[00:00:06]
UM, OKAY, EVERYONE, I THINK WE'RE GONNA GET STARTED.
UM, JUST SO EVERYONE KNOWS, THIS IS BEING RECORDED, SO WE WILL HAVE A, UM, IF PEOPLE WANNA LOOK AT IT AFTERWARDS, WE'LL HAVE THAT AVAILABLE ON OUR WEBSITE.
[1. Antitrust Admonition]
VERY QUICKLY, WE'RE GONNA GO OVER THE ANTITRUST ADMONITION.UM, I'M NOT GONNA READ THROUGH IT, BUT PEOPLE CAN LOOK AT IT, AND THEN IF YOU, UM, HAVE WANNA LOOK AT IT MORE CLOSELY, IT'S ON OUR WEBPAGE.
[2. ERCOT presentation (update to slides presented at the November 20, 2024 Katherine Gross TAC meeting, and information on Membership fees and voting structure of other Independent System Operators)]
AND, UM, I'M CATHERINE GROSS WITH THE ERCOT LEGAL DEPARTMENT.UM, I WAS GONNA, WE HAVE OUR AGENDA HERE.
I WAS GONNA GIVE SOME UPDATES BASED ON THE DATA I THINK I HAD SHARED AT THE NOVEMBER 20TH TAC MEETING.
AND THEN WE WILL HEAR FROM, UM, SOME OF THE DIFFERENT PRESENTERS ABOUT IDEAS FOR POSSIBLE CHANGES TO THE BYLAWS.
UM, SO LET ME JUST GET MY SCREEN.
SO AT THE NOVEMBER 20TH TAC MEETING, UM, I HAD GIVEN SOME DATA ABOUT HOW THE MEMBERSHIP, THE OVERALL MEMBERSHIP HAD CHANGED SINCE 2014, BUT AT THAT TIME, UH, WE DIDN'T YET HAVE THE 2025 DATA, AND PEOPLE HAD SAID THAT THEY WERE INTERESTED IN SEEING THAT DATA TOO.
AT THAT TIME, I WAS PRESENTING, WE WERE STILL KIND OF SORTING THROUGH ALL OF THE 2025 MEMBERS.
UM, SO IF YOU CAN SEE ON THE SCREEN, UM, 2024 SO FAR HAS, I GUESS, WELL, YEAH, SO FAR HAS BEEN OUR HIGHEST MEMBERSHIP YEAR AT 356 MEMBERS FOR 2025.
IT WAS 338, SO THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF A, UM, A LITTLE BIT OF A DIP THERE.
UM, BUT STILL, UM, THIS YEAR IS OUR SECOND HIGHEST YEAR.
WHERE DID YOU SEE THE DIP? I WAS JUST CURIOUS, WAS THAT OVERALL OR WAS THAT KIND OF CONCENTRATED IN ONE SEGMENT? UM, I HAVE, YEAH, I HAVE INFORMATION ON THIS, UM, PER SEGMENT, UM, ON THESE NEXT SLIDES.
UM, YOU CAN SEE THAT, UM, INDEPENDENT GENERATORS, UM, INCREASED THEIR OVERALL SHARE BY ABOUT 10%, UM, I'M SORRY, INCREASED BY ABOUT 3%.
SO THEY WERE 7% OF OVERALL MEMBERS, AND THEN 10%, UM, IN 2025, UM, I THINK SOME SIGNIFICANT CHANGES, UM, REPS WERE 9%, AND NOW THERE'S 3% OF OVERALL MEMBERS.
UM, ANOTHER THING IS INDUSTRIAL CONSUMER WAS 5% AND NOW IS 10%, BUT A LOT OF THE OTHER NUMBERS ARE SIMILAR.
UM, THIS GOES TO YOUR QUESTION.
THIS IS THE, UM, COMPARISON OF 2024 TO 2025.
UM, A LOT OF THE NUMBERS, THE PERCENTAGE SHARES ARE PRETTY SIMILAR FROM 2024 TO 2025.
UM, BUT YOU CAN SEE LIKE SMALL COMMERCIAL CONSUMER HAD THE LARGEST NUMBER CHANGE.
UM, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? LIKE THE, AND THEN ANOTHER NOTABLE THING, I THINK THAT IS PART OF, UM, A DISCUSSION POINT THAT STARTED, YOU KNOW, THE REASON WHY WE'RE HAVING THIS WORKSHOP, UM, WAS ORIGINALLY THE DISCUSSION OF DATA CENTERS AND CRYPTOCURRENCY CENTERS.
UM, OBVIOUSLY IN 2014 THERE WERE NONE IN THE INDUSTRIAL CONSUMER SEGMENT.
AND THEN IN 2025, NOW WE HAVE 12 OF THOSE.
UM, SO THEY'RE MAKING UP 36% OF THE INDUSTRIAL CONSUMER SEGMENT.
PEOPLE AT THE NOVEMBER 20TH ATTACK MEETING HAD ASKED FOR SOME INFORMATION JUST ABOUT OUR MEMBERSHIP FEES, UM, AND ALSO OUR VOTING STRUCTURE, AND THEN A COMPARISON OF HOW OTHER ISOS DO IT.
OUR CORPORATE MEMBERSHIP FEE IS $2,000 A YEAR, AND THEN ASSOCIATE AND ADJUNCT MEMBERS, IT'S 500.
[00:05:01]
A, A DIFFERENT FEE FOR, UM, SMALL AND LARGE CONSUMERS.AND THEN OPEC IS ABLE TO PARTICIPATE, BUT DOES NOT PAY A FEE.
UM, AND FI GUESS FROM THE DATA THAT WE HAVE, UM, WE CAN SEE THAT OUR MEMBERSHIP FEES HAVE NOT CHANGED SINCE AT LEAST 2000.
AND SOMEONE AT THE LAST, I GUESS, OR AT THE NOVEMBER 20TH TECH MEETING HAD ASKED ABOUT WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS THAT GO WITH THAT ANNUAL FEE.
UM, OBVIOUSLY THERE'S THE VOTING THAT WE'RE ABOUT TO TALK ABOUT, UM, BUT ALSO THAT FEE GOES TO PROVIDING, UM, ERCO T'S ABILITY TO HOST THINGS LIKE THIS.
UM, AND THAT'S PART OF THE MEMBERSHIP GRADE, UM, AGREEMENT.
AND THEN, UM, NOW I'M GONNA GET INTO SOME OF THE INFORMATION I FOUND ABOUT OTHER ISOS.
I WANT TO HEAVILY, UM, CAVEAT THOUGH THAT, UM, IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN LEARNING MORE ABOUT OTHER ISOS, UM, EITHER THEIR ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP FEES OR THEIR VOTING STRUCTURES, YOU SHOULD GO TO THE ORIGINAL SOURCE AND FIND MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT.
UM, I FOUND SOMETIMES THERE WAS CONFLICTING INFORMATION, UM, ON THE WEBSITES OR WHEN I WAS TRYING TO RESEARCH THIS.
AND ADDITIONALLY, UM, SOME ISOS ACTUALLY HAD A CONTACT CALL ME TO WALK ME THROUGH SOME OF THEIR, UM, VOTING STRUCTURES AND WHATNOT.
UM, BUT I DID NOT END UP HEARING BACK FROM ALL OF THEM.
SO, UM, IT'S PROBABLY FOR THE ENTITIES THAT HAVE AN ASTERISK, IT'S PROBABLY MORE LIKELY THAT THIS INFORMATION COULD BE INACCURATE.
UM, BUT FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, UM, CAL ISO DOES NOT HAVE STAKEHOLDER VOTING.
SO THE VOTING FEE STRUCTURE IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THEM.
ISO NEW ENGLAND FOR LIKE THE TYPICAL WHAT WOULD BE OUR CORPORATE MEMBER, THEIR FEE IS $5,000.
UM, END USE CUSTOMERS, UM, CAN START AT $500, BUT DEPENDING ON THEIR USAGE, IT CAN GO UP, UM, BEYOND $5,000.
ALTHOUGH THE PERSON FROM ISO NEW ENGLAND THAT I TALKED TO SAID THAT, THAT THEY HAD NOT SEEN THAT, I GUESS, UM, AND THEN GOVERNMENT MEMBERS CAN, IF THEY CHOOSE TO VOTE, THEY CAN DO SO, BUT IT'S A $500 VOTING FEE.
UM, MISO, THE TYPICAL VOTING AMOUNT FOR THE ANNUAL FEE IS A THOUSAND DOLLARS.
UM, BUT I WOULD NOTE WITH THAT, THEIR MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION FEE, THEIR ONE TIME FEE IS $15,000.
UM, SO THEY, YOU KNOW, IT'S A, A LOWER FEE, BUT THERE'S AN UPFRONT COST.
UM, NEW YORK ISO, THEIR TYPICAL VOTING FEE IS $5,000.
UM, ENVIRONMENTAL PARTIES OR SMALL CONSUMERS, THEY HAVE A SPECIAL FEE OF A HUNDRED DOLLARS.
AND, UM, THEN FOR GOVERNMENT MEMBERS, THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY.
AND PJM IS ALSO $5,000 FOR THE TYPICAL, UM, WHAT OUR EQUIVALENT OF CORPORATE MEMBER WOULD BE.
AND THEN, UM, CONSUMER ADVOCATE OFFICES, THEY CAN PARTICIPATE FOR A $500 FEE, AND THEN THEY SPECIFICALLY HAVE A $0 FEE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL OR SMALL COMMERCIAL INDIVIDUALS.
AND THEN SPP, FROM WHAT I COULD, FROM WHAT I FOUND, THEY HAVE A, A FLAT FEE OF $6,000.
UM, SO AGAIN, THAT'S JUST AN OVERVIEW.
UM, CAL ISO, AGAIN, I HAD TALKED ABOUT IN TERMS OF VOTING, THEY DON'T HAVE A SPECIFIC, UM, VOTING STRUCTURE LIKE WE DO.
UM, BUT FROM MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THERE'S MORE, THERE'S STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT, UM, OR INVOLVEMENT BY MARKET PARTICIPANTS JUST GENERALLY IN MEETINGS, BUT THERE'S NOT A SPECIFIC VOTING STRUCTURE.
UM, AND THEN ISO NEW ENGLAND, UM, THEY, I'M TRYING TO, THEY'RE ONE OF THE ONES THAT THEY, UM, THEY DID PROVIDE ME SOME, OR THEY DID VERIFY THAT THIS INFORMATION IS ACCURATE, BUT THEY, UM, THEIR VOTING STRUCTURE IS DIVIDED INTO, UH, THE GENERATION SECTOR, TRANSMISSION SUPPLIER SECTOR.
THEY HAVE AN ALTERNATIVE RESOURCES SECTOR, PUBLIC OWNED ENTITY SECTOR, AND THEN THE END USER SECTOR, UM, MISO,
[00:10:01]
UM, THIS IS THEIR VOTING SEAT STRUCTURE.UM, IPP IS INDEPENDENT POWER PRODUCER, THIS ONE AT THE TOP HERE.
AND EWG STANDS FOR EXEMPT WHOLESALE GENERATORS.
UM, AND THEY HAVE, UM, YEAH, TRANSMISSION OWNERS, TDU POWER MARKETERS, PUBLIC CONSUMER ADVOCATES, STATE REGULATORY AUTHORITIES, ENVIRONMENTAL, UM, END USE CUSTOMERS, COORDINATING MEMBERS, TRANSMISSION DEVELOPERS AND AFFILIATES.
AND THIS IS THEIR ADVISORY, UM, COMMITTEE, WHICH GIVES ADVICE TO THE BOARD.
UH, UM, AND THEN BELOW THAT IS THE PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE, WHICH, UM, IS KIND OF LIKE OUR EQUIVALENT TO A LOWER LEVEL OF TACK THAT GIVES ADVICE TO THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
UM, THEIRS WAS SOMEWHAT STRAIGHTFORWARD, I GUESS, IN THAT THEY HAD THIS CHART AVAILABLE ON THEIR WEBSITE.
UM, SO IT SHOWS, UM, KIND OF SIMILAR TO, TO US HERE WITH THE CONSUMER GROUP.
UM, BUT IT SHOWS THE, THE WEIGHTING OF THOSE, UM, INDIVIDUAL SEGMENTS.
AND THEN PJM, UM, AGAIN, HAS THESE FIVE DIFFERENT SEGMENTS AND THOSE ARE EQUALLY WEIGHTED.
UM,
THEY HAVE THEIR OWN SPECIAL, UM, MEETINGS WHERE THEY CAN COME TO A, A RECOMMENDATION AND THEY CAN RECOMMEND THAT TO THE BOARD, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE A, UM, VOTING STRUCTURE.
THEY'RE NOT INCLUDED IN THE VOTING STRUCTURE.
UM, AND THEN SPP, UM, FROM, FROM THE INFORMATION I FOUND, UM, THEY HAVE TWO MAIN SECTORS JUST TRANSMISSION, OWNING AND TRANSMISSION USING.
UM, SO THAT WAS JUST, I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE HAD ANY QUESTIONS.
I THINK SOMEONE HAD ASKED FOR INFORMATION ABOUT THAT AT THE NOVEMBER 20TH TECH MEETING, JUST TO GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF WHAT OTHER ISOS ARE DOING.
BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THAT, UM, HAS TO GUIDE WHAT ERCOT DOES.
WELL, NOW WE GO TO WHERE YOU HAD EVERYTHING ON WHAT ALL THEY ALL DO.
UH, ONE THING THAT IS KIND OF MISSING A LITTLE BIT THAT, UH, I THINK WOULD BE HELPFUL IF WE WERE GONNA LOOK AT THIS, BUT I, I, I THINK WE'RE OKAY.
IS WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? WHAT DOES EACH SEGMENT MEAN? YOU GOT THE WEIGHT ON THERE, BUT LIKE, LET'S TAKE, UH, MISO, I MEAN, NOT MISO.
LET'S TAKE PSPP, THE MOPSY GROUP, YOU KNOW, IT'S MM-HMM
IT'S KIND OF BROKE OUT INTO THOSE MM-HMM
BUT MOPSY HAS WHAT, A HUNDRED AND SOME ODD MEMBERS, WHICH IS UN WIELD ABLE.
UH, AND THEY'RE ACTUALLY LOOKING AT CHANGING THAT.
BUT, UH, I WAS JUST KIND OF CURIOUS ON, ON SOME OF THE OTHERS ON WHAT THE ACTUAL MEMBERSHIP INSIDE THOSE ARE.
'CAUSE I THINK THAT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A DISCUSSION THAT MAY BE HAD TODAY.
YOU MEAN LIKE, UM, THE, LIKE, UNDER THEIR DEFINITIONS, WHO, YEAH.
FOR INSTANCE, LIKE IS FALLING AWAY, FOR INSTANCE, THE INDEPENDENT GENERATOR SEGMENT IN INCUR HAS FOUR PEOPLE MM-HMM
UH, THE TRANSMISSION USERS IN, UH, SPP IS EVERY TRANSMISSION USER,
SO THAT, THAT'S WHAT I WAS KIND OF GETTING AT.
SEE HOW THAT, THAT PAIRS OUT THROUGH THE INDUSTRY.
AND SETH, I THINK HAS A COMMENT.
YEAH, I JUST WANNA MAKE A NOTE THAT, UM, I PARTICIPATE IN ALL OF THESE STAKEHOLDER, UH,
AND I THINK IT'S HELPFUL TO NOTE THAT, UM, PART, SOME OF THESE STRUCTURES REALLY WOULDN'T BE WORKABLE IN TEXAS BECAUSE OUR MARKET DESIGN IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.
AND JUST THE STRUCTURE, THE REGULATORY STRUCTURE IS DIFFERENT.
SO ONE EXAMPLE WOULD BE WE HAVE A VERY, A ROBUST DIRECT ACCESS, UH, MARKET.
UM, WHEREAS IN SOME OF THESE OTHER AREAS, UH, IN PARTICULAR STP, THEY DO NOT HAVE THAT.
[00:15:01]
THE OTHER THING IS, I THINK WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT POWER MARKETING, UM, THAT IS ALSO VERY ROBUST IN TEXAS, UH, VERSUS SOME OF THESE AREAS WHERE IT'S NOT, BECAUSE IT'S MORE OF AN INTEGRATED UTILITY BASED, UH, FRAMEWORK.SO THERE'S JUST NOT AS MUCH NEED FOR LIQUIDITY AND PEOPLE, UH, BALANCING DEMAND AND SUPPLY BECAUSE IT'S ALL INTEGRATED.
SO I THINK IT'S REALLY HELPFUL TO KIND OF ALSO THINK ABOUT THIS, THE CONTEXT OF HOW TEXAS' REGULATORY STRUCTURE AND MARKET STRUCTURES DIFFERENT.
SO I, I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT, SPEAKING FROM MY OWN OWN EXPERIENCE.
MARK, DR IS FOR THE SMALL COMMERCIAL, UH, MARKET SEGMENT.
UM, I WANNA EMPHASIZE WHAT SETH SAID, AND, AND I DON'T WANNA BE THAT GUY WHO SAYS, HEY, THIS IS THE WAY WE USED TO DO IT IN THE OLD DAYS.
BUT, UM, BUT I WAS AROUND WHEN WE CREATED THIS STRUCTURE AND IN THOSE MEETINGS, AND, UM, WE WERE PRETTY THOUGHTFUL, I THINK, ABOUT WHAT THIS MARKET LOOKED LIKE, WHY IT WAS DIFFERENT, AND HOW WE NEEDED TO MAKE IT WORK FOR US.
AND, AND FRANKLY, IT WASN'T VERY CONTROVERSIAL.
I, WE, WE VERY QUICKLY CAME TO AN AGREEMENT ON WHAT THE MARKET SEGMENTS WOULD LOOK LIKE.
AND, AND KIND OF LIKE SETH SAID, WE WERE THE FIRST MARKET WITH THIS, UH, REALLY ROBUST RETAIL, UH, COM CUSTOMER CHOICE COMPETITIVE MARKET.
SO WE EMPHASIZED THE, THE ROLE OF REPS.
WE HAVE, UH, UH, AN IMPORTANT ROLE HERE FOR POWER MARKETERS THAT MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED IN OTHER MARKETS.
WE HAVE VERY LARGE, UH, PUBLIC SEGMENTS WITH BOTH A, A, A LARGE NUMBER OF CO-OPS AND A LARGE NUMBER OF MUNIS.
SO WE SEPARATED THEM OUT FROM OTHER, UH, T AND D UH, MARKET SEGMENTS.
AND, AND THE STATE MAKES, UH, AN IMPORTANT COMMITMENT TO CONSUMERS HERE AND, AND CONSUMER, UH, OUTCOMES AND PRICES ARE ALWAYS A PRIORITY.
SO WE OVERWEIGHTED THE CONSUMERS IN THE SEGMENTS WITH SIX VOTES FOR CONSUMERS, UH, WITH FOUR AND ALL THE OTHER SEGMENTS.
AND, AND I THINK, FRANKLY, THIS HAS WORKED REALLY WELL FOR US OVER THE YEARS.
OBVIOUSLY, THE MARKET IS DYNAMIC.
UH, THERE'S SOME PROPOSALS TODAY THAT, THAT MERIT, UH, CONSIDERATION, AND I'M OPEN TO, TO DISCUSSING THOSE.
BUT I THINK THAT THIS BASIC STRUCTURE HAS SERVED US REALLY WELL IN THE, IN THE LAST 25 YEARS.
AND, UH, AND I DON'T SEE THAT THINGS HAVE CHANGED SO FUNDAMENTALLY THAT WE WOULD, UH, MOVE AWAY FROM IT IN A SIGNIFICANT WAY, THOUGH THERE'S ALWAYS OPPORTUNITIES, UH, AND REASONS FOR FINE TUNING.
YEAH, MARK, YOU AND I ARE THE OLD GUYS.
WE WERE AROUND HERE WHEN WE DID THIS.
AND IT, THE WAITING WAS THE KEY THING WE DID.
AND MAKING SURE WE HAD A BALANCE ON ENSURING THAT WE GOT A GOOD OUTCOME, AND EVERYONE HAD TO PRETTY MUCH BE ON BOARD FROM VARYING SIDES OF THE, OF THE ISSUES.
UH, AND SO THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I'M GONNA BE LOOKING AT TODAY.
AND THAT'S WHAT I'M HEARING FROM YOU, MARK, IS WHAT PROPOSALS WILL TRY TO CHANGE THAT, AND WE NEED TO LOOK AT THOSE REALLY CLOSELY.
UM, GOOD POINTS AND GOOD DISCUSSION.
UM, SO MOVING ON FROM THAT, UM, THIS IS JUST KIND OF A REFERENCE SLIDE.
UM, IF THERE WERE ANY CHANGES PROPOSED TO THE BYLAWS, THIS IS THE PROCESS WE WOULD FOLLOW.
UM, NOTE THAT THERE, UH, NEEDS TO BE FINAL BOARD APPROVAL, AND THEN, UM, THOSE BYLAW CHANGES WOULD NOT BE EFFECTIVE UNTIL THERE THEY HAD BEEN APPROVED BY THE PUC.
[3. Proposals Submitted for Discussion]
I THINK WE'RE READY TO MOVE ON TO THE, I GUESS, THE FOUR, UM, DISCUSSION POINTS OR PROPOSALS THAT WERE, UM, SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO THE MARKET NOTICE.I CAN, LET ME, I CAN GET YOUR SLIDES SET UP ON HERE.
I CAN HIT THE ARROW FOR YOU IF YOU'D LIKE
IS IS YOUR PREFERENCE? I'LL STAY HERE THEN.
[00:20:02]
MY NAME'S JOHN RU HUBBARD.UM, BUT THIS IS A JOINT PROPOSAL BY TIEC, ERCOT STEEL MILLS AND THE TEXAS BLOCKCHAIN COUNCIL.
SO GENERALLY, OUR GOAL WAS TO ADDRESS THREE THINGS.
UM, THE FIRST IS THAT THE CURRENT DEFINITION OF INDUSTRIAL CONSUMER DOESN'T SQUARELY, UH, CONTEMPLATE NON-MANUFACTURING FACILITIES SUCH AS DATA CENTERS OR CRYPTO FACILITIES.
AND SO WE WANTED TO REVISE THE DEFINITION, UH, TO INCLUDE THESE TYPES OF LARGE CONSUMERS, UM, BECAUSE THEY'LL BE A PART OF THE INDUSTRIAL SEGMENT.
HISTORICALLY, TIEC AND STEEL MILLS HAVE COLLABORATED TO MAKE SURE ONE OF THE INDUSTRIAL SUBSEGMENT SEATS IS HELD BY A HIGH LOAD FACTOR CUSTOMER, CUSTOMER, AND ONE LOAD, AND ONE SEED IS HELD BY A LOW LOAD FACTOR CUSTOMER.
BUT THESE TWO GROUPS DON'T REPRESENT COMPUTING LOADS SUCH AS DATA CENTERS OR CRYPTOCURRENCIES.
SO WE BELIEVE WE NEED TO ADD A THIRD SEED FOR, TO, TO REPRESENT THOSE INTERESTS.
UM, SO TO ALLOW EACH OF THESE GROUPS.
UM, BUT I, I THINK ONE THING THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO US IS THAT WE'RE NOT PROPOSING TO INCREASE THE WEIGHTING OF ANY GIVEN SEGMENTS VOTES OR ANY VOTES WITHIN THE SUBSEGMENT.
UM, AND SO WE'LL JUST SPLIT A SMALLER SHARE OF OUR CURRENT VOTE SHARE AIR.
SO THIS WILL REQUIRE CHANGES TO THE BYLAWS.
UM, I THINK THERE'S THREE OR FOUR CHANGES, BUT THE FIRST ONE IS THAT CLARIFYING THE DEFINITION OF INDUSTRIAL CONSUMERS TO SPECIFICALLY INCLUDE, UM, MANUFACTURING OR COMPUTING PROCESSES, INCLUDING THE VIRTUAL CURRENCY, MINING CONSUMERS, UM, AND THEN ADDING AN EXPLICIT DEFINITION FOR VIRTUAL CON VIRTUAL CURRENCY MINING CONSUMERS THAT REFERENCES THE DEFINITION IN, UH, THE, THE PUCS, UM, RULES.
THESE, THE, THE NEXT CHANGE IS, AGAIN, INCREASING THE NUMBER OF REPRESENTATIVES FROM TWO TO UP TO THREE, AND THEN ADDING CLARIFYING LANGUAGE, UM, TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S STILL TWO CHAIRS AVAILABLE.
ONE FOR HIGH LOAD FACTOR MANUFACTURING CONSUMERS AND ONE FOR LOW LOAD FACTOR MANUFACTURING CONSUMERS.
UM, AND THEN ALSO, UM, A AGAIN, CLARIFYING THAT WE WILL NOT TAKE AN EXTRA VOTE.
SO ADDING LANGUAGE THAT, UM, INDUSTRIAL CONSUMER REPRESENTATIVES WILL EQUALLY, THOSE IN ATTENDANCE WILL EQUALLY SPLIT THE TWO VOTES.
UM, THE, THIS CHANGE, UM, IS TO THE TAC PROCEDURES, AND THIS IS TO CONFORM WITH, AGAIN, THE IDEA THAT, UM, EACH TAC REPRESENTATIVE HAS ONE VOTE EXCEPT FOR INDUSTRIAL CONSUMERS WHO WILL SPLIT, UH, THE TWO VOTES.
UM, AND THEN AGAIN, THIS IS TO APPLY TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE.
SO THERE'S ALREADY LANGUAGE IN, UM, THE TAC PROCEDURES AROUND VOTING WITHIN SUBSEGMENTS OF, OF SUBCOMMITTEES.
AND THOSE REPRESENTATIVES THAT ARE IN ATTENDANCE EQUALLY SPLIT THE VOTE OF A SUBSEGMENT.
UM, SO THIS CHANGE JUST ALLOWS US TO HAVE ANOTHER REPRESENTATIVE ON, AS A PART OF THE SUBSEGMENT.
UM, SO INCREASING IT FROM FOUR TO FIVE WOULD ALLOW US TO HAVE, UH, A, A COMPUTING FACILITY SITTING IN SOME OF THESE, UM, SUB COMMITTEES AS WELL.
UM, AND, AND CATHERINE TALKED ABOUT THE PROCESS TO CHANGE THE BYLAWS, WE WOULD CONTEND THAT BECAUSE THERE IS SOME PENDING LEAD LITIGATION, UH, IT MAY BE WORTH, IN ADDITION TO FOLLOWING THE CURRENT PROCESSES, KIND OF DOING A HYBRID APPROACH THAT FOLLOWS BOTH PROCESSES, THE PROCESS FROM THE, UM, BYLAWS THAT, UH, WITH THE 2021 BYLAWS AS WELL AS THE 2022 BYLAWS, UM, THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCE IS THAT IT WOULD NEED TO GO TO THE, UM, UH, THE CORPORATE MEMBERS FOR A VOTE.
UM, AGAIN, WE WOULD JUST ARGUE THAT THIS IS THE, THE MO, LIKE THE NO REGRET SOLUTION BECAUSE, UH, IN THE EVENT THAT ONE OF THAT, THAT THE CURRENT BYLAWS ARE STRUCK DOWN.
AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE, SO HAPPY TO ANSWER.
UM, HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
YOU THINK SETH COCHRAN WAS ON THE, IN THE QUEUE? YEAH, THIS IS SETH WITH THE
UM, I, I WASN'T QUITE FOLLOWING IT TOTALLY.
UM, WHEN YOU SAY YOU'RE GOING TO INTRODUCE THIS NEW SUBSEGMENT, UM, ARE YOU ACTUALLY INCREASING THE OVERALL, UH, SHARE OF THE VOTING PIE BY INTRODUCING THIS SEGMENT? OR ARE YOU KEEPING THE SAME AMOUNT OF THE VOTING
[00:25:01]
PIE WITHIN, YOU KNOW, THE UMBRELLA LOAD SEGMENT AND JUST DIVVYING OUT WITHIN, WITHIN THAT TO THE, TO THE COMPUTING PEOPLE? YEAH, WE'RE KEEPING THIS THE SAME AMOUNT OF VOTES.WE'RE JUST SPLITTING UP OUR CURRENT VOTES.
AND SO THERE ALREADY EXISTS ON INDUSTRIAL SUBSEGMENT.
AND SO CURRENTLY IT HAS TWO VOTES OR TWO REPRESENTATIVES, AND SO NOW IT WOULD HAVE THREE REPRESENTATIVES, BUT THEY WOULD SPLIT THOSE SAME TWO VOTES.
UM, I, YOU KNOW, I JUST KIND OF SPEAKING BLUNTLY, THAT THAT SEEMS TO BE THE, IF, IF THAT'S THE CASE, THAT JUST SEEMS TO BE THE BUSINESS OF THE INDUSTRIAL SEGMENT, IF THAT'S WHAT THEY WANT TO DO, UM, BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT REALLY IMPACTING, UH, THE VOTING SHARES OF THE, THE GREATER, UH, YOU KNOW, THE GREATER SEGMENT.
THAT'S JUST KIND OF THE WAY I'M THINKING OF IT.
THAT'S, THAT'S OUR GOAL IS, IS TO HAVE THIS BE NON-CONTROVERSIAL AND NOT TO AFFECT ANYONE ELSE.
AND I THINK NABO WAS IN THE QUEUE.
SO JOHN, UH, SO THAT ONE VOTE FOR INDUSTRIAL THAT, UH, YOU GUYS WILL SHARE, RIGHT? IS THAT CORRECT? I, I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T FOLLOW YOUR QUESTION.
IS IT ONE VOTE THE INDUSTRIALS WILL SHARE? YES.
UH, IT'S, IT'S ACTUALLY TWO VOTES THE INDUSTRIALS WOULD SHARE, BUT I MEAN, UM, YEAH.
AND, UH, JUST WANT TO, UH, MAKE SURE, AND, UH, OPAC WOULD LIKE TO STAND, IS THAT IT STUDENT REDUCE THE RESIDENTIAL VOTING SHARE.
SO THAT SHOULD BE 1 3, 1 3, 1 3.
AND IF THE CONSUMER, I MEAN, IF THE INDUSTRIAL WANT SHARE THEIR PERSON, THAT'S FINE FOR US.
UM, AND IT LOOKS LIKE CHRIS HENDRICKS IS IN THE QUEUE.
THANKS, JOHN, ON THE, UM, APPRECIATE YOUR PROPOSAL, AND I THINK YOU DID IT THE RIGHT WAY TO MAKE IT NON-CONTROVERSIAL ON THE, UM, SUBCOMMITTEES NOT THE TAC.
CAN YOU GO OVER THAT SLIDE ONE MORE TIME ABOUT HOW YOU'RE GOING TO, UM, INCREASE THE NUMBER OF REPRESENTATIVES LIKE ON ROSS AND WMS AND RMS? SURE.
UM, SO CURRENTLY THE LANGUAGE ALLOWS, UM, THERE TO BE UP TO FOUR STANDING REPRESENTATIVES IN EACH SUBSEGMENT, UM, THAT REPRESENTS FOUR WITH DIFFERENT REPRESENTATIVES OF THE CONSUMER SEGMENT.
PRACTICALLY WHAT THIS HAS MEANT IS THERE'S BEEN, UH, IN THE PAST TWO INDUSTRIALS, UH, AND THEN ONE COMMERCIAL AND, AND ONE RESIDENTIAL.
AND SO BY INCREASING IT TO FIVE, IT WOULD ALLOW PE TO HAVE UP TO THREE INDUSTRIALS, UM, IN THE, THE DIFFERENT SUB-SEGMENTS.
ALTERNATIVELY, WE COULD DELETE THE NUMBER AND, AND THE VOTES WOULD STILL BE SPLIT BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, AND INDUSTRIAL.
AND THE NUMBER OF INDUSTRIAL PEOPLE THAT SHOWED UP WOULD BE SPLITTING THEIR SHARE OF THAT VOTE.
UM, THERE'S ALREADY EXISTING LANGUAGE THAT EACH OF THE SUBSEGMENTS, MEANING RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, AND INDUSTRIAL, HAVE A, A SHARE OF THEIR VOTE AND SPLIT THAT VOTE WITHIN THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO SHOW UP FOR THAT SUBSEGMENT.
AND I THINK WE HAVE BOB WHITMEYER IN THE QUEUE.
UM, FIRST OFF, CONGRATULATIONS.
THIS SEEMS LIKE A VERY SIMPLISTIC WAY TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM.
I GUESS MY QUESTION FOR THE BIGGER GROUP AT THE, AT THE RISK OF SHORTENING THIS MEETING SIGNIFICANTLY, WAS ANYBODY LOOKING TO MAKE CHANGES TO THE OTHER SEGMENTS? AND IF NOT, THIS DOES SEEM LIKE IT FITS, LIKE SETH SAID, ALL WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL CONSUMER SECTOR.
AND I DON'T THINK REALLY THE REST OF US SHOULD HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.
BUT, AM I WRONG? YOU'RE RIGHT, BOB.
AND SUSIE HAD A QUESTION IN THE QUEUE.
UM, SUSIE, ARE YOU STILL THERE? OKAY.
CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY NOW? YEAH.
I WAS TRYING TO GRAB THIS INFORMATION.
THIS IS SUZY CLICKING WITH ERCOT.
I JUST WANTED TO ADD A LITTLE CLARITY AROUND THE CONSUMER SEATS AT THE SUBCOMMITTEES.
THEY'RE NOT, UM, THE REPRESENTATION IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
[00:30:01]
PUT SOMETHING IN THE CHAT.YOU CAN SEE LIKE AT PRS AND AT RMS, WE MIGHT HAVE JUST ONE INDUSTRIAL, LIKE IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT RMS, WE HAVE ONE SEAT FOR THE RESIDENTIAL.
WE HAVE ONE SEAT FOR THE COMMERCIAL, AND THEN WE HAVE ONE SEAT FOR THE INDUSTRIAL RMS. SO THAT'S KIND OF HOW, UM, AND AT ROSS, IT, IT CAN BE UP TO FOUR SEATS AT RMS AND ROSS, BUT WE CAN, WE MIGHT ONLY HAVE ONE INDUSTRIAL ON THERE, SO I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WAS CLEAR.
SORRY, SUSIE, ARE YOU MEANING TO SAY THAT THE LANGUAGE ON THE SCREEN SHOULD SAY, I GUESS THAT WHAT TIEC SHOULD PROPOSE IS THAT IT SHALL CONSIST OF ONE, TWO, UP TO FIVE? WELL, WHAT I WOULD BE SAYING IS YOU WOULD, YOU WOULD BE HAVING, UM, YOU KNOW, FOR INSTANCE, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT RMS, WE ONLY HAVE, UM, WE HAVE ONE COMMERCIAL, ONE LARGE, ONE SMALL, AND THEN YOU HAVE ONE INDUSTRIAL.
SO YOU'RE ADDING AN ADDITIONAL PERSON TO THERE TO GO TO THE FIVE.
BUT YOU'RE SPLITTING THAT INDUSTRIAL BY TWO PEOPLE.
I MEAN, SPLITTING THEIR, THEIR PORTION.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT'S CLEAR TO THE GROUP.
THAT WOULD BE OUR, OUR GOAL IS TO SPLIT THAT PERSON INTO MULTIPLE VOTES.
SO SUZIE, YEAH, ACTUALLY, I, I'M KIND OF GOING DOWN THE LINES OF BOB WHITMEYER IS, THIS ISN'T THE FIRST TIME WE'VE CHANGED THE CONSUMER GROUP THROUGH THE BYLAWS THAT'S HAPPENED BEFORE.
UH, I, I WOULD BE CURIOUS TO KNOW WHAT THE ENTIRE, UH, GROUP THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S IN THE CONSUMERS.
'CAUSE I THINK THAT'S REALLY WHERE THE AGREEMENT NEEDS TO BE, UH, TO GET THAT DONE.
I MEAN, IF IT'S INTERNAL, OF COURSE, EVERYONE HAS TO VOTE ON THE BYLAW.
WELL, NO, WE DON'T VOTE ON THOSE ANYMORE.
UH, BUT, UH, I THINK THAT WE COULD HAVE INPUT INTO THE BOARD WHO DOES VOTE, UH, BUT I THINK A LOT OF WEIGHT SHOULD BE GIVEN TO WHAT THE SEGMENT THAT HAS THAT, THAT WANTS TO DO IT.
AND THE REASON I'M SAYING, I'M LOOKING FOR THE AGREEMENT WITHIN THAT SEGMENT TO KIND OF GIVE PEOPLE OUTSIDE OF THAT SEGMENT AND THE BOARD IS BECAUSE WE'VE GOT A DISCUSSION COMING UP LATER ABOUT THE INDEPENDENT GENERATOR SEGMENT.
MARK DREYFUS FOR THE SMALL COMMERCIAL CONS, UH, CONSUMER MARKET SEGMENT.
UM, I, I AGREE WITH THE, THE SENTIMENT AROUND THE ROOM THAT IF THE, IT'S THE WILL OF THE INDUSTRIAL CONSUMER MARKET SEGMENT TO RESTRUCTURE THEIR, UH, THEIR PARTICIPATION AND REPRESENTATION WHILE MAINTAINING THE CURRENT TACK OF VOTING STRENGTH WITHOUT DILUTING OR CHANGING THE VOTING STRENGTH, THAT SEEMS LIKE AN ISSUE FOR THE INDUSTRIAL MARKET SEGMENT.
I, I JUST NOTE, YOU KNOW, WHILE, WHILE I SAID BEFORE THAT I FEEL LIKE WE HAVE A ROBUST STRUCTURE THAT'S LASTED 25 YEARS, THERE'S ALSO A LOT OF CHANGES IN OUR MARKET.
AND, UM, THESE CRYPTO AND DATA CENTER CUSTOMERS ARE SUPER IMPORTANT RIGHT NOW.
THE BIGGEST THING THAT HAS HAPPENED IN THIS MARKET IN THE LAST YEAR IS THE NEW ERA OF TRANSMISSION PLANNING THAT IS DUE IN LARGE PART TO THE RISE THE ENTRY OF THESE NEW TYPES OF CUSTOMERS IN THE MARKET.
AND, AND I THINK WE NEED TO SEE THEM REPRESENTED.
AND, UM, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF TALK, YOU KNOW, IN THE BACKS OF ROOMS FOR SIX MONTHS ABOUT HOW TO DO THAT.
AND I THINK THIS IS A VERY REASONABLE PROPOSAL THAT THE INDUSTRIAL CONSUMER GROUP HAS COME UP WITH WITHIN ITSELF.
AND IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE IT, IT MAINTAINS THE DECISIONS WE'VE MADE ABOUT THE ALLOCATION OF CONSUMER VOTING STRENGTH OVER THE YEARS AND BRINGS THESE NEW CUSTOMERS IN.
SO I THINK IT'S A GOOD PROPOSAL.
AND I THINK LEE BRATCHER WAS IN THE QUEUE.
UH, AND I DO AGREE WITH THOSE LAST COMMENTS.
WE ARE NOT LOOKING TO INCREASE, YOU KNOW, VOTING SHARE.
THE, THE TEXAS BLOCKCHAIN COUNCIL REPRESENTS A LOT OF THE BITCOIN MINING INDUSTRY IN TEXAS AND, UH, ARE, ARE GRATEFUL FOR OUR FRIENDS AT TIEC AND, AND THE STEEL MILLS AND OTHER, UH, TYPES OF LOADS IN THE INDUSTRIAL SEGMENT FOR, UM, HAVING COME UP WITH A GOOD PLAN THAT THAT REALLY GIVES REPRESENTATION AND, UM, MORE VISIBILITY AND, AND KIND OF MORE CONNECTIVITY
[00:35:01]
TO THE BROADER, UM, YOU KNOW, TO TAC AND RMS AND, AND ALL THE, THE DIFFERENT SUBCOMMITTEES, UH, WITHOUT ACTUALLY CAUSING A, A, A NEED FOR CHANGE IN THE VOTING, UH, STRENGTH OF THAT SUBCOMMITTEE.UH, SO, SO WE'RE GRATEFUL FOR THOSE CONVERSATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN TAKING PLACE FOR A LONG TIME.
AND I THINK WE'RE IN, WE'RE IN AGREEMENT WITH, UH, OUR COLLEAGUES IN THAT COMMITTEE, UM, IN THE INDUSTRIAL SEGMENT AS TO WHAT THEY'VE PUT FORWARD.
YEAH, JUST REAL QUICKLY, WHILE I WAS SAYING WHAT I SAID WHILE AGO ABOUT, YOU KNOW, AGREEING THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S IN THAT SEGMENT, I THINK THERE'S ONE THING OVERALL WE NEED TO KEEP IN MIND WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS FROM BOTH, YOU KNOW, THE TAC OR TAC STRUCTURE, RMS AND WMS AND R, WELL, R-M-S-R-O-S AND WMS IS FROM BEING INVOLVED IN SOME OF THE OTHER INTEX, YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE MEETINGS AND THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ARE IN A NUMBER THAT'S MANAGEABLE.
AND I DO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF CONCERN ABOUT THAT, BUT I'M KIND OF OKAY WHERE THEY'RE AT RIGHT THERE.
BUT WHEN WE OPEN UP PANDORA'S BOX TOO FAR, WE CAN END UP WITH A 50 60 MEMBER, T-R-M-S-R-O-S AND WMSI THINK WE REALLY NEED TO BE CAUTIOUS ABOUT THAT.
'CAUSE THEN THE, WE WON'T FIND A CHAIR 'CAUSE NOBODY'S GONNA WANNA DEAL WITH THAT
I DON'T SEE ANY MORE QUESTIONS, SO I THINK WE COULD MOVE TO THE NEXT, UM, IDEA, UM, WHICH IS ENCHANTED ROCK.
UM, I'M MONICA BACHER SCHRADER REPRESENTING ENCHANTED ROCK.
UM, I'M HOPING OUR PROPOSAL IS SIMILARLY UNCONTROVERSIAL, BUT WE'LL SEE.
UM, THE LONG AND SHORT OF IT IS THAT WE'D LIKE TO CREATE A DG DISTRIBUTED GENERATION SEGMENT WITHIN THE ERCOT STAKEHOLDER STRUCTURE.
UM, AND IN ORDER TO NOT DILUTE THE VOTE OF EVERY SEGMENT WE PROPOSED, JUST REALLOCATING ONE OF THE FOUR VOTES FROM THE INDEPENDENT GENERATOR SEGMENT, UM, AT TECH TO SPECIFICALLY DISTRIBUTED RE UH, GENERATION RESOURCES.
UM, SOME JUSTIFICATION, UM, IS THAT ACCORDING TO ERCOT CDR REPORT, FOSSIL FUEL BASED SETTLEMENT ONLY DISPATCHABLE GENERATOR CAPACITY HAS GROWN BY 37% FROM 2020 TO 2024.
SO, YOU KNOW, SIMILARLY TO THE GROWTH GROWTH OF, UM, CRYPTO, UM, YOU KNOW, WE BELIEVE THAT THIS DG GROWTH, UM, JUSTIFIES, UM, SOME REPRESENTATION, SOME FORMAL REPRESENTATION AT ERCOT.
UM, YOU KNOW, CURRENTLY MANY DISTRIBUTED GENERATION ENTITIES ARE MEMBERS OF THE INDEPENDENT GENERATOR SEGMENT.
BUT, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF, UM, THIS SEGMENT IS LARGER, UM, GENERATION PRODUCERS AND, UM, ARE, THE MARKET MARKET PRIORITIES AREN'T EXACTLY ALIGNED.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, ENCHANTED ROCK IS CURRENTLY PART OF THE IRE SEGMENT THROUGH OUR REP ENTITY ELECTRO NET, UM, WHICH HAS, YOU KNOW, SIMILAR, UM, ALIGNMENT ISSUES.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT AND DG SEGMENT WOULD ENSURE THAT MORE NON-TRADITIONAL GROWING FLEXIBLE GENERATION RESOURCES HAVE A DIRECT REPRESENTATION SPECIFICALLY AT, UM, TAC.
UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, THE SEGMENT CURRENTLY HAS FOUR VOTES.
SO WE JUST LIKE TO DEDICATE ONE OF THESE VOTES TO, UM, DISTRIBUTED GENERATORS.
WE HAVE SOME SUPPORT FROM, UH, BASE POWER, UM, SUNNOVA VOLTI ACTUALLY MIGHT BE ON THE CALL.
AND, UM, TEVA, TEXAS ADVANCED ENERGY BUSINESS ALLIANCE, WHO REPRESENTS, UM, MANY OF THESE, UH, SIMILAR FLEXIBLE GENERATION FOLKS.
UM, THAT'S KIND OF THE LONG AND SHORT OF IT.
[00:40:01]
UM, THANKS, MONICA.I THINK WE HAVE SETH AND THEN CAITLIN ON THE LINE.
YEAH, I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, IT'S AN OVERALL OBSERVATION.
UM, SO IT'S NOT REALLY TARGETED AT YOU.
AND I ALSO READILY ADMIT, NONE OF THIS REALLY IS IMPACTING THE INDEPENDENT POWER MARKETING SEGMENT THAT I REPRESENT.
SO SOME WAYS I DON'T HAVE A DOG IN THIS HUNT.
UH, I'M GONNA PUT MY, MY, UM, MY HEAD OUT HERE AND MAKE A, MAKE A COMMENT.
I, I FEEL LIKE SOME OF THIS IS SELF-CORRECTING TO SOME DEGREE, BECAUSE WITHIN EACH SEGMENT YOU HAVE CORPORATE MEMBERS, AND THEN THEY VOTE FOR WHOEVER REPRESENTS THE PEOPLE THAT MAKE UP, UH, THOSE THAT, THAT SEGMENT OF CORPORATE MEMBERS.
SO IN OTHER WORDS, IF, IF THERE'S A BROAD SWATH OR A CERTAIN COMMUNITY OF, OF A PARTICIPANT, UH, WITHIN A SEGMENT, AND THERE'S ENOUGH OF 'EM, THEN THEIR ABILITY TO INFLUENCE WHO, UH, IS ULTIMATELY, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, VOTED ON AND, AND PASSED TO BE A REPRESENTATIVE OF THAT SEGMENT, THEN HAS AN INTEREST IN REPRESENTING THEM.
I KNOW I DIDN'T SAY THAT VERY DISTINCTLY, BUT, UH, IT FEELS LIKE TO THAT EXTENT, SORT OF SELF-CORRECTING BECAUSE EMBEDDED WITHIN ALL THIS IS, UH, A, A VOTING SYSTEM WITHIN THE SEGMENT THAT IS ABLE TO ELECT THE PEOPLE THAT REPRESENT THE SEGMENT.
SO I HOPE THAT MADE SENSE, BUT TO THAT END, I FEEL LIKE SOME OF THIS KIND OF TAKES CARE OF ITSELF.
I JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE THAT PERSPECTIVE.
THAT, UM, THAT DEFINITELY MAKES SENSE.
I THINK PART OF OUR THOUGHT PRESSES HERE IS THAT A LOT OF DISTRIBUTED GENERATION FOLKS DON'T NECESSARILY, UM, OR AREN'T MEMBERS OF ERCOT, UM, YET BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE, THEY DON'T FEEL LIKE THEY WOULD HAVE AS MUCH OF A A SAY.
UM, AND SO HAVING THIS DEDICATED VOTE WOULD INCENTIVIZE MORE DG TO BE PART OF, UM, THE, THE ERCOT UH, MEMBERSHIP.
I THINK CAITLYN WAS ALSO IN THE QUEUE.
THANK YOU CATHERINE, AND THANK YOU MONICA.
UM, I, I AGREE WITH A COUPLE OF THINGS.
SETH SAYS AS, AS WELL AS, YOU KNOW, SUZY'S MENTIONED THAT A-A-P-R-S-I MEMBER HAS A VOTE.
UM, UNFORTUNATELY THIS CAN'T BE UNCONTROVERSIAL LIKE THE, THE CONSUMER PROPOSAL FOR, FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS.
UM, YOU KNOW, I WOULD'VE LOVED THE OPPORTUNITY TO, TO COMPROMISE WITH THIS PROPOSAL.
I, I DON'T THINK ANY GENERATOR THAT CURRENTLY IS ONT WAS, WAS AWARE OF IT.
SO WE COULDN'T COME TOGETHER AND, AND TALK TO YOU AND COMPROMISE AND, AND GET TO SOMETHING THAT WAS UNCONTROVERSIAL.
YOU KNOW, AND I THINK WHAT HAS HAPPENED ON THE CONSUMER SEGMENT IS THOSE, THOSE TECHNOLOGY, WHATEVER WE'RE CALLING THEM, THOSE NEW TYPE OF LOADS HAVE BEEN MEMBERS OF ERCOT SINCE I THINK 2021.
AND SO THIS HAS BEEN FOUR YEARS THAT THEY HAVE BEEN WORKING TOWARDS THIS, WORKING WITH, WITH THAT GROUP ON HOW TO ALLOCATE VOTES, YOU KNOW, GOING TO, TO PRS WHEN THEY WANTED TO.
AND SO WE, WE JUST HAVEN'T SEEN THAT, YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T THINK WE'VE SEEN A PROBLEM THAT NEEDED TO BE SELF-CORRECTED.
I ALSO HAVE SOME, SOME QUESTIONS ON, ON EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE AS FAR AS, UM, DG, IS IT THE DER? IS IT THE A DER? ARE THESE MEMBERS NOT JOINING OUR CO OR, OR THESE POTENTIAL MEMBERS? ARE THEY NOT THE COMING MEMBERS BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO OR BECAUSE THEY CAN'T? I BELIEVE RIGHT NOW, UM, THERE'S, THERE'S AN ASSOCIATED, YOU KNOW, REQUIREMENT TO HAVE A TGC WITH THE PUC.
AND THAT KIND OF CONFLICTS WITH SB, UM, 1699, WHICH SAYS IF, IF YOU ARE, YOU KNOW, REGISTERED A DR, YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE A PGC.
AND I THINK THAT WAS DONE DELIBERATELY BECAUSE THERE ARE DIFFERENT RULES OF THE ROAD.
YOU KNOW, MONICA, AS, AS YOU YOURSELF SAID, THE INTERESTS ARE DIFFERENT.
I THINK BACKUP GENERATION THAT, YOU KNOW, AT A SMALL CONSUMER SITE, AT A RESIDENTIAL SITE, AT, AT A GROCERY STORE IS A SUPPLY SIDE SOLUTION.
AND, AND THERE'S DIFFERENT RULES, RIGHT? THEY DON'T HAVE WEATHERIZATION REQUIREMENTS.
SO I, I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WITHOUT SEEING LANGUAGE.
I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT LEVEL OF DG OR DER WE'RE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, AND WHETHER
[00:45:01]
THAT, THAT THEY CANNOT BECOME A MEMBER OR THEY, THEY DON'T WANT TO.SO I WOULD JUST NEED A LOT MORE INFORMATION THERE.
UM, YOU KNOW, ALL FAIR POINTS.
I, IN TERMS OF THE, UH, COMMUNICATION, I, WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY MARRIED TO THIS EXACT PROPOSAL.
WE ARE DEFINITELY OPEN AND WILLING TO WORK WITH, UM, YOU ALL TO COME TO A, A COMPROMISE ON THIS.
I GUESS I WAS JUST USING THIS, UH, THIS VENUE AS A, AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO, TO BRING UP THIS IDEA.
UM, IN TERMS OF THE DETAILS YOU WERE ASKING ABOUT, I CAN DEFINITELY DO SOME HOMEWORK AND, AND GET BACK WITH YOU.
UM, DOUG WAS NEXT IN THE QUEUE.
EVA, UH, JUST WANTED TO, UH, VOCALIZE OUR SUPPORT, UH, THAT MONICA ALREADY MENTIONED FOR THE EXPLORATION OF ADDING DG AS ITS OWN SEGMENT.
UM, YOU KNOW, WHILE, UH, WE'RE SENSITIVE TO THE DETAILS THAT CAITLIN POINTED OUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THE IDEA THAT DG IS DESERVING OF MORE NARROW REPRESENTATION, UH, ONTO ITS OWN SEGMENT AT ERCOT.
UM, ALSO, I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT, UH, YOU KNOW, WHILE KEITH, CAITLIN, AND SETH BROUGHT UP, UH, GOOD POINTS ABOUT, UH, YOU KNOW, THE CONSUMER SIDE OF THIS SORT OF BEING LONGSTANDING AND PRETTY WELL SETTLED, UM, I WOULD SAY THAT IT, IT DOESN'T SEEM, UH, PARTICULARLY LOGICALLY CONSISTENT TO SAY THAT CONSUMERS SHOULD BE AFFORDED GREATER DIVERSIFICATION IF THEY CAN COME TO AN AGREEMENT ON REALLOCATION WITHIN THEMSELVES.
UM, AND THAT THE, UH, INDEPENDENT GENERATOR SHOULD, SHOULD BE SHIELDED FROM THAT, UM, SEEMS A BIT UNEVEN.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS REASONING FOR THE DIFFERENCES, BUT, UH, OVERALL I WOULD SAY THAT, UM, I THINK THAT LACKS A LITTLE BIT OF LOGICAL CONSISTENCY THAT SHOULD ALSO BE HAMMERED OUT.
CAN I RESPOND TO DOUG REALLY QUICK? I THINK THAT'S THE WHOLE VALUE OF THE STAKEHOLDER SYSTEM IS THAT YOU ARE COMING TO A COMPROMISE WHERE YOU SEE THE, THE PROBLEM.
SO I, I THINK THAT'S, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FOR REPRESENTATION ON GET, GETTING TO THAT COMPROMISE POSITION IS, IS EVERYTHING.
AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE SPENDING SO MUCH TIME ON HOW MUCH WEIGHT EACH SEGMENT HAS, UM, TRYING TO GO IN ORDER.
AND, UH, MONICA, THANKS FOR, FOR BRINGING THIS TO US TO, TO DISCUSS TODAY.
I KNOW, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A, A LOT OF NEW IDEAS THAT ARE TOSSED OUT, AND THIS IS WHAT THE FORUM'S FOR.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, HAPPY TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION.
UM, I DO AGREE WITH, I THINK WHAT, WHAT KAITLYN WAS, UM, WAS, WAS GETTING AT, WHICH IS, I THINK THERE IS A, A MATERIAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DISTRIBUTED GENERATION AND CAPITAL G, CAPITAL R GENERATION RESOURCES THAT ARE ON THE BULK POWER SYSTEM AND OFFERING IN SC THEY'RE SUBJECT TO RUCK RELIABILITY MUST RUN, UH, OBLIGATIONS OR CO CONTROLS THEIR OUTAGES.
THEY HAVE TO CONDUCT WEATHERIZATION INSPECTIONS.
THEY'RE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR MAINTAINING ACCURATE REAL-TIME TELEMETRY.
AND, YOU KNOW, ERCOT IS ULTIMATELY CHARGED WITH MAINTAINING THE RELIABILITY AND BALANCE ON THE BULK POWER SYSTEM.
SO WHEN I THINK OF THE INDEPENDENT GENERATION SEGMENT, THAT'S REALLY WHAT I THINK THAT SHOULD BE REPRESENTING IS THE RESOURCES THAT ARE DIRECTLY CONTRIBUTING TO THE RELIABILITY OF THE BULK POWER SYSTEM.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, RESPECTFULLY, I, I WOULD BE INCLINED TO DECLINE THE, UH, THE, THE OFFER.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, IF, IF THERE IS CLARIFICATION NEEDED FOR THE IGEN SEGMENT, UM, I, I THINK I WOULD WANT TO EXPLORE MAKING CLEAR THAT THAT IS TO REPRESENT THOSE, THOSE GENERATION RESOURCES THAT ARE, UH, FRANKLY GOING TO BE NEED, ARE NEEDED, AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE NEEDED TO MEET THE GROWING NEEDS OF, UM, UH, CUSTOMER LOADS AS THE STATE AND THE STATE'S ECONOMY, UM, CONTINUALLY TO RAPIDLY EVOLVE.
AND I THINK ANDY WAS ALSO ON THE LINE.
AND, AND AGAIN, MONICA, THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS UP SINCE, SINCE WE'RE HAVING
[00:50:01]
THIS DISCUSSION.UM, I, I ALSO AGREE WITH SETH KAITLYN NED'S COMMENTS IN REGARDS TO JUST KIND OF THE PROCESS THAT, THAT WE'VE DEVELOPED HERE.
AND IT'S BEEN, THERE'S A VERY ROBUST PROCESS AND, AND A LONG, HIS STANDING HISTORY OF, OF WHAT, UM, HAS BEEN PUT IN PLACE TO DATE.
UM, I KNOW THERE WERE SOME, UH, DOUG HAD DRAWN SOME CORRELATIONS TO THE, THE CONSUMER SEGMENT, BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK JUST REITERATING THEY'RE, THEY'VE ADDED 12 CORPORATE MEMBERS OVER THE SPAN OF THREE YEARS.
AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THE PROCESS TODAY, LIKE SETH MENTIONED BEFORE, UM, PROVIDES OPPORTUNITIES FOR SEGMENT MEMBERS TO IDENTIFY WHERE THEY RESIDE, AND THEN SHOULD THE CORPORATE MEMBERSHIP, UM, INCREASE OR DECREASE RELATIVE TO THE EXISTING MEMBERSHIP, UM, THEN THOSE PARTICULAR SEATS AND, AND WAITING SHOULD, SHOULD KIND OF WORK ITSELF ACCORDINGLY.
AND SO, UM, WITH THAT, UM, I AGREE WITH NED.
I THINK, YOU KNOW, THERE PROBABLY NEEDS TO BE A MORE HOLISTIC DISCUSSION ABOUT KIND OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS DG, WHERE DOES IT SIT? DOES IT, YOU KNOW, WHEN I THINK IGEN SEGMENT, YOU KNOW, UM, SERVING THE BULK ELECTRIC SYSTEM, I AGREE WITH NED.
YOU KNOW, THERE'S A HUNDRED GIGAWATTS OF, OF CAPACITY RESOURCES THAT ARE LOOKING TO PERFORM THAT TYPE OF FUNCTION.
AND SO, UM, LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING THAT FURTHER DISCUSSION WITH YOU.
BUT, YOU KNOW, I'M KIND OF IN THE CAMP OF WHERE NED AND, AND SOME OF THE OTHERS ARE IN, IN TERMS OF, UM, WHERE WE SIT TODAY.
I THINK IT WAS BOB'S TURN NEXT.
YEAH, JUST REAL QUICKLY, AND I'M NOT GONNA REPEAT EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN SAID THAT I AGREE WITH, BUT THERE'S STILL THE ISSUE OF, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE DG IS BASICALLY LOW DISPATCHED AND EVERYTHING ELSE, SO THAT, THAT NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT.
UH, ONE THING THAT, THAT I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT IS THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, WHAT YOU SAID A LITTLE, BUT THANK YOU FOR BRINGING IT UP.
THIS IS A GOOD CONVERSATION, LET ME SAY THAT FIRST.
UH, HOWEVER, I THINK THERE WOULD'VE BEEN OTHER FORMS THAT WOULD'VE BEEN BETTER TO DO THAT FIRST.
UH, AND, UH, THE POINT I'M TRYING TO MAKE IS, IS YOU GUYS HAVEN'T JOINED THE GENERATOR SEGMENT.
YOU KNOW, UH, WE DO HAVE SOME DG IN THE GENERATOR SEGMENT, AND AS A MATTER OF FACT, WE HAVE OUR POWER WHO IS A DG THAT IS A VOTING MEMBER OF PRS FOR US.
SO I, I HAVE A LITTLE ISSUE WITH LOOKING FROM THE OUTSIDE, LOOKING IN SAYING, SOMETHING'S BROKE WHEN YOU HAVEN'T BEEN ON THE INSIDE TRYING TO WORK THROUGH THE PROCESS AND WORK WITH US ON THAT.
SO I THINK THERE ARE WAYS OF DOING THAT, YOU KNOW, AND YOU DO SAID, WELL, WE DON'T THINK WE HAVE THE POWER, YOU KNOW, OR THE VOTING THING, SO WE'RE NOT JOINING.
THAT'S A CHICKEN AND EGG ARGUMENT, YOU KNOW, SO GET IN, GET YOUR FEET IN THE WATER, COME ON IN, WORK WITH US, AND LET'S SEE HOW WE CAN WORK THIS OUT, IS THE WAY I WOULD LOOK AT THIS RATHER THAN TRYING TO DO THIS THROUGH A BYLAW CHANGE.
UM, I THINK, UH, MARK DREYFUS, YOU ARE NEXT.
MARK DREYFUS FOR THE COMMERCIAL, UH, SMALL COMMERCIAL CONSUMER SEGMENT.
I HAVE A, A COMMENT AND A QUESTION.
UH, THE COMMENT IS THAT, UH, WE HAVE 170 MEMBERS OF THE COMMERCIAL CONSUMER MARKET SEGMENT.
UM, WE, WE DO PAY A LOWER MEMBERSHIP FEE, BUT WE WORK REALLY HARD EVERY YEAR TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE ENGAGEMENT OF ALL THESE MEMBERS AND THAT THEY CONTINUE TO JOIN ERCOT AND FIND VALUE IN BEING A MEMBER OF ERCOT.
AND THE DIALOGUE THAT WE HAVE WITH THOSE MEMBERS EACH YEAR AS WE WORK WITH THEM TO BECOME, TO ASSURE THEIR MEMBERSHIP, UH, MAKES OUR MARKET SEGMENT STRONGER, IMPROVES THE INPUT THAT WE RECEIVE, AND, UH, AND IT BRINGS VALUE TO ALL OF OUR CUT TO HAVE A ROBUST MEMBERSHIP.
UM, MY QUESTION IS, AND THIS IS SINCERE QUESTION, IT'S NOT A GOTCHA, IS YOU MENTIONED THAT SOME MEMBERS OF THE DG COMMUNITY ARE MEMBERS OF THE INDEPENDENT GENERATOR MARKET SEGMENT, AND SOME ARE MEMBERS OF THE IRE MARKET SEGMENT.
UM, SO WHY IN YOUR PROPOSAL, WHAT WAS YOUR THINKING FOR WHY YOU WOULD HAVE A SEAT IN THE INDEPENDENT GENERATOR SEGMENT RATHER THAN THE IRE SEGMENT? I THINK GENERALLY, UM, IT ALIGNS, LIKE I MENTIONED, NOT EXACTLY WITH, UM, THE GOALS OF, UH, DG, BUT I THINK BETTER THAN THE IRE SEGMENT.
UM, I THINK CHRIS HENDRICKS IS ONLINE IN THE QUEUE.
[00:55:01]
NO REAL CONCERN, BUT JUST THAT AREA, THE INDEPENDENT GENERATOR SEGMENT OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS WITH THE KIND OF THE, IN KIND OF IMPRESSIVE GROWTH WITH WIND, SOLAR, AND NOW BATTERY STORAGE, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT COMPONENTS GETTING STUCK IN THAT AREA WHERE I CAN SEE SOME DIFFERENT, DIFFERENT VIEWPOINTS BASED ON DIFFERENT TYPES OF COMPANIES THAT ARE THERE SO FAR.THE MEMBERS OF THAT SEGMENT HAVE ALL SEEM TO BE ABLE TO WORK IT OUT.
SO I MEAN, I KEEP ON DEFERRING TO THEM TO, IF THEY HAVE AN ISSUE, THEY'LL KIND OF BRING IT UP AND I MEAN, I DON'T SEE HOW WE CAN, IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO START SPLITTING UP THE, THE VOTES BY TECHNOLOGY TYPE IN MY VIEWPOINT.
UM, AGAIN, ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE FROM AN OUTSIDER LOOKING IN, OBVIOUSLY IN ANOTHER SEGMENT, BUT, UM, MONICA, YOU HAD SAID IN YOUR LAYOUT THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, NOT, NOT MANY OF THE DG DEVELOPERS ARE CURRENTLY MEMBERS, ALTHOUGH THERE'S BEEN A FEW THAT HAVE BEEN CIED AS EXAMPLES.
IT SEEMS LIKE A GOOD FIRST STEP TOWARDS THIS IS TO, YOU KNOW, WORK WITHIN THAT COMMUNITY AND COURAGE, THOSE THAT AREN'T MEMBERS TO BECOME MEMBERS AND ACTUALLY START VOTING AT PRS BECAUSE ANYONE WHO'S A MEMBER CAN VOTE AT THAT COMMITTEE.
I THINK THE ISSUE THAT IS HAPPENING SO FAR IS LIKE, UH, THERE'S NOT A LOT OF PARTICIPATION CURRENTLY, AND SO TO GO STRAIGHT TO, YOU KNOW, BEING PART OF THE IG SEGMENT MAYBE ISN'T MAKING A LOT OF SENSE TO PEOPLE, BUT ONCE THAT PARTICIPATION LEVEL HAS HAPPENED, MAYBE IT DOES MAKE SENSE AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE.
SO THAT'S JUST A SUGGESTION TO MAYBE FOCUS ON THE MEMBERSHIP ASPECT AND THE, THE VOTING WHERE YOU CAN VOTE FIRST AND SEE HOW THAT GOES.
UH, JUST WANTED TO THANK MONICA FOR THIS PROPOSAL AND TO CONFIRM OUR SUPPORT FOR IT.
UM, I THINK WE SEE THIS AS A, AS A MEANINGFUL DIFFERENCE IN TERMS OF, UM, INTERESTS AND JUST APPROACH, UH, UH, TO MARKET PARTICIPATION IN ERCOT AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THINK GREATER THE, THE SEPARATION OUT OF A DG SEGMENT WILL ALLOW GREATER SPECIFICITY, UM, AND, UM, BETTER INPUT TO THE TAC.
I THINK NOW THE QUEUE IS CLEARED.
I JUST WANNA SAY THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR INPUT, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO CHATTING OFFLINE.
UM, SO I THINK, LET'S SEE, THE NEXT PRESENTER IS RA DID, AND NED, YOU DIDN'T HAVE A SLIDESHOW OR ANYTHING.
UM, SO THAT'S, THAT'S PROBABLY A GOOD, A GOOD SEGUE INTO THIS.
UM, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A, A TOPIC THAT IS, YOU KNOW, IT'S COME UP A COUPLE TIMES OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS IS, UH, YOU KNOW, AND CATHERINE, YOU'VE, YOU'VE BROUGHT THIS TO TACK AND, AND FRAMED IT AS, YOU KNOW, REALLY MOTIVATED BY, YOU KNOW, CHANGES IN THE, UH, IN THE CONSUMER SEGMENT OR POTENTIAL CHANGES IN THE CONSUMER SEGMENT, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO THANK, UM, JOHN SUBURB FOR, FOR BRINGING THE, UH, THE PROPOSAL FORWARD, UM, THAT WE WERE ABLE TO, TO TALK ABOUT EARLIER.
UM, I THINK IT'S PROBABLY GOOD CONTEXT TO START OFF BY SAYING, UH, YOU KNOW, VISTRA SHARES THE SAME, UH, THE SAME SENTIMENTS AND CONCERNS ABOUT BALANCE IN THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS THAT I THINK EVERYONE HAS, HAS VOICED TODAY.
I THINK THAT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT EVERYONE IN THE INDEPENDENT GENERATOR SEGMENT SHARES THAT, UH, THAT THAT CONCERN AND THAT RESPECT FOR THAT BALANCE.
SO, UM, AND TO SOME DEGREE, I WOULD SAY TAKE THE, WHAT, WHAT VISTA PROPOSED UP THERE AS, UH, YOU KNOW, HAVING A, AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS IF THERE WAS GOING TO BE CHANGES IN THE BALANCE OF THE STAKEHOLDER, UH, UM, REPRESENTATION, POTENTIAL CHANGES TO, UH, REFLECT THE, UH, THE, THE VALUE, UH, THAT, THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF VALUE THAT THE, UH, INDEPENDENT GENERATOR SEGMENT BRINGS TO THE, UH, TO THE MARKET.
SO, UM, I THINK THE DISCUSSION WE HAD EARLIER PROBABLY COLORS A LOT OF THAT.
UM, BUT, UM, NOT TO, UH, NOT TO REPEAT TOO MUCH.
UM, YOU KNOW, THE INDEPENDENT GENERATOR SEGMENT DOES HAVE, YOU KNOW, THAT IS WHERE YOU HAVE ALL, ALL OF THE RESOURCES THAT ARE ON THE BULK POWER SYSTEM THAT ARE INVESTING TO MEET THE
[01:00:01]
NEED, THE GROWING NEEDS OF THE STATE.UM, THEY ARE LARGELY CONSISTING OF CAPITAL G, CAPITAL R GENERATION RESOURCES THAT OFFER INTO SC WE PROVIDE ANSING RELIABILITY SERVICES AND ULTIMATELY HAVE TO LIVE AND DIE BY THE, UH, THE OP MARKET STRUCTURE.
THAT'S THE, THE, THE NATURE OF THE COMPETITIVE STRUCTURE WE HAVE.
UM, AND AS THE ERCOT SYSTEM CONTINUES TO EVOLVE, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE'RE GONNA NEED THE, THE MEMBERS OF THE INDEPENDENT GENERATOR SEGMENT TO REALLY EMBRACE THE OPPORTUNITY OF SERVING THOSE INCOMING NEW LOADS, UM, THAT, THAT MOTIVATED THE EARLIER DISCUSSION.
AND, UH, SO JUST WANTED TO EMPHASIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF THE INDEPENDENT GENEROUS SEGMENT IN THAT DYNAMIC.
UM, WE'VE OBSERVED THE, AND AND HEARD GROWING INTEREST FROM, UH, FOLKS WITHIN THE, THE EXISTING SEGMENT THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK CHRIS HENDRICKS JUST MENTIONED, THERE'S BEEN IMPRESSIVE GROWTH IN THE, UH, IN THE INVERTER BASED RESOURCE GROUP.
UM, I THINK THE SYSTEM THAT WE'VE HAD HIS HISTORICALLY, WHERE THERE'S BEEN AN INFORMAL SHARING AGREEMENT WITHIN THE, UH, WITHIN THE SEGMENT HAS WORKED REALLY WELL.
I THINK IT'S A TESTAMENT TO THE COLLABORATIVE NATURE OF ALL OF THE MEMBERS IN THE SEGMENT.
AND, UM, SO THE, THE, UH, BUT YOU KNOW, EACH OF THOSE MEMBERS, THEY, THEY PROVIDE DIFFERENT, DIFFERENT INSIGHTS AND DIFFERENT, UH, THEY BRING DIFFERENT EXPERIENCE TO, TO THE MARKET THAT'S RELEVANT, AGAIN, IN THE CONTEXT OF HOW DO YOU GET ALL OF THESE RESOURCES ON THE BULK POWER SYSTEM TO MEET THE NEEDS OF, OF CUSTOMERS AND THE MOST RELIABLE AND AFFORDABLE WAY.
UM, SO AT THE HEART OF WHAT VISTA'S PROPOSAL IS UP THERE WAS, YOU KNOW, I'LL, I'LL, I'LL BE THE FIRST TO ADMIT, THREW IT TOGETHER RELATIVELY QUICKLY, WANTED TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION.
IF WE WERE CHANGING THE BALANCE, THEN WE WANTED TO CONSIDER THAT MAYBE GENERATION RESOURCES, UH, SHOULD HAVE, YOU KNOW, GIVEN WHERE WE ARE IN THE, IN THE, THE GROWTH OF THE STATE, YOU MAY WANNA HAVE MORE VOICES FOR THOSE GENERATION RESOURCES.
UM, AND GIVEN WHAT WE, WE SAW AND, AND, UH, THIS MORNING, I THINK PERHAPS ANOTHER WAY TO THINK ABOUT IT IS, SHOULD THE, IN THE INDEPENDENT GENERATOR SEGMENT, UH, YOU KNOW, BE REFINED TO ONE, REFLECT THOSE CHARACTERISTICS THAT, UH, I RATTLED OFF EARLIER, UH, AND OR, UH, FORMALIZE THE, THE, WHAT HAS BEEN THE INFORMAL SHARING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE INVERTER BASED AND THERMAL REGENERATION RESOURCES WITHIN THE INDEPENDENT GENERATOR SEGMENT.
UM, SO IN THE HOPES THAT WE MIGHT GET SOME TIME BACK, I'LL, I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT.
UM, 'CAUSE I KNOW A LOT OF FOLKS ARE PROBABLY LOOKING AT THIS FROM THE, YOU KNOW, ARE THEY LOOKING TO, YOU KNOW, DOUBLE THE NUMBER OF SEATS AND THROW OFF THE BALANCE? I DON'T THINK THAT'S ON THE TABLE GIVEN THE, THE, THE TENURE OF THE, THE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD THIS MOR OR EARLIER THIS MORNING.
SO, UM, I HOPE THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, ASSUAGES ANY CONCERNS ABOUT THAT, UH, PARTICULAR, UH, ELEMENT, BUT HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS.
WHAT WAS YOUR PROPOSAL
UH, SO THE PROPOSAL WAS, SO THE WAY I WROTE IT UP WAS SEPARATE MEMBER SEGMENTS FOR THE THERMAL AND INVERTER BASED RESOURCES, RIGHT? SO RIGHT NOW, THE INFORMAL SHARING AGREEMENT IS, YOU KNOW, FOR INSTANCE, IN TAC AND MOST OF THE STAKEHOLDER SUBCOMMITTEES, UH, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S FOUR SEATS, TOOL, UH, TOOL BE FILLED BY THERMAL RESOURCES TOOL, BE FILLED BY INVERTER BASED RESOURCES, UH, IT'S EFFECTIVELY A, YOU KNOW, SHARING OF THE, OF THE VOTE.
UM, SO THE PROPOSAL WAS, YOU KNOW, IF THERE WAS GOING TO BE A REBALANCING, THEN LET'S CONSIDER SEPARATE SEGMENTS.
NOT TO SAY THAT THE CURRENT APPROACH DOESN'T WORK, BUT YOU KNOW, IF THE HOOD IS OPEN, THEN WE SHOULD CONSIDER GIVING MORE VOICE TO GENERATION RESOURCES.
THOSE ARE, YOU KNOW, THEY, FRANKLY, THEY PROVIDE ALL OF THE SUPPLY THAT THE SYSTEM NEEDS.
SO IS, SO, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT OPENING UP THE HOOD IN TERMS OF WAITING BOAT DIFFERENTLY, DOES THAT CHANGE YOUR PROPOSAL OR YOU STILL PROPOSING GENERATORS HAVE A LARGER WEIGHT OF VOTES OR NUMBER OF VOTES? I DO NOT WANT TO UPSET THE BALANCE THAT WE HAVE ALL, UH, WE HAVE ALL WORKED VERY HARD TO, UH, TO, TO SET AND MAINTAIN.
SO IT WOULD JUST, IT IS NOT TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF SEATS GIVEN THE CONTEXT WE HEARD THIS MORNING.
I HADN'T SEEN YOUR PRESENTATION WHEN, WHEN THE, THE INPUT WAS DUE.
SO WOULD YOU CONSIDER JUST HAVING A SUBSEGMENT WITHIN THE INDEPENDENT GENERATOR SEGMENT INSTEAD OF A SEPARATE SEGMENT AND THEN Y'ALL CAN DO WHAT YOU WILL THAT THAT'S A POSSIBILITY.
UM, SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT, UH, MARK SMITH WITH THE STEEL MILLS, UH, IF YOU, UH, CHANGE THE
[01:05:01]
ALLOCATION, THEN I THINK BASED ON WHAT WE, BETWEEN THE SUB, UH, THE SEGMENTS, WHAT WE SAW FROM THE MATERIALS CATHERINE PRESENTED EARLIER IS THAT IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS, THE, THE CONSUMERS HAVE A HIGHER, UH, VOTING STRENGTH GENERALLY.IF WE START MESSING WITH IT, I WOULD WANNA ARGUE FOR MORE VOTING STRENGTH FOR THE CONSUMERS.
IT'S, UH,
UM, AND AS WE HAD TO COME INTO THIS DISCUSSION NOT KNOWING WHAT THE, WHAT THE PROPOSALS WOULD BE, UM, I WANTED TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO DISCUSS THE VALUE THAT GENERATORS PROVIDE TO THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS AND TO THE BALANCE WITHIN, UH, WITHIN THAT PROCESS.
UM, IF THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS GOING TO BE, UH, YOU KNOW, THROWN OFF BY, UH, BY ANOTHER PROPOSAL, I'LL PUT IT THAT WAY.
UM, BOB HILTON, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? UH, JUST TO COMMENT, UH, JUST AS A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND, WE STARTED THIS INFORMAL SPLIT WITHIN THERE BASED ON, THIS HAS BEEN YEARS AGO, UH, THAT WE HAD TOTAL WAR
AND, UH, AND THERE WAS TALK ABOUT SINCE THERE WERE MANY MORE MEMBERS ON ONE SIDE THAN THE OTHER, THAT YOU JUST START TAKING SEATS AWAY FROM THE OPPOSITION YOU HAD.
UH, WE DIDN'T FEEL THAT CALMER HEAD SAID THAT'S NOT RIGHT.
SO WE CAME UP WITH THIS INFORMAL DEAL TO SAY, LET'S JUST SPLIT IT UP, BE EQUAL IN WHAT WE'RE DOING.
UH, NOW WHETHER WE MAKE IT FORMAL OR NOT, UH, YOU KNOW, THAT'S KIND OF IMMATERIAL TO ME.
UH, WE COULD DO IT IF YOU WANT.
AND 'CAUSE THAT'S, TO ME IS NOT GONNA CHANGE THE WAY I FEEL ABOUT THE WAY WE NEED TO BE MOVING FORWARD.
UH, SO, UH, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO THERE.
NOW, IF WE START TALKING ABOUT THIS ISSUE AND THEY WANNA TRY THAT, THEN WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT A LOT OF THINGS, BUT JOIN AND COME AND TALK TO US.
AND I THINK KAITLYN WAS IN THE QUEUE.
I, I APPRECIATE, YOU KNOW, THE KIND OF CONSTRAINTS AND UNDER WHICH YOU WERE WORKING ON THIS, AND WE, WE'VE TALKED A FEW TIMES THIS WEEK.
UM, I, I THINK JUST, JUST FOR CLARITY, I, I THINK WE WOULD CONSIDER THAT THIS IS WITHDRAWN OR MAYBE NOT FULLY PROPOSED BECAUSE OF WHAT WE SAW FROM THE, THE CONSUMER SEGMENTS.
I THINK WE WERE, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO ANTICIPATE THAT.
AND IF WE WERE, WE'RE GOING TO BE ADDING MORE, YOU KNOW, DEMAND SIDE CONSUMER SEATS, THEN WE WOULD WANT THE OPPORTUNITY TO BALANCE THAT ON THE SUPPLY SIDE.
BUT I THINK SEEING THE PROPOSAL THAT WAS PRESENTED TODAY, IF, IF THAT IS WHAT IS ACCEPTED, WE WOULD NOT BE PUTTING FORTH, YOU KNOW, UH, A PROPOSAL TO, TO ADD SEGMENTS FOR FOR GENERATION.
UM, SO I, AND THEN I'M SAYING THAT HOPEFULLY AS THE GENERATOR SEGMENT AND THEN ME AS JUPITER, YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T KNOW THAT I WOULD SUPPORT, LIKE FORMALLY SPLITTING IT, YOU KNOW, PUTTING WHAT WE DO INTO BYLAWS, BUT I, I DON'T KNOW THAT I WOULD OPPOSE IT EITHER, BUT I, I THINK THAT WE WOULD AGREE THAT WE ARE NOT ADDING VOTING SEATS OR A SEGMENT AT THIS TIME.
IS THAT RIGHT, NED? I WOULD AGREE THAT IT SEEMS TO, THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE TENOR OF THE DISCUSSION TODAY.
SO I THINK WE CAN GO TO OUR LAST ISSUE, WHICH IS, UM, FROM NEXT ERA.
UM, HI, GOOD MORNING OVER HERE.
UH, KARA BECKMAN, SINGER, DIRECTOR OF REGULATORY AND POLITICAL AFFAIRS FOR NEXTERA ENERGY RESOURCES.
REALLY WANNA THANK ERCOT STAFF AND ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BRAINSTORM TODAY.
I TOO DID NOT HAVE TIME FOR A FORMAL PROPOSAL, BUT I AM HOPING THAT WITH THIS EXPLORATORY DISCUSSION THAT SOME BYLAW CHANGES CAN BE, CAN BE MADE THOUGH I, I TAKE THE THEME EARLIER SAID, AND I WROTE IT DOWN SPECIFICALLY, UM, NOT CHANGING THE UNDERLYING STRUCTURE IS THE MISSION.
UM, SO, UH, IN THAT VEIN, NEXTERA'S PROPOSAL BELIEVES THAT IT'S, UM, IN THAT, IN THAT KIND OF OBJECTIVE.
SO A LITTLE BIT ABOUT NEXTERA FOR THOSE THAT DON'T KNOW.
WE ARE A LARGE GENERATOR IN TEXAS.
WE PROVIDE ABOUT SEVEN GIGAWATTS OF AN OPERATING PORTFOLIO WITH A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT COMING ONLINE.
I'M ALSO GONNA BORROW ANOTHER STATEMENT THAT NED SAID EARLIER THAT, UM, AS AN INDEPENDENT GENERATOR, WE PROVIDE
[01:10:01]
RELIABILITY TO THE BULK, BULK ELECTRIC SYSTEM AND NEXT DOES.SO SOME MAY BE SURPRISED THAT CURRENTLY NEXTERA IS UNABLE TO SIT IN THE INDEPENDENT GENERATOR SEGMENT AS CURRENTLY WRITTEN BY THE BYLAW BYLAWS.
AND THOSE REASONS, UH, I'M SURE HAD SOME HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE THAT I'M NOT AWARE OF, BUT AT LEAST CURRENTLY, UM, NEXTERA ENERGY RESOURCES SHARES A COMMON DISTANT CONTROL, UM, WITH LONE STAR TRANSMISSION LINE.
AND THE WAY THE STRUCTURE OF THE BYLAWS IS, IS THAT AN AFFILIATE IS DETERMINED IF ENTITIES, UM, SHARE A COMMON CONTROL WITH A T AND D, WHICH LONE STAR IS.
SO WHEN WE APPLIED FOR MEMBERSHIP, FRANKLY IN 2025, WE WERE UNABLE TO SIT IN THE INDEPENDENT GENERATOR SEGMENT.
WE WOULD ONLY BE PLACED IN THE IOU SEGMENT AFTER A LOT OF DISCUSSIONS WITH ERCO.
AND, YOU KNOW, INTERNALLY, WE DON'T FEEL THAT NEXTERA IS IN THE INDEPENDENT OR THE IOU SEGMENT, REALLY FROM A PRACTICAL PERSPECTIVE.
WE ARE A GENERATOR, WE THINK LIKE A GENERATOR.
WE WANNA ADVOCATE FOR THE GENERATOR COMMUNITY AND THINK THE MARKET WOULD BE, UM, BETTER FIT IF WE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE INVOLVED IN THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS.
SO, UM, JUST A LITTLE BIT OF A BACKGROUND, UM, DEPENDING ON THE CONVERSATION TODAY, HAPPY TO WORK.
I'VE HAD SOME OFFLINE CONVERSATIONS WITH SOME MARKET PARTICIPANTS.
I THINK I'M GONNA COME UP WITH SOME BYLAW LANGUAGE THAT I'LL SUBMIT TO ERCOT STAFF.
BUT, UM, YEP, THAT'S THE PITCH.
SO THANK YOU AND I WELCOME QUESTIONS AND FEEDBACK.
BOB HILTON, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YEAH, YEAH, YEAH.
UH, ON THE, ON THE TOP SURFACE, KARA, I, I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH, YOU KNOW, NEXTERA BEING OUR SITE, BUT AT ALL, YOU KNOW, WITH THAT SIDE, UH, THE, THE CONCERN I HAVE IS ALL GOING TO BE IN THE WORDING AND WHAT THAT MEANS BECAUSE AS, AS YOU KNOW, UH, WE HAVE HUGE ISSUES IN THE SOUTHWEST POWER POOL WITH AFFILIATE ISSUES TO WHERE CERTAIN COMPANIES HAVE FOUR OR FIVE VOTES, BASICALLY IS WHAT THEY TURN INTO, EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE SOME SEPARATION THERE.
SO I HAVE TO SEE THE WORDING ON THAT SO THAT WE'RE NOT OPEN UP A PANDORA'S BOX LIKE WE HAVE IN THE SOUTHWEST POWER POOL, WHICH IS TURNING AROUND AND TRYING TO CHANGE THAT.
AND ACTUALLY WE'RE BOTH TRYING TO GET THAT CHANGED SO THAT THEY DON'T HAVE THOSE ISSUES.
AND I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE OF WE'RE NOT GONNA DO ANYTHING HERE THAT'S GONNA STEP US TOWARD WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO FIX OVER THERE.
WE DO NOT WANT TO SWAY OR, UM, INCORRECTLY OR MISASSIGNED SOME MEMBERSHIP VOTES.
I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE COUNTERPART WITH LONE STAR ROB ORES HERE TODAY AS WELL, I WOULD IMAGINE AS WE KIND OF WRITE THROUGH THE BYLAWS, IS THAT, I'LL GO WITH YOU.
PRS YOU, DEPENDING IF LONE STAR OR NEXTERA HOLDS THE CORPORATE OR THE AFFILIATE MEMBERSHIP, ONLY ONE OF US WOULD VOTE IN PRS, RIGHT? AND THEN I THINK DOWN, THINK DOWN TO THE TAC WMS AND ROS, ONLY ONE OF US WOULD BE ABLE TO SIT IN THE RESPECTIVE SEAT.
SO DEFINITELY HEAR THE FEEDBACK AND I THINK, UM, I THINK THE, THE EXTERNAL ATTORNEY WE'RE WORKING WITH SAID, LET'S TAKE A SCALPEL TO IT.
RIGHT? LET'S, LET'S THINK, LET'S THINK POIGNANTLY AND WHERE CAN WE MAKE THESE AMENDMENTS THAT, TO YOUR POINT, WON'T PROVIDE ANY UNDUE INFLUENCE.
CAN, CAN I ASK A QUESTION JUST REAL QUICKLY, UH, SINCE I'M RESPONDING TO THAT, UH, I'M JUST MAKING SURE THAT'S OKAY.
AND I'M NOT ADVOCATING THIS OR ANYTHING, OR SAYING THIS DOESN'T NEED TO HAPPEN BECAUSE OF THIS, BUT CAN'T, SOMEBODY, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT CAN'T NEXTERA JOIN THE GENERATOR SEGMENT AS AN ASSOCIATE MEMBER, WHICH THEY COULD HOLD, GRANTED YOU DON'T GET A VOTE, BUT YOU COULD HOLD POSITIONS IN THE GENERATOR SEGMENT ON DIFFERENT COMMITTEES.
IS THAT CORRECT OR INCORRECT? THAT WAS WHAT I ATTEMPTED TO DO FOR THIS YEAR.
AND, UM, I HAD SOME GREAT CONVERSATIONS WITH ERCOT STAFF.
SO AGAIN, THANK YOU ERCOT FOR ALLOWING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO DIG IN HERE.
BUT THE WAY, AND PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT WITH THE WAY THEIR INTERPRETATION OF THE BYLAWS IS BECAUSE OF JUST OF THE AFFILIATION, NEXTERA WAS NOT ABLE TO SIT IN THE INDEPENDENT GENERATOR SEGMENT, EVEN AS AN ASSOCIATE.
SO ALTHOUGH I CAN SIT IN AN ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTION FOR THE WORKING GROUPS, WHICH I AM, UM, I HAVE, WE DECIDED TO DECLINE OUR MEMBERSHIP BECAUSE WE DID NOT WANNA BE LISTED AS AN IOU, EVEN AS AN ASSOCIATE.
THAT SURPRISES ME A LITTLE BIT.
'CAUSE I BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE SOME COMPANIES THAT ARE CORPORATE MEMBERS IN ONE SEGMENT AND ARE AFFILIATE MEMBERS IN OTHERS.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHY, IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT SPECIFICALLY STATES, IF YOU OWN TRANSMISSION AFFILIATED WITH A TRANSMISSION, THEN YOU CAN'T DO IT.
THAT'S WHY I'M REALLY SURPRISED AT WHAT YOU JUST SAID.
SO I, I CAN MAYBE CLARIFY OR MAYBE NOT, BUT
UM, THE DEFINITION OF INDEPENDENT GENERATOR AND THE BYLAWS SAYS AN ENTITY THAT IS NOT A T AND D ENTITY OR AFFILIATE OF A T AND D ENTITY.
[01:15:01]
THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE ISSUE.SO I THINK, SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WAS DRIVING THIS.
AND I THINK ON, UM, NOT TO BE TOO SPECIFIC, BUT ON THE APPLICATION WE HAVE INFORMATION, WELL, ON THE APPLICATION, UM, NEXTERA LISTED LONE STAR AS AN AFFILIATE.
SO, UM, IT WAS IN THAT WAY OBVIOUS.
THERE MIGHT BE OTHERS THAT WE'RE NOT AWARE OF BECAUSE WE DON'T, UM, WHEN WE'RE GETTING THE MEMBERSHIP APPLICATIONS, WE'RE RELYING ON WHAT'S IN, LIKE, WHAT THE ENTITY FILLS OUT ON THE APPLICATION.
SO WE'VE SEEN THAT ONE OTHER TIME, BOB WITH LINEBACKER.
UM, LINEBACKER IS A, UM, AND I DON'T WANNA SPEAK FOR LINEBACKERS, SO IF ANYBODY'S ON THE PHONE, PLEASE KEEP ME HONEST.
UM, BUT THERE WAS A, I BELIEVE IT WASN'T A PROTOCOL INTERPRETATION REQUEST, BUT IT WAS A FORMAL DOCUMENT FROM ERCOT LEGAL THAT PLACED LINEBACKER IN THE IOU SEGMENT.
AND SO WE HAVE SOME HISTORY THERE AND WE JUST KIND OF WANNA FIGURE OUT THE BEST PATH FORWARD.
SO, SO I'LL JUST KEEP THIS CONVERSATION GOING IF YOU DON'T MIND.
SO YOU'VE GOT TWO PATHS THAT I SEE.
ONE IS TO CHANGE THE AFFILIATE DEFINITION IN THE BYLAWS, AND THE OTHER IS TO CHANGE THE DEFINITION OF INDEPENDENT GENERATOR SEGMENT.
SO THERE'S TWO PATHS, I'M NOT SAYING I'M SURE I KNOW WHICH ONE YOU WOULD RATHER GO WITH.
UH, BUT UH, YOU KNOW THAT THERE IS TWO PATHS I THINK WE NEED TO RECOGNIZE THERE.
THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WE WANTED BEFORE TAKING PEN TO PAPER.
WE WANTED TO HEAR FROM Y'ALL, SO APPRECIATE IT.
YEAH, SO THERE IS TWO WAYS SO WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT.
YEAH, AND I GUESS JUST TO ADD ON TO THAT, I WAS TALKING ABOUT THE, THE DEFINITION OF INDEPENDENT GENERATOR IN THE BYLAWS.
WE DIDN'T GET INTO THE DEFINITION OF AFFILIATE IN THE BYLAWS, UM, WHICH IS A LITTLE BIT COMPLICATED.
UM, BUT AGAIN, ON THE APPLICATION IT WAS LISTED AS AN AFFILIATE, SO WE JUST WENT WITH THAT AT FACE VALUE.
BUT TO YOUR POINT, THERE COULD BE, UM, UNDER NEXTERA'S PROPOSAL OR THEIR IDEA THAT THEY'RE THINKING ABOUT, THERE'S TWO AVENUES THEY COULD TAKE THE, THE, UM, PROPOSING A CHANGE TO THE DEFINITION OF AFFILIATE OR LOOKING AT THE DEFINITION OF INDEPENDENT GENERATOR.
AND YOU WOULD AGREE THAT BOTH WOULD REQUIRE A BYLAW CHANGE THOUGH, CORRECT? CORRECT.
I THINK MARTHA, YOU ARE NEXT IN THE QUEUE.
MARTHA HENSON WITH ENCORE, LIKE ON THE SURFACE WE DON'T HAVE A CONCERN WITH THIS.
AT A HIGH LEVEL WOULD DEFINITELY LIKE TO SEE THE SUGGESTED LANGUAGE THAT NEXTERA MIGHT PROPOSE.
IT'S ACTUALLY THE DEFINITION I THINK OF INVESTONE UTILITY, THAT'S THE PROBLEM.
'CAUSE IT SAYS YOUR A, B, C OR D, OR A B OR C, WHICH I'LL SAY YOU HAVE WIRES.
AND THEN D SAYS YOU'RE AN IOU IF YOU HAVE AN AFFILIATE
SO IT'S, I THINK IT MAY, MAY NEED TO LOOK AT THE IOU DEFINITION ACTUALLY, AND PROBABLY OUR PREFERENCE TO LOOK AT THAT VERSUS CHANGING THE AFFILIATE DEFINITION IN THE BYLAWS, WHICH IS VERY COMPLICATED.
UM, AND SO I, AS LONG AS THE PRINCIPLE OF, UH, ONE, ONE COMPANY, ONE VOTE IS MAINTAINED, I THINK WE'LL PROBABLY BE OKAY WITH THIS.
SO WE WOULDN'T WANNA SEE, FOR INSTANCE, YOU KNOW, NEXTERA HAVING A VOTE IN THE GENERATION SEGMENT AND LONE STAR HAVING A VOTE IN THE IOU SEGMENT.
UM, BUT WE LOOK FORWARD TO HOPEFULLY, YOU KNOW, WORKING ON SOMETHING HERE THAT MAKES SENSE.
IT SEEMS TO US, BASED ON MEMORY, THIS WAS KIND OF A LEGACY CONSTRUCT BASED ON, UM, OLD VERTICALLY INTEGRATED UTILITIES THAT EXISTED IN THE NINETIES AND EARLY TWO THOUSANDS.
YOU KNOW, AT ONE TIME UNDER THE TXU OR TEXAS UTILITIES UMBRELLA, WE WERE, UH, IN THIS SITUATION WITH RA, UH, ACTUALLY LUMINATE AND TXU AND THEN ENCORE WE'RE HAVING TO ALL VOTE IN THE IOU SEGMENT, WHICH WAS VERY AWKWARD.
SO I DEFINITELY UNDERSTAND WHY THAT'S NOT IDEAL.
UM, SO THANKS KARA, FOR LAYING THAT OUT AND, UM, LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING WHAT YOU'RE THINKING IN MORE DETAIL.
YEAH, THANKS MARTHA, FOR THE FEEDBACK.
UM, NED, I THINK YOU ARE NEXT.
I PROBABLY DON'T HAVE A WHOLE LOT TO ADD, UH, BUT I, I DID WANT TO, BUT F FIRST OF ALL, I'LL SAY I'D LIKE TO SEE WHAT YOU HAVE PROPOSED.
UM, I WAS GONNA COMMENT THAT I, I BELIEVE THERE ARE SOME, UH, PROVISIONS IN THE DEFINITION OF AFFILIATE THAT NEED TO BE KIND OF, UH, PULLED THROUGH FROM PURIA AND THE POCS RULES SO THAT THERE'S SOME GUARDRAILS ON, ON WHAT CAN AND CAN'T BE CHANGED THERE.
UM, BUT THAT, THAT WAS ALSO JUST GONNA SAY, YOU KNOW, WHAT MARTHA MENTIONED, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, WE IN PREDECESSOR COMPANIES UNDER THE ENERGY FUTURE HOLDINGS UMBRELLA, YOU KNOW, LUMINANT HAD, UH, HAD BEEN THE IOU SEGMENT WITH, UH, DUE TO THE AFFILIATION WITH ENCORE AND, UM, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS, PERHAPS AWKWARD AT TIMES, BUT I THINK WE, WE ALSO MA MANAGED TO MAKE IT WORK.
SO, UM, JUST CURIOUS IF THAT'S, IF THAT IS, UH, THE PR THE PRIMARY CONCERN THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO, TO ADDRESS IS INABILITY TO REACH AGREEMENT WITHIN THE, WITHIN THE COMPANY, OR IS IT,
[01:20:01]
UM, IS IT SOMETHING ELSE? NO, IT'S NOT INTERNAL.IT'S TO PARTICIPATE IN THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS.
AS YOU WELL NOTED, THERE'S SOME COMPLICATED ISSUES FACING OUR GREAT MARKET HERE IN THE STATE OF TEXAS.
AND THE MORE, UM, VOICES THAT WE HAVE THAT HAVE, YOU KNOW, A GOOD HISTORY OF RELIABLE PRODUCTION OF POWER UNDERSTANDS THE MARKET WILL, WILL BENEFIT THE MARKET.
AND SO I THINK THAT'S THE MAIN GOAL, HOW TO DO SO IN A FAIR AND EQUITABLE FASHION.
UM, MARK, I THINK YOU HAD A QUESTION NEXT.
UM, WELL, AS I SAID EARLIER IN THE MEETING, I HATE TO BE THE OLD GUY WHO SAYS, OH, THIS IS THE WAY WE DID IT THEN.
UM, BUT I, I DID PARTICIPATE IN THE DRAFTING OF THE BYLAWS AND WE WERE STICKLERS ON THE AFFILIATE, UH, DEFINITION.
I, I THINK WITH GOOD REASON THERE, THERE'D BEEN A LOT OF HISTORY AT THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION ABOUT, UH, ABOUT AFFILIATE RESPONSIBILITIES.
AND SO WE WERE, WERE VERY RIGOROUS IN DEVELOPING THAT DEFINITION.
I, I WOULD NOTE THAT THE CURRENT BYLAWS AS WRITTEN AND, UH, THE CITIES THAT SPONSOR ME ARE IN LITIGATION ABOUT THE CURRENT BYLAWS.
UH, THE CURRENT BYLAWS HAVE REMOVED ANY VOTING RIGHTS OF THE MEMBERSHIP.
AND IF THERE ARE NO VOTING RIGHTS OF THE MEMBERSHIP, THEN I REALLY HAVE TO RETHINK THINK WHY WE HAVE THE STRICT AFFILIATE DEFINITIONS THAT WE HAVE TODAY FOR MEMBERSHIP.
AS LONG AS WE DON'T DILUTE OR, UH, MODIFY VOTING STRENGTH.
UM, WHEN MEMBERS DON'T HAVE VOTING RIGHTS, WE MAY, UH, IT MAY TAKE A DIFFERENT POSITION ON WHAT IT MEANS TO BE A MEMBER AND AN AFFILIATE OF A MEMBER.
UM, BUT AS FAR AS THE VOTING RIGHTS IN THESE COMMITTEES, UM, I I THINK YOU AGREE THAT, UH, ONE COMPANY, ONE ENTITY, ONE OVERALL ENTITY, ONE VOTE HAS TO BE MAINTAINED.
AND I'LL, I DIDN'T THINK ABOUT IT THAT WAY, MARK, BUT I WILL, I'LL SECOND MARK'S COMMENTS THERE, BUT MY COMMENT WAS GONNA BE FROM, UH, WE'VE HAD A SIMILAR ISSUE IN THE PAST WITH THE, THE IRE SEGMENT AND KIND OF HAVING THE AFFILIATE ISSUE PREVENT PEOPLE FROM BEING ABLE TO, TO SERVE IN THE IRE SEGMENT AS WELL.
SO I, I SEE YOUR, I SEE YOUR PROBLEM.
IT'S JUST KIND OF GONNA BE HOW TO FIX IT.
THE DEVIL'S IN THE DETAILS AS THEY ALWAYS SAY.
UM, BOB, DID YOU HAVE A, I JUST WANTED TO RESPOND TO MARK A. LITTLE BIT.
UH, WHILE I UNDERSTAND YOU NEED TO THINK THROUGH THAT, I STILL DON'T BELIEVE THAT CHANGES MY THOUGHTS ON AFFILIATE BECAUSE OF HOW THAT COULD OVERLOAD AND CREATE DUPLICATE VOTING FOR, UH, YOU KNOW, FOR AFFILIATES THROUGH THE REST OF THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS OF THE THINGS THAT GET TO THE BOARD THROUGH THAT PROCESS.
SO THAT DOESN'T REALLY CHANGE A LOT FOR ME ON THAT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO GET THAT OUT SINCE YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT, UH, THAT, 'CAUSE KIRA KNOWS WE HAVE, WE'VE HAD HUGE ISSUES IN SPP OVER THIS KIND OF THING, RIGHT.
IN ALL THE WORKING GROUPS AND EVERYTHING.
AND, AND THAT HAS CREATED A LOT OF PROBLEMS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIX.
AND, AND IT ALSO RAISES A PROBLEM WHEN YOU'RE VOTING FROM FOR VOTING MEMBERSHIP ON COMMITTEES.
IF YOU WERE A MEMBER OF TWO SEGMENTS AND HAD VOTING RIGHTS IN BOTH THOSE SEGMENTS, YOU COULD VOTE FOR THE, YOUR REPRESENTATIVE IN THIS CASE, IN THE IRU SEGMENT AND IN THE GENERATOR SEGMENT.
SO THAT ALL THAT HAS TO BE THOUGHT THROUGH.
SO I THINK FOR NEXT STEPS, IT SOUNDS LIKE SOME PROPOSALS ARE MORE, ARE FURTHER ALONG THAN OTHERS.
UM, I GUESS THE TIE PRESENTATION WAS THE FURTHEST ALONG.
JUST MAKING SURE THAT NONE OF THE, UM, OTHER, NONE OF THE OTHER, UM, CONSUMER SEGMENTS OR, OR SUBSEGMENTS, I GUESS WOULD BE CONCERNED WITH THAT PROPOSAL.
[01:25:01]
UM, SO AN IDEA WAS TO, I GUESS SOMEHOW LIKE SOLICIT FEEDBACK.UM, AND I COULD DO THAT THROUGH A MARKET NOTICE, UM, IF THAT SOUNDS LIKE THE BEST WAY TO HANDLE IT.
AND THEN THAT GIVES PEOPLE OR ENTITIES AN OPPORTUNITY TO FILE SOMETHING, NOT FILE, BUT TO SUBMIT SOMETHING WRITTEN IN RESPONSE.
UM, JUST SO WE MAKE SURE THAT THERE ARE NO OTHER CONCERNS WITH THAT IDEA.
CATHERINE, I HAVE A QUESTION ON JUST THE PROCESS AND I'M, THE MARKET NOTICE SOUNDS GREAT FOR THIS INITIATIVE, IS THE THOUGHT TO SEEK STAKEHOLDER INPUT AND THEN PRESENT IT TO THE BOARD.
CAN YOU WALK ME THROUGH THAT KIND OF A LINEAR PROCESS? 'CAUSE EVEN THOUGH WE NEXT YEAR DIDN'T HAVE A PROPOSAL, UM, THIS CONVERSATION WAS VERY WORTHWHILE.
SO I PLAN ON HAVING LANGUAGE, UM, THAT I WOULD LIKE TO FOLLOW ON THAT OPPORTUNITY AS WELL.
SO I THINK THAT, UM, I MAY HAVE CONFUSED THINGS BY INITIALLY CALLING THESE PROPOSALS.
'CAUSE WE HAVE THESE FOUR IDEAS THAT ARE PRESENTED, BUT THEN THERE'S ALSO UNDER THE BYLAWS, IF SOMEONE HAS A, UH, TRULY FLESHED OUT PROPOSAL FOR A CHANGE IN THE BYLAWS, THEN UNDER SECTION 13 ONE, THERE'S A PROCESS PROCESS THAT'S LAID OUT.
AND I THINK THERE WAS A, UM, ONE OF MY SLIDES WENT OVER THAT PROCESS.
BUT, UM, A CORPORATE MEMBER CAN SUBMIT THAT PROPOSAL IDEA, UM, TO THE SECRETARY OF, OF ERCOT, WHICH WOULD BE CHAD SEALEY, AND THEN, THEN THE BOARD WOULD CONSIDER IT.
SO SINCE WE'RE MORE IN THE IDEAS STAGE OF THESE DIFFERENT, UM, PROPOSALS, THESE FOUR PROPOSALS, I THINK WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO MORE IS, UM, IN A MORE INFORMAL WAY OR SEMI LIKE NOT AS FORMAL AS SUBMITTING AN ACTUAL PROPOSAL, UM, BUT TO, UM, SEE IF THERE'S CONSENSUS, SEE IF THERE'S OTHER IDEAS BEFORE THEN, UM, A CORPORATE MEMBER WOULD ACTUALLY FORMALLY MAKE A PROPOSAL TO MAKE A CHANGE.
LIKE ANYONE CAN DO THAT, A CORPORATE MEMBER CAN DO THAT AT ANY TIME.
BUT, UM, TRYING FOR EFFICIENCY TO, TO MAKE SURE THE I IDEA IS, HAS PRETTY GOOD CONSENSUS BEFORE THAT HAPPENS.
SO FOR THE TIEC ONE, THAT SEEMS LIKE IT'S FURTHER ALONG, UM, AS I UNDERSTAND ENCHANTED ROCKS, IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE GONNA MAYBE HAVE OFFLINE DISCUSSIONS AND THEN VISTRA, YOU KIND OF HAVE, UM, NOT GONNA MAYBE PURSUE THAT RIGHT NOW, YOUR IDEA, BUT PENDING WHAT HAPPENS WITH OTHER IDEAS IS YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT.
SO I, I THINK WE'LL AS THE, THE INDEPENDENT GENERATOR SEGMENT, WE'LL PROBABLY WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, GIVEN THE, THE, THE, THE EARLIER DISCUSSION, WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THERE'S ANY CHANGES THAT WE'D LIKE TO PUT FORWARD.
UM, SO THE, THE QUESTION I'D GOTTEN IN THE Q4 WITH, FOR YOU, CATHERINE, IS UM, I, I'M, I'M GATHERING THAT YOU, YOU WOULD PROBABLY LIKE FOR THE BOARD TO BE ABLE TO CONSIDER, YOU KNOW, IS ALL CHANGES THAT AREN'T GOING TO BE, UH, YOU KNOW, OPPOSED FOR INSTANCE, UM, IN ONE FELL SWOOP FOR EFFICIENCY PURPOSES.
SO GIVEN WHERE THE PROPOSAL FROM TIC AND THE BLOCKCHAIN COUNCIL IS WHERE YOU HAVE SOME PROPOSED LANGUAGE, UM, DO YOU HAVE A TIMEFRAME THAT YOU'RE THINKING THAT WOULD GO TO THE BOARD SO THAT IF THERE ARE OTHER CONSIDERATIONS FOLKS HAVE A A TIMEFRAME TO SHOOT FOR? I DO NOT HAVE A TIMEFRAME.
UM, I THINK GIVING AT LEAST A MONTH FOR ENTITIES TO WHO WANT TO RESPOND TO, TO PROVIDE SOMETHING AND IN RESPONSE WOULD BE GOOD.
UM, SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT, YEAH, I HAVEN'T THOUGHT OUT WHAT BOARD MEETING THAT WOULD BE.
UH, THAT WOULD, I THINK IT WOULD JUST BE HELPFUL TO KNOW WHEN, WHEN THAT ONE WILL BE UP.
'CAUSE THAT BECOMES THE STALKING HORSE FOR EVERYTHING ELSE.
WELL ALSO, I DON'T THINK WE'RE IN A, A RUSH AS LONG AS EVERYTHING'S IN PLACE BY THE NEXT ELECTION CYCLE.
UM, SO I THINK THERE'S TIME TO, FOR PEOPLE TO CATCH UP, IF YOU WILL.
SO THAT'S PROBABLY WHAT THE SEPTEMBER BOARD IS THE LAST ONE BEFORE? I THINK SO, YEAH.
YEAH, WE GOT ALL THE TIME IN THE WORLD.
UM, AND THEN I GUESS JUST WE COVERED THE FIRST THREE, BUT THEN THE NEXT ERA, IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE STILL KIND
[01:30:01]
OF IN THE EARLY STAGES.OH, I'M GONNA MEET THE DEADLINE
SO IF WE'RE LOOKING, AND I AGREE, I AGREE.
UM, BUT UM, YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE LOOKING, I AGREE IT'S FOR NEXT YEAR ELECTIONS, SO, UM, I COULD PROBABLY COMMIT TO HAVE LANGUAGE, I'D LIKE TO TALK TO A FEW, FEW OF MY COUNTERPARTS THAT HAVE SPOKEN TODAY, BUT I CAN, I, I COULD PROBABLY COMMIT THAT.
WE CAN GET THAT OVER TO YOU IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS.
UM, AND SO WE HAVE IN THE, THAT'S HELPFUL.
WE HAVE IN THE QUEUE, CAITLYN AND THEN CHAD, CAITLYN.
I NORMALLY WOULDN'T INSIST TO GO AHEAD OF CHAD, BUT I WANT HIM TO ANSWER MY QUESTIONS ALSO.
UM, SO I'M A GO A LITTLE BIT UNCLEAR.
UM, SO, SO ANY MEMBER OR MARKET PARTICIPANT, LET ME MAKE SURE, I THINK IT'S MEMBER CAN, CAN, UM, PROPOSE AN AMENDMENT TO THE BYLAWS.
THEY DON'T NEED CONSENSUS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
BUT IS THIS ALSO, ARE WE CONSIDERING THAT ERCOT MIGHT BE PROPOSING THESE IF THEY'RE AT STAKEHOLDER CONSENSUS? UM, AND I THINK MY OTHER QUESTION IS, RIGHT, A, A MEMBER CAN PROPOSE CHANGES, AS MARK POINTED OUT, WE DON'T VOTE ANYMORE.
AND I WOULD ASSUME, YOU KNOW, ERCOT WILL GIVE THEIR OPINION TO THE BOARD AS WELL.
UM, SO I, I'M WONDERING WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE THROUGH THIS KIND OF STAKEHOLDER PROCESS, RIGHT, IS, IS ERCOT GOING TO PRESENT SOME, YOU KNOW, COMPILED VERSION OF CHANGES AND SAY THESE ARE AGREED UPON AND, AND WE ALSO SUPPORT THESE, OR IS IT ULTIMATELY GONNA BE UP TO THE MEMBER TO PROPOSE THEM NO MATTER HOW MUCH SUPPORT THEY THEY DO OR DON'T HAVE? AND THEN LOOKING AT YOUR SLIDE, WHICH IS VERY HELPFUL, UM, WE DON'T REALLY HAVE ALL THE TIME IN THE, THE WORLD.
I, I THINK WE NEED TO PLAN ON THESE BEING AT TWO OF THE HR AND G COMMITTEE MEETING.
AND SO THAT'S, YOU KNOW, JUNE AND SEPTEMBER OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
UM, AND, AND I, I KNOW THAT THE KIND OF DEADLINE WE WERE WORKING UNDER WAS FOR THAT CONSUMER ISSUE.
I DON'T WANT TO CALL THE PROBLEM TO BE RESOLVED GOING INTO NEXT, NEXT YEAR'S MEMBERSHIP CYCLE.
UM, SO IF I COULD GET A LITTLE BIT, OR WE COULD GET A LITTLE BIT MORE CLARITY ON THOSE, THOSE NEXT STEPS OF, OF HOW WE THINK THOSE AMENDMENTS WOULD BE PROPOSED.
UM, IF IT'S MEMBERS, IF IT'S ERCOT, DOES, DOES IT ULTIMATELY MATTER HOW MUCH SUPPORT THEY DID OR DIDN'T HAVE? AND THEN I THINK A, A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THAT TIMEFRAME BECAUSE I THINK WE WOULD WANT THOSE TO GO, YOU KNOW, START BEING CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD IN, IN JUNE PROBABLY THIS CHAD CAN KNOW, CAN ONLY HEAR ME.
SO I MEAN, I GENERALLY AGREE WITH YOU, CAITLIN, THAT I MEAN THE, THE FIRST POINT IS WE'RE TRYING TO BE EFFICIENT IN THE CHANGES AND, AND MANY OF THE PEOPLE THAT SPOKE TODAY HAVE INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE THAT IT, IT'S NOT EASY TO JUST CHANGE THE BYLAWS BECAUSE EVERYBODY WANTS TO WEIGH IN AND THERE'S RED LINES UPON RED LINES.
SO WITH ALL THESE PROPOSALS, TRYING TO BE EFFICIENT IN WHERE PEOPLE REALLY WANT TO GO IS KIND OF OUR FIRST OBJECTIVE.
SO ONLY JOHN HAD LIKE REAL RED LINE LANGUAGE TO FULLY UNDERSTAND AND FRAME UP A DISCUSSION WITH HR AND GENE.
IT'S UNCLEAR TO ME ON WHETHER MONICA AND NED ARE GONNA MOVE FORWARD WITH ANY TYPE OF TRUE PROPOSAL TO GET FURTHER CORPORATE MEMBER FEEDBACK.
UM, CLEARLY NEXTERA WANTS TO ADDRESS THE AFFILIATE ISSUE, BUT UNTIL WE SEE RED LINES, NONE OF THE MEMBERS CAN REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THE IMPACT IS TO THE OVERALL MEMBERSHIP STRUCTURE AND HOW IT WILL IMPACT VOTING WITHIN THOSE SEGMENTS.
SO TO ME IT, IT SEEMS A LITTLE HALF BAKED NOW FOR THESE OTHER PROPOSALS AND, AND PART OF THE MARKET NOTICE WOULD BE, CAN WE GET FORMAL RED LINES TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO HAVE MORE OF A THOUGHT PROCESS AND DISCUSSION BEHIND THOSE? WE MAY NEED TO HAVE ANOTHER LITTLE SECOND WORKSHOP, UM, TO GET SOME OF THAT DIALOGUE, BUT WE WANNA OBVIOUSLY BE DELIBERATE AND STRUCTURED AND EFFICIENT IN ANY OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES THAT GO INTO THE BYLAWS PROCESS SO THAT IT'S KIND OF DEALT WITH ALL AT ONCE.
AND THAT THERE IS KIND OF GENERAL CONSENSUS AND MOMENTUM, UH, AS WE MOVE THIS FORWARD TO HRG AND THE BOARD AND THAT THE MEMBERS AREN'T, YOU KNOW, HOPEFULLY TREMENDOUSLY DIVIDED ON WHAT WOULD BE TALKED ABOUT IN HR AND G.
[01:35:01]
WE WOULD AT LEAST FRAME UP THE ISSUE IN APRIL WITH JUST, AGAIN, SOMEWHAT CONSISTENT WITH THIS WORKSHOP, A HIGH LEVEL DISCUSSION OF WHAT THE STAKEHOLDERS ARE THINKING ABOUT AS FAR AS, UH, CHANGING SOME OF THE DEFINITIONS WITHIN THE BYLAWS.BUT THEN I AGREE WITH YOU, I THINK TRYING TO GET IT TO THE JUNE HRG MORE FORMALLY TO KICK OFF THE REST OF THE PROCESS WOULD BE WHERE YOU WANT TO GO.
SO THAT SEPTEMBER IS UTILIZED AS A, AS A FINAL DISCUSSION WITH THE BOARD AND PC VOTE BECAUSE THEN YOU START YOUR 2026 MEMBERSHIP PROCESS IN NOVEMBER AGAIN.
SO WE'LL OBVIOUSLY TAKE THE ACTION ITEM TO FRAME UP A MARKET NOTICE WITH SOME TIMELINES, BUT THOSE THAT HAVE ACTUAL IDEAS THAT THEY TALKED ABOUT TODAY, WE WE ARE GONNA NEED SOMETHING FOR THE CORPORATE MEMBERS TO CONSIDER.
UM, BOB, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? Y YEAH, JUST TO, AND I'LL ADMIT I NEED TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE PROCESS FOR BY LITTLE CHANGES 'CAUSE IT'S CHANGED AND I HAVEN'T REALLY GOT THERE, BUT FROM WHAT I WAS JUST GATHERING IS SOMEONE WRITES A, AND THIS IS JUST VERBALLY WHAT YOU SAID, UH, SOMEONE DECIDES THEY WANNA DO A BYLAW CHANGE, THEY SUBMIT IT TO THE SECRETARY AND THEN IT GOES TO THE BOARD.
USED TO GENERALLY ANY OF THOSE TYPE OF THINGS THAT CAME OUT TAC GOT TO AT LEAST LOOK AT AND EITHER SAY, YEAH, WE LIKE IT.
EVEN THOUGH THEY DON'T GET A VOTE, THEY COULD.
AND THAT GIVES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE MARKET TO SEE WHAT IT IS.
THE, THE PROCESS YOU DESCRIBED, LIKE I SAID, I MAY BE MISSING A STEP IN THERE WAS THAT SOMEONE, SOME MEMBER ERCOT, WHOMEVER COULD SEND SOMETHING TO CHAD AND THE FIRST TIME WE SEE IT IS WHEN IT GETS POSTED TO THE HR AND G UH, UH, AGENDA.
AND THAT TO ME WOULD BE HORRIBLE
SO, UH, WE DON'T HAVE THAT LOOPHOLE IN THERE.
DO WE LIKE THE, THE MOST UPTODATE VERSION, WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN THE 2021 BYLAWS VERSION RIGHT? SAYS THAT CORPORATE MEMBERS ARE PROVIDED A MINIMUM OF 21 DAYS ADVANCE NOTICE AND THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON ANY PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENTS PRIOR.
I I THOUGHT THAT WAS IN THERE, BUT I HAVEN'T LOOKED AT IT, SO THANK YOU.
THERE'S STILL THE 21 DAY, UM, PERIOD FOR ALL CORPORATE MEMBERS TO, TO WEIGH IN.
BUT BOB, WHAT I'M REALLY TRYING TO DO IS JUST TO MAKE SURE FROM THE DISCUSSION TODAY, WHICH ONES ACTUALLY WANNA MOVE FORWARD OR NOT, SO THAT WE CAN TRY TO ALIGN EVERYTHING ON A SIMILAR TIMELINE.
I I ALSO THINK YOU, YOU WOULD WANT TO AT LEAST AS A COURTESY, UH, RUN THE, THE BYLAW AMENDMENT PROPOSAL BY TAC.
I THINK THAT WOULD BE, UH, USEFUL.
I MEAN, YEAH, WE CAN WIN, WE CAN ALWAYS, I MEAN, AS CATHERINE'S BEEN DOING FOR THE LATTER PART OF 2024 HAS BEEN ENGAGING TACK EVERY MONTH ABOUT WHERE THIS PROCESS IS.
YEAH, I WASN'T CRITICIZING, I WAS JUST SAYING WE WANNA BE SURE THAT IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO THE BOARD IF, IF TAC CAN HAVE INPUT.
SO I WILL WORK ON A MARKET NOTICE, UM, THAT WILL ASK FOR, WE HAVE A DEADLINE FOR MORE FORMAL, UM, IDEAS IF THERE ARE ANY.
AND THEN, UM, WE'LL ALSO NEED TO ELICIT FEEDBACK TO ANY OF THE MORE FORMAL IDEAS, UM, WITH THE GOAL OF HAVING, UM, BETTER IDEA OF WHAT, YOU KNOW, AT HIGH LEVEL, THE, THE PROPOSALS ARE GONNA BE IN APRIL, UM, FOR THE APRIL BOARD MEETING.
UM, WELL THANKS FOR ALL THE DISCUSSION.
I THINK IT'S BEEN VERY HELPFUL AND UM, WE WILL KEEP WORKING ON IT.