 3 45 OPTIONS AS WELL AS 7 65. 
          OUR GOAL IS TO HAVE OUR INITIAL BACKBONE PLAN. 
          SO WHAT WOULD THAT, UH, HIGHER VOLTAGE NETWORK LOOK LIKE, OR WHAT WOULD THE, THE FOOTPRINT FOR 3 45 LOOK LIKE BY EARLY SEPTEMBER? THIS WILL START TO GIVE STAKEHOLDERS A VIEW AS WELL AS OUR REGULATORS. 
          WHAT TYPE OF MILEAGE COMPARISONS WILL WE SEE? I CAN TELL YOU FROM THE LARGE LOAD GROWTH THAT YOU'VE HEARD US REPORT ABOUT, FROM GOING UP TO 150 GIGAWATTS OF LOAD, THAT'S GONNA REQUIRE SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENT IN TRANSMISSION TO BE ABLE TO MEET THOSE NEEDS OF THE NEW LOADS THAT ARE COMING TO THE STATE. 
          WE WILL HAVE OUR FINAL REGIONAL TRANSMISSION PLAN COM COMPLETED BY THE END OF THE YEAR, WHICH WILL GIVE US THAT VIEW, UH, OF HOW TO MOVE FORWARD TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THE CONSUMERS OF TEXAS. 
          WANTED TO, OH, COMMISSIONER KOBOS, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YEAH, CHRISTY, BEFORE YOU MOVE ON, I I JUST WANTED TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE EHV WORK THAT ERCOT IS DOING AND GET SOME MORE FEEDBACK FROM YOU AND THEN MAYBE DOVETAIL THAT BACK INTO THE PERMIAN. 
          SO THE EHV WORK THAT Y'ALL ARE DOING IS ESSENTIALLY CULMINATING INTO A STUDY THAT WILL BE COMPLETED BY THE END OF THE YEAR. 
          IS THAT STILL ON TRACK? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, DOES ERCOT PLAN TO, UM, TAKE DRAFTS OF THAT STUDY TO RPG FOR TECHNICAL FEEDBACK BEFORE THE COMPLETION OF THE STUDY IN DECEMBER? ABSOLUTELY. 
          SO WE'LL FOLLOW OUR NORMAL PROCESS, JUST LIKE WE HAVE WITH HISTORICAL RTPS IS, SO, YOU KNOW, WHEN I SAY WE PUT THAT INITIAL BACKBONE OUT THERE, THEN WE START THE SERIES. 
          AND GIVEN THE MAGNITUDE OF THESE, WE MAY HAVE TO HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL WORKSHOPS AS WELL OUTSIDE OF JUST THE REGULAR MONTHLY RPG MEETINGS SO THAT WE CAN GET THE FEEDBACK FROM THE STAKEHOLDERS ON THE FEASIBILITY OF THESE PLANS. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, MAYBE WHAT WE'VE SEEN HISTORICALLY, WE'VE PUT AN ENDPOINT, YOU KNOW, IN POINT A AND IT'S RECOMMENDED, YOU KNOW, THAT'S NOT GONNA BE A GOOD OPTION. 
          YOU SHOULD PROBABLY PUT IT AT POINT B INSTEAD. 
          SO WE'LL GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS, JUST LIKE WE ALWAYS DO. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL, YEAH, I, AND I APPRECIATE THAT BECAUSE FROM MY PERSPECTIVE AT LEAST, UM, I THINK THAT WE NEED TO GET A LOT OF STAKEHOLDER TECHNICAL FEEDBACK ON, ON THE STUDY BECAUSE THIS IS A NEW CONCEPT. 
          WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, UM, THE TRANSMISSION DEVELOPERS AND AND OTHERS IN THE RPG PROCESS HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO VET THE STUDY AND, AND HAVING WORKSHOPS AND GETTING AS MUCH TECHNICAL FEEDBACK AS POSSIBLE BEFORE YOU COMPLETE THE STUDY AND, UH, FILE AT THE PUC, I THINK WOULD BE, UM, A, A GRIT STEP OR, YOU KNOW, THE PROCESS SHOULD FLOW THAT WAY. 
          THAT WAY ONCE WE GET IT, IT HAS ALL THE TECHNICAL 
          [01:50:01]
FEEDBACK THAT Y'ALL TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION IN ADDITION TO Y'ALL'S WORK. 
          UM, AND, AND CAN GO THROUGH THE STUDY AND, AND TAKE STEPS WE NEED TO DO TO PROCESS THAT INFORMATION ON OUR END, UM, AS IT DOVETAILS BACK TO THE PERMIAN. 
          AND THEN JUST IN GENERAL, I THINK THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE COST ESTIMATES Y'ALL HAVE PROVIDED, OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, UM, IT'S, YOU KIND OF HAVE TO EXTRAPOLATE FROM OTHER MARKETS. 
          I THINK MISO'S COST ESTIMATES ARE THE ONES Y'ALL RELY ON. 
          UM, AND IT'S GONNA BE REALLY IMPORTANT TO, TO TRY TO GET A GRANULAR VIEW OF, OF THOSE COSTS. 
          I THINK, UM, AS THE WORLD EXISTS TODAY WITH, UM, ANY KIND OF SUPPLY CHAIN CONSTRAINTS AND COSTS AND, AND ALL OF THAT INVOLVED, I THINK MISO, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY, THEY PUT OUT THOSE COST ESTIMATES OF THEY HAVE 1 7 65 KV TRANSMISSION LINE ON THEIR SYSTEM. 
          AND SO IT'S SORT OF A, YOU KNOW, AN ONGOING REVIEW FOR THEM AND BEING AS DILIGENT AS WE CAN ON, ON THOSE, THE COST SIDE OF IT, AS WELL AS THE RELIABILITY BENEFITS AS WELL, UM, UH, I THINK IT'S GONNA BE REALLY IMPORTANT TO DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE TO UNDERSTAND BOTH RELIABILITY AND COST BENEFITS OF THE HIGHER VOLTAGE LINES AS WE LOOK TO, TO POTENTIALLY LAYER THAT INTO THE TEXAS MARKET. 
          ABSOLUTELY. 
          YOU MAY HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE SHORT TERM COST FOR THE LONG TERM BENEFITS INVESTMENTS FOR ALL THE CONSUMERS, FOR THE GROWING NEEDS ON THE SYSTEM. 
          AND HOW DO WE BEST ADDRESS THOSE? UM, I, YOU MENTIONED SUPPLY CHAIN. 
          SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE BEEN DOING IS TRYING TO GET FEEDBACK FROM VENDORS AND WHAT WE HEAR FROM SOME OF THE STAKEHOLDERS IS CONCERNED PRO ABOUT THE SUPPLY CHAIN. 
          UM, I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE RECOGNIZE THEIR SUPPLY CHAIN RISK NO MATTER WHAT VOLTAGE THAT WE CHOOSE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH AS A REGION BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT, UM, AND NEEDS THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE ON A 3 45, IF WE JUST STAY WITH THAT FOR THE ENTIRE SYSTEM, THE AMOUNT OF LINES THEY'RE GONNA BE NEEDED, WHAT SOME OF THE VENDORS HAVE INDICATED TO US IS THEY'RE LOOKING FOR KIND OF THE HEAD NOD OF, YES, WE'RE GONNA BE MOVING FORWARD ON A HIGHER VOLTAGE, AND THEN THEY'LL START RAMPING UP THEIR SUPPLY CHAINS TO MEET THAT DEMAND. 
          MM-HMM, . 
          UM, SO YEAH, AND ULTIMATELY SORT OF FOLDING THAT BACK INTO THE EFFORT THAT, UM, WE'RE EMBARKING IN IN THE PERMIAN, RIGHT, AND THE NEED TO SERVE THAT LOAD OUT THERE AS WE'RE TRYING TO DO, AND, AND HOW THAT ALL SORT OF PARA, YOU KNOW, KIND OF COINCIDES AND, AND OVERLAPS WITH EACH OTHER IN TERMS OF THOSE FACTORS. 
          LIKE, YOU KNOW, HAVING IMPORT PATHS AT EHV, ARE THEY, YOU KNOW, I KNOW, OR YOU GUYS FILED A VARIETY OF OPTIONS ON THAT, WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, A MIX OR, YOU KNOW, ALL 3 45 KV, SOME EHB INVOLVED. 
          AND, AND SO IT'S SOMETHING TO KIND OF TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION, I GUESS, AND, BUT AS WE LOOK TO, I GUESS, DELIBERATE ON THAT PLAN LATER. 
          BUT ANYWAY, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SOME OBSERVATIONS AND GET ADDITIONAL THINGS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          WITHOUT, I HESITATE, UH, STARTED. 
          SO WITHOUT DIVING INTO THE, THE, THE PERMIAN OPTIONS, YOU KNOW, THE, THE REGIONAL, THE ANNUAL REGIONAL TRANSMISSION PLAN, WE'RE LOOKING AT A HOLISTIC SOLUTION FOR THE ENTIRE STATE FOR THE STATE'S NEEDS FOR 2030, WHICH WE WILL RECOMMEND A EHP OPTION FOR THAT AS WELL, WHICH WOULD MEAN IF WE GO FOR THAT, FOR THE WHOLE STATE, THAT WOULD ACTUALLY GET THAT EHP OPTION OUT TO THE PERMIAN SOONER THAN WHAT WE WERE LOOKING AT, UM, IN THE PERMIAN BASIN PLAN. 
          SO, UM, YEAH, I THINK WE'LL HAVE TO HAVE CONTINUED DIALOGUE ON THAT ISSUE. 
          GREAT. 
          THANK YOU, CHRIS. 
          I THINK, UH, JULIE HAS A QUESTION AND THEN FOLLOWED BY CARLOS. 
          ABSOLUTELY. 
          GO AHEAD, JULIE. 
          MY, MY QUESTION'S NOT RELATED TO TRANSMISSION, SO I'M GONNA HOLD IT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY, CARLOS, LATER. 
          YEAH, NO, IN, IN TERMS OF, UM, EXTRA HIGH VOLTAGE OR EVEN ULTRA HIGH VOLTAGE. 
          I MEAN, IF THE GROWTH IN THE MARKET IS THE ONE THAT WE ARE FORECASTING, YOU BETTER LOOK AT ALL THOSE OPTIONS, INCLUDING HVDC, HVAC AND, UH, AS HIGH, UH, A KV RATING AS POSSIBLE, SIMPLY BECAUSE IF IT'S OVER A THOUSAND MILES, AND DEPENDING ON THE DROP POINTS, OF COURSE, BUT IF IT'S POINT TO POINT TO, TO A CERTAIN LEVEL, ALL OF THOSE ARE GONNA BE WAY MORE EFFICIENT. 
          SO WE'VE BUILT A BACKBONE OF THREE 40 FIVES AROUND THE STATE, REALLY, AND THAT MAY BE SUBOPTIMAL IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT LONG DISTANCES AND LARGE LOADS. 
          SO ENCOURAGE YOU TO EXPLORE THAT. 
          DEFINITELY. 
          RIGHT, SO WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE, THE WIRES CONNECT THE, THE GENERATION TO THE LOAD. 
          WE TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT WE'RE SEEING IN THE GENERATION INTERCONNECTION QUEUE, AND YOU PROBABLY WERE GETTING TIRED OF SEEING THIS SLIDE OVER AND OVER AGAIN. 
          UM, BUT WHAT I REALLY WANNA HIGHLIGHT TODAY THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN THE LAST TIME YOU SAW IT 
          [01:55:01]
IS WE'VE GOT SIX GIGAWATTS OF GAS NOW IN THE QUEUE COMPARED TO THE LAST TIME I SHARED IT WITH YOU. 
          SO WE'RE STARTING TO SEE THAT INTEREST PICK UP. 
          UM, OVERALL, YOU CAN SEE THAT WE STILL CONTINUE TO HAVE THE MAJORITY OF THE QUEUE, OH, WELL OVER THE MAJORITY, UH, IN SOLAR AND BATTERY INTEREST. 
          UM, BUT WITH, I THINK WITH THE TEF, UH, DRAWING INTEREST AS WELL, WE'RE, WE'RE STARTING TO SEE THAT QUEUE INCREASE. 
          I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT DIFFERENCE. 
          ALSO, ANOTHER DIFFERENCE WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT FOR YOU ON THE LARGE LOAD, UH, SIDE FROM WHAT YOU SAW LAST TIME. 
          UM, AND THEN IT'S KIND OF HARD HOPEFULLY MAYBE IF YOU HAVE IT UP ON YOUR SCREEN, BUT THAT GRAPH THAT'S IN THE FAR RIGHT CORNER, THE ACTUAL AND PROJECTED LARGE LOAD GROWTH, UH, THROUGH 2028, THE LAST TIME YOU SAW THAT THAT LARGE LOAD GROWTH WAS 43,000 IN THE LARGE LOAD SIDE, WE'RE NOW UP TO OVER 49,000 OF INTEREST OF LARGE LOADS WANTING TO INTERCONNECT IN THE SYSTEM. 
          SO THE KEY TAKEAWAY THERE IS THERE'S A COUPLE OF REVISION REQUESTS THAT ARE IN THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS, NPR 1 2 3 4, THAT ONE'S EASY TO REMEMBER. 
          AND PR ONE 15, THIS IS REALLY LOOKING AT WHAT INFORMATION DO WE NEED TO OBTAIN VIA THE TRANSMISSION SERVICE PROVIDERS ON THOSE LARGE LOADS SO THAT WE CAN MODEL THEM PROPERLY AND PLAN THE SYSTEM BECAUSE OF THEIR OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS AND HOW THEY IMPACT, UM, THE OPERATION OF THE GRID. 
          SO STAY TUNED FOR THOSE. 
          SINCE WE'VE MET, UH, WE'VE PUT OUT THE MONTHLY OUTLOOKS FOR RESOURCE ADEQUACY FOR BOTH SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER, AND WE CONTINUE TO SEE THOSE HIGHEST CHANCE OF RISK INTO GOING INTO EMERGENCY OPERATIONS IN THE EVENING HOURS AS THE SUN SETS, UM, WHILE WE STILL HAVE, UM, HIGH LOAD ON THE SYSTEM. 
          BUT SEPTEMBER IS A LITTLE BIT LUT, UM, OF RISK THAN WHAT WE SAW IN AUGUST. 
          OCTOBER IS SHOWING A LITTLE BIT HIGHER RISK THAN SEPTEMBER. 
          AND REALLY THE REASON THAT'S DRIVING THAT IS ONCE WE GET THROUGH THE SUMMER MONTHS, WE'LL GO INTO OUTAGE SEASON WHERE, UM, THE RESOURCE ENTITIES WILL ONCE TAKE MAINTENANCE, UH, TO, YOU KNOW, MAKE REPAIRS FROM OPERATING HARD DURING THE SUMMER AND PREPARE FOR THEIR WINTER OPERATIONS. 
          SO THAT RISK WILL GO UP A LITTLE BIT IN OCTOBER. 
          AND THEN LAST, BUT NOT LEAST, A LOT OF WORK ON THE RELIABILITY STANDARD FRONT. 
          UM, THE COMMISSION RELEASED ITS PROPOSAL, UH, FOR PUBLICATION BACK IN JUNE. 
          THERE WERE STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS THAT WERE PROVIDED, AND I THINK I'VE GOT A TYPO THERE ON THE DATE. 
          BUT, UH, WE EXPECT THAT THE COMMISSION WILL BE TAKING ACTION ON THE RELIABILITY STANDARD AT THE END OF THIS MONTH. 
          UM, SO THAT'LL BE A, A ANOTHER STEP FORWARD AND COMMUNICATING WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS POTENTIAL RISK, UH, ON THE SYSTEM, THE VALUE OF LOST LOAD. 
          UM, WE'VE BEEN WORKING, UH, WITH A CONSULTANT TO, UH, DO A, THERE WAS A VALUE OF LOST LOAD SURVEY THAT WENT OUT TO CONSUMERS EARLIER THIS SPRING, AND THEY'VE WORKED, UH, TO PROVIDE US A DRAFT REPORT. 
          UM, AND SO WE EXPECT TO TRY TO PUBLISH THAT, UM, IN THE COMING DAYS ABOUT WHAT THOSE RESULTS WERE FROM THE SURVEY. 
          AND THEN FINALLY, THE COST OF NEW ENTRY, UH, WORK HAD BEEN DONE ON OUR STUDY, UH, FOR COST OF NEW ENTRY. 
          THE COMMISSION AT ITS JULY OPEN MEETING, UH, AGREED UPON A CONE OF 140 KILOWATT HOURS PER YEAR, UH, IS PROPOSED FOR PLANNING PURPOSES. 
          SO USING THAT AS INPUT INTO THE RELIABILITY STANDARD CALCULATIONS, UM, THAT REFLECTED A COMBUSTION TERM TECHNOLOGY. 
          AND SO THAT TAKES US, UH, HIGHER THAN WHAT THE, THE CURRENT, UH, CONE IS. 
          THAT'S IN THE PROTOCOLS OF 1 0 5. 
          THEY ALSO SUGGESTED THAT WE CONDUCT ANOTHER REVIEW OF THE COST OF NEW ENTRY JUST BECAUSE OF THE CHANGES WE'RE SEEING ON THE GRID, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM OUR PREVIOUS SLIDES, TO DO THAT IN 2026 AND THEN GET ON A CADENCE OF EVERY FIVE YEARS TO LOOK AT CONDUCTING THOSE STUDIES. 
          SO WITH THAT, I'LL SEE, JULIE, DID YOU STILL HAVE A QUESTION YOU WANTED TO COME BACK TO? NO, MY QUESTION'S MORE GENERAL, SO NOT RELATED TO THIS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU, CHRISTINE. 
          SO NEXT, DAN WOODFIN WILL PRESENT THE SYSTEM 
          [8.2
System Operations Update]
OPERATIONS UPDATE, WHICH IS AGENDA ITEM 8.2. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          WANT TO GO THROUGH, UM, FOUR HOT TOPICS, UM, THAT PARTICULAR THINGS WE WANNA HIGHLIGHT FOR YOU. 
          AND THEN WE ALSO 
          [02:00:01]
HAVE APPENDIX WITH SOME OF THE REGULAR REPORTING RESULTS IN IT. 
          UM, START WITH HURRICANE BURL. 
          UM, OBVIOUSLY IT, UM, WAS IN, ORIGINALLY UP TO ABOUT THREE AND A HALF DAYS AHEAD OF TIME WAS PLAN. 
          UH, THE, ALL THE MODELS WERE SHOWING THAT IT WAS GOING INTO THE MEXICO SOUTH OF BROWNSVILLE. 
          UM, IT WOUND UP, UH, GOING INTO, UH, MATAGORDA COUNTY UP, YOU KNOW, JUST SOUTH OF HOUSTON. 
          UM, THE, THE MESSAGE THERE IS ANYTIME THERE'S A HURRICANE IN THE, ESPECIALLY IN THE WESTERN GULF, UH, WE HAVE TO BE PREPARED. 
          AND, UH, WE WERE WATCHING THIS ONE ALL THE WAY. 
          EVEN IF IT HAD GONE IN SOUTH OF BROWNSVILLE, THERE COULD HAVE BEEN EFFECTS IN THE ERCOT SYSTEM. 
          SO WE WERE, WE WERE WATCHING IT. 
          UM, ONE OF THE KEY THINGS THAT I THINK FOLKS HAVE, UM, NOTED ON THIS IS THAT IT WAS SLOW TO WEAKEN AS IT CAME ONSHORE. 
          UH, IT DUMPED A LOT OF RAIN IN, IN THE HOUSTON AREA. 
          UM, MOST OF THE, THE ISSUES WERE, UH, THE SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF LOAD LOSS IN THE HOUSTON AREA, UM, DUE TO MOSTLY DISTRIBUTION OUTAGES, BUT WE WANTED TO LOOK AT KIND OF FROM AN ERCOT SYSTEM PERSPECTIVE, MEANING PRIMARILY TRANSMISSION AND GENERATION THAT, THAT WE'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR. 
          UH, HOW, HOW DID THAT OPERATE? UM, ONLINE RESERVES REMAINED HIGH THROUGHOUT THE EVENT. 
          UM, WE HAD, UM, SOME TRANSMISSION, UH, OUTAGES. 
          YOU CAN SEE THE NUMBERS THERE, CIRCUITS THAT, THAT WENT OUTTA SERVICE AT SOME POINT DURING THE, DURING THE STORM AND A FEW GENERATORS THAT TRIPPED OFF LINE. 
          UH, ONE OF THE BIGGEST THING, UH, THINGS THAT HAPPENED FROM A SYSTEM PERSPECTIVE IS YOU CAN SEE THE GRAPHIC THERE SHOWED THAT FOR, SAY, THE COASTAL LOAD ZONE, THE DEMAND ON THE SYSTEM WAS A LOT LOWER DURING THAT, UM, THOSE DAYS. 
          AND THAT'S A RESULT OF ALL OF THOSE DISTRIBUTION LOAD OUTAGES. 
          UM, BUT IT HAD A SYSTEM IMPACT THAT WE HAD A LOT LESS DEMAND. 
          WE HAD TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS TO OUR LOAD FORECAST AND THOSE KIND OF THINGS TO ACCOUNT FOR THAT. 
          UM, WE WILL BE SENDING RFIS OUT TO SOME OF THE, THE ENTITIES THAT DID HAVE TRANSMISSION AND GENERATION OUTAGES JUST TO LEARN AS A KIND OF CON CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT LEARNING, UH, TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE AREN'T THINGS THAT WE NEED TO DO DIFFERENT WE, OR THEY NEED TO DO DIFFERENT NEXT TIME. 
          BUT, UH, AT THE CURRENT, UH, POINT IN TIME, WE'RE NOT AWARE OF ANY, LIKE RELAY MISS OPERATIONS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. 
          SO NOT, NOT A LOT TO REPORT ON THIS FROM A ERCOT, UH, OPERATIONS PERSPECTIVE. 
          I'VE GOT A FEW SLIDES I WANNA TALK ABOUT ANCILLARY SERVICES. 
          UM, THIS IS A SLIDE THAT I'VE SHOWN YOU BEFORE, UH, TO KIND OF KEEP TRACK OF ALL THE DIFFERENT MOVING PARTS THAT ARE GOING ON RELATED ANCILLARY SERVICES. 
          ONE OF ONE OF THEM IS THE, UH, ERCOT CONTINGENCY RESERVE SERVICE THAT THOSE CHANGES THAT WE SAID WE WERE GONNA BE TRYING TO MAKE BEFORE SUMMER THIS YEAR. 
          AND WE HAD A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT NRR THAT, THAT WERE PROPOSED. 
          THE, UH, NPR 1224 WAS ONE THAT THE BOARD, UH, ENDORSED LAST TIME THE COMMISSION WOUND UP, UH, REJECTING THAT NPRR. 
          BUT WE HAVE IMPLEMENTED, IT HAD TWO PIECES TO IT. 
          IT HAD THE PIECE OF WHEN WE WOULD RELEASE CCRS AND WHAT THE PRICE FLOOR WOULD BE, UM, THAT WOULD BE ENGAGED WHEN, WHEN THOSE WERE, UH, WHEN THOSE WERE RELEASED. 
          UM, THE COMMISSION TURNED THIS DOWN, BUT, UH, WE HAVE IMPLEMENTED IN OUR STARTING AU AUGUST 1ST IN OUR, UH, OPERATING PROCEDURES THAT WE WILL RELEASE ECRS WHEN IT MEETS THE CRITERIA THAT WAS COVERED IN THAT, UM, UH, NPRR, WHICH IS, IF WE'RE SHORT, UH, IF SC IS SHORT OF HAVING ENOUGH CAPACITY TO SERVE LOAD BY 40 MEGAWATTS FOR TWO SC INTERVALS, THEN WE, WE WILL RELEASE IT. 
          AND THAT'S BEEN IMPLEMENTED IN OUR PROCEDURES SINCE, SINCE AUGUST, UM, 1232. 
          UH, WE'VE ACTUALLY, ERCOT STAFF HAD PROPOSED THIS NPRR. 
          WE'VE ACTUALLY PULLED IT BACK OUT OF THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS BECAUSE IT WAS KIND OF KEYED ON HAVING A PRICE FLOOR THAT WAS SIMILAR TO WHAT WOULD'VE BEEN IN 1224. 
          AND BECAUSE OF SOME OF THE DISCUSSION THAT WENT ON AROUND THAT, WE DECIDED THAT ONE'S NOT GONNA WORK WITHOUT THAT PRICE FLOOR. 
          SO WE PULLED THAT BACK OUT AND WE'LL, BASICALLY, UH, UNLESS SOME OTHER CHANGE HAPPENS, WE'LL CONTINUE TO OPERATE WITH THE, THIS CURRENT OPERATING PROCEDURE THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE THROUGH, THROUGH RT C UNTIL RTC IS DEVELOPED, UM, UNLESS SOME OTHER CHANGE OCCURS. 
          UH, SO THAT'S KIND OF THE FIRST, FIRST SWIM LANE. 
          SECOND SWIM LANE IS CHANGES TO THE ANCILLARY SERVICE QUANTITIES 4 20 25. 
          AND, UH, 
          [02:05:01]
IF YOU RECALL THAT IS, WE'RE MAKING CHANGES THERE. 
          SO, AND IT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED SO THAT THE COMMISSION ULTIMATELY HAS TO APPROVE THE, THE ANCILLARY SERVICE METHODOLOGY THAT SETS THE MINIMUM QUANTITIES, UM, THAT NPRR 1222 WAS DONE IS, HAS BEEN APPROVED. 
          UM, WE WILL BE BRINGING ANCILLARY SERVICE QUANTITIES IN THAT, IN THAT METHODOLOGY DOCUMENT BACK TO YOU TO ENDORSE IN OCTOBER SO THAT IT HAS TIME TO GO TO THE COMMISSION AND GET, UH, APPROVED THERE BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR SO THAT WE CAN IMPLEMENT THOSE FOR 2025. 
          UH, WE WILL BE, UM, HAVING A WORKSHOP, UH, ON THIS, UH, IN WEEK AND A HALF FROM NOW, I GUESS, TO START TALKING ABOUT THAT WITH STAKEHOLDERS. 
          I'M SORRY, THE NEXT, NOW I'M CONFUSING MYSELF. 
          THIS IS WOODY'S LAUGHING AT ME. 
          THE, UH, THE, THE, UH, UM, THIS ONE WE'RE STARTING TO TALK ABOUT IT THE NORMAL STAKEHOLDER PROCESS LIKE THE OPERATING WORKING GROUP AND SO FORTH. 
          THE THIRD SWIM LANE IS THE ONE I WANNA TALK MORE TO YOU ABOUT TODAY, WHICH IS THE ANCILLARY SERVICE STUDY THAT THE LEGISLATURE HAS REQUIRED. 
          THE, UH, APPROVED BE BE PROVIDED TO THE LEGISLATURE, UH, BY THE END OF THIS YEAR FOR THE, FOR THE NEXT SESSION. 
          AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE PUC AND THE IMM ON THAT. 
          UH, AND I'M GONNA TALK MORE ABOUT THAT ON THE NEXT SLIDE. 
          AND THEN THE FINAL THING IS, IS DRS, UH, DISPATCHABLE RELIABILITY RESERVE SERVICE, UM, WE HAVE PROPOSED NPR 1235. 
          THAT ONE ACTUALLY WON'T. 
          THE DRS SERVICE IS NOT PLANNED TO BE IMPLEMENTABLE AFTER RTC, UH, HOPEFULLY SOON AFTER RTC. 
          SO THIS ONE'S A LITTLE FURTHER OUT PERHAPS. 
          BUT THAT'S ALL THE BUCKETS OF THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON RELATED TO, TO, UH, ANCILLARY SERVICES RIGHT NOW. 
          SO THE PC ANCILLARY SERVICE STUDY, UM, AS A BACKGROUND, OUR ANCILLARY SERVICES, WE, WE REALLY REALIZED THERE, THEY'RE DIVIDED INTO TWO BUCKETS. 
          THERE'S A BUCKET, WHICH IS THE ANCILLARY SERVICES THAT WE USE FOR CONTROLLING THE FREQUENCY ON THE SYSTEM, KIND OF IN REAL TIME. 
          THINGS LIKE REGULATION, RESPONSIVE RESERVE, AND A PORTION OF ECRS. 
          AND THEN THERE'S ANOTHER BUCKET, WHICH IS THE ONES THAT WE REALLY PROCURE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'VE COMMITTED ENOUGH GENERATION, THAT WE DON'T FIND OURSELVES WITH SUFFICIENT GENERATION AVAILABLE. 
          BUT BECAUSE OF ALL THE MANY UNCERTAINTIES THAT CAN HAPPEN, LIKE UNIT TRIPS, FORECAST ERRORS, AND SO FORTH, WE HAVEN'T COMMITTED ENOUGH TO SERVE THE LOAD. 
          AND SO THERE'S REALLY THOSE TWO BUCKETS. 
          UM, AND I'LL COME BACK TO WHY THAT'S IMPORTANT IN A MINUTE. 
          UM, SENATE BILL THREE REQUIRED THAT THE PUC WILL WRITE A REPORT BY THE END OF THE YEAR, ANY DETAILING KIND OF ANY CHANGES THAT ARE NEEDED OVERALL FROM A AN FOR ANCILLARY SERVICES. 
          UH, THE PEC ASKED ERCOT AND IMM TO KIND OF PROVIDE A, UH, A SYNOPSIS OF WHAT WE THINK CHANGES ARE NEEDED, AS WELL AS KIND OF DESCRIBING THE OVERALL FRAMEWORK. 
          UM, THE FINAL REPORT THAT WE'RE WRITING AND TO THE IMS WRITING, UH, OR IS DUE TO BE FILED AT THE LEGISLATURE, UH, SORRY, AT THE PUC BY THE END OF SEPTEMBER, UH, WE WILL BE HAVING A WORKSHOP, THIS IS THE ONE I MENTIONED EARLIER THAT WILL BE ON, ON AUGUST 28TH TO DESCRIBE WHAT ERCOT AND THE IMM ARE, ARE PLANNING TO PUT IN THE, THOSE REPORTS. 
          PC WILL THEN HAVE A WORKSHOP IN, IN, SOMETIME IN LATE OCTOBER. 
          AND THEN THEY HAVE TO SUBMIT THE, UH, REQUIREMENTS TO THE LEGISLATURE THIS, THIS OVERALL REPORT BY, UM, UH, JANUARY OF NEXT YEAR. 
          AND SO WE'RE GONNA BE WORKING ON THAT. 
          THE KEY THING FOR STAKEHOLDERS PARTICULARLY, IS TO PAY ATTENTION TO THAT AUGUST 28 WORKSHOP. 
          UM, THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE'RE PLANNING ON MAKING AT THAT WORKSHOP, JUST TO KIND OF GIVE YOU AN OVERVIEW, IS THAT THERE ARE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT, THAT, THAT ARE CHANGES THAT WE'RE GONNA RECOMMEND. 
          ONE IS THAT IN THIS FREQUENCY RESPONSE BUCKET, WE THINK WE'VE GOTTEN THOSE PRETTY WELL DEFINED. 
          THERE'S NOT ANY REAL CHANGES THAT ARE NEEDED THERE. 
          THEY'RE DRIVEN LARGELY BY OUR NERC REQUIREMENTS. 
          UM, ON THE OTHER HAND, THE, UH, THERE ARE SOME CHANGES THAT WE THINK MAY BE WARRANTED, UH, ON THE KIND OF, HAVE WE COMMITTED ENOUGH RESOURCES AND WE BOUGHT ENOUGH ANCILLARY SERVICES TO COVER IF THE MARKET'S NOT BRINGING ENOUGH, UH, COMMITMENT TO THE TABLE. 
          AND THOSE TWO THINGS ARE THAT WE, RIGHT NOW, WE DO A, A, UH, KIND OF, UH, PSEUDO STATISTICAL ANALYSIS TO DETERMINE WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE. 
          WE'RE GONNA BE RECOMMENDING THAT WE PUT IN PLACE A, A PROBABILISTIC MECHANISM, UM, KIND OF A MONTE CARLO TYPE ANALYSIS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT WILL TELL US KIND OF WHAT IS THE RISK AT EACH POINT IN TIME BASED ON KIND OF THE AGGREGATE 
          [02:10:01]
RISKS THAT ARE GOING ON, RATHER THAN LOOKING AT THE RISKS INDEPENDENTLY. 
          AND SO WE'RE, THAT ANALYSIS WILL BE WORKING WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS. 
          THE FUNDAMENTAL WAY TO DO THE ANALYSIS IS EASY. 
          IT'S WHAT RISKS ARE YOU TRYING TO COVER, AND HOW TO APPROPRIATELY SET UP THE INPUTS AND ASSUMPTIONS IN ORDER TO HAVE THE, THE, THE, THE MODEL CALCULATE NUMBERS THAT MAKE SENSE AND THAT COVER THE RISKS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO COVER TODAY. 
          THAT'S THE HARD PART. 
          SO WE'LL BE WORKING WITH STAKEHOLDERS, WE'LL START TO TALK ABOUT THAT AT THE, THE, ON THE 28TH. 
          SO THAT'S THE FIRST THING. 
          THE SECOND THING IS, RIGHT NOW, LIKE I MENTIONED EARLIER, WE'LL BE BRINGING TO YOU IN DECEMBER, THE MINIMUM QUANTITIES OF, AS THE, THE METHODOLOGY FOR DETERMINING THOSE AND BASICALLY SETTING THOSE MINIMUM QUANTITIES IN DECEMBER FOR EVERY HOUR OF THE NEXT YEAR. 
          AND THAT WAS A COMPROMISE THAT WAS MADE SOME TIME AGO THAT YOU COULD, YOU COULD PROCURE MORE EFFICIENTLY, BUT, BUT THE RETAIL, UH, PROVIDERS CAN HEDGE BETTER IF THEY KNOW THE, WHAT THE QUANTITIES ARE FURTHER IN ADVANCE. 
          AND SO THAT WAS KIND OF THE TRADE OFF AS TO WHY WE HAD, UH, THEN HAVE BEEN PROCURING THOSE IN DECEMBER AND SETTING THOSE REQUIREMENTS. 
          BUT IF AS THE AMOUNT OF ANCILLARY SERVICES WERE BUYING IS GROWING BECAUSE OF THE GROWING UNCERTAINTY ON THE SYSTEM, UM, IF WE COULD BUY THOSE, SET THOSE QUANTITIES CLOSER TO REAL TIME, SAY WITHIN THE LAST WEEK WHEN THE, WE HAVE REAL FORECASTS FOR WIND, SOLAR, AND, AND LOAD AND, AND SO FORTH, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO IT, THE, THE EFFICIENCY GAINS FROM DOING IT CLOSER TO REAL TIME, MAYBE A LOT MORE TODAY THAN WHAT THEY WERE WHEN WE ORIGINALLY STARTED BUYING THESE IN DECEMBER. 
          SO THAT, THAT'S THE KIND OF THE, WE WOULD BE RECOMMENDING THAT, THAT, THAT WE TALK ABOUT THAT WITH STAKEHOLDERS AND, AND ULTIMATELY, UH, START TO BUY THOSE, COME UP WITH A MECHANISM THAT WILL ALLOW US TO SET THOSE QUANTITIES CLOSER TO REAL TIME. 
          SO THAT, THAT'S GONNA BE OUR TWO RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          UM, ACTUALLY, I GUESS THERE'S THREE. 
          ONE IS DON'T MAKE CHANGES TO THE FREQUENCY STUFF, AND THEN THE OTHER TWO. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, UH, THE, THE NEXT THING IS, IF YOU RECALL, UH, WE PASSED, UH, NPR 1149 SOME TIME AGO. 
          AND ONE OF THE OUT ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT THE BOARD ASKED IN THAT IS, HOW OFTEN DO WE NOT HAVE ENOUGH CAPACITY PROVIDING ANCILLARY SERVICES? AND SO THE GRAPHIC ON THE NPR 1149 HAD THE, THE PROJECT BEHIND THAT HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED NOW. 
          AND SO WE'RE ABLE TO EASILY KIND OF CAPTURE THOSE NUMBERS. 
          SO THE GRAPHIC ON THE, THE, THE LEFT HERE SHOWS, UM, ACCUMULATED OVERALL HOURS OF THE MONTH, HOW MANY MEGAWATTS WERE THE QSE THAT ARE PROVIDING ANCILLARY SERVICES, NOT HAVING ENOUGH MEGAWATTS TO COVER ALL THEIR ANCILLARY SERVICE OBLIGATION IN AN HOUR. 
          AND SO IT'S ADDING THAT UP OVER ALL THE HOURS OF THE, THAT MONTH. 
          UM, AND WHAT WE SEE IS THERE'S A LITTLE OVER 20,000 MEGAWATTS, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THAT OVER THE COURSE OF, UH, IF YOU AVERAGE IT, OR IF YOU AVERAGE IT OVER SEVEN 20 HOURS IN THAT MONTH, THAT'S ABOUT 27 MEGAWATTS AN HOUR ON, ON, UH, AVERAGE. 
          AND IT'S, UM, UM, FOR JULY AND FOR JULY, THAT'S 0.4% OF THE TOTAL ANCILLARY SERVICE MEGAWATTS. 
          AND SO THAT SEEMS TO BE A, A RELATIVELY LOW NUMBER ON THE RIGHT GRAPH, YOU'LL RECALL THAT WE HAD NVR 1186, AND ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT ER STAFF HAD IS THAT AS WE HAVE MORE ENERGY STORAGE RESOURCES THAT ARE PROVIDING ANCILLARY SERVICES, THOSE MEGAWATTS MAY NOT BE THE SAME AS A MEGAWATT THAT IS AVAILABLE FOR THE WHOLE HOUR IF THEY START RUNNING OUT OF, OF, OF JUICE DURING THE HOUR. 
          AND SO WE'VE, WE'VE, WE, WHILE THIS IS NOT A COMPLIANCE METRIC, AND THE COMMISSION EXPLICITLY SAID, WE DON'T WANT THIS TO BE A COMPLIANCE ME, UH, METRIC, WE THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO TRACK THAT BECAUSE OTHERWISE YOU DON'T KNOW HOW CLOSE TO THE EDGE YOU ARE. 
          AND SO WE'VE STARTED DOING THIS ANALYSIS THAT SHOWS, IN ADDITION TO THE CAPACITY SHORTAGES THAT ARE SHOWN ON THE, THE LEFT SIDE, ON THE RIGHT SIDE, UH, IF, IF THEY HAD TO MA IF THE, UH, UH, UH, QSE THAT WAS POINTING TO AN ENERGY STORAGE, RESOURCES BEING THE RESOURCE THAT WAS PROVIDING THOSE, AS WOULD, IF THEY WERE DEPLOYED FOR THE REST OF THE HOUR, WOULD THEY HAVE ENOUGH JEWS TO PROVIDE THOSE MEGAWATTS FOR THE REST OF THE HOUR? AND WHAT, WHAT WE FOUND, AT LEAST FOR, UH, JUNE AND JULY SPECIFICALLY, 
          [02:15:01]
WE NEED TO LOOK AT JULY BECAUSE IT'S A FULL MONTH. 
          UH, THERE WAS REALLY NOT THAT MANY MORE MEGAWATTS OF SHORTAGE, UM, DUE TO THE THAT. 
          AND SO OUR INTENT IS WE'LL PUT THIS IN OUR, OUR, UH, SET OF METRICS THAT WE'RE TRACKING OVER TIME. 
          AND, UM, WHEN WE, IF WE START TO SEE SOMETHING THAT'S KIND OF OUT OF THE ORDINARY OR IT STARTS TO GO UP, WE'LL REPORT ON THAT. 
          BUT GENERALLY THIS WILL START IN THE FUTURE, GO INTO THE, THE APPENDIX PART OF MY REPORT, AND WE'LL JUST TRACK IT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S NO NOTHING THAT COULD CAUSE A RISK TO RELIABILITY. 
          AND THEN FINALLY, UM, WE DID A SUR UH, UM, A SURVEY, UH, THAT'S LOOSELY RELATED TO, UH, NPR, UH, I'M SORRY, NO, 12 2 45. 
          BUT REALLY OUR INTENT WAS TO FIND OUT REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENS WITH 2 45, ARE, ARE THE IBR PLANNING TO, UH, MAXIMIZE THEIR CAPABILITY OR HAVE THEY ALREADY MAXIMIZED THEIR CAPABILITY TO RIDE THROUGH FREQUENCY AND VOLTAGE EVENTS? AND SO WE ISSUED A SURVEY. 
          UM, WHAT WE FOUND, AND I THINK THE, I GUESS 85% OF THE PEOPLE WE, UH, SENT THIS TO RESPONDED 15% DIDN'T RESPOND. 
          THE 15% THAT DIDN'T RESPOND ARE KIND OF THE GRAY ON THE END OF THE BAR THERE. 
          AND WHAT WE FOUND IS THAT, UM, ROUGHLY ABOUT FIVE MEG, 5,000 MEGAWATTS, UM, WERE, UM, DIDN'T HAVE ANY PLANS TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS. 
          ANOTHER THOUSAND OR 1500 OR SO, UM, WEREN'T PLANNING ON DOING ANYTHING UNTIL THEY FOUND OUT WHAT WAS GOING ON WITH 2 45. 
          UM, THEN THERE WAS ANOTHER SET UP TO ABOUT, UP TO A TOTAL OF ABOUT 20 GIGAWATTS THAT SAID, WE'RE STILL INVESTIGATING. 
          WE DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE THI ADDITIONAL THINGS WE CAN DO THAT SOFTWARE FIRMWARE OR, UH, SETTINGS CHANGES TO MAXIMIZE FURTHER. 
          AND THEN THERE WAS, UH, ROUGHLY 30 GIGAWATTS THAT SAID, WE'RE PLANNING TO MAXIMIZE. 
          WE JUST, SOME OF US DON'T. 
          SOME OF THEM SAID, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO DO, SO WE DON'T KNOW WE'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS, BUT IF THERE ARE IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE SOFTWARE FIRMWARE OR, UH, SETTINGS CHANGES, WE WILL MAKE THOSE. 
          AND THEN THERE'S A, UM, ROUGHLY ABOUT EIGHT GIGAWATTS THAT SAID, WE'RE ALREADY MAXIMIZED. 
          AND SO WE THOUGHT THIS WAS INTERESTING TO, TO, UH, JULIE'S POINT EARLIER, THIS IS A INTERESTING METRIC TO TRACK TO SEE KINDA LOOK AT WHAT, WHAT ARE, WHAT ARE PEOPLE DOING, WHAT ARE THEY PLANNING TO DO IN THE FUTURE? WE'LL HAVE TO CONTINUE TO LOOK AT THIS AGAIN AS WE GET INTO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF 2 45 AND BE ABLE TO TRACK IT THAT WAY. 
          AND I THINK THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT, UNLESS YOU GOT QUESTIONS, QUESTIONS FOR DAN? YEAH, THIS IS JULIE. 
          MY, MY QUESTION'S RELATED TO ANCILLARY SERVICES, AND IF THIS IS A DUPLICATION OF WHAT YOU'RE WORKING ON, THEN PLEASE, YOU KNOW, DISREGARD IT. 
          BUT MY QUESTION IS, LAST SUMMER AUGUST HAD SOME ANOMALOUS BEHAVIOR, SO I WAS WONDERING IT WAS POSSIBLE TO BRING BACK IN OCTOBER SOME SORT OF COMPARISON OF ANCILLARY SERVICE FOR SUMMER 23 VERSUS SUMMER 24, BOTH IN TERMS OF COST AND RELIABILITY. 
          AND SO ONE OF THE, LIKE QUESTIONS NESTED IN THAT IS, ARE WE SPENDING MORE ON ANCILLARY SERVICES TO ASSURE RELIABILITY WITH GREATER DEPENDENCY ON INVERTER BASED RESOURCES IN 24? OKAY. 
          UM, SOME OF THAT WE CAN PROBABLY ANSWER TODAY BECAUSE I THINK WE ARE, UH, SOME, SOME THINGS WE ARE, IT'S ALL SET AS FAR AS THE QUANTITIES OF ANCILLARY EAGLE SERVICES GO. 
          THOSE ARE BASED ON WHAT, HOW MUCH WE'RE, UH, WE DETERMINED BACK IN LAST DECEMBER THAT WE WOULD BE BUYING FOR THIS YEAR. 
          BUT, UM, THE COST OF THOSE AND SO FORTH, WE'LL HAVE TO, WE CAN PUT TOGETHER A DEEP DIVE FOR, FOR THE NEXT MEETING. 
          YEAH, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT YOU, UH, HELP SHAPE THE BOARD'S WAY OF LOOKING AT EXPENDITURES FOR RELIABILITY GOING FORWARD. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH, I THINK WE CAN DO THAT. 
          ANYTHING ELSE FOR DAN? ALRIGHT, THANK YOU, DAN. 
          NEXT UP WE'VE GOT GORDON DRAKE, WHO'S GONNA PRESENT 
          [8.3
Commercial Markets Update]
AGENDA ITEM 8.3, WHICH IS THE COMMERCIAL MARKETS UPDATE. 
          GOT IT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          I'M GORDON DRAKE, DIRECTOR OF MARKET DESIGN AND ANALYSIS AT 
          [02:20:01]
ERCOT, AND I'M PLEASED TO BE HERE IN FRONT OF THE COMMITTEE, UH, TO PRESENT THE COMMERCIAL MARKETS UPDATE. 
          UH, WHAT I HOPE TO DO WITH THESE UPDATES ON A, ON A REGULAR BASIS IS, UH, ACHIEVE THREE PRIMARY OBJECTIVES. 
          FIRST OF ALL, TO HIGHLIGHT, UH, NOTABLE TRENDS AND OBSERVATIONS THAT WE HAVE OBSERVED IN THE MARKET, UH, TO TO TALK ABOUT ACTIVE WORK THAT WE HAVE UNDERWAY, UH, IN THE REALM OF MARKET EVOLUTION, AS WELL AS TO HIGHLIGHT KEY STAKEHOLDER CONVERSATIONS THAT WE, UH, THAT WE ARE CARRYING OUT OR PLAN TO CARRY OUT, AND THE, THE, THE KEY AND SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES THAT WE ARE SPEAKING AT, SPEAKING TO IN THOSE ENGAGEMENTS. 
          UM, WHAT I'LL BE SPEAKING ABOUT SPECIFICALLY TODAY, UH, WILL BE A MIRROR SOMEWHAT OF, UH, DAN'S PRESENTATION, UH, AS HE SPOKE ABOUT THE SYSTEM AND RELI RELIABILITY IMPACTS AND, AND OBSERVATIONS THROUGH HURRICANE BARRELL. 
          I'LL SPEAK TO SOME OF THE SYSTEM-WIDE AND LOCALIZED MARKET IMPACTS THAT WERE OBSERVED, UM, AND, AND, AND ALSO SPEAK TO, UH, AGAIN, SOME OF THOSE, UH, MARKET INITIATIVES WE HAVE UNDERWAY. 
          UM, SPECIFICALLY AROUND, UH, THE DEMAND RESPONSE, SORRY, DISPATCHABLE RELIABILITY RESERVE SERVICE DRRS, UH, THE A DER PILOT AND, UH, AND OTHER KEY, UH, CONVERSATIONS THAT ARE HAPPENING IN THE MARKET RIGHT NOW. 
          UM, NOTHING TO VOTE ON OBVIOUSLY TODAY, BUT DID WANT TO TALK ABOUT THOSE, UH, THOSE KEY ACTIVITIES THAT WE ARE, UH, PROGRESSING AND ALSO PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE. 
          SO, AS DAN NOTED, WE DID NOT OBSERVE, UH, THOUGH HURRICANE BARRELL WAS A, A SIGNIFICANT EVENT FOR, UH, FOR THE STATE, A SIGNIFICANT WEATHER EVENT AND NOVICE HAD A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT TO, UH, THE PEOPLE OF THE, THE HOUSTON AREA AND THROUGHOUT TEXAS, UM, THAT IMPACT WAS LIMITED PRIMARILY TO THE DISTRIBUTION NETWORK. 
          AND SO AS WE LOOK AT THE THE OVERALL MARKET TRENDS, WE SEE A RELATIVELY MILD SERIES OF PRICING OUTCOMES AT THE SYSTEM-WIDE LEVEL, UM, AS THE, UH, HURRICANE MADE LANDFALL IN MATAGORDA, UM, ON EARLY IN THE MORNING ON JULY 8TH, E EXITING THIS, THE, THE STATE ON JULY 9TH, UM, YOU CAN SEE PRICES OSCILLATING IN A VERY LIMITED BAN BETWEEN $0, UM, ONLY REACHING ABOVE $75 IN THE, AT THE, THE LATTER PART OF TUESDAY AFTER THE STORM HAD ALREADY EXITED THE STATE. 
          UM, AND SO AS WE, WE SEE THAT MOVE THAT THAT TREND, UM, PERSISTED THROUGH BOTH DAY AHEAD AND REAL TIME PRICES AT THE SYSTEM WIDE LEVEL, UM, A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT CONTRIBUTED TO THIS, UM, WE DID SEE A SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION IN, UH, IN OUR PEAK DEMAND, UH, IN OUR PEAK LOAD BETWEEN, UH, SUNDAY, JULY 7TH AND MONDAY JULY 8TH, UH, ON THE SCALE OF, UH, ABOUT 15 AND A HALF, NEARLY 16 GIGAWATTS. 
          UH, WE DID SEE, UH, AN UPWARD TREND IN FORCED OUTAGES OVERALL, BUT IT'S DIFFICULT FOR US TO, UH, DIRECTLY ASSIGN, UH, CORRELATION OR, SORRY, CAUSATION WITH HURRICANE BARREL FOR ALL THOSE OUTAGES. 
          I THINK DAN HAS GIVEN SOME GOOD, UH, GOOD NUMBERS ABOUT, UH, THE, THE, THE EXTENT OF GENERATOR OUTAGES, UH, AND THOSE, SO AS WE SAW A, UH, AN OVERALL TREND, UH, UPWARDS IN, IN FORCED OUTAGES, UH, ONLY A SUBSET OF THOSE I THINK CAN BE ASSIGNED DIRECTLY TO, UM, TO HURRICANE BARREL AND, AND MORE INFORMATION WILL BE, UH, WILL BE COMING ON THAT AS A RESULT OF THE RFIS THAT, THAT DAN MENTIONED. 
          AND SO THIS IS THE, THIS IS THE SYSTEM-WIDE PICTURE. 
          THIS IS WHAT WE, UH, THAT WE SEE WHEN WE LOOK ACROSS THE STATE. 
          INTERESTINGLY, AS WE ZOOM IN AND LOOK AT THE MORE LOCALIZED EFFECTS, WE NOTICED, UH, A NUMBER OF INTERESTING THINGS THAT, THAT TOOK PLACE, AND PARTICULARLY THE PRICE SEPARATION BETWEEN THE HOUSTON ZONE AND THE SOUTH LOAD ZONES. 
          UM, AND TRADITIONALLY HOUSTON, BECAUSE OF ITS SIZE AND ITS DEMAND, UH, IS A NET IMPORTER FROM, UH, GENERATION, UH, FROM OTHER PARTS OF, OF THE STATE. 
          UM, WHEREAS, UH, BECAUSE OF THE LOAD LOSS ON THE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IN THE HOUSTON METRO AREA, UM, THERE WAS AN EXCESS OF GENERATION AVAILABLE BECAUSE THERE WAS MUCH LESS LOAD TO SERVE. 
          AND SO, UH, GENERATORS WITHIN THAT, WITH THAT HOUSTON LOAD ZONE, WERE SEEKING TO SUPPLY OUT OF THE HOUSTON AREA, WHICH INTRODUCED NOT ONLY VERY LOW PRICES, BUT IN FACT NEGATIVE PRICES IN THE HOUSTON LOAD ZONE, UM, WHICH MOVED IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION OF THE, UH, THE SOUTH LOAD ZONE. 
          SO WE SAW THESE, UH, THE PRICE SEPARATION, UM, HOUSTON LOAD ZONE REACHING, UH, NEGATIVE $30 A MEGAWATT HOUR AT ITS, AT ITS MINIMUM. 
          UM, AND THE, THE PRICES IN THE, UH, AT LEAST THE, THE LOAD ZONE PRICES IN THE SOUTH ON MONDAY, UM, REACHING ABOVE $200 A MEGAWATT HOUR. 
          SO YOU, AND YOU CAN SEE THOSE MOVING IN, IN OPPOSITE DIRECTIONS THROUGH THOSE, THE, THE PEAK HOURS OF THE STORM AS IT, UH, IMPACTED THE, THE COASTAL AREAS, UH, AND PARTICULARLY BETWEEN THE VICTORIA AND HOUSTON METRO AREAS. 
          UH, SO WE SAW THAT OBSERVATION. 
          WE SAW THAT TREND, UH, PERSIST BOTH BETWEEN THE, UH, THE LOAD ZONE PRICES AS WELL AS THE HUB PRICES. 
          UM, SO THIS IS A, THIS IS A, AGAIN, SORT OF AN, AN INTERESTING OBSERVATION THAT THOUGH THE OVERALL, THE, THE 
          [02:25:01]
STATE AT THE, THE TRANSMISSION LEVEL AND THE WHOLESALE MARKET LEVEL, UM, PRICES WERE, WERE RELATIVELY MILD BECAUSE OF THOSE LOCATIONAL EFFECTS AND WHERE THE, THE STORM IMPACTED MOST DIRECTLY. 
          UH, WE DID SEE LOCATIONAL PRICE SEPARATION. 
          WE, WE WERE ABLE TO, TO TEASE OUT SOME OF THOSE EFFECTS OF, UH, OF HURRICANE BARREL, UH, ON LOCATIONAL PRICES, WHICH THEN, UM, RETURNS TO, TO MORE NORMAL, UH, PRICES AS WE GOT THROUGH WEDNESDAY AND INTO THE, UH, THE LATTER PART OF THE WEEK. 
          SO PRICES NORMALIZED AS WE, UH, REACHED THE, THE END OF THE WEEK. 
          AND, UM, AS IT, UH, JEFF MCDONALD NOTED IN, IN HIS, UH, HIS PRESENTATION PRICES FOR THE REMAINDER OF OF JULY WERE RELATIVELY MILD COMPARED TO PREVIOUS YEARS. 
          I'LL PAUSE THERE TO SEE IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS TOPIC BEFORE MOVING ON TO THE NEXT HEARING. 
          NONE. 
          UM, I WANTED TO SPEAK NOW TO THE MARKET INITIATIVES, UH, SOME KEY MARKET INITIATIVES THAT WE HAVE UNDERWAY, UH, SPECIFICALLY THE PERFORMANCE CREDIT MECHANISM, UH, THE DISPATCHABLE RELIABILITY RESERVE SERVICE, AND THE A DR PILOT, BEGINNING WITH THE PERFORMANCE CREDIT MECHANISM. 
          UH, MOST RECENTLY, THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION HOSTED A, UH, A WORKSHOP ON JULY 25TH, UM, IN RESPONSE TO STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS PROVIDED, UH, AND RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO, UM, MATERIALS PUBLISHED FOLLOWING THE APRIL 17TH WORKSHOP, UH, THAT WAS HOSTED BY ERCOT AS THE, UH, THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE, THE VARIOUS DESIGN PARAMETERS IN THE PERFORMANCE CREDIT, CREDIT MECHANISM VAULT, AND TO HEAR MARKET PARTICIPANT FEEDBACK ON THOSE, UH, THOSE, THE CHOICES, UH, IN FRONT OF, UH, THE SECTOR, AND PARTICULARLY IN FRONT OF THE COMMISSION, UH, ABOUT SELECTING DESIGN PARAMETERS FOR THE PERFORMANCE CREDIT MARKET PERFORMANCE, CREDIT MECHANISM DESIGN. 
          UM, THE NEXT STEPS WILL BE, UH, THE PUBLISHING OF A STRAW MAN THAT TAKES INTO ACCOUNT THE, UH, A NUMBER OF DESIGN OPTIONS AND ESTABLISHES THEN THE SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS AROUND DIFFERENT DESIGN OPTIONS AND DIFFERENT CHOICES FOR DEFAULT, SORRY, NOT DEFAULT FOR DESIGN PARAMETERS THAT COULD BE SELECTED. 
          UH, WE EXPECT THAT TO BE, TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE COMING DAYS, UH, TO SUPPORT PUC EFFORTS AND, AND PUC STAFF EFFORTS TO ALSO, UH, MAKE, UH, MAKE THEIR VIEWS KNOWN AND SUPPORT A FULSOME CONVERSATION AT THE COMMISSION MEETING, THE OPEN MEETING ON AUGUST 29TH, UM, COMING OUT OF THAT, THAT STRAW MAN, AND WITH THE, THE CLARITY ON, UH, THE, UH, VARIOUS DESIGN PARAMETERS THAT HAVE BEEN SELECTED WILL ENABLE US TO PERFORM A COST AND MARKET EFFECTS ANALYSIS OR COST AND BENEFITS ANALYSIS ON THE, UM, ON THE CHOSEN DESIGN PARAMETERS THROUGHOUT THE FALL, SO THAT BY THE END OF THE YEAR, UH, WE CAN, WE CAN PUBLISH THAT IN SUPPORT OF THE ONGOING DELIBERATION ON THE PERFORMANCE CREDIT MECHANISM, THE DISPATCH BILL, RELIABILITY RESERVE SERVICE, UM, IT, IT WAS LAST DISCUSSED AT THE, UH, PROTOCOL, UH, THE PRS MEETING PROTOCOL, REVISION SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING, UH, IN JUNE, UH, WHICH IT WAS REFERRED TO BOTH WMS AND ROZ. 
          UH, IT WAS FURTHER DISCUSSED AT, UH, AT ROZ, UH, IN A, IN A RECENT MEETING. 
          AND IT WAS THERE THAT WE, UH, WE WERE ABLE TO OUTLINE, UH, BOTH THE PRS AND AS WELL AS AT ROS OUTLINE THE, THE CURRENT DIRECTION, UH, THAT WE ARE, UH, TAKING DRRS IN A, IN A MULTI-STAGE APPROACH, UH, TO FIRST CONSIDER THE, UM, UH, DEVELOPMENT OF DRS FOR OFFLINE RESOURCES, UM, WHICH IS A DEPARTURE FROM HOW WE HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN, UH, DEVELOPING DRS TO, UH, TO LOOK AT A, A COMBINATION OF CONTROLLABLE LOAD RESOURCES ONLINE AND OFFLINE RESOURCES AND ENERGY STORAGE RESOURCES, BUT RECOGNIZING SOME OF THE, UH, TECHNICAL COMPLICATIONS OF, OF, UM, ADOPTING THE PARTICIPATION OF ENERGY STORAGE RESOURCES OUTTA THE GATE, AS WELL AS STATUTORY RESTRICTIONS ON THE INCLUSION OF, UM, UH, CONTROLLABLE LOAD RESOURCES. 
          WE HAVE PIVOTED TO, UH, A MULTI-STAGE APPROACH THAT WILL, UM, FOLLOW FIRST THE PATH OF NPRR 1235 THAT WILL BE FOCUSED ON OFFLINE ONLY RESOURCES TO ALLOW US TO RECOGNIZE AND, AND MOVE AT PACE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF DRS AND RECOGNI RECOGNITION OF THE LEGISLATIVE, UH, DESIRE TO, TO CONTINUE TO ADVANCE THAT WHILE IN A, IN A SEPA TRACK AND IN A, UH, A FURTHER NPR THAT WE EXPECT TO PUBLISH BY THE END OF THIS YEAR. 
          LOOK AT THE, UH, ENERGY STOR, THE, UH, TECHNICAL QUESTIONS, UH, AND, AND HOW BEST TO OVERCOME THOSE FOR THE INCLUSION OF ENERGY STORAGE RESOURCES IN DRS AND IN THE FULLNESS OF TIME. 
          SO WE HAD COMMITTED TO, UH, TO TAKE THAT ON AS, AS PART OF A, AN ONGOING EVOLUTION OF THE DESIGN OF DRS, AND WE'LL DO THAT IN A, IN A SUBSEQUENT NPRR, UH, BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR TO GIVE THAT CLARITY TO STAKEHOLDERS. 
          UM, AND AS WELL TO BE RESPONSIVE TO THE, UH, TO THE ONGOING STAKEHOLDER CONVERSATION WHERE WE'VE, WE'VE RECEIVED FEEDBACK ABOUT THE, UH, THE DESIRE FOR INCLUSION OF ES ESRS IN DRS. 
          FINALLY, 
          [02:30:01]
I'D LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE A DER, THE AGGREGATED, UH, DISTRIBUTED ENERGY RESOURCE PILOT AND OUR PROGRESS ON THAT IN SUPPORT OF THIS EFFORT AT THE PUC. 
          UM, THERE ARE TWO PRIMARY ACTIVITIES THAT WE ARE UNDERTAKING RIGHT NOW. 
          FIRST IS, UH, EVALUATING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE RESOURCES ALREADY, UH, PARTICIPATING WITHIN THE, THE PILOT. 
          UH, WE ARE NOW INTO A, A, A SECOND PHASE OF DR. 
          SORRY, OF, OF A DER. 
          UM, AND IN THE INTEREST OF LEARNING WHAT WE CAN FROM THAT EXPERIENCE AND SEEING HOW WE CAN, UH, APPLY THAT IN A, UH, MORE FULSOME PARTICIPATION MODEL, UH, WE ARE UNDERTAKING THAT ACTIVITY. 
          UH, WE ARE ALSO LOOKING AT WAYS IN WHICH, UH, WE CAN, UH, ENABLE NEW PARTICIPATION MODELS FOR AGGREGATED DERS WITHIN THE ERCOT MARKET. 
          UM, AND, AND WORKING WITH THE, UH, WORKING WITH THE COMMITTEE TO ADVANCE THAT. 
          UM, WANNA RECOGNIZE THE, THE COMMENTS, UM, PROVIDED BY COMMISSIONER GOTTY AT THE LAST OPEN MEETING, UM, AND CERTAINLY COMMIT TO, TO WORKING WITH THE, UH, THE REST OF THE A DR PILOT WORKING GROUP AND, AND OTHERS TO, TO CONTINUE TO ADVANCE THIS WORK AND ACHIEVE ITS STATED GOALS. 
          . 
          WITH THAT, I'D LIKE TO TURN IT OVER TO ANY QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. 
          WHAT'S THE, UH, LATEST ON, HOW ARE WE THINKING ABOUT PCM IN TERMS OF IF THERE'S A VIEWPOINT OF GOING LIVE IN THE MARKET AT SOME POINT? I MEAN, HOW FAR OUT INTO THE FUTURE ARE WE LOOKING AT THIS POINT? SO I, I THINK WE STILL HAVE WORK TO DO FROM A, FROM A PROCESS PERSPECTIVE, FIRST TO GET THROUGH THE COST AND, AND MARKET EFFECTS ANALYSIS TO, TO DEMONSTRATE WHAT THE BENEFITS MIGHT BE OF THAT. 
          AND THEN, UH, THERE WILL BE SUBSEQUENT RULEMAKING THAT TAKES PLACE THROUGH 2025 IF, UH, ASSUME WE CONTINUE ON THAT, THAT PATH. 
          SO I THINK WE ARE STILL, UH, WORKING ON WHAT THAT TIMELINE WOULD BE FOR IMPLEMENTATION. 
          UH, BUT I THINK WE'RE ENCOURAGED BY THE, THE PROGRESS THAT, THAT WE ARE MAKING, UM, WITH THE, THE STAKEHOLDER CONVERSATIONS TO, IN TO, TO FLUSH IT OUT IN ITS FULL SO THAT WE CAN UNDERSTAND THE, UH, BOTH THE, THE BENEFITS AS, AS WELL AS WHAT IT WOULD TAKE FROM AN IMPLEMENTATION PERSPECTIVE. 
          SO I THINK IT'S, IT'S TOO EARLY TO SAY WHEN IT WOULD BE IMPLEMENTED, BUT I, I THINK WE STILL HAVE A WAYS TO GO, UH, TO, TO MAKE IT THROUGH THE APPROVAL PROCESS AND THEN INTO IMPLEMENTATION. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S FAIR. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR GORDON? NO, THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          SO NEXT UP WE'VE GOT, UH, MATT MUES IS 
          [8.3.1
Real-Time Co-optimization Update]
NEXT WITH AGENDA ITEM 8.3 0.1, WHICH IS REAL TIME CO-OP OPTIMIZATION UPDATE. 
          MATT. 
          ALRIGHT, THANK YOU AND GOOD AFTERNOON A THIRD TIME TO TALK ABOUT RTC FOR SOME OF Y'ALL TODAY. 
          SO, UH, I'LL KEEP IT BRIEF OR I CAN, IN TERMS OF THE MAJOR UPDATES, UM, WE ARE STILL IN RIGHT NOW AS HEADS DOWN ON THE PLAN. 
          UH, FROM A PROGRAM PERSPECTIVE, IT'S BEEN EASY TO WORK WITH OUR VENDOR AND TALK ABOUT WHAT THEIR TIMELINE IS. 
          THE HARDER PART IS NOW WEAVING TOGETHER ALL THE INTEGRATION POINTS FOR ERCOT TO PLAN OUT THE TESTING OF THAT AND TO GO LIVE. 
          UM, WE HAVE A BEST OF BREED SYSTEM, SO NOTHING IS A STANDALONE, EVERYTHING CONNECTS TO EVERYTHING. 
          AND SO, UH, WE'RE WORKING ON THOSE DETAILS RIGHT NOW. 
          BUT YOU KNOW, REALLY THE IDEA IS THESE INTERDEPENDENCIES FROM BUILDING OUT SERVERS TO THE SYSTEM OPERATOR TRAINING ARE ALL THOSE DETAILS THAT WE'RE VETTING OUT WITH A PLAN TO HAVE A GO LIVE SCHEDULE, UH, BY THE END OF SEPTEMBER. 
          FROM AN EXTERNAL SIDE WORKING WITH THE R-T-C-B-T-F, AGAIN, THAT'S WHAT THE BOARD IN TAC HAS SAID. 
          HERE'S WHERE ALL THE RTC DISCUSSION HAPPENS. 
          THAT FOCUS HAS BEEN MAINLY ON MARKET READINESS OVER THE PAST FEW MONTHS. 
          WE'VE HAD TECHNICAL DEEP DIVES ON ALL THE DIFFERENT TELEMETRY CHANGES AND MARKET SUBMISSION CHANGES. 
          UH, WE PUBLISH A MARKET TRIALS PLANNED FOR COMMENTING ON WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE, UH, AND THEN ALSO THE QUEASY ATTESTATIONS. 
          AND THAT'S AN INTERESTING FEEDBACK LOOP THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO PROVIDE. 
          UM, ON SLIDE SIX IN TERMS OF OUR, UM, THE SEQUENCE THAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH, WE WILL BE REVAMPING THIS AFTER WE GET THROUGH, UM, GETTING TO THE PROJECT SCHEDULE. 
          THEN WE'LL CIRCLE BACK ON A LOT OF THESE, YOU KNOW, 20 ISSUES ARE HARD TO LOOK AT WITHOUT CONTEXT. 
          AND SO WE'LL START TO THREAD THOSE TOGETHER AS WHAT DEPENDS ON ANOTHER ONE TO GET THOSE DONE. 
          AND REALLY WE'LL START TO MOVE FROM MORE MARKET TRIALS DETAILS CURRENTLY THAT THE MARKET READINESS MORE INTO ANALYSIS IS WHAT'S GONNA BE, UH, IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS. 
          AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT ON THE LAST SLIDE. 
          YOU SAW THIS SLIDE LAST MONTH OR TWO MONTHS AGO AT THE LAST R AND M MEETING. 
          THIS IS THE IDEA OF ERCOT DOES NOT HAVE A GO LIVE DATE YET, BUT WERE IT TO GO LIVE IN ITS CURRENT FORM. 
          BEST CASE WOULD BE POTENTIALLY STARTING MARKET TRIALS IN MAY TO THEN EVOLVE THROUGH THESE, UH, SUBMISSIONS, TELEMETRY TESTS, OPEN LOOP TESTS, CLOSED LOOP TESTS, AND ULTIMATELY GO LIVE THAT, THAT'S A SIX MONTH STRETCH. 
          AND SO AS WE GET THROUGH THOSE, UH, ACTIVITIES, UM, ONE OF THE PREDECESSORS TO THAT IS RATHER THAN WAITING UNTIL MAY, IS THIS QUEASY ATTESTATION THING ON THE TOP LEFT ARE QUEASY IS AWARE THAT THIS IS EVEN COMING AT 'EM. 
          SO WITH THAT, 
          [02:35:01]
IN TERMS OF THE, OH, SORRY. 
          ATTESTATION IS ONE MORE SLIDE OUT. 
          I WAS TRYING TO BUILD UP TO IT, BUT HERE I AM. 
          SO WE PUBLISHED THE MARKET TRIALS PLAN FOR EACH OF THESE BOXES. 
          WE DO HAVE A ONE PAGER ESSENTIALLY THAT SAYS, HERE'S WHAT ERCOT BRINGS TO THE TABLE READINESS WISE, HERE'S WHAT WE EXPECT QUEASY TO DO WEEKLY MARKET CALLS AND TO GET THROUGH THAT, WHAT'S IT MEAN TO FINISH SUCCESSFULLY. 
          SO EACH OF THOSE IS A ONE PAGER IN A MARKET TRIALS PLAN THAT WE WILL LOOK TO HAVE COMPLETE AT THE NEXT MEETING. 
          UM, THE NEXT PIECE WAS 2019 IS WHEN WE DID THE RTC PROTOCOLS AND THE SINGLE MODEL. 
          THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DRIFT OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS, AS YOU CAN IMAGINE. 
          SO AS WE FINISHED THE BUSINESS, UM, REQUIREMENTS, THERE IS A SINGLE LARGE RTC CLARIFYING NPR TO ALIGN WITH OUR REQUIREMENTS AS WELL AS FOUR FOR THE BATTERIES. 
          UH, AND SO THE BATTERIES IS NOT, IT'S A SINGLE NPRR, BUT IT'S OPERATING GUIDE, PLANNING GUIDE IN A BINDING DOCUMENT. 
          SO ON THE ATTESTATIONS, THIS IS THE INTERESTING ONE. 
          SO WE SENT THIS OUT TO THE QUEASY AUTHORIZED REPS. 
          WE'VE TAKEN A DRAFT TO THE TASK FORCE. 
          TASK FORCE, SORRY, NO NEWS IS GOOD NEWS. 
          IN, IN THE CASE OF THIS, WE'RE NOT A VOTING BODY. 
          THERE'S NO PUSHBACK TO THE IDEA OF GETTING THIS OUT THE DOOR. 
          WE SENT TO THE QUEASY AUTHORIZED REPS AND THEIR BACKUPS. 
          UM, AND THEN THE QUEASY WITH RESOURCES WERE THE ONES IDENTIFIED. 
          WE HAVE 400 QUEASY, WE'RE NOT WORRIED ABOUT ALL 400. 
          THEY CAN BE BANKS, MARKETERS, LOAD ONLY. 
          IT'S THE QUEASY WITH RESOURCES THAT HAVE THE HEAVY LIFT ON, UH, THE REAL TIME CO OPTIMIZATION AND THE BATTERIES. 
          AND THOSE ACCOUNTABLE EXECUTIVES IS, WE WANTED THEM TO IDENTIFY AT THEIR COMPANY THAT'S NOT JUST THE AUTHORIZED REP ON RECORD. 
          DO THEY WANT TO DESIGNATE WHO'S IN CHARGE OF, FROM AN EXECUTIVE STANDPOINT, THIS PROGRAM SO THAT WE HAVE THE RIGHT COMMUNICATION CHANNEL? AND WE ASKED THEM TO ATTEST OR KNOWLEDGE THAT, UM, THEY ARE AWARE OF THE INTERFACE CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN POSTED BY ERCOT THAT THAT WORK HAS DONE. 
          AND ALSO THE IDEA THAT THEY, UM, HAVE A NEED NOW TO DEVELOP THE NECESSARY SYSTEM CHANGES TO ENGAGE THE RTC PLUS B MARKET TRIAL ACTIVITIES, POTENTIALLY AS EARLY AS MAY, 2025. 
          AND THE SCORECARD IS ON THE NEXT SLIDE. 
          UH, THE LAST PIECE IS AT THE LAST MEETING WE ALSO DID A DEEP DIVE ON SETTLEMENTS AND BILLING. 
          YOU KNOW, IT'S FUN TO TALK ABOUT THE OPERATIONAL THINGS AND HOW THESE FIT TOGETHER. 
          UM, THIS WAS A, A CHANCE TO PAUSE AND TALK ABOUT THE, ALL THE BILLING DETERMINANTS THAT CHANGE AS WE GET TO THESE NEW, UM, YOU KNOW, MARKETING CONSTRUCTS. 
          SO IN TERMS OF THE ATTESTATION, SO THERE ARE 106 QUES WITH RESOURCES THAT ARE CAUGHT AND THAT'S A, WITH RESOURCE CAPITAL R RESOURCES, IT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, DISTRIBUTED, SORRY, IT'S NOT THE SMALLER, UH, SETTLEMENT ONLY GENERATORS OR, YOU KNOW, BILL BLEVINS COULD GIVE YOU A WHOLE CLASS ON ALL THE DIFFERENT CONTEXTS OF GENERATORS OR, UH, RESOURCES WE HAVE. 
          BUT OF THOSE A HUNDRED AND SIX NINETY NINE RETURN, THE ATTESTATION ON TIME, WE HAD FIVE QUEASY THAT CURRENTLY DON'T HAVE RESOURCES. 
          SO IN OTHER WORDS, THEY CAN'T QUALIFY SOMETHING THEY DON'T HAVE IN THEIR FLEET, BUT HISTORICALLY THEY HAVE HAD AT ONE POINT RESOURCES. 
          SO THOSE ARE COMPANIES THAT WILL MONITOR AS WE GO INTO MARKET TRIALS TO MAKE SURE THAT IF THEY DO ACQUIRE RESOURCES THAT THEY'RE THEN PART OF THE, UH, SCORING. 
          WE ONLY HAD ONE QUEASY THAT IS NOT YET SUBMITTED AS, I'LL USE THAT WORD. 
          YOU KNOW, THIS IS DUE LAST MONDAY, SO IT'S BEEN ONE WEEK OVERDUE. 
          UM, AND THAT QUEASY PATTERN ENERGY IS STILL, UM, NAVIGATING WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE IN THEIR COMPANY AND IS IT THEM OR SOMEONE THEY SUBCONTRACT TO TYPE WORK. 
          SO WE'RE WORKING THROUGH THAT WITH THEM. 
          AND THEN ONE QUEASY RED LINE, THE ATTESTATION. 
          SO I DIDN'T THINK IT WAS, I THOUGHT IT MADE SENSE TO AT LEAST ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, BUT IT'S NOT A RISK ITEM. 
          UH, IT'S JUST MORE WHERE LCRA SAID, WE DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN BIND AND COMMIT TO A POSSIBLE GO LIVE DATE. 
          SO THEIR WORDS ARE ON THE SCREEN. 
          BUT AGAIN, THIS IS, THIS IS REALLY GOOD NEWS FROM WHERE I SIT, EVERYONE'S AWARE AND ONLY ONE MARKET PARTICIPANT IS KIND OF WORKING THROUGH THE MECHANICS OF GETTING IT BACK TO US RATHER THAN ANY KIND OF SHOCK AND AWE. 
          SO LAST SLIDE. 
          SO IN TERMS OF THE NEXT STEPS, AGAIN, THERE WILL BE A GO LIVE DATE IS THE PLAN FOR WHEN WE COME BACK TO THE NEXT MEETING. 
          UM, SO STARTING IN SEPTEMBER, HERE'S THE ANALYTICAL THING I WAS, UM, TALKING ABOUT. 
          WE WILL START TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO RUN SIMULATIONS IN PROBABLY LATE SEPTEMBER. 
          AGAIN, THAT'S TAKE IN THE OPERATING DAY SUCH AS SEPTEMBER, 2023, RERUNNING IT THROUGH AN RTC ALGORITHM AND SEEING WHAT THE PRICE AND, UH, DISPATCH WOULD LOOK LIKE. 
          SO WE'RE HOPING THAT THAT, UM, AND AGAIN, THE RTC TASK FORCE HAS ALREADY GIVEN US 20 OPERATING DAYS. 
          THEY WANT US TO LOOK AT, LET'S LOOK AT SOME HIGH WIND, LET'S LOOK AT SOME SHOULDER ISSUES, LET'S LOOK AT THE HOTTEST DAY, THE COLDEST DAY, THOSE TYPES OF, UH, DIALS TO LOOK AT THIS TO STRESS TEST THAT. 
          UM, AND THEN JUST A REMINDER IS PEOPLE STUDY THIS. 
          THEY MAY WANNA TALK ABOUT THE AS DEMAND CURVES, WHICH WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER TODAY. 
          AND UM, AND WE ARE KIND OF HEMMED IN FROM A POLICY PERSPECTIVE OF STAYING UNDER THE ORDC CURVE. 
          SO WE HAVE ORDC REFLECTS SCARCITY TABLETOP AT 5,000, KIND OF A DROP OFF AND THEN TAILS OFF. 
          SO THAT'S HOW WE'VE SPREAD OUT THE REGULATION RESPONSIVE ECRS AND THEN NONS SPIN, HOW IT LAYERS DOWN THAT. 
          SO IF WE WANNA 
          [02:40:01]
START TO MOVE THAT AROUND, THE IDEA IS IF IT'S WITHIN THE ORDC CURVE, IT CAN ALL STAY OUTTA THE COMMISSION WORLD. 
          AND I COULD STILL TALK ABOUT AT THE COMMISSION, BUT WE CAN DO THAT WITHIN PROTOCOLS ITSELF. 
          IT'S WHEN WE START TO CHALLENGE THE ORDC CURVE ITSELF AND WHETHER THOSE ARE THE RIGHT NUMBERS THAT IT GETS INTO A POLICY VERSUS NOT POLICY PLACE FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE. 
          UM, AND THEN JUST A REMINDER THAT THE SCOPE IS LOCKED DOWN AT THIS POINT. 
          WE HAVE, UH, DAY AHEAD MARKETS UP AND RUNNING INTERNALLY. 
          WE LOOK FORWARD TO THE MARKET TRIALS. 
          UH, I KNOW IT'S ALREADY BEEN HIT A COUPLE TIMES TODAY. 
          THE IDEA THAT IF WE WOULD CHANGE, UH, ANY SIGNIFICANT DESIGN CHANGES, UM, WOULD BE A DELAY OF, IT'S NOT ONLY IN THE MONTHS TO DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT SOMETHING, IT'S ALSO THE PROTOCOLS TO GET TO THAT POINT. 
          SO IT'S OBVIOUSLY A POLICY DISCUSSION TO VET A NEW DESIGN CONCEPT THEN, THEN TRY TO IMPLEMENT THAT AND ALL THE IMPLEMENTATION WORK IN BETWEEN. 
          AND WITH THAT, I'LL WRAP IT UP AND ASK IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS. 
          OKAY. 
          QUESTIONS FOR MATT? YEAH, CHAIRMAN, I HAVE A QUESTION. 
          GO AHEAD MATT. 
          UH, DURING THE TESTING PROCESS, WHICH I THINK I JUST HEARD IS GONNA TAKE MONTHS. 
          UH, CAN YOU ILLUMINATE US OR IS THAT GONNA BE A BLACK HOLE? CAN YOU GIVE US A FEELING FOR TEST RESULTS QUALITY, UM, WHERE THE STICKY POINTS, ET CETERA. 
          SO I GUESS THERE'S TWO PIECES OF THAT QUESTION. 
          ONE, WOULD IT BE THE ERCOT INTERNAL TESTING? ARE THERE ANY SHOWSTOPPERS OR SEVERE DEFECTS THAT WOULD CAUSE US TO DELAY THAT WOULD COME OUTTA THE PROGRAM? ON THE MARKET TRIALS PIECE, EACH OF THESE PIECES THAT YOU SEE OVER TIME, THE GOOD NEWS IS, IS ITERATIVE. 
          ITERATIVE. 
          SO YOU'LL FIND OUT SOONER RATHER THAN LATER. 
          CERTAIN QU ARE NOT, UH, KEEPING UP. 
          SO I, I'LL PICK ON THE QUEASY SUBMISSION TESTING. 
          WE WOULD BE REQUIRING THOSE SUBMISSIONS FOR EACH QUEASY WITH A RESOURCE TO HAVE CHECKED THE BOX ON ALL THE NEW AND MODIFIED SUBMISSIONS AND THEN LIGHT UP A SCORECARD FOR THE TASK FORCE T AND THE BOARD TO SEE WHICH QUEASY HAVE SUCCEEDED OR NOT SUCCEEDED, AND THEN HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MITIGATE THAT RISK. 
          SO THE FEEDBACK LOOP IS SCORECARDS ON EACH OF THESE BOXES OVER TIME. 
          DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? MORE OR LESS? ARE WE GONNA GET A PERCENT PASS OR FAIL? YES, I WILL. 
          TESTING, YES. 
          AND WE'LL NAME NAMES. 
          I DON'T MEAN TO BE RUDE ABOUT IT, BUT WE'LL WE ARE GONNA BRING FORWARD A SCORECARD SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU SEE HERE. 
          SO THIS COULD BE FOR TELEMETRY TESTING AND WE BRING FORWARD AT THE END OF THE TELEMETRY TEST, WHICH QUEASY HAVE SUCCEEDED OR NOT. 
          OKAY, TERRIFIC. 
          THANK YOU. 
          YOU BET, RAYMOND. 
          THANK YOU MATT. 
          NEXT WE'LL HAVE AUSTIN RELLE PRESENT AGENDA ITEM 
          [8.4
Market Credit Update]
8.4, WHICH IS THE MARKET CREDIT UPDATE. 
          HELLO, AUSTIN RELLE WITH AIR CUP. 
          SO IS OUR USUAL UPDATE ON KEY CREDIT INDICATORS AND OTHER CREDIT RELATED DEVELOPMENTS. 
          UM, I DID PUT HERE WE HAD A VOTING ITEM OR REQUEST FOR YOU ALL THE REMAIN 1215 BACK TO TACK, BUT YOU ALREADY DID THAT, SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          UH, THIS YEAR, YOU KNOW, THE, IN THE CREDIT WORLD, THINGS HAVE BEEN PRETTY UNREMARKABLE DUE TO THE, UH, MILD PRICES. 
          SO I REALLY DON'T HAVE ANYTHING MAJOR TO REPORT. 
          THIS COULD BE A PRETTY SHORT PRESENTATION. 
          WE'VE HAD NO DEFAULTS, UH, NO UPLIFTS TO THE MARKET AND THE TOTAL POTENTIAL EXPOSURE, YOU KNOW, THE ESTIMATE, UM, EXPOSURE, UM, WE'RE CALCULATING NOW FOR, UH, THE MARKET IS, IS BEEN PRETTY FLAT ALL SUMMER. 
          UM, YOU CAN SEE HERE WE GOT 1.8 BILLION IN MAY TO 2 BILLION IN JUNE. 
          YOU KNOW, THESE NUMBERS ARE LAGGED OBVIOUSLY WHEN WE PUT 'EM TOGETHER. 
          LOOKING AT NUMBERS FOR JULY AND AUGUST, WE'RE STILL IN THAT 2 BILLION NUMBER. 
          SO IT'S BEEN A VERY FLAT SUMMER, UH, LAST YEAR IN AUGUST. 
          ABOUT THIS TIME WE WERE HAD, UH, TOTAL POTENTIAL EXPOSURE MORE ABOUT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 5 BILLION AND, UH, PROBABLY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 3 BILLION THE YEAR BEFORE. 
          SO, UM, VERY MILD SUMMER FOR US. 
          UM, ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? SO AN UPDATE ON NPRS WE HAVE THAT ARE RELATED TO CREDIT, WE HAVE 1205, WHICH WE HAVE DISCUSSED HERE SEVERAL TIMES THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE PDC ON JUNE 13TH. 
          JUST A REFRESHER ON WHAT THAT NPR DID THAT I, I KIND OF BREAK IT INTO TWO PARTS. 
          ONE IS IT INCREASED THE ISSUER LIMITS ON BANKS, UM, BASED ON THEIR TANGIBLE NET WORTH. 
          IT BASICALLY DOUBLED, UH, THE ISSUER ISSUER LIMITS THAT WE ALLOW, WHICH, UM, I THINK IS STILL WITHIN PRETTY REASONABLE MEANS IS BASED ON A PERCENTAGE OF, UH, TANGIBLE NET WORTH. 
          AND ALONG WITH THAT WE ALSO, UM, INCREASE THE, UH, 
          [02:45:01]
THE UH, UH, QUALITY STANDARDS FOR THE BANK. 
          SO IT KIND OF GAVE 'EM MORE HEADROOM, BUT ALSO LIMITED THE, THE NUMBER OF BANKS THAT WE WOULD TAKE LCS FROM. 
          SO WHAT WE DID WAS, UH, ON JULY 1ST, WE IMPLEMENTED THE FIRST PHASE OF THAT. 
          WE DOUBLED THE ISSUER LIMITS TO CREATE SOME HEADROOM FOR THE SUMMER AND TO ALLOW, UH, COUNTERPARTIES TO MOVE FROM SOME OF THE BANKS THAT WILL NO LONGER BE PERMITTED TO, TO SOME OF THE HIGHER QUALITY BANKS. 
          UH, AND BEING A MILE SUMMER, THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, WE REALLY HAVEN'T SEEN ANY, ANY, NOT MUCH TO REPORT ON THAT WE OPENED UP THE LIMITS AND, UH, WE'RE JUST SITTING THERE NOW AS PEOPLE MOVE TO THE, UH, TO THE, UH, HIGHER QUALITY BANKS. 
          SO ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? THIS IS A CHART WE SHOWED YOU THE LAST COUPLE MEETINGS SHOWING HOW SOME OF THESE BANKS WERE HITTING THEIR ISSUER LIMITS BEFORE WE OPENED UP THE LIMITS AND YOU SAW SOME RED AND YELLOW INDICATING PEOPLE HAD BREACHED THEIR LIMIT OR WERE, OR WERE CLOSE. 
          OBVIOUSLY NOW WITH THE INCREASING OF THE, UH, OF THE LIMITS, NONE OF OUR BANKS, UM, HAVE BREACHED THEIR, UH, THE, THEIR, UM, UH, SORRY . 
          NONE OF THE BANKS HAVE, UM, HAVE BREACHED THEIR LIMITS, UH, AT THIS TIME. 
          IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? OKAY. 
          AND THEN THIS WAS THE SLIDE FOR 1215, WHICH WE ALREADY DISCUSSED ASKING YOU TO REMAND IT BACK TO TAC, WHICH YOU'VE DONE. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          OKAY, QUESTIONS FOR AUSTIN? GOOD, THANKS AUSTIN. 
          THE NEXT UP 
          [8.5
Revision Request Status Update]
WE HAVE ANN BOURNE. 
          WE'LL PRESENT AGENDA ITEM 8.5, REVISION REQUEST STATUS UPDATE. 
          GREAT, GOOD AFTERNOON, ANN. 
          BORN HERE. 
          UM, WE HAVE 14 REVISION REQUESTS FOR CONSIDERATION TOMORROW AT THE BOARD. 
          GET THAT THERE. 
          ALL RIGHT, AND YOU'VE ALREADY LOOKED AT FIVE OF THEM TODAY AND THE REMAINING NINE ARE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. 
          UM, THERE ARE CURRENTLY 58 REVISION REQUESTS IN PROCESS. 
          UM, AND 18 NEW REVISION REQUESTS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED SINCE THE JUNE BOARD FOR THE AGING REVISION REQUESTS. 
          THESE ARE THE ONES THAT HAVE BEEN TABLED FOR OVER SEVEN MONTHS. 
          UM, WE HAVE 12 OF THOSE. 
          UM, ACTUALLY SORRY ABOUT THAT. 
          FOR THE AGING REVISION REQUEST, WE HAVE 12 THAT ARE ON THIS LIST AND THAT'S PRETTY MUCH ON PAR WITH THE PREVIOUS MONTHS. 
          WE'VE HAD ONE REVISION REQUEST THAT'S BEEN REMOVED FROM THIS LIST, THAT'S NPR 1188. 
          UM, THAT ONE HAD BEEN TABLED FOR ALMOST OVER A YEAR, SO PRS WAS ABLE TO MOVE THAT ONE FORWARD. 
          AND THEN TO DATE WE HAVE APPROVED 45 REVISION REQUESTS. 
          LET'S SEE IF WE CAN GET THAT. 
          THERE WE GO. 
          SO TO DATE WE'VE HAD APPROVED 45 REVISION REQUESTS THROUGH, THROUGH THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS. 
          ANY QUESTIONS? NOPE. 
          GOOD. 
          THANK YOU ANNE. 
          THANK YOU WOODY. 
          FUTURE 
          [9.
Future Agenda Items]
AGENDA ITEMS? I DID, I DIDN'T HAVE ANY CHANGES TO THE, THE CURRENT LIST OR ANYTHING TO RECOMMEND. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WE CAN SEE THAT IT'S TAB NINE. 
          UM, SO THAT'S FINE. 
          ANY, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT OR WE'RE GOOD? NO, MAYBE, YEAH, I DON'T HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL CHANGES THERE. 
          OKAY. 
          FINAL AGENDA ITEM BEFORE WE ADJOURN IS AGENDA ITEM 10, OTHER BUSINESS. 
          IS THERE ANY OTHER BUSINESS THAT THE COMMITTEE WILL WISH, WISH TO DISCUSS? UH, HEARING NOW WITH NO FURTHER BUSINESS REMAINING, NO EXECUTIVE SESSION EXPECTED FOR TODAY. 
          THIS MEETING'S NOW ADJOURNED. 
          THE WEB, THE WEBCAST WILL BE CONCLUDED. 
          CHAIR GLEASON. 
          THIS MEETING OF THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF TEXAS IS ADJOURNED. 
          .
* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.