* 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.
          [00:00:04]
          ALL SORRY FOR THE DELAY. 
          WE'LL GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED. 
          UH, CAN SOMEONE ON THE WEBEX CONFIRM THEY CAN SEE THE SCREEN AND HEAR MY VOICE? SOMEONE ON THE WEBEX. 
          CHIME IN. 
          ALRIGHT, CAN SOMEONE ON THE WEBEX CONFIRM THEY CAN HEAR ME AND SEE THE SLOT, SEE THE WEBPAGE FOR TODAY? WE GOT YOU. 
          VERY GOOD. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          ALRIGHT, WELL GOOD MORNING. 
          WELCOME TO WORKSHOP NUMBER FOUR. 
          UH, WE GOT A LOT TO COVER TODAY. 
          I GUESS JUST TO KICK IT OFF, UM, ERCOT, UH, DID KIND OF THE LONG HAUL ON GETTING A VERY LARGE, UH, PLANNING GUIDE REVISION OUT THE DOOR LAST WEEK. 
          I WILL ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR AS THE LATE NIGHT POSTINGS LAST NIGHT GOT OUT. 
          UM, OUR FOCUS IS DEFINITELY ON THE REVISION REQUESTS RATHER THAN ALL THE HOW'S AND WHAT'S BEHIND IT. 
          AND, UH, I, MY INTENTION WAS AND IS TO USUALLY POST MATERIALS AT LEAST A DAY BEFORE. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, AS WE CYCLE THROUGH THESE WORKSHOPS EVERY SEVEN OR 14 DAYS, DAY BEFORE, WE'LL BE THE MARK THAT WE'RE TRYING TO HIT. 
          AND I JUST WANTED TO APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. 
          SO JUST WANTED TO, UM, UPFRONT, THAT'S NOT GOOD FORM WHEN WE'RE IN A LARGE STAKEHOLDER COMMUNITY WITH ALL THE OTHER WORKSHOPS GOING ON. 
          SO DEFINITELY ERCOT IS NOT BLIND TO HOW MUCH YOU'RE HAVING TO CARRY, UH, IN PARTNERSHIP WITH US. 
          SO, UH, 
          [1. Antitrust Admonition]
SO LET ME GO AHEAD AND GET THE ANTITRUST ADMONITION ON THE SCREEN FOR A SECOND. 
          YOU WANNA TAKE A SECOND TO READ THAT. 
          AND THE WAY WE'RE LOOKING TO UNPACK AT THE WORKSHOP, I EMAILED THIS OUT TO TAC AND THE LLWG, WAS THAT WE'RE GONNA GO THROUGH A KIND OF A 10 MINUTE RECAP OF WHY WE'RE HERE, WHAT'S THE SCOPE, WHAT'S OUTTA SCOPE, AND THEN WE'RE GONNA GO THROUGH THE STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK IN FAQ, UM, IN A DRY RUN YESTERDAY. 
          THIS WILL TAKE MORE LIKE 40 MINUTES WITHOUT QUESTIONS. 
          WHAT WE REALLY WANT TO DO IS TO BE ABLE TO SAY, WE'VE HEARD THE QUESTIONS. 
          HERE'S WHAT WE THINK ARE SOME BASIC RESPONSES, LIKE WE HAVE 70 SLIDES TO HIT TODAY. 
          WE JUST WANTED TO PAUSE AND KIND OF WALK THROUGH THREE SLIDES THAT ARE KIND OF FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE DIRECTION WE'RE HEADED. 
          NOT THAT THAT'S THE END GAME, BUT WHY WE'RE HEADED WHERE WE ARE. 
          SO THOSE FAQ SLIDES WILL BE SOMETHING WE HIT. 
          AND THEN ALSO THE RESULTS OF THE SURVEY. 
          SO WE HAD THROWN OUT THE SURVEY AND I THINK 80 PLUS OF Y'ALL RESPONDED BACK. 
          UM, A LOT OF WHAT ERCOT PROPOSED LAST TIME HAD FILL IN THE BLANKS ON DATES. 
          YOU KNOW, SO WHAT DATES IS THE MARKET THINKING ON CUTOFFS AND TIMELINES, OR WHAT KIND OF COGEN ARRANGEMENTS DO WE WANT? SO WE'LL START TO WALK THROUGH THOSE AS PART OF THE FAQ. 
          BUT MY INTENT IS TO NOT HAVE A QUEUE AND MUSCLE THROUGH THAT BECAUSE IF WE STOP FOR QUESTIONS IN THE FIRST 20 SLIDES, WE'RE NOT GONNA MAKE IT THROUGH THE REST OF THE MATERIALS. 
          AND WE'RE WELCOME TO AT THE END OF THE AGENDA, COME BACK AROUND TO THIS AND GO TOP TO BOTTOM AGAIN. 
          BUT, UM, MY, MY HOPE IS TO SPEND MAYBE 45 MINUTES SETTING THE STAGE FOR, FOR TODAY. 
          AND THEN WE'RE GONNA HAVE JEFF WALK THROUGH THE BATCH ZERO. 
          UH, THE IDEA IS THERE'S PRESENTATION MATERIALS. 
          UH, YOU'LL NOTICE IF YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE HAD TIME TO OPEN THE PRESENTATION, IT'S UNIQUE. 
          WHAT WE'VE DONE IS FROM WHAT WE COMMUNICATED THE LAST WORKSHOP TO WHAT'S CHANGED FOR NOW, WE'VE ACTUALLY INTRODUCED SOME RED LINES, LIKE WHAT'S BEEN INTRODUCED CONCEPTUALLY, AND THEN THAT HAS A FOOTER ON THAT SLIDE THAT POINTS OVER TO THE BIGGER LANGUAGE THAT SAYS THIS IS SECTION XXX. 
          SO IT'S THE HOW AND WHY WE'RE DOING IT. 
          CONTEXT THAT POINTS YOU OVER TO THE LANGUAGE. 
          AND WE'LL JUST HAVE TO SEE HOW JEFF WANTS TO NAVIGATE THE IDEA OF SHOWING SLIDES AND THEN ALTERNATING IN AND OUTTA THE REVISION REQUESTS. 
          I KNOW THIS WILL TAKE US TO LUNCH AND MAYBE A LITTLE AFTER LUNCH. 
          AND THEN AT THAT TIME, WE'VE HAD FOUR SETS OF MARKET COMMENTS COME IN. 
          SO WE'LL GIVE EACH, UH, MARKET COMMENTER. 
          I'VE EMAILED THEM. 
          WE HAVE AN ORDER. 
          UH, THEY'LL EACH GET 15 MINUTES TO UNPACK THEIR CONCERNS OR QUESTIONS. 
          SO THAT'S THE FORMAL, UH, FEEDBACK FROM THEM. 
          AND THEN WE WILL BE HOPING TO, AND I THINK WE'LL HAVE TIME FOR DISCUSSION OF THE, UH, BRING YOUR OWN GEN AND INITIAL CONTROLLABLE LOAD RESOURCE CONCEPT. 
          SO I KNOW THAT'S A, UH, TOPIC THAT PEOPLE WANT ERCOT TO START HELPING WITH AND TO GET SOMETHING OUT THERE. 
          AND THE IDEA IS WE WILL HAVE ANOTHER TIME SLOT AT LLWG ON FRIDAY. 
          THAT'S ONLY AN HOUR. 
          SO IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE GONNA SAY HAVE A WHOLE NOTHER WORKSHOP, BUT IT WILL GIVE PEOPLE, UH, SOME TIME AND SPACE FOR QUESTIONS THERE TOO. 
          AND I'M ESTIMATING WE END AT FOUR 30. 
          I THINK IT'S A REASONABLE TIME TO CUT OFF. 
          UM, AND THEN BE READY FOR OUR NEXT WORKSHOP AFTER THAT, UH, TUESDAY AFTER NEXT. 
          SO WITH THAT, LEMME GO AHEAD AND GET US GOING ON THE SLIDES. 
          OH, OH, ALSO, WE DON'T HAVE COREY HERE RUNNING. 
          SO JANICE HAS KINDLY STEPPED IN TO RUN THE QUEUE. 
          GOD BLESS HER. 
          SHE IS GOING TO HELP NAVIGATE THE QUESTIONS AS THEY COME IN. 
          UH, WE ALSO RECOGNIZE IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION TO GET IN THE QUEUE, SAY PUT ME IN THE QUEUE OR A QUESTION. 
          BUT IF YOU'RE JUST MAKING QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, EXT, WHATEVER THAT WORD EX 
          [00:05:01]
EX, IF YOU'RE JUST SAYING EXT, WHAT IS THE WORD? EXTEMPORANEOUSLY? EXTEMPORANEOUSLY. 
          WE'RE NOT GONNA PUT YOU IN THE QUEUE. 
          I SHOULDN'T EVEN TRY THAT WORD. 
          ESPECIALLY ON A DAY. 
          LIKE, YEAH, I'VE HAD ENOUGH ISSUES GETTING THE SLIDES POSTED ON TIME. 
          UM, ENGINEER IN ENGLISH. 
          OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT, HERE WE GO. 
          BY THE WAY, MY NAME'S MATT MARINAS, IF YOU'RE KEEPING TRACK OF WHO THIS GOOFBALL IS. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          OKAY. 
          IF I HAVE NOTHING ELSE, I HAVE HUMOR. 
          OKIE DOKE. 
          ALRIGHT, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE. 
          [2. Timeline and governance recap (10 mins)]
OKAY, WE JUST TALKED ABOUT ALL THIS. 
          THIS IS HOW WE'RE GONNA ROLL. 
          OKAY, JUST A FEW SLIDES. 
          YOU'VE SEEN THESE BEFORE. 
          THIS IS THE MARCH TO THE FINISH LINE, WHICH IS THE JUNE BOARD. 
          UH, WE HAVE THESE, UH, WE'RE ON WORKSHOP NUMBER FOUR OF SEVEN WORKSHOPS AFTER SEVEN WORKSHOPS. 
          THE IDEA IS TO TRANSITION TO AS NEEDED PRS AND ROS MEETINGS. 
          UH, SANDEEP BOKAR IS ALREADY REACHING OUT TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT TO PUT ONE OR TWO SPECIAL ROS MEETINGS IN MID TO LATE APRIL. 
          UH, THAT IS TO THEN SET THE STAGE FOR GETTING TO TECH, WHICH HAS EXTRA MEETINGS POSSIBLY IN THE TWO DAY MEETING HERE ON THE CALENDAR TO GET TO THE BOARD. 
          SO IT IS A, UM, THERE'S A LOT MORE WORK COMING. 
          UH, WHAT WE HAVE ADDED HERE IS A TARGET, WHICH IS FOR ERCOT TO FILE THE NECESSARY REVISION REQUEST TO CON, UM, TO SUPPORT THE CONTROLLABLE LOAD RESOURCE AND BRING YOUR OWN GEN. 
          UH, SO WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE, AND WE'LL TALK MORE ABOUT THAT IN THE MEETING, IS THAT TODAY'S MEETING IS THAT INITIAL VERY HIGH LEVEL. 
          HERE'S THE TYPES OF CONFIGURATIONS WE'RE THINKING ABOUT. 
          WE'LL HAVE MORE DETAILS AT THE 24TH WORKSHOP, AND THEN HOPEFULLY BY MARCH 30TH WE HAVE DRAFT LANGUAGE OR CONCEPTS THAT WE'LL RELEASE IN AN NPR AND OR OPERATING GUIDE REVISION AND OR OUR PLANNING GUIDE REVISION TO THEN HIT THAT NEXT WORKSHOP SEVEN. 
          UH, AND AGAIN, IF WE NEED AN EXTRA WORKSHOP, WE CAN, OR IF WE JUST ROLL RIGHT INTO THE ROS UM, PIECE. 
          SO AGAIN, THERE'S MORE COMING ON THIS. 
          SO IN TERMS OF HOW DO WE GET FEEDBACK, UM, I, I'LL JUST PAUSE. 
          WHAT I THINK IS GONNA HELP IS TO FORMALLY FILE COMMENTS, UH, ESPECIALLY TO THE PICKER IN THIS CASE FOR THE BATCH ZERO PROCESS. 
          UH, THE FORMAL FILING IS NOTICED TO EVERYONE AT THE SAME TIME. 
          SO IRRESPECTIVE OF WHAT THE, UM, HOST DOES, EVERYTHING IS ON THE RECORD WITH THE COMPANY. 
          YOUR PRESENTATION COULD BE CLIP TO IT. 
          AND I'LL ENSURE THAT EVERY MEETING WE HAVE IS THAT THOSE ARE THE FIRST IN LINE TO WALK THROUGH THEIR COMMENT. 
          SO YOU'LL HAVE A TIME AND SPACE TO SHARE YOUR COMMENTS. 
          UM, AGAIN, IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT SAYING THAT'S WRONG, IT'S ABOUT TELL US WHAT THE RIGHT ANSWER IS. 
          SO AS ERCOT, WE'D REALLY LIKE TO KNOW, UM, WHAT THE COUNTER PROPOSAL IS TO GET US INTO A BETTER SPOT, UM, FOR ADOPTION. 
          UH, AGAIN, THE PIGGER UH, THAT PLANNING GUIDE REVISION GOES FROM THIS LARGE LOAD WORKSHOP INTO ROS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT. 
          SO THAT'S THE LARGE REVISION REQUEST THAT GOES TO TACK ON THE BOARD AND THE PUC. 
          AND IF YOU WANT TO FILL OUT A FORM FOR THE PIGGER, IT'S CLICKING HERE AND THAT'S HOW YOU CAN GET A BLANK FORM. 
          AND FOR THE NPR IS THERE. 
          AND THEN THIS IS THE SAME SLIDE AS LAST TIME. 
          JUST A REMINDER THAT THE, UH, 58 40 LOAD FORECASTING RULE FOR LARGE LOADS IS, UM, HAS BEEN ADOPTED AND IN EFFECT. 
          AND THAT 5 8 4 8 1 IS NOT YET ADOPTED AND IS IN FLIGHT. 
          AND, UM, THAT IS THE FRAMEWORK THAT WE'VE KIND OF LIFTED INTO THE CURRENT PROPOSAL. 
          UM, ASSUMING THAT THOSE ARE HOW THESE MARRY TOGETHER FOR BATCH ZERO, WHETHER THAT'S APPROPRIATE OR NOT, THAT'S UP FOR DEBATE LATER TODAY. 
          AND IN TERMS OF REMINDER OF THE SCOPE, SO EVERYTHING ABOUT THAT JUNE 1ST MEETING IS BATCH ZERO. 
          EVERYTHING ELSE AFTER THAT IS A STRETCH GOAL THAT WE ALL WANNA PARTNER WITH AND TRY TO GET TO, WHICH IS THE CLR AND BRING YOUR OWN GEN. 
          UH, AGAIN, WE USE THE SURVEY, OTHER TOOLS TO TRY AND GET THIS, UM, FEEDBACK LOOP TIGHT AND RAPID AND THE, BUT THE LONG TERM BATCH PROCESS OF WHAT DO WE DO AFTER FIRST BATCH, THAT'S REALLY, WE'RE GOING TO SET THAT TO THE SIDE AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN IN THE CONTEXT OF THESE MEETINGS. 
          SO WE CAN HAVE A SIDE NOTES OF THINGS TO REMEMBER TO COME BACK TO, BUT IT'S NOT TO SOLVE TODAY. 
          [3. Stakeholder Survey Feedback and FAQ (20 mins)]
OKAY. 
          SO IN TERMS OF THE FAQS, THIS IS A LOT OF WORDS, BUT AGAIN, SINCE WE RELEASED IT LAST NIGHT, I'M JUST GONNA KIND OF SLOW DOWN AND WALK THROUGH 'EM. 
          AND JEFF, IF YOU WANT TO CHIME IN ON ANY OF THEM FOR CONTEXT, YOU'RE WELCOME TO. 
          SO WE THEME THIS INTO THE BATCH ZERO PROCESS, TIMELINE AND DECISION POINTS IS KIND OF THE TOPIC. 
          UH, THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS THAT WE'VE HEARD KIND OF ECHOING THROUGH EITHER IN THE SURVEY OR IN THE WORKSHOPS. 
          IS IT POSSIBLE TO INCLUDE A SECOND POST REFINEMENT DECISION POINT FOR MARKET PARTICIPANTS TO OPT OUT? AND THE ANSWER IS NO. 
          ERCOT IS DESIGNED. 
          BATCH ZERO IS A ONE BINDING COMMITMENT. 
          YOU KNOW, WE RUN THE PROCESS AND THEN THERE'S THAT 30 DAY WINDOW FOR THAT COMMITMENT. 
          THE REFINEMENT, UM, DOES NOT CHANGE THE COMMITTED RAMP AND IT'S NOT INTENDED TO INCREASE COST. 
          YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO SECURITIZE ADDITIONAL MEGAWATTS 'CAUSE THERE ARE NO ADDITIONAL MEGAWATTS. 
          IT ONLY FINALIZES 
          [00:10:01]
A TRANSMISSION SOLUTION. 
          UH, AND THEN A SECOND OPT OUT TO DO THAT REINTRODUCES THE LOOP, UH, STUDY RISK THAT WE'RE ALREADY IN. 
          SO JUST A REMINDER OF THAT ONE. 
          NEXT, WHAT WILL THE BATCH ZERO STUDY ALLOCATIONS, UH, BE FINALIZED AND COMMUNICATED? ALLOCATION TIMING IS TIED TO THE COMPLETION OF THE BATCH ZERO STUDY PHASE UNDER THE DRAFT. 
          FIGURE 1 45 TIMELINE ALLOCATION RESULTS WILL BE ISSUED IN THE JANUARY 20, 27. 
          UH, AND FINAL DATES WILL BE CONFIRMED FINAL IN THE FINALIZATION OF P 1 45. 
          SO AS PROPOSED AS JANUARY, 2027. 
          BUT WHATEVER'S ADOPTED WILL BE THAT DATE. 
          CAN THE 30 DAY COMMITMENT WINDOW BE EXTENDED? UH, ERCOT INTENDS TO MAINTAIN THE 30 DAY COMMITMENT WINDOW CONSISTENT WITH THE DRAFT, UH, PC PROJECT. 
          UM, 5 8 4 8 1. 
          THE FULL BATCH ZERO SCHEDULE, INCLUDING THE COMMITMENT DEADLINE WILL BE PUBLISHED IN ADVANCE. 
          AND THEN WHAT IS THE DATE FOR MEETING COMMITMENT CRITERIA? THE DATE FOR MEETING CRITERIA IS PROPOSED IS MARCH 1ST, 2027 IN PICKER 1 45. 
          AND WHAT GETS TO THE BATCH ZERO PLANNING? UM, BATCH ZERO PLANNING INTEGRATION. 
          HOW CAN BATCH ONE PROCEED BEFORE BATCH ZERO YEAR SIX? TRANSMISSION SOLUTIONS ARE FULLY IDENTIFIED. 
          THIS IS THAT IDEA. 
          WE'RE ONLY STUDYING YEARS ONE THROUGH FIVE. 
          WHAT ABOUT THE YEAR SIX? SO UNDER A SIX MONTH CADEN, EACH BATCH PROCESS WOULD BE ACTIONABLE RESULTS FOR YEAR ONE THROUGH FIVE. 
          WHILE THE YEAR SIX TRANSMISSION SOLUTIONS MAY CONTINUE THROUGH THE R-T-P-R-P-G PROCESS, THAT REFLECTS THE TRADE OFF BETWEEN SPEED AND THE FULL TRANSMISSION VETTING. 
          IF WE WANTED TO GET ALL THE YEAR SIX, ALL THE DETAILS OF THOSE LONG TERM PROJECTS, WE'D BE OUTTA THAT WINDOW. 
          SO THAT'S THE GIVE AND TAKE OF THIS DESIGN. 
          NEXT SLIDE. 
          UH, BATCH ZERO PLANNING AND INTEGRATION. 
          HOW ARE THE IN-FLIGHT RPG PROJECTS INCORPORATED INTO BATCH ZERO? PROJECTS THAT HAVE PROGRESSED THROUGH RPG AND RECEIVED ENDORSEMENT AT THE START OF BATCH ZERO WILL BE TREATED CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED PLANNING PRACTICES AND BE INCORPORATED INTO THE BATCH ZERO STUDY. 
          HOW DOES BATCH ZERO INTERACT WITH THE 2026 AND 2027 RTP BASED ON THE CURRENT SEQUENCING, BATCH ZERO WILL NOT AFFECT THE 2026 RTP BECAUSE COMMITMENT OCCURS AFTER THE 2026 RTP MODELING CYCLE IS COMPLETE. 
          UH, LOADS THAT MEET COMMITMENT MILESTONES IN MARCH, 2027 MAY BE INCORPORATED INTO THE 2027 RTP AND THE FINAL TIMING ALIGNS DEPENDING ON THE FINALIZATION OF PICKER 1 45 AND PUBLICATION OF BATCH ZERO SCHEDULE. 
          OKAY, IN TERMS OF TRANSMISSION UPGRADES, HOW ARE MULTI-YEAR YEAR SIX UPGRADES, UH, AND BASE CASES HANDLED? ERCOT RECOGNIZES THE YEAR SIX SOLUTIONS MAY INVOLVE COMPLEX MULTI-YEAR TRANSMISSION UPGRADES. 
          BATCH BATCH ZERO ESTABLISHES A COMMITTED LOAD BASELINE AND PROVIDES EARLIER CLARITY ON REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS. 
          LONG DURATION UPGRADES WILL CONTINUE TO PROCEED THROUGH ESTABLISHED TRANSMISSION PLANNING PROCESSES, INCLUDING RTP AND RPG PATHWAYS. 
          UH, NEXT QUESTION. 
          IF NO RELIABLE TRANSMISSION SOLUTION EXISTS WITHIN THE STUDY HORIZON, HOW WILL THE ALLOCATED MEGAWATTS BE HANDLED? UH, WITHIN YEARS ONE THROUGH FIVE, ERCOT WILL ALLOCATE THE MEGAWATTS THAT CAN BE RELIABLY SERVED BASED ON EXISTING SYSTEM CAPABILITY. 
          PROJECTS MAY RECEIVE PARTIAL ALLOCATIONS DURING THIS PERIOD. 
          IF CONSTRAINTS EXIST BY YEAR SIX, THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT THE RTP PROCESS WILL IDENTIFY UPGRADES NECESSARY TO SERVE FULL COMMITTED LOAD ACCORDINGLY. 
          YEAR SIX REFLECTS FULL A HUNDRED PERCENT SERVICE OF THE COMMITTED MEGAWATTS. 
          AND THE LAST ONE OF THESE, UH, ALLOCATION OUTCOMES AND RAMP SCHEDULES. 
          CAN ERCOT CHANGE THE MEGAWATT ALLOCATIONS AFTER COMMITMENT? NO. 
          FOR BATCH ZERO AFTER THE COMMITMENT POINT, THE MEGAWATT ALLOCATION BY YEAR IS LOCKED. 
          THE REFINEMENT PHASE IS INTENDED ONLY TO FINALIZE THE TRANSMISSION PLAN, NOT REDUCE MEGAWATTS OR DELAYED DELIVERY YEARS FOR COMMITTED MEGAWATTS. 
          IF A PROJECT DROPS OUT, ARE THE MEGAWATTS REALLOCATED WITHIN THE SAME BATCH? WE'VE PROBABLY HAD THIS QUESTION 20 TIMES. 
          NO. 
          ERCOT IS NOT PLANNING TO REALLOCATE THE MEGAWATTS WITHIN THE BATCH ZERO AFTER COMMITMENT BECAUSE IT CREATES COMPLEXITY AND REOPENS TUDY CASES. 
          ADDITIONAL MEGAWATTS WOULD GENERALLY BE ADDRESSED IN THE SUBSEQUENT BATCHES MAINTAINING THE PROCESS OF STABILITY AND SCHEDULE CERTAINTY. 
          SO THE IDEA IS YOU KEEP ROLLING ON THIS CADENCE AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE TO GET THAT EXCESS CAPACITY. 
          UH, FINANCIAL SECURITY AND COST RESPONSIBILITY. 
          OUR FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS, INCLUDING KAYAK AND SECURITY, LOCKED A COMMITMENT BASED ON THE DRAFT PF UH, PFP FOR THE PC PROJECT 5 8 4 81. 
          ERCOT IS PROPOSING THAT THE FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS ARE ESTABLISHED AND LOCKED AT THE COMMITMENT POINT. 
          THE REFINEMENT PHASE MAY ADJUST TRANSMISSION SOLUTIONS, BUT IT IS NOT INTENDED TO REPRICE COMMITMENTS OR INTRODUCE POST COMMITMENT TRUE UP COSTS. 
          THIS HAS COME UP QUITE A BIT TOO. 
          THE PROCESS IS DESIGNED TO PROVIDE COST CERTAINTY AND AVOID REOPENING FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS AND SUBSEQUENT PLANNING STEPS. 
          OKAY, SECOND TO LAST. 
          HOW WILL ADDITIONAL GENERATION BE MODELED IN BATCH ZERO? ERCOT WILL APPLY THE METHODOLOGY ESTABLISHED IN PICKER 1 27 WHEN MODELING ADDITIONAL GENERATION IN BATCH ZERO. 
          UH, THE MODELING APPROACH AND ASSOCIATED ASSUMPTIONS WILL BE DOCUMENTED 
          [00:15:01]
IN THE PUBLISHED CASE ASSUMPTIONS TO ENSURE TRANSPARENCY AND CONSISTENCY. 
          UH, DOES BATCH ZERO INCLUDE A LOW SOLAR SCENARIO? THE BATCH ZERO DOES INCLUDE A NULL SOLAR SCENARIO INTENDED TO REFLECT STRESSED CONDITIONS. 
          OKAY, SO AGAIN, YOU MAY NOT AGREE WITH EVERYTHING WE JUST SAID, BUT THIS IS SETTING THE TRAJECTORY FOR WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED. 
          AND ALL OF THAT IS, UM, UP FOR DEBATE, BUT THOSE ARE, WE HOPE ARE KIND OF CHEAT SHEETS TO GO BACK TO. 
          AND WHY DID THEY SAY THAT? UM, WHAT'S THE APPROACH? SO NOW WE'RE GONNA GET BACK, UM, AND PLAY BACK TO YOU WHAT YOU HEARD. 
          LET ME FLIP DOWN REAL QUICK HERE. 
          OKAY, SO THE SURVEY, UH, FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT COMPLETED, YOU'LL NOTICE IT WAS 20 QUESTIONS IN TERMS OF, UM, THE THINGS THAT WE HAD THE COMEBACK FEED ON WHERE IT WAS ELIGIBILITY AND SCREENING HAD TWO MULTIPLE CHOICES, THREE FREE RESPONSES. 
          THE DESIGN OF BATCH ZERO HAD MULTIPLE CHOICES. 
          COMMITMENT, REALLOCATION CONFIDENTIALITY AND TRANSPARENCY. 
          THAT WAS AN INTERESTING ONE. 
          JUST ONE MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION. 
          AND THEN CLR AND BYOG. 
          SO, UM, GOSH, I'LL TRY TO READ THIS QUICKLY, BUT EACH ONE OF THESE HAS A SLIDE. 
          SO AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO GET LOST IN THIS, BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS FAIR FOR EVERYONE TO KIND OF SEE AND SOAK IN WHAT WE'RE SAYING AND NOT JUST BORE YOU TO DEATH. 
          SO, UH, NUMBER ONE. 
          QUESTION NUMBER ONE WAS RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY CUTOFF. 
          UH, STAKEHOLDERS SHOWED A PREFERENCE FOR DECEMBER 27 AS THE LATEST IN-SERVICE DATE TO DEMONSTRATE DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY. 
          SO WE'LL SHOW YOU NUMBERS IN A MINUTE, BUT THAT WAS THE SWEET SPOT ON. 
          UM, STAKEHOLDER PREFERENCE. 
          HOW ABOUT THE PARTIALLY COMPLETE STUDY DATE CUTOFF? UH, STAKEHOLDERS SHOW A CLEAR PREFERENCE FOR A JUNE, 2026 CUTOFF DATE, AND THAT'S TO DETERMINE BATCH ZERO ELIGIBILITY FOR PARTIALLY COMPLETE STUDIES. 
          UH, HOW ABOUT THE INTERMEDIATE AGREEMENT INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT CRITERIA? CUTOFFS, UH, STAKEHOLDERS SHOWED STRONGEST PREFERENCE FOR JULY, 2026, DEADLINE TO MEET AGREEMENT CRITERIA FOR BATCH ZERO INCLUSION DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY. 
          AND THAT WAS DIFFERENT TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY. 
          STAKEHOLDERS STRONGLY FAVOR SITE PREPARATION AND CONSTRUCTION AS PROOF OF DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY WITH ADDITIONAL EMPHASIS ON CAPITAL COMMITMENT, SITE CONTROL AND INTERCONNECTION READINESS. 
          AND THEN SITE PREP AND CONSTRUCTION STAKEHOLDERS STRONGLY FAVOR DEFINING SITE PREP AND CONSTRUCTION THROUGH SITE CONTROL AND POSTED FINANCIAL SECURITY, ALSO SUPPORTING STAGED ENGINEERING PERMITTING AND EQUIPMENT DEPOSITS. 
          NOW IN TERMS OF THE DESIGN OF THE BATCH ZERO, THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES STAKEHOLDERS SHOW SUPPORT OF ERCOT BATCH ZERO PRINCIPLES. 
          UH, THOUGH IT'S RELATIVELY CLOSE SPLIT INDICATES MEANINGFUL STAKEHOLDER SENSITIVITY AS TO HOW THE FRAMEWORK IS IMPLEMENTED. 
          WHEN I SHOW YOU THE DATA, YOU'LL SEE WHAT THOSE WORDS KIND OF MEAN. 
          UH, THE REFINEMENT STUDY APPROACH. 
          THIS IS THE IDEA THOSE MONTHS AFTER THE COMMITMENT. 
          UH, STAKEHOLDERS BROADLY SUPPORT THE PROPOSED REFINEMENT STUDY APPROACH, THOUGH MINORITY SIGNALS, UH, SENSITIVITY TO THE IMPLEMENTATION DETAILS AROUND THAT. 
          UH, TRANSMISSION UPGRADE AND PROCESS DESIGN STAKEHOLDERS OVERWHELMINGLY FAVOR A SHORTER SIX MONTH BATCH STUDY TIMELINE SIGNALING A STRONG PREFERENCE FOR SPEED AND PROCESS EFFICIENCY OVER LONG STUDY DURATION. 
          UH, THERE IS STILL A 12 MONTH CAMP, AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT IN A MINUTE. 
          UH, AND THEN ALSO A FINAL COMMITMENT PERIOD. 
          STAKEHOLDERS BROADLY FAVOR PRESERVING FLEXIBILITY AND LOAD RAMP AND FINANCIAL COMMITMENTS AS COST ESTIMATES EVOLVE WITH LIMITED SUPPORT, UH, FOR RIGID OR FULLY REOPENED ALLOCATION APPROACHES. 
          AND THEN PUBLICLY DISCLOSED INFORMATION, UH, THAT'S COME UP A FEW TIMES HERE, WHICH IS, WHY DON'T WE JUST POST ALL THIS STUFF PUBLICLY. 
          SO THIS IS TRYING TO FIND, WELL, WHAT DO WE WANNA PUBLISH PUBLICLY? SO STAKEHOLDERS STRONGLY SUPPORT PROTECTING CUSTOMER IDENTITY AND COMMERCIALLY SENSITIVE PROJECT DATA, UH, SIGNALING A PREFERENCE FOR TRANSPARENCY AT THE SYSTEM LEVEL RATHER THAN BY COMPANY. 
          SO I'LL JUST MARCH THROUGH THIS B ONE THROUGH E ONE SLIDES. 
          UH, SO HERE IS THAT, UM, IN TERMS OF THE DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY CUTOFF DATE, THIS IS HOW THE DATES CAME OUT TO DECEMBER, 2027. 
          UH, YOU CAN SEE SOME WENT ALL THE WAY OUT MUCH FURTHER INTO THE FUTURE. 
          UH, SOME WENT BACK INTO MAY, 2026. 
          I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT. 
          YOU CAN TRY TO REMEMBER WHAT YOU PUT IN THE BLANK. 
          . 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          AND THEN THIS ONE'S A LITTLE MORE TIED. 
          THIS ELIGIBILITY AND SCREENING, PARTIALLY COMPLETE STUDY CUTOFF DATES. 
          UH, AGAIN, MOST FAVORED THE JUNE, 2026. 
          YOU KNOW, YOU CAN SEE SOME INTO THE JULY AND THEN MAY, BUT MOST OF THEM ARE IN THIS, UH, THOSE THREE MONTH PERIODS. 
          I HAVE A COUPLE WAY OUT HERE. 
          AND THEN ELIGIBILITY AND SCREENING. 
          THE IDEA OF THE INTERMEDIATE OR INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT CRITERIA, CUTOFF DATES, UH, THE LION'S SHARE IS HONING IN ON THE MAY, JUNE, JULY WITH JULY, 2026 BEING THE MOST FAVORED VIEW. 
          UM, OH, AND BEFORE I GO TOO FAR, MY APOLOGIES. 
          UH, WE DID TWEAK THE KEY ON HERE, UM, FROM 
          [00:20:01]
THE PREVIOUS ONE, WHICH IS WE TEASE OUT THE GENERATORS SEPARATELY. 
          THEY'RE MIXED IN WITH THE OTHERS BEFORE. 
          SO IT'S WIRES, COMPANIES, LARGE LOADS, OTHERS, AND THEN GENERATORS. 
          ELIGIBILITY AND SCREENING. 
          IN TERMS OF DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY, WHAT INFORMATION SHOULD BE REQUIRED FOR PROJECTS TO DEMONSTRATE DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY? SITE PREPARATION IS THE MIDDLE ONE. 
          HERE IS THE IN CONSTRUCTION. 
          UH, THE NEXT MOST WAS THE, THIS OTHER, AND WE'LL TALK OVER HERE TO THE RIGHT. 
          ALSO, WHETHER OR NOT HAVING PURCHASED ALL THE NECESSARILY CUSTOMER OWNED HIGH VOLTAGE TRANSFORMERS AND CIRCUIT BREAKERS WITH DELIVERY BY PROJECT IN SERVICE STATE. 
          THAT'S THE LONG LEAD TIME ON CRITICAL EQUIPMENT THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT HERE BEFORE. 
          AND INCLUSION IN A QUARTERLY STABILITY ASSESSMENT. 
          SO IN TERMS OF THE OTHER CRITERIA, SUGGESTED, UH, EVIDENCE OF FINANCIAL COMMITMENT, UM, IS OTHER, AGAIN, WHAT'S IN THIS 49% BECAUSE OTHER IS JUST A WORD. 
          FINANCIAL COMMITMENT WAS A LEADING PIECE OF IT. 
          UH, EQUIPMENT ORDERS PLACED SECURITY PROVIDED, UH, VERSUS FULL EQUIPMENT PURCHASE. 
          UH, DEMONSTRATING SITE CONTROL, ZONING APPROVALS, PERMITS, UH, ENGINEERING AND ERROR, CONNECTION READINESS, MILESTONES, EXECUTE AGREEMENTS, MODELING DATA SUBMITTED. 
          AND I'M NOT SURE WHAT EPC CONTRACTS ARE, BUT EPC CONTRACTS AND COMMERCIAL FIRMNESS INDICATORS SUCH AS POWER PURCHASE AGREEMENT. 
          CAN ANYONE TELL ME WHAT AN EPC IS? ENGINEERING PROCUREMENT CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          THE NEXT ONE WAS SITE PREP AND CONSTRUCTION. 
          UM, AGAIN, MAJORITY WERE FAVORING THE SITE CONTROL, EITHER OWNED OR LONG, LONG TERM LEASED LAND. 
          UH, AND THEN FINANCIAL SECURITY. 
          AND THEN THEY EXECUTED INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT BREAKER, MAJOR ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT, DEPOSITS, ENGINEERING, THE DESIGN, HIGH VOLTAGE TRANSFORMER. 
          SO THERE'S THE DISTRIBUTION. 
          UH, SO CAN, TO SUMMARIZE, THIS ONE'S HARD 'CAUSE THERE'S A LOT GOING ON, BUT STRONG MAJORITY OF RESPONDENTS WERE IN FAVOR OF DEFINING SITE PREP AND CONSTRUCTION TO INCLUDE POSTED FINANCIAL SECURITY DEPOSITS AND DEMONSTRATED SITE CONTROL WITH SUPPORT FOR SOME OF THESE OTHER AREAS, INCLUDING BREAKER, MAJOR ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT, INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENTS, AND HIGH VOLTAGE TRANSFORMERS. 
          ALRIGHT, AND THEN THE NEXT ONE, C ONE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES. 
          DO YOU AGREE WITH ERCOT FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES FOR BATCH ZERO? AND IT'S KIND OF A 50 50 SPLIT? YES AND NO. 
          SO IT'S A MAJORITY RESPONDENTS AGREE WITH ERCOT. 
          I WOULD SAY A NARROW MAJORITY AGREE WITH THE PRINCIPLES OF BATCH ZERO. 
          UH, MIXED STAKEHOLDER ALIGNMENT, TSPS AND GENERATORS STAKEHOLDERS SHOW CLEAR MAJORITY SUPPORT FOR PROPOSED FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES. 
          LARGE LOW CUSTOMERS ARE AMBIVALENT WHILE OTHERS ARE OPPOSED. 
          UH, REASONS FOR OPPOSITION CONCERN OVER RETROACTIVE APPLICATION OF PROPOSED 5 8 4 8 1 RULES AND POTENTIAL INVALIDATION OF PREVIOUSLY APPROVED STUDIES OR ALLOCATED MEGAWATTS OBJECTION TO REALLOCATION OF NON UTILIZED CAPACITY IN THE A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS PER MEGAWATT FINANCIAL SECURITY REQUIREMENT VIEWS AS VIEWED AS ECONOMICALLY HAR, HARMFUL AND PREMATURE. 
          UH, THE RISK OF INEQUITABLE TREATMENT DURING DUE TO TSP DRIVEN DELAYS, POTENTIALLY DISADVANTAGING PROJECTS THROUGH NO FAULT OF DEVELOPERS AND THE NEED FOR CLEAR ALIGNMENT WITH SENATE BILL SIX AND FINAL PC GATING RULES BEFORE IMPLEMENTING BATCH ZERO CRITERIA. 
          SO THAT'S WHERE WE ARE. 
          WE'LL SEE HOW THE DISCUSSION GOES TODAY. 
          OKAY, REFINEMENT STUDY APPROACH. 
          UH, STRONG MAJORITY OF RESPONDENTS ARE AGREE WITH THIS REFINEMENT SITE. 
          SO IF YOU REMEMBER THE LAST WORKSHOP, THAT'S WHERE BROUGHT ERCOT BROUGHT FORWARD THAT NEW CONCEPT, UH, THAT'S BEING WELL RECEIVED, UH, BY THE WIRES COMPANIES, LARGE LOAD CUSTOMERS ACROSS THE BOARD. 
          UH, THERE ARE CONCERNS OVER THE REFINEMENT STUDY COULD DELAY PROJECTS OR OVERLAP WITH SUBSEQUENT BATCHES, CREATING INEFFICIENCIES RE STUDIES OR UNCERTAINTY NEED FOR CLEAR CRITERIA SEQUENCING OR OPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL TRANSPARENCY RISKS THAT THE PROCESS COULD REOPEN OR EFFECTIVELY UDDY PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PROJECTS, PENALIZING INVESTMENTS MADE EARLIER, UNDER EARLIER ASSUMPTIONS. 
          UH, AND THEN REQUIREMENTS TO ENSURE ALIGNMENT WITH STATUTORY TIMELINES, THE PURE ONE 20 DAY RULE AND AVOID CONFLICTS WITH SENATE BILL SIX NET METERING REVIEWS. 
          UH, AND THEN OBJECTIONS TO CERTAIN IMPLEMENTATION ELEMENTS, INCLUDING THE A HUNDRED THOUSAND, UH, PER MEGAWATT SECURITY REQUIREMENT AND EXTENDING GOVERNANCE APPROVAL, TIMELINES, TRANSMISSION UPGRADE AND DESIGN PROCESS AND DESIGN. 
          UH, WHICH TRANSMISSION UPGRADE BATCH PROCESS WOULD YOU PREFER? SO, SIX MONTH VERSUS THE 12 MONTH. 
          SO HERE'S THE DATA OR THE, YOU KNOW, THE DATA WITHIN THE DATA. 
          UM, THE MOST OF THE LARGE, UH, TSPS WE'RE IN FAVOR OF THE 12 MONTH PROCESS. 
          UH, A LOT OF THAT IS AROUND THE ALIGNMENT WITH EXISTING R-P-G-R-T-P PROCESSES AND HOW DO YOU GET THIS TOGETHER INTO A SINGLE PUT TOGETHER FINAL STUDY RATHER THAN ONE FEEDING INTO THE OTHER. 
          SO I, I WON'T SAY MUCH MORE THAN THAT, OR I SAW JEFF COME OFF AS COME OFF MUTE. 
          GO AHEAD. 
          YEAH, MATT, JUST YOU WANNA ADD TO THAT? YOU KNOW, I THOUGHT THAT WAS INTERESTING DATA. 
          WHILE, WHILE THERE IS A STRONG MAJORITY THAT FAVORS THE SIX MONTH PROCESS, 
          [00:25:01]
UM, AS MATT SAID, NOT ALL OF THE LARGER TSPS, BUT, UM, UH, I WOULD SAY MOST OF THE LARGE TSPS FAVOR THE 12 MONTH. 
          AND, AND I, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT REPRESENTS A SIGNI SIGNIFICANT, UM, NUMBER OF MILES OF TRANSMISSION IN THE STATE. 
          UM, AND SO I THINK THAT THAT, UH, HAS SOME WEIGHT TO IT. 
          UM, AND SO WE'RE STILL THINKING ABOUT ABOUT THAT. 
          UM, AND, AND I'LL SAY WE'RE, WE'RE TRYING TO THREAD THIS NEEDLE. 
          UM, I, I THINK BATCH ZERO, WE, WE FEEL WE, WE SHOULD STICK WITH THE, THE PROCESS WE'VE LAID OUT IN THE PICKER, BUT ONGOING BATCH. 
          UM, WE WE'RE, WE'RE THINKING ABOUT HOW TO TAKE THAT FEEDBACK AND AGAIN, TRYING TO SEE IF WE CAN THREAD THAT NEEDLE. 
          IT, IT'S, IT'S A TRICKY SITUATION, UM, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO, UH, FIND THAT, THAT BALANCE IN, IN THE TRADE OFFS. 
          BUT, UH, BUT WE, WE ARE TAKING THIS FEEDBACK VERY SERIOUSLY AND, AND ARE CONTINUING TO CHURN INTERNALLY ON THAT, UH, PARTICULARLY WITH THE, THE ONGOING AS WE'RE THINKING ABOUT THE ONGOING BATCH PROCESS. 
          ALRIGHT, THANK YOU JEFF. 
          AND WE'RE ALMOST DONE HERE. 
          AND THEN WE'LL TAKE A PAUSE FOR, UH, OPENING THE QUEUE HERE IN A SECOND, UH, COMMITMENT ALLOCATION, FINAL, UH, COMMITMENT PERIOD. 
          SO SOME PARTICIPANTS WERE CONSIDERING A FINAL COMMITMENT PERIOD AFTER THE REFINEMENT STUDY. 
          IN THIS CASE, HOW SHOULD COST AND LOAD RAMP DIFFERENCES DURING THE SUBSEQUENT STUDY REFINEMENTS OCCUR? SO THIS IS THE IDEA OF, WE SAID IT'S A SINGLE COMMITMENT. 
          THIS IS IN THE EVENT THAT THERE'S A SECOND COMMITMENT AFTER THE REFINEMENT PROCESS. 
          UM, SO THERE IS MAJORITY RESPONDENTS WERE FAVORED ADJUSTING THE LOAD RAMP IN FINANCIAL SECURITY UPWARD OR DOWNWARD BASED ON THOSE CHANGED IN COST ESTIMATES. 
          ON THE THEORY OF A SECOND, UH, COMMITMENT, A MIXED STAKEHOLDER ALIGNMENT, TDS PS LARGE OLD CUSTOMERS AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS ARE ALIGNED, UM, ALLOWING FLEXIBILITY TO ADJUST COMMITMENTS WHILE GENERATORS ARE COMPARATIVELY STRONGER FOR LOCKING THE ORIGINAL LOAD RAMP AND FINANCIAL COMMITMENT. 
          SO HERE'S THE CONFIDENTIALITY AND TRANSPARENCY, AND I WILL SAY THIS IS SOMETHING WE DON'T HAVE TO SOLVE TODAY, BUT I THINK THIS IS GOOD STEP FORWARD IN UNDERSTANDING WHERE PEOPLE BELIEVE. 
          UM, SO THERE'S A STRONG PREFERENCE. 
          WHAT SHOULD REMAIN CONFIDENTIAL, FIRST AND FOREMOST IS THE CUSTOMER IDENTITY. 
          UM, AND THEN WHEN IT COMES TO EVERYTHING ELSE IS KIND OF A DISTANCE SECOND OF WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO PUBLISH A TABLE OF STUFF, WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, BY THE LL YOU KNOW, THE LOAD, LARGE LOAD ID OR WHETHER IT'S SYSTEM WIDE. 
          BUT THERE'S THE IDEA OF WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO START PUBLISHING AND SHARING SOME OF THIS INFORMATION WHEN IT COMES TO, YOU KNOW, WHERE IS IT POINT OF INTERCONNECTION REQUESTED MEGAWATTS, AWARD AND MEGAWATTS TRANSMISSION UPGRADES, UH, COST ESTIMATES, FINANCIAL COMMITMENTS, RAMP SCHEDULE, STEADY RESULTS. 
          SO WE'RE NOT, WE DON'T HAVE LANGUAGE FOR THIS TODAY, BUT THIS IS, WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO START HAVING TRANSPARENCY ON RESULTS OR THE LARGE LOADS IN GENERAL. 
          ALRIGHT, SO WITH THAT, UM, WE'LL OPEN UP THE QUEUE AND I, WHAT I WANNA STAY WITH IS MAYBE SOME CLARIFYING QUESTIONS. 
          UH, AND WE'LL JUST GIVE THIS 20 MINUTES TO SEE WHERE IT GOES. 
          UH, THERE MAY BE A POINT AT WHICH I RUDELY INTERVENE AND JUST CUT OFF THE QUESTION AND SAY, WE'VE GOTTA GET JEFF UP HERE TO START RUNNING THROUGH, UH, THE MEAT OF THE MEETING. 
          SO JANICE, IF YOU WANT, I CAN START TO FIGURE OUT WHEN THINGS STARTED. 
          HERE'S WHAT I DON'T WANNA DO IS TO GO BACK 20 MINUTES AGO. 
          I WANTED TO GET ALL THIS INFORMATION OUT. 
          UM, SO JANICE, DO YOU HAVE A NATURAL CUT POINT TO CHOOSE FROM OR DO YOU WANT ME TO PICK IT FOR YOU? SHE UPDATED, PUT THERE. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH, I, I CAN, IF YOU CAN'T SEE THE CUBE IN, I CAN. 
          I THINK PRASHANT IS FIRST. 
          YEP. 
          PRASHAN, GO AHEAD. 
          HEY, UH, THIS IS PRASHANT FROM BLACK MOUNTAIN. 
          QUICK QUESTION ON SLIDE 10. 
          SLIDE 10, UM, YES, UH, ON THE RTP VERSUS BATCH ZERO, UH, MY QUESTION IS, IF A LOAD GETS INCLUDED IN THIS 2026 RTP, UH, WOULD THAT BE AUTOMATICALLY INCLUDED IN THE BATCH ZERO? UH, SO THE ANSWER TO THAT PRASHANT IS, UH, WE WILL LOOK AT, UH, WE'RE BATCH ZERO, WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA FOLLOW WHAT IS IN, UH, PICKER 1 45, WHICH, UM, I THINK RIGHT NOW DOES NOT, UH, AS, AS DRAFTED, UH, DOES NOT INCLUDE A, UH, 2026 RTP CONSIDERATION. 
          ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. 
          OKAY, NEXT UP IN THE QUEUE. 
          UH, BILL BARNES. 
          HEY MATT, CAN YOU GUYS HEAR ME OKAY? YES, GO AHEAD. 
          THANK YOU. 
          SLIDE 23, PLEASE. 
          THIS IS RELATED TO THE SURVEY QUESTION ON A SIX MONTH VERSUS AN ANNUAL CADENCE, AND I'LL JUST, I'LL KIND OF SPEAK TO OUR 
          [00:30:01]
RESPONSE, WHICH IS REALLY CONDITIONED ON THE EXPECTATION THAT A SIX MONTH PROCESS WOULD BE FASTER OVERALL IN TERMS OF COMPLETING THE STUDIES AND THEN, UH, GETTING THE, THE DETERMINATION THROUGH THE TRANSMISSION PLANNING PROCESS, RTP AND HAVING LINE OF SIGHT TO NEW TRANSMISSION PROJECTS. 
          I WOULD SAY THAT IF THE 12 MONTH PROCESS, WHICH INCLUDE WHICH COULD POTENTIALLY INCORPORATE THE BATCH STUDY AND WHAT WOULD BE INCLUDED IN RTP, IF THAT OVERALL GETS YOU TO A FASTER OUTCOME, THEN I THINK A LOT OF RESPONDENTS FOR THE SIX MONTH PROCESS WOULD CHANGE THEIR ANSWER TO 12 MONTHS. 
          I KNOW WE WOULD. 
          SO I, I THINK THAT'S, UM, KIND OF WORTH DIGGING IN OR CLARIFYING. 
          'CAUSE A SIX MONTH BATH BATCH PROCESS, WHICH THEN HAS TO WAIT ON AN RTP IS PROBABLY NOT FASTER OVERALL THAN A 12 MONTH BATCH STUDY THAT INCORPORATES BOTH. 
          BUT I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR, UH, T'S RESPONSE TO THAT, IF THAT IS A POSSIBILITY. 
          THANKS. 
          YEAH, SO I, I THINK THE, UM, IT IS A LITTLE HARD TO HEAR IN THE ROOM, BUT I, I THINK THE MAYBE COMMENT OR QUESTION WAS, UH, WE, UH, VOTED FOR A SIX MONTH PROCESS, BUT WE'D BE, UH, MAYBE WOULD PREFER A 12 MONTH IF THAT RESULTS IN, UM, NOT HAVING TO WAIT FOR THE RTP TO IDENTIFY WHAT, WHAT THE FULL SET OF SOLUTIONS ARE. 
          AND I, I'LL SAY I APPRECIATE THE COMMENT, WE'RE STILL THINKING ABOUT THAT LONG TERM. 
          OKAY, THANKS JEFF. 
          THAT WAS EXACTLY, UH, THE COMMENT. 
          THANKS. 
          ALRIGHT, THANK YOU BILL. 
          THANK YOU JEFF. 
          SHANNON CARAWAY, SLIDE 10 PLEASE. 
          YEP. 
          THE SECOND QUESTION THERE, THE, HOW DOES BATCH ZERO INTERACT WITH 20 26 20 27 RTP? YOUR FIRST SENTENCE SAYS, BASED ON THE CURRENT SEQUENCING, BATCH ZERO WILL NOT AFFECT THE 2026 RTP BECAUSE COMMITMENT OCCURS AFTER THE 2026 MODELING CYCLE IS COMPLETE. 
          THE, MY QUESTION IS, IS WHY IS THE REVERSE NOT TRUE WHERE YOU WERE TAKING THE 2026 RTP? YOU KNOW, IF WE LOOK AT YOUR FEBRUARY 3RD PRESENTATION WHERE Y'ALL WERE TAKING THE RTP INTO ACCOUNT, GIVEN THAT THESE CYCLES ARE ALIGNED DIFFERENTLY AND THAT WE HAVE THE RTP, THEY'LL HAVE THE APRIL 1ST DEADLINE AND WE HAVE THE 58,480 RULE THAT, UH, MAKES IT WHERE THE COMMITMENT CRITERIA IS ESSENTIALLY ALIGNED, WHY ARE YOU NOT INCLUDING THE 2026 RTP? BECAUSE OTHERWISE YOU'RE JUST MISSING A WHOLE YEAR AGAIN OF, UM, OF RTP? SO THAT'S MY FIRST QUESTION. 
          I'LL PAUSE. 
          I THINK THAT THE CHALLENGE WITH THAT IS THAT THE, UM, THE COMMITMENT CRITERIA FOR 2026 RTP, UH, IS, UM, UH, POTENTIALLY DIFFERENT FROM WHAT THE COMMITMENT CRITERIA WILL BE COMING OUT AT 58 4 81. 
          AND SO THE TRANSMISSION PLAN THAT COMES OUT OF BATCH STUDY, WE, WE WANT THAT TO BE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE THINK THE COMMITMENT CRITERIA WILL BE COMING OUT OF 58 41, WHICH MAY ALIGN, MAY NOT ALIGN WITH 2026 RTP. 
          DOESN'T THE 58 4 80 RULE ACTUALLY SAY THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF IT IS TO ALIGN IT WITH WHAT WAS GONNA COME OUT OF 50 AS BEST AS THEY KNEW AT THE TIME 58 41. 
          I THOUGHT I READ THAT IN THERE AND, UM, YEAH, I DON'T, I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK, I DON'T, I DON'T WANNA SPEAK FOR, UH, COMMISSION ON THIS, BUT I, I, UM, THE, THE 58 4 80 HAS IT, IT POINTS TO 58 41. 
          YEP. 
          BUT HAS THIS BE, BECAUSE 58 41 IS NOT COMPLETE, HA HAS THIS SORT OF SPECIAL RULE FOR 2026. 
          YEP. 
          BUT, UM, I THINK OUR, OUR READING OF THAT IS THAT THAT MAY NOT ALIGN. 
          THAT THE SPECIAL 2026 RULE MAY NOT ALIGN WITH THE FOREVER RULE. 
          THAT WILL BE IN 58 4 81, UH, IT AND THEREFORE IF, IF THE TRANSMISSION PLAN THAT WE WILL BE ENDORSING OUT OF BATCH ZERO, IF, IF THAT TIMING IS 2027 IS WHEN WE THINK THAT'LL OCCUR, WE, WE WANT TO NOT LOOK AT THE SPECIAL 2026 RULE. 
          WE WANT TO LOOK FORWARD TO WHAT WE THINK THE RULE WILL BE IN 2027. 
          'CAUSE THAT, THAT, THAT IS WHAT THAT TRANSMISSION PLAN WILL BE ENDORSED UPON BASED UPON, I THINK FOR BATCH ONE. 
          THAT MAKES COMPLETE SENSE. 
          BUT LET ME TAKE WHAT YOU JUST SAID AND ASK THE QUESTION IN REVERSE FOR YOUR 2026 RTP IF YOU HAVE THE CONCERNS. 
          YOU JUST STATED THAT THE BATCH ZERO COULD BE 
          [00:35:01]
A DIFFERENT SET OF CRITERIA. 
          WHAT'S THE PURPOSE OF DOING THE 2026 RTP AT ALL? IF YOU THINK THAT YOU COULD WIND UP WITH A MORE RE IT'S ONLY IF YOU WOULD WIND UP WITH A MORE RESTRICTIVE BATCH ZERO CRITERIA THAT YOUR CONCERN WOULD BE VALID. 
          AND SO IF THAT'S YOUR REAL CONCERN, THEN WHY, WHY EVEN GO THROUGH THE EFFORT OF DOING A 2026 RTP? BECAUSE IF YOU, WHEN YOU'RE FINISHED, HOW ARE YOU GONNA BE ABLE TO TAKE ANY BOARD ACTION ON ANYTHING IF YOU'VE TAKEN THE POSITION THAT, WELL, THE, THE CRITERIA IS DIFFERENT. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A GOOD EXERCISE, UH, PLUS PAT HERSELF ON THE BACK AND COME BACK NEXT YEAR. 
          IT SEEMS LIKE THE INTENT OF THE 58,480 WAS TO COMMISSION TO DO THE VERY BEST THEY COULD. 
          THE COMMISSIONERS WITH WHAT WAS KNOWN THEN TO GET THAT REFLECTED IN, UH, IN THE, UH, 2026 RTP AND 2026 RTP NEEDS TO BE USEFUL WHEN IT'S FINISHED ACTION NEEDS TO BE TAKEN ON IT OR OTHERWISE WE'VE WASTED ANOTHER YEAR. 
          YEAH. 
          AND, AND I'LL I'LL SAY, UM, SO I, UM, I UNDERSTAND THE TIE IN NOT NOT TRYING TO MAKE THIS AN RPG UH, MEETING, BUT, UM, SO, SO I, I DON'T WANNA GO TOO FAR INTO 2026 RTP, BUT I THINK PROBABLY WE MAY WANNA, YOU KNOW, GIVE AN ANSWER ON THAT. 
          YEAH. 
          UH, GOOD MORNING, THIS . 
          SO THERE, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF REASONS WHY WE HAVE TO DO THE RTP. 
          UH, ONE IS OF COURSE THE FUNDAMENTAL DRIVER IS THE NERC TPL CRITERIA, WHICH REQUIRES YOU TO DO THE PLANNING ASSESSMENT, LOOKING AT BOTH NEAR TERM AND LONG TERM. 
          AND NUMBER TWO, THE WAY THIS BATCH STUDY IS SCOPED IS IT'S FOCUSES ON ALL LARGE LOADS. 
          THAT'S NOT THE ONLY LOAD THAT CONNECTS TO THE SYSTEM. 
          THERE IS A LOT OF, UH, YOU KNOW, OTHER LOAD GROWTH AND PROJECTS. 
          AND THE WAY THE BATCH STUDY IS LAID OUT IS LIKE THE, WHEN YOU GO TO YEAR FIVE AND SIX, THERE ARE GONNA BE LARGER PROJECTS THAT'S GONNA COME OUT OF THE RTP. 
          AND, UH, YOU KNOW, THE CURRENT PLANNING CYCLE IS, YEAH, WE NEED TO DO THE RTP, JUST BOTH FOR NERC AND THE PLANNING CRITERIA. 
          THERE ARE PARTS OF STUDIES WHICH, YOU KNOW, SPECIFIC TO PLANNING, UM, SPECIFIC TO OR CUT REGION THAT'S LAID OUT IN THE PLANNING GUIDES. 
          THOSE ARE NOT COVERED IN THE BATCH STUDY EITHER. 
          SO I THINK THERE ARE A NUMBER OF DRIVERS FOR DOING THE RTP AND THE RTP IS THE TRANSMISSION PLANNING ASSESSMENT, UH, FOR THEIR CUT REGION. 
          TO BE CLEAR, I WAS BEING SARCASTIC WITH WHY ARE WE DOING IT? I'M ACTUALLY POINTING OUT THE, WE ABSOLUTELY NEED TO DO THE 2026 RTP. 
          JUST WANNA BE CLEAR THAT THAT'S WHAT I BELIEVE, BUT TO NOT, BUT TO THEN WORRY THAT BATCH ZERO CAN'T HAVE USED IT AS YOU PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED BACK ON YOUR FEBRUARY 3RD PRESENTATION THAT YOU WOULD, SEEMS ILLOGICAL. 
          UH, IT SEEMS LIKE YOU'RE MORE WORRIED THAT 58 41 TURNS OUT DIFFERENT. 
          OKAY, GREAT. 
          THAT SHOULD APPLY TO THINGS THAT, THAT ARE COMING ALONG NEW AFTER THAT THAT APPLIES. 
          AND THAT'S THE NEW LAW OF THE LAND. 
          BUT IT ISN'T THAT COMMISSION INTENT OF, UH, COMMISSIONER INTENT OF, UH, 58,480 SHOULD JUST BE IGNORED. 
          UH, OTHERWISE WHAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF THAT RULE? SO I WOULD JUST ASK YOU TO RECONSIDER THAT AND, AND MOVE TO USING IT AS YOU WERE PREVIOUSLY PROPOSING TO USE IT BACK ON THE FEBRUARY 3RD ONE. 
          ALRIGHT, SO THAT'S R-T-P-R-P-G ON THE, HEY SHANNON, YOU HAD THE FLOOR FOR A BIT. 
          UH, YOU WANNA TAKE ONE MORE AND THEN WE'RE GONNA NEED, WE HAVE A QUEUE BEHIND YOU. 
          SURE. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          UH, RPG. 
          YES. 
          IN YOUR PRESENT, UH, YOUR, UH, FIGURE YOU PUT OUT, I THINK Y'ALL TIED THAT TO DECEMBER 15TH FILING QUESTION FOR YOU THERE IS, WHAT'S THE LOGIC IN MAKING THAT RETROACTIVE BACK TO THE 15TH? IT SEEMS LIKE TO ME THAT OUGHT TO BE, YOU KNOW, THE MOST LOGICAL ONE IS WHEN THE RULE IS PASSED, THEN THAT BECOMES THE NEW EFFECT. 
          OTHERWISE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE ONCE AGAIN, TAKING THE EXISTING PLANNING PROCESS THAT DOES WORK AND YOU'RE IMPAIRING IT BY MAKING IT ONE TO WHERE THANK YOU TSPS FOR YOUR WORK, BUT WE'RE GONNA TOSS IT IN THE TRASH. 
          UH, I WHY, WHY WOULD THAT NOT BE UP THROUGH THE DATE OF THE RULE ADOPTION BE YOUR CUTOFF. 
          YEAH, IT, I THINK MAYBE BETTER TO ADDRESS THAT WHEN WE GET TO THAT POINT IN THAT PRESENTATION. 
          SHANNON, THANKS. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          AND I SEE CINDY BOKAR, WE'LL LET YOU BE THE LAST ONE IN THE QUEUE AND WE'RE GONNA CUT THE QUEUE OFF AT THAT POINT AND SEE HOW FAR WE CAN GET THE NEXT 20 MINUTES ON THE, UH, EIGHT PEOPLE HERE. 
          SO ERIC GOFF, YOU'RE NEXT. 
          [00:40:05]
UM, VERY BRIEFLY, I THINK BILL BARNES MADE SOME EXCELLENT POINTS ABOUT THE SIX MONTH VERSUS TRADE MONTH, SIX MONTH VERSUS 12 MONTH TRADE OFFS. 
          AND I THINK THAT THE REASON YOU GOT THE ANSWERS THAT YOU GOT IS BECAUSE THE QUESTION WASN'T, YOU KNOW, WELL WORDED. 
          OF COURSE PEOPLE WANT A SHORTER PROCESS, RIGHT. 
          BUT TO THE EXTENT THAT THE 12 MONTH PROCESS GETS YOU WHAT YOU WANT AND THE SIX MONTH PROCESS DOESN'T, IT'S NOT A GOOD QUESTION. 
          AND SO I THINK WE NEED TO RE-ASK THESE QUESTIONS TO GET AT THE POINTS THAT BILL AND I ARE RAISING. 
          THANKS. 
          IF YOU WANT TO EMAIL ME THE QUESTION, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. 
          NO, SERIOUSLY. 
          I COULD USE SOME HELP. 
          LIKE HOW DO WE YEAH. 
          RUN THAT DECISION TREE THROUGH THE RIGHT QUESTIONS? UH, THAT SOUNDS GOOD. 
          UM, I, I, I'LL BE HAPPY TO DO THAT, BUT SPECIFICALLY I THINK IT'S WORTH A DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE, UH, YOU'RE GETTING MORE FROM THE 12 MONTH PROCESS THAT YOU'RE NOT GETTING THE SIX MONTH PROCESS. 
          AND I THINK WE HAVEN'T REALLY TALKED ABOUT THE, THE TRADE OFFS ENOUGH. 
          GOTCHA. 
          I, I, AND I WONDER IF, IF WHAT PEOPLE WANT IS A TRANSMISSION PLAN AND YOU'RE NOT GETTING IT FROM THE SIX MONTH PLAN, WHY WE'RE DOING IT. 
          OKAY. 
          SO I HEAR YOU'RE SAYING IS YOU MAY NEED TO SEE THOSE TRADE OFFS TO THEN KIND OF ASK THE RIGHT QUESTION. 
          THAT'S RIGHT. 
          OKAY, COOL. 
          THANKS ERIC. 
          ALRIGHT, NEXT, UH, KEVIN HANSEN. 
          YEAH, KEVIN HANSEN AND VERJEE, MY QUESTION IS, WILL WE KNOW BY THE START OF BATCH ZERO HOW RPG PROJECTS IDENTIFIED BY THE BATCH PROCESS WILL BE PAID FOR, WILL BE TCOS OR ALLOCATE TO LARGE LOADS? BUT WE KNOW THAT I ANSWER BEFORE IT KICKS OFF. 
          I, UH, I I THINK THAT THAT IS ULTIMATELY A, UM, I THINK THAT'S 58 41 QUESTION. 
          YEP. 
          UM, THIS IS BARKSDALE WITH THE COMMISSION AND KEVIN, YOU AND I TALKED ABOUT THIS PRETTY EXTENSIVELY BEFORE THE MEETING. 
          SO, UM, JUST TO REITERATE WHAT I SAID. 
          UH, THE RULE MAKING FOR THE INTERCONNECTION STANDARDS IN PROJECT NUMBER 5 8 4 8 1 DIRECTLY ADDRESSES DIRECT COST TO INTERCONNECT AND THAT THOSE ARE PAID FOR BY THE LARGE LOAD. 
          THERE IS IN THE DRAFT RULE THAT IS UP FOR THE COMMISSIONER'S CONSIDERATION ON THURSDAY PROVISIONS DEALING WITH SYSTEM UPGRADES. 
          SO THE, BUT FOR COSTS TO IMPROVE THE SYSTEM IN ORDER TO HANDLE A LARGE LOAD IN A PARTICULAR GEOGRAPHIC AREA, THERE ARE PROVISIONS IN THERE THAT WOULD ALSO COVER FOR THE LARGE LOAD PAYING FOR THOSE AS WELL. 
          UM, I WILL BE QUITE CANDID AND SAY THAT THERE'S A LOT OF DEBATE AROUND THAT AND HOW THE COMMISSIONERS CHOOSE TO HANDLE THAT ON THURSDAY. 
          WE WILL SEE, UM, AND WE WILL LOOK FORWARD TO RECEIVING FORMAL STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS IN THE COMMENT PERIOD ON THAT RULEMAKING. 
          UM, SO I THINK THAT SHOULD ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, UM, ABOUT WHO IS PAYING FOR THE COST TO INTERCONNECT. 
          SO THE, THE AMOUNT OF THE COST THOUGH, YOU WILL NOT KNOW UNTIL THE RPG PROJECTS ARE COMPLETED. 
          SO THEREFORE, THEORETICALLY, IF IT'S A BILLION DOLLAR TRANSMISSION PROJECT FOR A LARGE LOAD, THEORETICALLY YOU CAN HAVE YOUR, IF IT'S HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS TWICE, SO IT'S FOR SAY FOR A GIGAWATT LOAD, YOU'RE WRITING A CHECK FOR A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS, THEN ON TOP OF THAT YOU MAY HAVE AN ADDITIONAL BILL OF A BILLION DOLLARS FOR AN RRP G PROJECT THAT WE DON'T KNOW YET THE RULES OF THE GAME. 
          I THINK, I THINK THE RULES OF THE GAME ARE QUITE CLEAR. 
          THE ACTUAL NOMINAL DOLLAR AMOUNT IS SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD NEVER KNOW UNTIL THE ACTUAL PROJECT HAS BEEN DEVELOPED. 
          SO I THINK THE RULES ARE QUITE CLEAR THOUGH, BUT THE LOADS COULD NOT, SO WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE UNDERSTAND THE RULES. 
          AGAIN, WHAT YOU'RE WALKING AWAY FROM. 
          IF YOU HAVE A NUMBER YOU DON'T LIKE, UH, FROM THE RRP G PROJECT IN THE FUTURE, I THINK YOU AND YOUR INTERCONNECTING UTILITY HAVE TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT, UM, THE TYPE OF PROJECTS THAT MIGHT BE NEEDED IN ORDER TO CONNECT THE LOAD. 
          AND YOU MIGHT HAVE A BETTER INDICATION THROUGH THOSE PRIVATE ONE-ON-ONE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THE SCALE OF THOSE NECESSARY UPGRADES IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE THE LOAD. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, WE'RE DOWN TO THE LAST SIX QUESTIONS HERE. 
          BOB WHITMEYER, UH, SLIDE 25 PLEASE. 
          SO THE, THE FIRST BULLET OVER THERE IS THE L-I-L-L-I-S NUMBER CONFIDENTIAL. 
          IT WOULD HELP ERCOT TREMENDOUSLY IF YOU COULD PUBLISH THE LIST JUST OF LLI NUMBERS 
          [00:45:01]
AND WHAT THEY HAVE COMPLETED IN ERCO T'S MIND BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF, A LOT OF MISCOMMUNICATION. 
          OBVIOUSLY THERE'S NO DIRECT COMMUNICATION BETWEEN ERCOT AND LARGE LOADS. 
          I WOULD PREFER TO HAVE A ALLELE, A LARGE LOAD, INTERCONNECTED ONGOING OPERATION. 
          BUT SHORT OF THAT, IF YOU COULD JUST TELL THESE LOADS, 'CAUSE THEY ALL KNOW THEIR NUMBERS. 
          IF THEY COULD JUST SEE WHERE THEY ARE IN THE PROCESS, I THINK THAT WOULD BE EXTREMELY HELPFUL. 
          THANK YOU. 
          SO MORE OR LESS A CHECKLIST STATUS REPORT? YEP. 
          GOT IT. 
          SO, HEY, HEY BOB. 
          UH, COUPLE THOUGHTS, QUICK THOUGHTS ON THAT. 
          SO, UM, WE, WE HAVE GIVEN THAT INFORMATION TO THE, UH, TSPS, UH, I THINK WE ARE HESITANT TO PUBLICLY POST THAT. 
          AND, UH, AND THAT'S BECAUSE WE'VE GOTTEN FEEDBACK THAT IT, IT, UM, FOR, UH, SOME LARGE LOAD PROJECTS, THOSE PROJECTS HAVE BEEN SOLD TO OTHER DEVELOPERS. 
          UH, AND, AND SO YOU MAY KNOW, UH, YOU, YOU MAY KNOW A, A, UH, A LLI NUMBER THAT IS NOT YOUR PROJECT ANYMORE. 
          AND BY KNOWING THE STATUS OF THAT, THEN THAT GIVES YOU SOME COMPETITIVE INFORMATION THAT, THAT YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE. 
          AND SO THAT, I THINK THAT'S THE DIFFICULTY WITH WHERE WE'RE AT TODAY. 
          BUT I THINK WE'RE, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO TEASE OUT IN THIS IS, UH, SHOULD WE WRITE DIFFERENT RULES AROUND THAT GOING FORWARD? AND, AND JEFF, I I COMPLETELY AGREE, YOU NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL WITH THAT, BUT I WOULD ALSO LIKE YOU TO RECOGNIZE THAT I THINK IT WOULD TAKE A LOT OFF ERCOT PLATE IF SUCH A SYSTEM EXISTED, BUT YOU'RE, YOU'RE RIGHT TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT EXPOSING THAT INFORMATION. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY, THANKS. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          NEXT QUESTION. 
          UM, OOPS, JUST MOVED ON ME, UH, GODFRIED ARTHUR OR ARTHUR? YEAH. 
          HELLO, CAN YOU HEAR ME? GOOD? YES, GO AHEAD. 
          ALRIGHT, QUICK ONE. 
          SO, UM, FOR BADGE ZERO, WHAT DOES THE INTERMEDIATE CRITERIA LOOK LIKE FOR LOAD WITH INTERCONNECTION STUDIES SPECIALLY COMPLETE? SO LIKE, ARE THEY ALSO SUBJECT TO THE HUNDRED THOUSAND, UM, DOLLARS PER MEGAWATTS FINANCIAL SECURITY? YEAH, I, I, I THINK WE'LL GET TO THAT LATER IN THAT PRESENTATION. 
          OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          THANK YOU SIR. 
          UH, NEXT CHRIS MATTIS, WELL, I, OKAY, IT STILL WORKS WIRELESSLY, UM, . 
          SO ON TO, TO ECHO, I THINK ERIC AND, AND BILL'S POINT AND JUST TRANSPARENTLY ON SLIDE 23, I ACTUALLY VOTED FOR A 12 MONTH PERIOD OR, OR PASSWORD 12 MONTH PERIOD, BUT THAT WOULD ALSO BE IN LINE WITH GOOGLE AND LAN'S COMMENTS OF CLEAR DELIVERABLES COMING OUT OF IT. 
          SO, AND WE'VE KIND OF REITERATED THIS A FEW TIMES THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS, THAT IF YOU'RE GOING TO POSE QUESTIONS LIKE THIS, WHAT ARE THE CLEAR DELIVERABLES THAT COME OUT OF A SIX MONTH PROCESS AND NINE MONTH PROCESS OR A 12 MONTH PROCESS AND GIVE STAKEHOLDERS, WELL, HONESTLY JUST COMMITMENTS FROM BOTH SIDES. 
          IF THE EXPECTATION OUT OF THIS IS FINANCIAL COMMITMENTS TO JUSTIFY THE LOAD, THEN THOSE LOADS SHOULD KNOW WHAT THEY ARE GETTING OUT OF A PROCESS IN IT. 
          AND IT IS NOT FIRM TRANSMISSION UPGRADES, AND I'VE EXPRESSED THIS IN THE CURRENT WAY, SECURITIES ARE PROPOSED THAT CAN LEAVE LARGE LOADS ON THE HOOK FOR HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT ARE NON-REFUNDABLE FOR TIMELINES THAT ARE UNCLEAR ON THE DELIVERY, WHICH IS A REALLY UNFAIR RISK TO THE LOAD. 
          SO I DON'T WANT TO REVISIT THIS QUESTION AS SIMPLY AS THIS, I WANT TO REVISIT THIS QUESTION AND I, I THINK ERCOT PERSPECTIVE IS ACTUALLY REALLY WHAT'S IMPORTANT HERE. 
          WHAT CAN YOU DO IN SIX MONTHS? WHAT CAN YOU DO IN NINE MONTHS AND WHAT CAN YOU DO IN 12 MONTHS AND SET THE STAGE FOR US TO DECIDE ON THAT. 
          LIKE, I'M INTERESTED TO KNOW AND, AND THAT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL FOR THIS, THIS QUESTION. 
          UM, AND THEN ON THE LLI AND POINT THAT BOB BROUGHT UP, I'M WONDERING WHY CAN'T WE JUST REASSIGN THOSE WHEN THEY ARE TRANSACTED UPON OR, OR GIVEN A NEW NUMBER? YEAH, SO I THINK WE'RE OPEN TO THAT GOING FORWARD. 
          I, I, THE, THE QUESTION IS RIGHT NOW, UM, THAT I THINK WE, WE DON'T HAVE A SYSTEM TO DO THAT TODAY. 
          SO WHAT, WHAT DO WE DO IN FIRST AND SECOND QUARTER OF 2026 IS, I THINK WE HAVE THE SYSTEMS THAT WE HAVE AND, AND THE, THE RULES THAT WE HAVE. 
          BUT GOING FORWARD, I THINK WE'RE DEFINITELY OPEN TO CHANGING THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THIS IS GONNA GET TO MY OTHER POINT FROM LAST TIME, WHICH IS WHAT ARE THE ADMINISTRATIVE GAPS WE CAN ALREADY START ADDRESSING? 
          [00:50:01]
SO THAT WAY WHEN WE HAVE THE BATCH PROCESS STARTING IN, YOU KNOW, A PROPOSED AUGUST SEPTEMBER TIMELINE, WE'RE, WE'RE KIND OF READY FOR THAT. 
          AND I, I REALLY THINK A CENTRAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM OF JUST LIKE INFORMATION SUBMITTED IS REALLY, REALLY CORE TO THE SUCCESS OF THIS. 
          AND WE NEED TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION NOW. 
          EVEN IF ALL THAT BEING, EVEN IF WE HAVEN'T FULLY FINISHED THIS PROCESS, AT THE VERY LEAST WE'RE GETTING TO A CENTRALIZED UNDERSTANDING OF HOW INFORMATION IS, IS GOING TO BE SUBMITTED FROM TSP TO TSP TO ERCOT. 
          AND THEN WE CAN, I THINK WITHIN THAT, FIGURE OUT HOW THE LOADS WILL OR WILL NOT BE INVOLVED STILL, STILL IN THIS PROCESS WITHOUT, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THAT CAN'T START WITHOUT THIS BEING DONE OR THAT CAN START WITHOUT THIS BEING DONE. 
          I GUESS THAT'S REALLY WHAT I'M SAYING. 
          BUT THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, NEXT JENNY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, THIS IS JENNY, SHE FROM SAUNA. 
          JUST A QUICK QUESTION THAT IF ONE INTERCONNECTION REQUEST THAT WAS SUBMITTED TO THE INTERCONNECTING UTILITY LAST YEAR FOR 100 MEGAWATT, BUT WE HAVE SINCE THEN REDUCED THE CAPACITY TO 74 MEGAWATT THIS YEAR AND THIS REDUCTION HAS JUST BEEN APPROVED BY THE INTERCONNECTING UTILITY. 
          BASED ON THIS CHANGE, WILL THIS PROJECT BE INCLUDED AS BASE LOAD OR STUDIED LOAD IN THE BATCH ZERO PROCESS? I MIGHT NEED TO PHONE A FRIEND ON THAT DON'T OFF ANY OF THE LARGE LOAD, UH, INTERCONNECTION TEAM IS ONLINE AND CAN ANSWER THAT. 
          YEAH, IT, IT, UM, IT, IF NOT MAYBE, UM, SEND US AN EMAIL ON THAT AND WE'LL WE'LL TRY TO ANSWER, UM, QUESTIONS ON ANY SPECIFIC PROJECTS. 
          GOT IT. 
          SOUNDS GOOD. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. 
          DOWN THE LAST TWO HERE CHRIS, AND THEN SANDEEP. 
          GO AHEAD. 
          CHRIS HENDRICK, UH, CHRIS HENDRICKS FOR SWITCH. 
          UM, MY QUESTION OR REALLY A SUGGESTION ON THE CONFIDENTIALITY ON PAGE 25 IS FOR THE NEXT WORKSHOP IF WE COULD GET A COMPARISON BETWEEN WHAT THE GENERATORS ARE ALL ALLOWED OR WHAT YOU PRODUCE FOR THE GENERATORS, WE COULD KIND OF COMPARE THAT TO THE LARGE LOAD AND SEE WHAT WE CAN AGREE WITH AND WHAT WE CAN'T AGREE WITH. 
          AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. 
          I AGREE. 
          OKAY. 
          GOOD FEEDBACK. 
          SO A COMPARISON OF DISCLOSURES. 
          YEP. 
          ALRIGHT, THANKS. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          AND LAST ONE, SANDEEP BOKAR, LCRA ON THE QUESTION ON THE IN-FLIGHT RPG PROJECTS, UH, I I TAKE THAT THAT'S MORE FOR THE, WELL DEFINITELY FOR THE UPGRADES, THE STANDARD PRACTICES RPG APPROVED PROJECTS YOU INCLUDE IN THE BASE CASES. 
          SO ONE QUESTION IS, UH, WHEN WE SAY THEY, THEY'VE RECEIVED ENDORSEMENT, IS THAT ER CARD BOARD APPROVED? BECAUSE THAT PUSHES SOME OF THE PROJECTS FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD VERSUS THAT AT, AT THE RPG PRESENTATION, ER CARD HAS CONCLUDED THE, UH, THE, THE WORK AND HAS PRESENTED AT THIS IS THE RECOMMENDED OPTION, WHICH DID, BECAUSE THAT WILL MATTER DEPENDING ON, 'CAUSE THERE ARE SOME OF BIG PROJECTS GOING THROUGH RIGHT NOW, UH, IN THE PROCESS AND CURIOUS WHICH ONE IS USED. 
          UM, I MIGHT NEED, UH, HELP FROM MY TRANSMISSION PLANNING FRIENDS, BUT I THINK THE CURRENT PRACTICE IS, IT, IT'S WHENEVER THE PROJECT IS ENDORSED BY ORCO, WHICH WOULD, FOR TIER ONE PROJECTS WOULD BE BOARD OF DIRECTOR AND, AND, UH, ENDORSEMENT TIER TWO, IT WOULD BE ERCOT INDEPENDENT REVIEW AND TIER THREE IT WOULD BE WHEN IT'S RECEIVED RPG APPROVAL. 
          GOT IT. 
          YEAH, I THINK GIVEN THE, THE FACT THAT WE NEED A LOT OF TRANSMISSION UPGRADES FOR THIS WORK, I WOULD ENCOURAGE WE, WE HAVE THAT EXCEPTION AS PART OF THIS PROCESS. 
          UH, UM, USE THE EARLIER ENDORSEMENT, UH, AS A, AS, AS A, AS A SLICE IN TIME. 
          AND THE SECOND QUESTION ON THAT ONE WAS, UH, THAT WAS ABOUT THE UPGRADES. 
          UH, IS THAT ALSO TRUE ABOUT THE LOADS THEN IF THE LARGE LOADS THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THE STUDY ALSO FALL INTO THE SAME CATEGORY THAT THEY ARE INCLUDED AS WELL ALONG WITH IT? UM, YEAH, SO WE WOULD, UM, IT'S UH, I THINK IT'S COMPLEX. 
          UH, IT'S, IT'S LAID OUT IN 1 45. 
          I THINK IF, IF Y'ALL, UH, BEAR WITH US, THEN WE'LL WE'LL WALK THROUGH THAT HERE IN A LITTLE BIT. 
          GOOD DEAL. 
          AND THE LAST COMMENT WAS ABOUT THE SIX MONTH VERSUS THIS 12 MONTH. 
          UH, I THINK WE WERE ALSO ONE OF THOSE WHO SUPPORTED THE 12. 
          UH, THE LOGIC THERE WAS, ESPECIALLY FOR THE BATCH ZERO, IT IS GOING TO BE A LOT OF WORK. 
          I KNOW EVERYONE IS ASKING ABOUT SIX MONTHS. 
          IT'S JUST A LOT OF CASES AND, UH, LOT OF PROJECTS WILL BE CLEARED AS PART OF THIS. 
          [00:55:01]
SO MORE TIME WE SPEND AND GET IT RIGHT ON THE FIRST ATTEMPT WOULD BE NICE TO BATCH ONE AND, AND ONWARDS MAYBE A SIX OR NINE MONTH MAY. 
          UH, MAYBE, UH, SOMETHING WE CAN, UH, LOOK AT. 
          BUT FIRST ONE, THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE GET IT RIGHT AND UH, WE HAVE THE UPGRADES LINED UP TO FOLLOW. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          OKAY, PERFECT. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          OKAY. 
          SO AT THIS POINT I THINK WE'RE GONNA TRANSITION TO JEFF, THANK YOU FOR THE, UH, THE QUEUE MANAGEMENT HERE, JANICE. 
          AND AT THIS POINT WE'RE GONNA 
          [4. Batch Zero NPRR/PGRR Walk-through (most of meeting)]
KIND OF STOP THE QUEUE AGAIN AND LET JEFF GET THROUGH. 
          HE'S GONNA DO A WALKTHROUGH. 
          UM, AND JEFF, IF YOU WANNA KIND OF BE THINKING ABOUT HOW TO GO THROUGH THIS. 
          SO WE HAVE THE PRESENTATIONS UP, YOU HAVE DIFFERENT SECTIONS TO WALK THROUGH IN THE BIGGERS ON, UM, IN THE BACKGROUND. 
          SO LET, LETS GO. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH, AND I'M JUST, TO BE HONEST, I'M NOT, UM, SURE HOW I'M GONNA DO THIS. 
          I I THINK I'M GOING TO WALK THROUGH THE PRESENTATION, BUT AS WE NEED TO, UH, GO OVER TO THE LANGUAGE, THEN WE WILL, UM, DO THAT. 
          UH, ALSO TO, UM, START WITH I'VE HAD, UH, A LOT OF, UM, KUDOS ON, UH, GETTING THE LANGUAGE OUT. 
          I KNOW, UM, THAT THERE'S, UH, THAT'S OFTEN ACCOMPANIED WITH, BUT WE DISAGREE WITH THIS SECTION OR WE DISAGREE WITH THIS LANGUAGE. 
          BUT, UH, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE UH, HEARD A LOT OF APPRECIATION FOR GETTING THAT OUT. 
          AND I WOULD BE REMISS IF I DIDN'T ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THERE WAS A WHOLE TEAM OF FOLKS THAT, THAT WORKED ON THIS, UM, AT, AT ERCOT. 
          AND, UM, AND, UH, THREE INDIVIDUALS IN PARTICULAR, UH, AG SPRINGER, CHRISTINA SWITZER, AND EVAN ROWE, WHO, UH, HAD, UH, SPENT A LOT OF HOURS OVER WEEKENDS, UH, SOME REALLY LATE NIGHTS. 
          UH, THERE, THERE WERE TIMES WHERE I WOULD, UH, GO TO BED AND, YOU KNOW, THEY'D ASK ME BE ASKED QUESTIONS AND I'D GO TO BED AND, UH, I'D WAKE UP AND, YOU KNOW, THEY'D SENT THE LATEST VERSION, UH, THAT THEY'D WORKED ON UNTIL MIDNIGHT. 
          SO, UH, JUST WANTED TO, UH, YOU KNOW, IT IS THE KUDOS THAT WE'VE GOTTEN. 
          I WANTED TO EXTEND THAT AND MAKE SURE THAT, THAT THE TEAM WAS RECOGNIZED FOR THEIR HARD WORK. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, UM, WITH THAT, UM, AND ONE OTHER, UM, KIND OF UPFRONT COMMENT I WANNA MAKE IS THAT, UH, UH, I THINK MATT KIND OF ALLUDED TO THIS, BUT YOU KNOW, THIS IS A, UM, THIS IS A PROCESS. 
          SO WHAT WE HAVE POSTED THAT IS LIKELY NOT THE FINAL VERSION, UH, THAT YOUR, YOUR COMMENTS, NOT JUST, UH, HEY, YOU GOT IT WRONG OR CAUGHT, BUT YOU KNOW, HERE HERE'S ALTERNATIVE LANGUAGE THAT WE THINK WORKS BETTER. 
          UH, THAT I THINK THAT THAT IS HELPFUL. 
          UH, WE, WE'VE TRIED TO TAKE THAT FEEDBACK, UH, THAT WE'VE GOTTEN ALONG THE WAY. 
          SO I'VE ALREADY HEARD COMMENTS TODAY OF, HEY, YOU, YOU SAID SOMETHING DIFFERENT, UH, AT A PREVIOUS WORKSHOP AND WHY, WHY DID YOU CHANGE? AND THAT CHANGE HAS BEEN BECAUSE OF THE, UH, THE FEEDBACK THAT WE'VE GOTTEN. 
          AND SO THIS IS, YOU KNOW, STILL A PROCESS WHERE WE ARE ASKING FOR THAT, THAT FEEDBACK. 
          UM, OKAY. 
          SO WITH THAT, UH, I WANTED TO START HERE AGAIN THAT THIS WAS, UM, A, UH, SLIDE THAT AG PUT TOGETHER FOR THE LAST WORKSHOP THAT, UH, I THINK GOT A LOT OF, UH, GOOD, UH, COMMENTS AND, AND FEEDBACK AND WAS HELPFUL FOR THE DISCUSSION. 
          SO I WANTED TO START HERE. 
          UH, SO WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA START WITH THE, THE STUDY PROCESS. 
          SO MATT, I THINK WE'RE, WE'LL TRY TO GO THROUGH SLIDE 42 IF WE CAN, UH, ACHIEVE THAT BEFORE LUNCH. 
          UH, AND, AND THEN, AND THEN WE'LL STOP AND, UM, AND TAKE COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS AT THAT TIME. 
          UH, BUT I'M GONNA START HERE WITH KIND O OVERALL HIGH, HIGH LEVEL. 
          WHAT, WHAT IS THE PROCESS THAT WE ARE PROPOSING? AND, AND THAT IS THAT WE WOULD HAVE A, UH, IN, IN BATCH ZERO. 
          AGAIN, THIS IS, UM, THAT, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE, WE'VE HEARD THE FEEDBACK ON SHOULD WE HAVE A, A LONGER PROCESS. 
          I THINK WE'RE, UM, WE, WE CAN DISCUSS THAT FOR, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE SUBSEQUENT FIGURE FOR THE ONGOING BATCH. 
          BUT FOR, FOR BATCH ZERO AS LAID OUT IN PI FIGURE 1 45 IS, IS THAT WE WOULD HAVE A SIX MONTH PROCESS WHERE WE WOULD DO, UH, ERCOT WOULD PERFORM STUDY STATE AND DYNAMIC STABILITY, UH, UH, STUDIES. 
          UH, WE WOULD IDENTIFY WHERE WE HAVE PLANNING CRITERIA VIOLATIONS DUE TO THE ADDITION OF THE NEW LARGE LOADS THAT ARE UNDER STUDY IN BATCH ZERO. 
          UH, AND THAT WE WOULD WORK ITER ITERATIVELY WITH THE TSPS TO IDENTIFY, UH, SOME UPGRADES THAT COULD BE, UM, UH, PUT IN PLACE IN TIME TO, UH, TO, UH, GET, GET THE LOADS, UH, SERVED AT A HIGHER LEVEL. 
          UH, AT THE END OF THAT STUDY, UH, THERE WILL BE A, UH, A COMMITMENT PERIOD THAT IS CURRENTLY LAID OUT AS A 30 DAY COMMITMENT PERIOD. 
          AND THAT 30 DAY IS A COPY PASTE FROM 58 4 81, UH, PFP, UH, DRAFT, UH, A A 30 DAY COMMITMENT PERIOD. 
          UM, AND, UH, THIS CAME UP IN FAQS, ARE ALREADY HEARD IT AGAIN TODAY. 
          UH, THAT COMMITMENT AND 
          [01:00:01]
ANY FINANCIAL SECURITY, UH, THAT IT WOULD BE REQUIRED BASED ON UPGRADES WOULD BE AT THAT SNAPSHOT IN TIME OF WHAT WE KNOW AT THE END OF THAT BATCH STUDY, UH, PROCESS. 
          SO, UH, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY, UH, COMMISSION CAN, UH, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY CAN CHANGE THE RULES, BUT AS WE ARE READING 58 41, THAT COMMITMENT IS A SNAPSHOT IN TIME COMMITMENT. 
          UH, AND, AND SO THAT IS WHAT, WHAT, YOU KNOW, AT THAT POINT IN TIME. 
          SO AT, IF THE REFINEMENT STUDY OR A LATER RPG PROJECT IDENTIFIES A DIFFERENT SET OF TRANSMISSION UPGRADES, THAT THAT DOES NOT IMPACT THE WHAT IS COMMITTED TO AT, AT THIS POINT IN TIME. 
          WHAT THIS COM, THIS I-L-E-I-L-L-E COMMITMENT PERIOD, UH, IS BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW AT THAT SNAPSHOT IN TIME, UH, BASED ON THE LOADS THAT THEN, UH, COMMIT. 
          THEN WE WOULD GO THROUGH A THREE MONTH BATCH, ZERO REFINEMENT. 
          THIS THREE MONTH WOULD BE, SAY NEXT SPRING. 
          UH, UH, SO APPROXIMATELY A YEAR FROM NOW, WE WOULD BE WORKING ON THIS REFINEMENT TO DETERMINE BASED ON, UH, WHICH OF THOSE LOADS HAVE COMMITTED, UH, WHICH TRANSMISSION PROJECTS WERE IDENTIFIED, UM, ARE NEEDED TO MOVE FORWARD. 
          WE WOULD ALSO LOOK AT ALTERNATIVE TRANSMISSION, UH, UH, UP UPGRADE OPTIONS, AND WE WOULD DEVELOP A TRANSMISSION PLAN THAT WOULD GO TO THE RPG AND IF NEEDED, WOULD RECEIVE, UH, BOARD ENDORSEMENT. 
          UH, SO THAT HIGH, HIGH LEVEL, THAT'S, THAT'S THE PROCESS. 
          UH, SO LET, LET'S GET INTO DETAIL. 
          SO, UM, MATT KIND OF NOTED THIS EARLIER, BUT I'LL, I'LL POINT OUT AGAIN. 
          UH, SO WE HAVE, UH, WELL, A LOT OF THESE SLIDES ARE CARRY OVER FROM THE FEBRUARY 26TH WORKSHOP, BUT WHERE WE HAVE MADE CHANGES OR MADE CLARIFICATION, SOME OF THESE AREN'T, AREN'T ACTUALLY CHANGES. 
          WE'VE, WE'VE TRIED TO MARK THAT WITH RED TEXT. 
          UH, SO SOME OF THIS IS JUST CLARIFICATIONS, BUT WE'VE MADE CHANGES AND, OR CLARIFICATIONS AND, UH, FROM THE FEBRUARY 26 SLIDES, THEN WE'VE TRIED TO NOTE THAT IN RED. 
          UH, SO THE, UH, THIS STUDY SCOPE IS, UH, ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE HAD LAID OUT AT THE FEBRUARY 26TH WORKSHOP WHERE WE WOULD BE STUDYING, STUDYING 2028 TO 2030, TIER 2032, WHICH IS YEARS ONE TO FIVE. 
          UH, AND, UM, THOSE, UH, YOU'RE TRYING TO IDENTIFY WHAT, WHAT ARE THE, UH, THE CRITERIA VIOLATIONS FOR SUMMER PEAK, UH, SUMMER, UH, NO, NO SOLAR CONDITION, UH, AS WELL AS FALL PEAK. 
          AND WE'LL, WE'LL DO THAT, TRY TO IDENTIFY THOSE CRITERIA VIOLATIONS, AND THEN TRIED TO, UM, COME UP WITH, UH, TRANSMISSION UPGRADES. 
          UM, THAT REALLY NO CHANGE ON THE STUDY METHODOLOGY IN THE STUDY ELEMENTS THAT, THAT WE HAD LAID OUT AT THE FEBRUARY 26TH WORKSHOP IS WE WILL, WE'LL PREPARE THE STUDY CASES. 
          UH, IF YOU LOOK AT THE TIMELINE, WE ACTUALLY START, UH, SO, SO WE, WE WILL TALK LATER ABOUT THE JULY 15TH AS AS BEING SORT OF OUR, OUR, OUR SNAPSHOT FOR WHEN WE ARE GOING TO, UH, UH, KIND OF IDENTIFY THE CRITERIA FOR THE, UH, YEAH, THAT'S FINE. 
          THE LOADS. 
          I'M NOT UNDER PG E, SO NO WORRIES. 
          BYE. 
          FIVE. 
          UM, UH, SO, UM, WE'LL, WE'LL IDENTIFY, UM, THE, OR, SORRY, UH, I WAS SAYING IS, UH, THE, THE STUDY CASES WILL ACTUALLY START BEFORE THAT JULY 15TH TO PUT TOGETHER THOSE STUDY CASES. 
          UH, THEN WE'LL, WE WILL RUN OUR RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT. 
          UH, WE WILL THEN, THAT'S PRIMARILY A STEADY STATE ANALYSIS. 
          THEN WE WILL ALSO RUN A STABILITY SCREENING ASSESSMENT AS WE, UH, TALKED ABOUT AT PREVIOUS WORKSHOPS. 
          WE'LL IDENTIFY WHAT THOSE TRANSMISSION IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ARE. 
          AND, UM, UH, AND THEN WE WILL ALSO BE LOOKING FOR THE OTHER STUDY ELEMENTS. 
          YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT JUST STUDY STATE AND STABILITY STUDIES THAT GO INTO A LARGE LOAD INTER CONNECTION STUDY. 
          THERE ARE OTHER ELEMENTS. 
          SO WE'LL BE LOOKING FOR THOSE ELEMENTS AS WELL. 
          OKAY. 
          AT THE 26TH WORKSHOP, WE DID NOT HAVE THESE, UH, DATES LAID OUT, UH, BUT, UH, HAVE THOSE NOW AS, AS, UH, ARE INCLUDED IN FIGURE 1 45. 
          UH, THE, UH, THE, OUR, OUR CUTOFF DATE FOR GETTING INFORMATION TO GO INTO THIS STUDY WILL BE, UH, JULY 15TH. 
          UM, THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO, UH, POST THE, UH, OR, OR TO FINALIZE THE, THE BATCH SERIAL STUDY REPORT AT THE END OF JANUARY OF 2027, WHICH, UH, LEADS TO A MARCH 1ST, UH, COMMITMENT DEADLINE FOR THE, UH, LARGE LOAD. 
          SO, SO TSPS WOULD NEED TO NOTIFY US BY MARCH 1ST THAT THAT COMMITMENT DEADLINE OR THAT COMMITMENT HAS, UH, REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN MET. 
          UM, AND, UH, THAT THEN LEADS TO A JUNE 1ST COMPLETION OF THE BATCH ZERO REFINEMENT STUDY. 
          UH, WHICH WOULD, UH, AT THAT POINT, WE WOULD SUBMIT THAT, THAT, UH, SET 
          [01:05:01]
OF PROJECTS TO RPG. 
          UM, THE, UH, OUTPUTS REALLY AT A HIGH LEVEL HAVEN'T CHANGED SINCE THE, UM, UH, THE FEBRUARY 26TH WORKSHOP. 
          SO LOOKING TO HAVE A STUDY REPORT, A LOAD COMMISSIONING PLAN, UM, ESTIMATED SECURITY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE LOADS, UH, TO, UH, TO, TO MEET, UH, FOR THE, UM, UH, THAT MARCH 1ST DEADLINE. 
          AND THE, UM, AND THERE WOULD BE MAYBE SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT WE WOULD, UH, SEND JUST TO, UH, TSP, SOME INFORMATION THAT MAY BE CONSIDERED CONFIDENTIAL. 
          UM, AND, UH, AGAIN, REFINEMENT AND RPG HANDOFF, UM, THAT, YOU KNOW, REALLY HASN'T CHANGED. 
          WE ADDED A CLARIFICATION THAT THE, UH, MEGAWATT ALLOCATION FOR THE LARGE LOADS THAT MEET THAT COMMITMENT CRITERIA, THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT IS NOT EXPECTED TO BE ADJUSTED DURING THE REFINEMENT PERIOD. 
          UH, SO IF, IF WE, UH, TELE LOAD THAT IN 2029 THAT THEY HAVE 250 MEGAWATTS, UH, ALLOCATED, UH, WE WOULD NOT, IF THE TRANSMISSION PLAN CHANGES, UH, THAT TWO 50 MEGAWATT DOESN'T CHANGE, THEY, THEY STILL HAVE THAT, THAT 250 MEGAWATTS IN THAT YEAR. 
          UM, SO, UH, TRIED TO PUT TOGETHER JUST A, A LITTLE CHART TO ILLUSTRATE, UH, WHAT WE'RE THINKING ON, YOU KNOW, HOW, HOW THIS WORKS. 
          UM, AND, UH, AND I'LL, I'LL WALK THROUGH IT REAL QUICK AND, UH, HOPEFULLY THIS WILL BE HELPFUL. 
          BUT THE, UM, UH, D THE DEVELOPERS ESSENTIALLY WOULD, WOULD NEED TO, UH, MEET THE, UM, INTERMEDIATE AGREEMENT REQUIREMENTS TO, UM, TO, TO QUALIFY AND, AND, AND WE'LL WALK THROUGH. 
          WHAT, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? WE'LL WALK THROUGH THAT, UH, LATER ON IN THE PRESENTATION. 
          UH, BUT THE, UH, YOU KNOW, TSPS WOULD THEN SEND THE INFORMATION TO ERCOT OR ERCOT WILL THEN, UH, BUILD THE STUDY CASES. 
          WE'LL POST THOSE CASES ON MIS, UH, CERTIFIED. 
          UH, ERCOT WILL BE PERFORMING THE, UH, THE STUDY, STATE STUDY. 
          THEN, UH, TSPS, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY CAN ALSO PERFORM THEIR OWN STUDY, UH, AND, AND THAT I THINK THAT PERFORMING THEIR OWN STUDY IS OPTIONAL, BUT WORKING WITH US, WE WOULD EXPECT THAT WE WOULD HAVE, UM, TRYING TO ILLUSTRATE HERE WITH THE ARROWS BACK, BACK AND FORTH WITH THE TSPS ON THE STUDY RESULTS. 
          UM, WE'LL ALSO SIMILARLY BE PERFORMING THE STABILITY SCREENING STUDY, AND WOULD EXPECT TO HAVE BACK AND FORTH CONVERSATIONS WITH TSPS AS WE ARE, UH, IDENTIFYING THE, THE PLANNING CRITERIA VIOLATIONS, UM, AT, AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE STABILITY SCREENING STUDY. 
          THEN WE WOULD HAVE ALL THE RESULTS. 
          WE WOULD COMMUNICATE THOSE RESULTS. 
          UM, AND THE, UM, AT, AT THAT POINT, THAT THAT'S THAT COMMITMENT WHERE THE DEVELOPER AND THE TSP WOULD ENTER INTO THE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT AND NEED TO MEET THE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT REQUIREMENTS, UH, AS WHAT WILL BE LAID OUT IN 58 41, UH, ERCOT WOULD THEN POST OR, OR WOULD PERFORM THE, UH, REFINEMENT TRANSMISSION PLANNING STUDY BASED ON WHICH LOADS THE TSPS HAVE COMMUNICATED TO US HAVE MET THE, THE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT REQUIREMENTS. 
          UM, WE WOULD, OF COURSE, NEED, UH, COST ESTIMATES AND A FINAL REVIEW OF THOSE. 
          COST ESTIMATES ARE IMPORTANT BECAUSE THAT INFORMATION WOULD BE NEEDED AS, AS WE'RE SUBMITTING THAT, THAT REFINEMENT TRANSMISSION PLAN FOR RPG REVIEW. 
          UM, UH, SO WE, OR ERCOT WOULD THEN, UH, THIS IS, IS SORT OF A CHANGE FROM THE CURRENT, UH, PROCESS IS ERCOT WOULD THEN SUBMIT THAT SET OF PROJECTS FOR RPG REVIEW, WE'LL RESOLVE ANY RPG COMMENTS AND IF NECESSARY, TAKE THOSE PROJECTS TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR ENDORSEMENT. 
          UH, SO THAT HIGH, HIGH LEVEL HOPE, HOPEFULLY THAT HELPS. 
          UH, I KNOW IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A BUSY SLIDE, BUT HOPEFULLY THAT KINDA HELPS, UH, ILLUSTRATE THE PROCESS A LITTLE BIT BETTER. 
          UM, AND THIS IS, UH, ALSO A, UH, A CARRYOVER FROM THE, UH, LAST WORKSHOP, BUT THE DATES HAVE BEEN SLIGHTLY MODIFIED TO, TO ALIGN WITH WHAT WAS SUBMITTED IN PIRE 1 45. 
          UH, SO AGAIN, IT'S, WE'RE, WE'RE STARTING THAT CASE BUILD, UH, EARLY SO THAT WE CAN CAPTURE, YOU KNOW, IF THERE ARE, FOR EXAMPLE, RPG PROJECTS THAT ARE ENDORSED AT THE JUNE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, THEN WE WOULD TRY TO INCORPORATE THOSE PROJECTS INTO THE STUDY CASES. 
          WE'LL BUILD THOSE STUDY CASES. 
          AND THEN ROUGHLY LATE SEPTEMBER IS WHEN WE WOULD START THE STEADY STATE ANALYSIS WITH THE STABILITY SCREENING STARTING SHORTLY THEREAFTER, FINAL REPORT AT THE END OF JANUARY. 
          UM, AND THEN THAT GIVES THAT 30 DAY, THAT 30 DAY, UH, COMMITMENT WINDOW IS ROUGHLY THE MONTH OF, OF FEBRUARY. 
          UM, THAT, THAT THEN LEADS TO THE, UH, BATCH, UH, OR, SORRY, THE FACT TWO STABILITY STUDY. 
          SO THAT'S, WE DIDN'T TALK ABOUT THAT, THAT'S NOT REALLY IN THE PIGGER, BUT IT'S A COMPLIANCE OBLIGATION THAT ERCOT WOULD HAVE WHERE WE WOULD BE DOING A FULL STABILITY STUDY. 
          UM, BUT THEN THE BATCH REFINEMENT STUDY WOULD START, UM, UH, ROUGHLY MARCH 1ST AND GO THROUGH JUNE, 
          [01:10:01]
HAVE A RPG COMMENT PERIOD, RESOLVE ANY COMMENTS. 
          AND THEN THAT LEADS US TO A, UM, AUGUST TAC AND SEPTEMBER BOARD ENDORSEMENT, UH, IN 2027 FOR WHATEVER TRANSMISSION PROJECTS COME OUT OF THE REFINEMENT STUDY. 
          OKAY. 
          SO I'M GONNA WALK THROUGH EACH OF THOSE, UH, STEPS THAT ARE LAID OUT. 
          UM, IF YOU SEE, WE, WE'VE GOT THESE, UH, STEPS HERE, UH, ONE THROUGH NINE ON THE, UH, LEFT ON, ON THIS, UH, GANTT CHART VIEW. 
          I WANNA WALK THROUGH EACH OF THOSE AND WHAT, WHAT WOULD THOSE MEAN? UH, SO FOR THE CASE BUILD, FOR BATCH ZERO, UM, THE, THERE'S CERTAIN INFORMATION THAT WE WILL NEED FROM THE TD T DSPS, UH, AND, AND SO WE NEED, UH, THE TSPS TO SEND US THAT INFORMATION. 
          UH, WE WOULD THEN, UH, UH, BUILD THE CASES AND WE, WE WOULD MAKE OUR DETERMINATION REGARDING WHICH LOADS ARE MEETING THE, UH, CRITERIA TO BE INCLUDED IN, UH, BATCH ZERO, UH, BASED ON THE INFORMATION THAT, THAT THE TDSP ARE GIVING US. 
          UM, AND THEN WE WOULD, UH, OF COURSE BUILD THE CASES. 
          UM, STATE STEADY STATE ANALYSIS. 
          I THINK WE, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS PREVIOUSLY. 
          UM, N NOTHING HAS REALLY CHANGED, UH, SINCE THE, UH, LAST WORKSHOP. 
          SO I'LL JUST, UH, SKIMM OVER THAT REAL FAST. 
          UM, THE, UH, STABILITY SCREENING, I, I THINK THIS IS MORE A CLARIFICATION IS, YOU KNOW, HASN'T REALLY CHANGED, BUT IT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE LOOKING AT, UH, ANY STABILITY SCREENING CRITERIA VIOLATIONS. 
          UH, THIS IS PRIMARILY A VOLTAGE STABILITY, UH, TYPE ANALYSIS THAT WE'RE RUNNING. 
          UH, AND SO WE'RE GOING TO, UM, LOOK AT THAT. 
          WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA DO THAT SCREENING AND SEE, UH, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH OF THE, UH, PEAK DEMAND CAN WE, CAN WE RELIABLY SERVE EACH YEAR. 
          UM, AND, AND WE WILL, UM, YOU KNOW, IDENTIFY THOSE, THOSE CONSTRAINTS. 
          UM, AND THEN, UH, WE WILL PRODUCE A, A FINAL REPORT SUMMARIZING THE RESULTS. 
          UM, WE'VE SAID THIS BEFORE, SO THIS IS JUST A CLARIFICATION THAT AS, UH, DESIGNED RIGHT NOW ON PIER 1 45, THE 2033 LOAD, UM, UH, WE WILL SET AT THE REQUESTED AMOUNT. 
          UH, SO THIS IS A YEAR SIX ASSUMPTION THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO CONSTRUCT THE TRANSMISSION THAT WOULD BE NECESSARY TO, UH, TO SERVE THE FULL LOAD BY 2033, EVEN IF WE DON'T IDENTIFY WHAT ALL THOSE TRANSMISSION UPGRADES ARE IN THAT, UH, BATCH STUDY TIMEFRAME. 
          UH, AND THE IDEA HERE IS, UH, IF, IF YOU LOOK AT THAT TIME WINDOW, UH, LEMME GO BACK 'CAUSE I, I, I DIDN'T, UM, TALK ABOUT THIS, BUT THAT, THAT WINDOW OF COMMITMENT LINES UP, UH, WITH THE BEGINNING OF 2027 RTP. 
          UH, SO THE IDEA HERE IS THAT, UM, THAT YEAR SIX ANALYSIS THAT WE WEREN'T, WEREN'T ABLE TO IDENTIFY ALL THOSE UPGRADES AS PART OF THE, UH, BATCH STUDY, UH, WE, WE WOULD, WOULD BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY ALL THOSE AS PART OF THE 2027 RTP. 
          UM, AND THEN, UM, YOU OF COURSE, THE INFORMATION, THE FINAL REPORT WOULD BE, UH, USED BY THE, UH, TSPS. 
          THEY WOULD KNOW WHAT THE, UM, UH, FINANCIAL SECURITY OBLIGATIONS. 
          AND, AND, YOU KNOW, THIS IS, AGAIN, DEPENDENT ON FINAL RULE FOR 58 41. 
          UH, BUT WHATEVER WOULD BE NECESSARY, UH, THE IDEA IS THAT THAT, UH, FROM AN ERCOT PERSPECTIVE, THAT, THAT THE INFORMATION WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE FINAL REPORT. 
          OF COURSE, THERE'S GONNA BE INFORMATION THAT, THAT ERCOT DOESN'T HAVE, THE, THE TS TSPS OR T DSPS WOULD HAVE THEMSELVES, BUT ANY INFORMATION THAT, THAT THEY WOULD NEED FROM ERCOT WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE FINAL REPORT. 
          OKAY? SO THE, UH, DEVELOPER COMMITMENT DEADLINE, UM, THE, UH, IDEA HERE IS THAT THE, UM, THE, THE DEVELOPERS WILL GET A, UH, A MEGAWATT BY YEAR, UH, ALLOCATION. 
          AND, UM, THEY WOULD THEN NEED TO ENTER INTO THAT BINDING INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT, UH, BY MARCH 1ST. 
          UH, THE, THE DETAILS OF WHAT, WHAT ARE, WHAT IS NEEDED TO SATISFY THAT INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT IS ESSENTIALLY WHATEVER COMES OUT OF 58 41. 
          UM, SO WE HAVE INCLUDED WHAT, WHAT WE THINK IS THE REQUIREMENTS RIGHT NOW BASED ON THE DRAFT PFP, BUT ULTIMATELY THIS WILL BE, AND AGAIN, THIS IS FEBRUARY OF 27, MARCH 1ST, 2027, WE'RE EXPECTING THAT WE WOULD HAVE THE FINAL 58 41 RULE IN PLACE BY THAT TIME. 
          SO IT'LL BE CLEAR WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE AT THAT TIME FOR MEETING THE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT REQUIREMENTS. 
          UM, AND THEN ERCOT, WE, WE NEED 
          [01:15:01]
THE TDSP TO, UH, FORMALLY TELL US, UH, THAT THE LOADS HAVE MET THAT INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT CRITERIA. 
          SO WE, WE NEED THAT, THAT FORMAL NOTIFICATION, UH, THAT, THAT THE LOADS HAVE, UH, MET THAT, UM, IF A LOAD, UH, DOES NOT MEET THAT, THEN WE WOULD ASSUME THAT THAT LARGE LOAD HAS WITHDRAWN, UH, THEIR APPLICATION. 
          UH, SO IT IS NOT LIKE TODAY WHERE LOADS, UM, I GUESS THERE IS A DEADLINE TODAY, BUT I'LL SAY IT'S NOT LIKE IT WAS PREVIOUSLY WHERE YOU COULD KIND OF INDEFINITELY HANG OUT. 
          UH, THERE WOULD BE A DEFINITE DECISION POINT THAT THE LOAD NEEDS TO MAKE, UH, IN ORDER TO MOVE FORWARD. 
          WE ARE CONTEMPLATING HAVING A, UM, YOU KNOW, SOME SORT OF, UM, UH, RAMP IN, IN, THIS IS NOT IN THE BATCH, THIS IS NOT IN BIGGER 1 45, BUT IN THE ONGOING, UH, PROCESS, HA HAVING SOME SORT OF KIND OF BRIDGE WHERE IF YOU DIDN'T LIKE THE RESULTS, UH, YOU DON'T HAVE TO START COMPLETELY OVER AGAIN. 
          UH, YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO GO INTO THE NEXT BATCH. 
          UH, BUT WE'LL LAY THAT OUT WHEN WE GET TO THAT, UH, THAT BATCH STUDY PROCESS. 
          UM, BUT THERE, THERE IS A CLEAR DECISION POINT THOUGH, UH, IN, AT, IN, AT THE END OF JAN, BETWEEN THE END OF JANUARY AND MARCH 1ST, WHERE THE LOADS WOULD HAVE TO MAKE THAT DECISION ON IF THEY WANT TO COMMIT OR, OR WITHDRAW. 
          IF THEY DON'T COMMIT, THEN WE'RE, WE WILL ASSUME THAT THEY, UH, ARE GOING TO WITHDRAW. 
          UM, AND, AND THEN JUST TO REITERATE, UH, IF THAT LOAD MAKES THAT COMMITMENT, UH, NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS DOWN THE ROAD, WE WE'RE NOT GOING TO REALLOCATE THOSE MEGAWATTS. 
          SO IF YOU COMMIT TO 250 MEGAWATTS, THEN WE WOULD NOT GO BACK AND REALLOCATE THAT. 
          YOU'RE, YOU'RE, UM, DIDN'T USE THIS LANGUAGE IN THE, UH, IN THE PICKER, BUT COLLOQUIALLY IT'S, YOU'RE, YOU'RE LOCKED IN ON THOSE MEGAWATTS. 
          UH, BUT AT MARCH 1ST, UM, AND WE'VE, UH, TALKED ABOUT THIS REFINEMENT STUDY QUITE A BIT, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, THE IDEA IS THAT WE WOULD THEN TAKE WHICHEVER LOADS HAVE COMMITTED, THEN WE WOULD, UH, GO THROUGH THIS REFINEMENT PROCESS WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT THE, UH, THE LOADS, UM, THAT HAVE COMMITTED AND THE TRANSMISSION UPGRADES AND ASSESSING WHETHER THOSE ARE THE RIGHT TRANSMISSION UPGRADES STILL. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, WE MAY ALSO, YOU KNOW, THIS GIVES US SOME, SOME ADDITIONAL TIME TO LOOK AT ALTERNATIVES, UM, TO, EVEN IF ALL THE LOADS, UM, COMMITTED, UH, YEAH, THERE, THERE'S STILL SOME, UH, TIME PERIOD IN THERE WHERE WE COULD MODIFY THE, THE TRANSMISSION UPGRADES. 
          UM, BUT AGAIN, THAT DOES NOT AFFECT THE FINANCIAL COMMITMENT OR DOES NOT AFFECT THE MEGAWATTS FROM THE, UH, THE LOADS. 
          UM, AND THEN THAT REFINEMENT STUDY WOULD RESULT IN A FINAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDED TRANSMISSION FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS THAT WOULD BE SUBMITTED FOR RPG PROJECT REVIEW. 
          UM, WE, UH, WOULD THEN TAKE THAT THROUGH AND RPG, UH, COMMENT PROCESS, UH, THAT RPG PROJECT CLASSIFICATION. 
          UH, THE WAY THAT WE'RE THINKING ABOUT THIS IS THAT YOU WOULD, UH, GROUP ALL OF THE TRANSMISSION PROJECTS THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THAT REFINEMENT STUDY AND THAT THAT WOULD BE SUBMITTED AS A SINGLE PACKAGE. 
          AND, AND SO THAT SINGLE PACKAGE WOULD BE BASED ON, UH, THE, THE TIER CLASSIFICATION WOULD BE BASED ON THAT ENTIRETY OF THAT PACKAGE. 
          UH, SO IF IT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, FIVE $50 MILLION PROJECTS, THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, AT SOME, SOME TOTAL, THAT WOULD BE A $250 MILLION PROJECT. 
          IT'D BE A TIER ONE PROJECT. 
          SO WE WOULD TAKE THAT TO THE BOARD FOR BOARD ENDORSEMENT. 
          UH, BUT THE REFINEMENT STUDY WOULD ACT AS, OR COTS INDEPENDENT REVIEW. 
          SO WE WOULD NOT THEN GO AND, AND DO A SEPARATE INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF THAT. 
          THE REFINEMENT STUDY IS ARCOS, IT'S BOTH THE SUBMITTAL AND THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW FOR THAT, THAT SET OF PROJECTS. 
          UM, AND THEN, UH, WE WILL GO THROUGH AN RBG, UH, STUDY MODE IF WE HAVE COMMENTS, UH, THAT THE, THE COMMENTS ARE NOT REALLY LOOK, WOULD, WOULD NOT BE, YOU KNOW, DON'T, DON'T SERVE THIS LOAD, DON'T REALLOCATE THE MEGAWATTS. 
          IT, IT'S, IT'S REALLY MORE REFINEMENT OF THE, THE, UH, TRANSMISSION ALTERNATIVES. 
          UM, AND THEN WE WOULD, UM, UH, AS, AS NOTED, WE WOULD TAKE THAT TO T AND THE BOARD FOR ENDORSEMENT. 
          UM, AND, AND THEN THIS, UH, IS NOT, NOT REALLY, UM, PART OF P 1 45, BUT WE WANTED TO REITERATE THIS, UH, IDEA THAT AS LAID DOWN IN P 1 45 AND HEARD THE COMMENTS, UH, IN FROM THE SURVEY AND COMMENTS THIS MORNING ON POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, IS A SIX MONTHS STEADY CADENCE, IS THAT THE RIGHT THING? BUT A, A AS WE HAVE AT LEAST, UH, UH, CONTEMPLATED IT, IT IS A SIX MONTH PROCESS, UM, A SIX MONTH CADENCE THAT IS A LONGER PROCESS IF YOU CONSIDER THE REFINEMENT AND, AND, AND THAT, UH, BUT THE, UM, UH, THAT THE CADENCE AT LEAST IS, IS THAT THIS WOULD HAPPEN EVERY SIX MONTHS. 
          UM, OKAY, SO WITH THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S 
          [01:20:01]
A LOT OF, UH, GETTING INTO DETAILS. 
          UM, BUT LET'S, UH, PAUSE AND, UH, TAKE ANY QUESTIONS THAT FOLKS HAVE. 
          GREAT. 
          AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S CLEAR IN THE, I AM I SENT A MINUTE AGO. 
          WE WERE GONNA WAIT UNTIL THEY GOT TO THE END AND THEN OPEN THE QUEUE. 
          SO WE JUST OPENED THE QUEUE. 
          SO IF YOU'RE ALREADY IN THE QUEUE, GET IN AGAIN BECAUSE THAT WAS THE IDEA SOME, AND THE REASON I'M DOING THIS, AND IF I DIDN'T ARTICULATE IT WELL, SOMETIMES THE SLIDES WILL ANSWER THE QUESTION AND WE JUST WANT TO KEEP THIS AS EFFICIENT AS POSSIBLE. 
          SO NOW WE'LL START WORKING THROUGH. 
          AND AGAIN, ALSO, NOTHING THAT JEFF REALLY DID WENT INTO ELIGIBILITY. 
          THIS IS THE MECHANICS OF HOW THE PROCESS IS RUN AND HOW FIT TOGETHER. 
          WE HAVE A WHOLE NOTHER SECTION ON, UH, ELIGIBILITY IN THE NEXT PIECE. 
          SO, ALRIGHT, WITH THAT, WE'LL START THE QUEUE. 
          DO YOU KNOW WHO'S NUMBER ONE? ALRIGHT, NED, YOU'RE NUMBER ONE. 
          I FEEL LIKE I GUESSED THE RIGHT NUMBER OF JELLY BEANS IN THE JAR. 
          THAT'S RIGHT, THAT'S RIGHT. 
          . 
          UM, ALL RIGHT. 
          UH, SO I'VE GOT A, A COUPLE, I THINK SOME OF 'EM WILL BE PRETTY QUICK. 
          UH, THE FIRST ONE IS ON SLIDE 30, UM, WITH THE JULY 15TH DEADLINE OR, UH, THE, THE REQUIRED PROJECT INFO SUBMITTED FOR INCLUSION. 
          I, I THINK IN SOME OF THE PRIOR, UH, MATERIALS Y'ALL HAD COMMUNICATED AN EXPECTED EFFECTIVE DATE OF AUGUST 1ST, IS, DOES THIS IMPLY THAT THAT IS CHANGING AND MOVING UP? NO, UM, IT'S, UM, IT, IT, IT'S REALLY, I THINK THE, UM, EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE PIG WOULD BE, UH, TECHNICALLY IF THE, UH, I THINK IF THE COMMISSION APPROVES IT. 
          AND, UH, SO WAY I'M THINKING ABOUT IT IS THE, UH, BOARD ENDORSES IT ON JUNE ONE OR JUNE TWO. 
          UH, I THINK THE NEXT 30 DAYS THAT THE, UH, COMMISSION WOULD HAVE TO APPROVE IT WOULD, WOULD BE, OR THEIR NEXT MEETING, 30 DAYS AFTER, WOULD BE JULY 9TH OPEN MEETING, UH, WHICH WOULD MAKE IT EFFECTIVE ON AUGUST 1ST IF WE FOLLOW KIND OF THE NORMAL PROCESS, RIGHT. 
          UH, SO THAT, THAT IS THE EFFECTIVE DATE. 
          BUT, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT CAN LOOK BACK AND SAY THAT JULY 15TH IS OUR CUTOFF FOR, FOR WHEN WE ARE, UH, LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, THAT CAN, IT CAN LOOK BACK FOR THAT JULY 15TH DATE AND SAY THAT THAT'S OUR CUTOFF DATE FOR WHEN WE WOULD ACCEPT THE, UM, UH, THE, THE PROJECT INFORMATION. 
          OKAY. 
          SO Y'ALL ARE LOOKING AT THAT AS KIND OF A, THE, YOU KNOW, IT'S BEEN APPROVED. 
          IT'S NOT IN EFFECT, BUT IT'S IN, IT'S IN THE, UH, THE, THE GRAY AREA IN BETWEEN. 
          YES. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, OKAY. 
          WANNA, WANNA THINK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT? YEAH. 
          AND, AND THAT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE WE NEED TO START, WE NEED TO GET THOSE CASES BUILT. 
          WE NEED TO, UM, YEAH, I, I THINK WHAT WE'VE HEARD A LOT OF COMMENTS IS, OR, OR YOU NEED TO HURRY AND START THIS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE SO YOU CAN GET RESULTS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. 
          YEAH. 
          UH, AND SO THAT, THAT'S, THAT THAT'S OUR THINKING THERE. 
          YEAH. 
          AND IT'S IMPORTANT TRADE OFFS TO THINK THROUGH IS, YOU KNOW, THE, TRYING TO BE TIGHT WITH THE PROCEDURAL, UH, YOU KNOW, NOT, NOT HAVING THINGS BE RETROACTIVE IN APPLICATION, BUT UM, ALSO BE ABLE TO MOVE FAST. 
          SO, UM, BUT I APPRECIATE THAT THERE'S A TENSION YOU'RE TRYING TO BALANCE AND, AND RESOLVE THERE. 
          SO, UM, YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          AND NOT TO BELABOR THAT, BUT THE, UM, THE, THE TIE IN WITH THE 2027 RTPI, I THINK IS IMPORTANT. 
          SO WE, WE WANT TO HAVE THAT COMMITMENT WINDOW BE SUCH THAT THE, THE LOADS THAT ARE COMMITTED ARE COMMITTED IN A TIMEFRAME WHERE, WHERE WE, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO GET THEM INTO THE 2027 RTP. 
          YEAH. 
          AND GONNA APPRECIATE THAT FROM THE PRIOR DISCUSSION. 
          SO, SO THAT, THAT'S HOW WE KIND OF BACK UP AND GET TO JULY 15TH. 
          OKAY. 
          MAKES SENSE. 
          UM, SO NEXT ONE IS, UH, CLARIFICATION ON SLIDE 31. 
          UM, YOU'VE GOT THE, THE GREEN BOX IN THE MIDDLE BOTTOM SAYS PROVIDE COST ESTIMATES, AND WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT HAVING A POINT IN TIME COST ESTIMATE AT THE END OF THE BATCH THAT WOULD, UH, FEED INTO THE BOTTOM LEFT BOX ON SIGNING THE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT. 
          SO WOULD THERE BE A TRUE UP WITHIN THE THREE MONTHS OF THE, UH, THE REFINEMENT OR IT IT WOULD BE LOCKED IN AT THE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT? UM, POINT, YEAH. 
          SO, UM, AGAIN, AND I'LL, YOU KNOW, 58 41 IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE, BUT I THINK THE, THE WAY THAT WE ARE READING THAT IS THAT IS A POINT IN TIME COMMITMENT. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, SO IT IS AT THE END OF THAT TIME, THE LOAD NEEDS TO MAKE THAT FINANCIAL COMMITMENT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND ALLOCATION WITHIN, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'VE GOT A BUNCH OF PROJECTS THAT ARE ALL CONTRIBUTING TO DIFFERENT UPGRADES, UH, WILL YOU BE DOING THAT ON JUST A, YOU KNOW, EVEN SPLIT? OR IS THERE A PERCENTAGE ALLOCATION ON HOW CONTRIBUTIONS TO A PARTICULAR UPGRADE WOULD NEED TO BE, UH, CONSIDERED THERE? UM, I, I, I THINK THAT IS, UM, I THINK RIGHT NOW THAT WE'RE, WE'RE THINKING WE SHOULD WAIT ON 58 41 THAT, THAT, THAT WILL LIKELY PROVIDE CLARITY ON WHAT WE SHOULD DO THERE. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN LAST ONE, YEAH, IF YOU DON'T MIND, I'LL JUST JUMP IN AND JUST REMIND FOLKS THAT THE, UM, THE PRIMARY COMMITMENT THAT'S BEING CONTEMPLATED IN 5 8 4 8 1 
          [01:25:01]
IS ABOUT THE SECURITY, RIGHT? YEAH. 
          AND NOT NECESSARILY ABOUT THE CONSTRUCTION AND NATIVE OR THE CONTRIBUTION AND NATIVE CONSTRUCTION RELATED TO THE DIRECT COST TO INTERCONNECT. 
          AND SO I KNOW THIS IS A POINT OF CONTENTION AND I KNOW THAT THE RULE THAT'S BEFORE THE COMMISSIONERS, UM, FOR THURSDAY, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK LOTS OF PEOPLE ARE WEIGHING IN ON KIND OF THE TIMING AND DOLLAR AMOUNTS OF THOSE SECURITY COMMITMENTS AS THEY TIE INTO THE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT. 
          AND THEN HOW THAT PLAYS INTO WHAT YOUR KAYAK, UM, UH, CONTRIBUTIONS ARE AND, UM, OTHER TYPES OF FINANCIAL SECURITY. 
          I THINK THOSE ARE KIND OF A WATERFALL EFFECT AFTER THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          I APPRECIATE THAT. 
          I CLARIFICATION. 
          UM, LAST, LAST QUESTION I HAD WAS ON SLIDE 39, UM, AND THE PLAN TO HAVE ALL OF THE REFINEMENT PROJECTS GO THROUGH A SINGLE RPG PROJECT, UM, IN COMBINATION. 
          IS THERE A REASON WHY ERCOT WOULDN'T WANT TO MAYBE CONSIDER DOING SOME MAYBE SUB-REGIONAL, UM, ALLOCATION? SO INSTEAD OF LIKE ONE BIG ONE FOR THE ENTIRE STATE OF TEXAS, YOU MIGHT HAVE ONE THAT'S APPLICABLE FOR WEST TEXAS, ONE FOR SOUTH TEXAS, ONE FOR NORTH, ONE FOR EAST. 
          YEAH. 
          I, I THINK EFFICIENCY, IT, IT'S, UH, OUR, OUR THINKING HERE IS, IS WE JUST WANNA BE AS EFFICIENT AS POSSIBLE. 
          SO, UM, YOU SUBMIT A SINGLE PACKAGE OF, OF PROJECTS, WE THOUGHT THAT THAT WOULD BE MOST EFFICIENT RATHER THAN PREPARING, YOU KNOW, HAVING TO MAKE A JUDGMENT CALL, OKAY, IS, IS THIS, YOU KNOW, IS THIS LINE UPGRADE? IS THAT GOOD WITH THIS? YOU KNOW, OR, OR THIS REGION OR THAT REGION IS JUST, JUST PUT IT ALL IN ONE PACKAGE. 
          OKAY. 
          THE ONE THING THAT STOOD OUT TO, TO US IN REVIEWING THAT WAS YOU COULD GET INTO, UH, KIND OF A NUMBER OF, A LOT OF COMMENTS AROUND, UH, A SINGLE PACKAGE AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THERE MAY BE ONE REGION WHERE IT'S PRETTY CLEAR AND THERE ISN'T A WHOLE LOT OF DEBATE ABOUT IT, BUT THEN THE COMMENTS ON ANOTHER REGION COULD HOLD UP THE OTHER. 
          SO THERE MIGHT BE A, THERE MAY BE SOME NEED TO CONSIDER, UH, WHETHER YOU CAN MOVE FASTER IF YOU DON'T DO IT ALL AS A SINGLE SHOT, BUT A COUPLE OF LARGE AGGREGATED SHOTS. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT, NEXT QUESTION. 
          MARTHA. 
          THANKS MATT. 
          MARTHA HENSON WITH ENCORE ON SLIDE 30 WHERE IT SPOKE TO THE, UM, JULY 15TH, 2026 DATE WHERE YOU NEED ALL THE INFORMATION FROM THE TSPS, ARE YOU EXPECTING THAT TO LOOK LIKE AN RFI FROM ERCOT TO TSPS? MAYBE LIKE SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THE R-T-P-R-F-I OR HAVE YOU THOUGHT YET ABOUT WHAT THE FORMAT OF THAT IS GONNA LOOK LIKE? UM, I, I HAVE NOT THOUGHT A A LOT ABOUT THAT. 
          UH, I, I THINK THE, UM, JUST TO BE FRANK, I, I THINK THAT, UH, WHAT WE HAD ENVISIONED WAS MORE, UH, THAT THIS IS A REQUIREMENT IN THE PLANNING GUIDE FOR THE TSPS TO PROVIDE THIS INFORMATION TO US. 
          AND, AND SO IT WOULDN'T TAKE, WOULD NOT NEED AN RFI, THE TSPS WOULD JUST, UH, PROVIDE THE INFORMATION, UH, THAT SAID IF, IF IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF WE PROVIDED A TEMPLATE OR YOU KNOW, SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THEN I THINK WE'RE OPEN TO THAT. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, I THINK THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL. 
          THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT YOU'RE GONNA NEED FROM US AND DIFFERENT DATES ATTACHED TO DIFFERENT THINGS. 
          UM, I GUESS THE OTHER THING ALONG THAT LINES, UM, IT'D BE HELPFUL IF ERCOT CONSIDER, COULD CONSIDER WOULD BE WHETHER THERE'S SOME WAY YOU COULD STANDARDIZE THE, AT ALL THE VARIOUS ATTESTATIONS THAT ARE NEEDED, LIKE FOR OUR EQUIPMENT, THE CUSTOMER'S EQUIPMENT AND THE SITE DEVELOPMENT AND STUFF. 
          LIKE IF, I THINK IT'LL BE EASIER BOTH ON YOU AND ON US TO HAVE A STANDARD FORM FOR THAT, THAT THAT COULD BE USED SO WE'RE NOT SEEING LIKE 20 DIFFERENT  RIGHT. 
          TYPES OF ATTESTATIONS. 
          YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          THAT, THAT'S GOOD FEEDBACK. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANKS. 
          ALRIGHT, NEXT. 
          KEVIN HANSEN? YEAH, UH, JEFF, MY QUESTION WAS, JUST MAKE SURE, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THIS, IS THAT RIGHT NOW YEAR FIVE, WOULD IT BE LIMITED BY THE AMOUNT OF LOAD BUT YEAR SIX COULD THEORETICALLY BE INFINITE LOADS ADDED AND THE CASES WOULD STILL SOLVE? 'CAUSE WE HAVE INFINITE GENERATION FROM BIGGER 1 27? YEAH, I THINK THEORETICALLY THAT'S CORRECT. 
          PRACTICALLY. 
          OKAY. 
          I THINK THAT'S, I'M JUST NOT LIKELY MAKING SURE THERE'S NO LIMITATION ON YOUR SEX. 
          CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          THANKS. 
          ALRIGHT, NEXT QUESTION. 
          UH, SHANNON CARAWAY, SAME SLIDES OR WHAT AS HIS WAS 28? SO HERE ON THIS STUDY HORIZON, YOU'RE SAYING 28 THROUGH 32, I WAS PREVIOUSLY SORT OF EXPECTING IT'D BE 27 THROUGH 31. 
          SO FOR A LOAD THAT'S ENERGIZING IN 27, HOW ARE YOU, HOW ARE YOU TREATING THAT HERE? UM, I, SO I THINK THE, UH, LOADS THAT ARE ENERGIZING IN 27, UM, I, I, I THINK THAT, UH, THE EARLIEST, 
          [01:30:01]
IF YOU LOOK AT THE, UM, UH, I THINK IT'S FOURTH QUARTER IF I REMEMBER RIGHT, OR IS THE EARLIEST YOU COULD ENERGIZE IN 27 IF YOU ARE IN THIS, UM, UH, IN, IN, IN, IN THIS STUDY, THAT'S WHERE YOU HAD TO PROVIDE, UH, PROOF THAT YOU HAD MET CERTAIN CRITERIA YOU COULD, BUT IT WASN'T, YOU COULDN'T ENERGIZE BEFORE THEN, IT'S ANY WORD THEN. 
          AND EARLIER YOU HAD TO PROVIDE PROOF THAT YOU WERE READY. 
          YEAH. 
          SO, HEY, JEFF AG WAS WILLING TO PIPE IN ON THIS ONE IF YOU WANT. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH, AG GO AHEAD. 
          HEY, UH, THIS IS AG SPRINGER ERCOT, UM, SHANNON, THE, THE, THE WAY THAT THIS IS, UH, STRUCTURED, UM, IS IS VERY SIMILAR TO THE FLOW CHART THAT WAS SHOWN AT THE FEBRUARY 26TH WORKSHOP. 
          THAT, UH, THERE IS A PATH FOR LOADS ENERGIZING IN 2027 TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY HAVE, UH, SUFFICIENT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS PROGRESS FOR THAT TO BE REALISTIC. 
          AND, UH, AS A RESULT, IF THEY MEET ALL THE CRITERIA, THEN THEY'RE INCLUDED AS BASE LOAD, UM, IN THE EVENT THAT THE, THE LOAD IS NOT ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT IT IS INCLUDED AS STUDIED LOAD, BUT WITH A 2028 JANUARY 1ST, 2028 IMMUNIZATION DATE OR LATER. 
          UH, SO THAT'S BASED ON THE STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK THAT, YOU KNOW, LOADS THAT WERE NOT ALREADY UNDER CONSTRUCTION WERE REALLY HAD NO REALISTIC PATH TO ENERGIZING IN 2027. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          I THINK THAT'S REALLY HELPFUL. 
          SO LET ME RESTATE AND SEE IF THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE SEEING. 
          IF YOU'RE A 27 PROJECT AND YOU MEET THE CRITERIA, YOU COME IN AS BASE LOAD, THE 2028 THROUGH 32 IS REALLY THE YEARS YOU'RE STUDYING FOR ALLOCATION. 
          IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT? YES, I'D SAY THAT'S ACCURATE. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S SUPER HELPFUL. 
          VERY, UH, CLEAR. 
          NEXT QUESTION ARE COMMENTS ON 31 OVER AT THE RIGHT SECOND BOX? YOU'VE GOT BILL CASES AND POST ON MIS CERTIFIED AREA. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          UH, I THINK THAT'S HELPFUL. 
          I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE ALSO A POST ON MIS CERTIFIED AREA AFTER THE COMMUNICATE RESULTS PIECE. 
          SO IN OTHER WORDS, WHAT'S COMING OUT OF IT, THERE SHOULD BE A WHOLE SET OF TRANSMISSION UPGRADES THAT WERE ASSUMED. 
          SO LET'S, LET'S GET, LET'S ADD A FLOW A BOX TO GET THAT PUBLISHED AS WELL WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH, I THINK WE COULD DO THAT. 
          THANKS. 
          ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. 
          NEXT UP IS LEE CHER. 
          HEY, GOOD MORNING. 
          UM, BASED UPON THE, UH, FLOW CHART THAT AG AND SHANNON WERE JUST DISCUSSING, UM, WHEN YOU GO TO SLIDE 30, THERE, THERE SEEMS TO BE A WAY FOR A LOAD THAT HAS AN ENERGIZATION DATE IN 2028 TO MAKE IT INTO BATCH ZERO AS LOAD THAT IS NOT CONSIDERED FOR REALLOCATION. 
          UM, BUT THAT LOAD WOULD HAVE TO HAVE MET THE FULL INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT CRITERIA BEFORE THE JULY 15TH DEADLINE. 
          UM, AND THEN IT'S ALSO SAYING HERE THAT THAT LOAD NEEDS TO MEET THE FULL INTERCONNECTION CRITERIA BY MARCH 1ST, 2027. 
          WOULDN'T IT HAVE ALREADY HAD TO MEET THAT CRITERIA? IS THAT JUST A UNIQUE CASE OR AM I UNDERSTANDING THIS INCORRECTLY? YEAH, AND WE MAY, UH, MIGHT GET INTO THIS A LITTLE BIT MORE, UM, LA LATER ON IN THE, IN THE PRESENTATION, BUT I, I THINK IT IS, UM, THERE ARE LOADS THAT WILL BE CONSIDERED, UM, UH, NOT, NOT SUBJECT TO TU IN FIRM, UH, IF YOU WILL, IN BACHELOR LAW. 
          AND THERE ARE OTHER LOADS THAT IN BATCH ZERO WILL BE, UH, STUDIED AND ALLOCATED MEGAWATTS. 
          UM, THE, UH, THAT FIRMNESS, I THINK, UH, THAT THOSE, THOSE LOADS THAT ARE NOT RESTUDIED, UH, I THINK THAT THAT DATE IS, UH, JULY 15TH TO, TO MEET THAT. 
          BUT THE LOADS THAT ARE STUDIED, THEIR INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT DATE IS MARCH 1ST OR DEADLINE I SHOULD SAY. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S VERY HELPFUL AND THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE. 
          LAST QUESTION IS, UM, UNRELATED, IT'S ON THE, UH, A PREVIOUS SLIDE. 
          I'M NOT SURE REMEMBER WHICH ONE, BUT IT'S THE NO SOLAR SCENARIO. 
          BUT MY QUESTION IS, SINCE SOLAR IS SO COMMONLY MATCHED WITH BATTERIES AND THE CHANCES OF A NO WIND NIGHT TO CHARGE BATTERIES AND THEN A NO SOLAR DAY, THE DAY FOLLOWING IS, IS PRETTY LOW. 
          AND ALSO ERCOT HAS THE ABILITY TO CAR CURTAIL LARGE LOADS IF EMERGENCIES ARISE, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF THE SENATE BILL SIX ARE, ARE WE SURE THAT IT'S NECESSARY TO INCLUDE A NO SOLAR SCENARIO? IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S, UM, SELF-LIMITING IN A SENSE BECAUSE OF THOSE PROTECTIONS. 
          [01:35:02]
S SO, UM, A COUPLE CLARIFICATIONS. 
          SO, UH, I, UH, THE WAY THAT WE ARE THINKING, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THE, UM, THE SECTION YOU'RE REFERRING TO OUTTA SB SIX, UH, CORRECTLY, THE WAY, THE WAY THAT WE WERE THINKING ABOUT THAT IS THAT THAT'S REALLY A FOR SYSTEM WIDE EMERGENCIES. 
          SO THAT, UH, CURTAILMENT PIECE WOULD NOT BE APPLICABLE FOR, UH, TRANSMISSION, UH, TO MANAGE TRANSMISSION CONSTRAINTS. 
          THAT, THAT, THAT'S REALLY A SYSTEMWIDE, UH, ENERGY EMERGENCY. 
          UM, AND SO WOULD, WOULD NOT WANT TO RELY ON THE LOADS FOR, YOU KNOW, E EVERY DAY THE, THE SUNSETS MANAGING TRANSMISSION CONSTRAINT. 
          UM, AND, AND SO WE, WE DO SEE THAT THIS, AND THIS SHOWS UP QUITE A BIT IN REAL TIME NOW, UH, TH THIS IS A CRITICAL OPERATING CONDITION THAT WE NEED TO STUDY. 
          IS THAT NO SOLAR CASE? NOW YOU MENTIONED BATTERIES. 
          I THINK THERE, THERE WILL BE A, UH, AN ASSUMPTION ON, UH, YOU KNOW, SOME OUTPUT FROM THE, THE BATTERIES. 
          I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. 
          I'D HAVE TO GO BACK AND TALK TO THE, UM, THE ENGINEERING TEAM. 
          UH, BUT THERE, THERE IS SOME ASSUMPTION THERE THAT YOU WOULD GET SOMETHING FROM THE BATTERIES, UH, AT THAT NO SOLAR TIME. 
          UNDERSTOOD. 
          THANKS. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          NEXT QUESTION. 
          OOPS. 
          GOT COVERED UP THERE, JOEL, GO AHEAD. 
          YEAH, UM, SLIDE 38 PLEASE. 
          SO IN THIS, UM, SORT OF REFINEMENT AND, AND THE IDEA THAT, UM, MEGAWATTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMMITTED TO AREN'T SUBJECT TO REALLOCATION, DOES THAT INCLUDE THE RAMP SCHEDULE? IS THAT, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, AS WELL. 
          SO EVEN IF THE REFINEMENT RESULTS IN TRANSMISSION PROJECTS THAT ARE GONNA TAKE LONGER, YOU'RE NOT GONNA CHANGE THE RAMP SCHEDULES OF THE LOADS? YEAH, THAT I, I WOULD MAYBE SAY THAT THE OTHER WAY AROUND IS THAT A, THE TRANSMISSION PLAN CAN, THE, THE ALTERNATIVE TRANSMISSION PROJECTS WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED VALID IF THEY CAN'T MEET THE RAMP SCHEDULE THAT HAS BEEN COMMITTED TO. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          NEXT CLAYTON GREER CLAYTON, IF YOU'RE TALKING, WE DON'T HEAR YOU YET. 
          UH, SORRY, I WAS MUTED. 
          YEAH. 
          UH, SLIDE 31, PLEASE. 
          I THINK YOU CORRECTLY SHOW IN THERE THE BACK AND FORTH THAT WOULD, UNDER THIS CURRENT STYLE PROCESS, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A MASSIVE BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THE, UH, THE PERFORMING THE STEADY STATES AND THEN, UH, ALLOWING THE TSPS TO REVIEW THOSE, UM, WITH WHAT WE SAW, UH, WITH THE GRID ASRA TOOL. 
          ARE YOU NOT THINKING OF USING GRID ASRA, I GUESS ON THIS? UM, YOU'RE, UH, YOU'RE PUTTING ME IN AN AWKWARD SPOT, GLEN. 
          UH, 'CAUSE WE, I, I, SO I'LL, I'LL SAY, UM, WE ARE CURRENTLY EVALUATING, UH, DIFFERENT, UH, SOFTWARE TOOLS THAT COULD HELP WITH THIS PROCESS. 
          UH, I THINK OUR, OUR EXPECTATION IS THAT FOR, UH, BATCH ZERO, UH, THAT WE WILL BE USING THE, UH, TOOLS THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE. 
          UM, NOT SURE YET ABOUT THE ONGOING PROCESS, BUT, UH, I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE USING CURRENT TOOLS, WHICH ARE, YOU KNOW, PRIMARILY GONNA BE POWER WORLD AND PSSE FOR, FOR RUNNING THE ANALYSIS. 
          UM, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I WILL ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT VARIOUS SOFTWARE TOOLS FOR SPEEDING UP THE PROCESS GOING FORWARD. 
          OKAY. 
          I, I, I GUESS I, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED AT HOW WE THINK WE'RE GONNA ACTUALLY GET THIS TO SOLVE. 
          I, YOU KNOW, FROM YOUR PREVIOUS PRESENTATION, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE GONNA TRY TO PUT 140 GIGS THROUGH THIS FIRST BATCH IF IT ALL, I MEAN, DEPENDING ON HOW THE, THE RULE COMES OUT AND IF PEOPLE POST THEIR, THEIR SECURITY AND WHATNOT. 
          UM, BUT, YOU KNOW, IT'S TAKEN OVER A YEAR FOR THE RPG PROCESS TO PROCESS A FOUR, UH, GIGAWATT UPGRADE IN THE SOUTHERN DALLAS AREAS, THIR, YOU KNOW, SO IT'S GOING ON THIR OVER 13 MONTHS FOR THAT. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, I, I'M NOT SURE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF WAYS THAT THIS COULD NOT BE SUCCESSFUL. 
          AND I, I THINK THAT IF YOU DON'T ADOPT SOME OF THESE TOOLS, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE SUCCESSFUL IF YOU'RE TRYING TO CLEAR THAT MUCH LOAD AND COME UP WITH THAT MANY PROJECTS THAT HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT COMPLEX OF A STR OF A, OF A STRATEGY WITH THE, THE TSPS, YOU KNOW, NOT WORKING, YOU KNOW, WORKING INDEPENDENTLY AND YOU'RE THROWING PROJECTS AT THEM AND THEN THEY'RE PROVIDING FEEDBACK BACK. 
          I, I, I JUST DON'T KNOW HOW THIS WORKS. 
          YEAH, I, I APPRECIATE THE COMMENT AND I'LL, I'LL JUST SAY, YEAH, WE, WE UNDERSTAND THE, UH, MODELING CHALLENGES AND, UM, ARE ACTIVELY LOOKING FOR, UM, WAYS TO RESOLVE THOSE CHALLENGES. 
          [01:40:02]
OKAY, GOOD. 
          UH, THAT'S GOOD TO HEAR. 
          AND THEN ON THE, UM, I, I FORGET THE SLIDE WHERE YOU'RE ASKING FOR, UM, AFFIDAVITS FROM THE, FROM THE TSPS ON WHAT LOADS THAT, THAT PROCESS PROBABLY NEEDS TO BE AUTOMATED TO WHERE YOU'RE CLICKING BOXES, YOU KNOW WHO, WHO POSTED AND WHO DIDN'T, SO THAT YOU'RE NOT GOING THROUGH A MA YOU KNOW, LIKE PAPERWORK THROUGH, UH, DO AN EXECUTIVE'S DESK SIGNING OFF ON EACH INDIVIDUAL PROJECT. 
          'CAUSE IT'S FOR LIKE ENCORE FOR INSTANCE, THAT'S PROBABLY GONNA BE, YOU KNOW, QUITE A FEW PROJECTS THAT THEY'RE HAVING TO PROCESS. 
          SO I WOULD SUGGEST MAYBE ON THE BACKEND, I MEAN, I KNOW THAT, THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT ALL THESE IMPROVEMENTS, BUT THAT WHAT THAT SEEMS LIKE LOW HANGING FRUIT TO TRY TO MAKE THAT A MORE AUTOMATED PROCESS. 
          THANKS. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          THANK CLAYTON. 
          CHRIS MATTIS, UH, CHRIS MONTES, GOOGLE. 
          THIS IS ON SLIDE 42. 
          AND SO HERE'S WHERE I THINK MAYBE WE'RE JUST HAVING COMMUNICATION ISSUES ABOUT WHAT'S SIX MONTHS, WHAT'S NINE MONTHS AND WHAT'S A YEAR? BECAUSE TO ME THIS LOOKS LIKE A NINE MONTH PROCESS, AND I THINK Y'ALL WOULD CALL IT A SIX MONTH PROCESS, BUT THE DELIVERABLE IS AT THE END OF, WELL, A LITTLE MORE THAN NINE MONTHS. 
          IF I THINK MAYBE, AND, AND I'M OPEN TO FEEDBACK ON THIS, I THINK I WOULD JUST CALL THIS ALL, YOU KNOW, THE NINE MONTH BATCH PROCESS, BECAUSE IT'S GONNA INCLUDE THE REFINEMENT, IT'S GONNA INCLUDE THE TRANSMISSION PLAN FINALIZATION, AND STAKEHOLDERS WOULD PROBABLY FEEL A LOT MORE COMFORTABLE BECAUSE THEN THEY, AGAIN, KNOW THE OUTCOMES OF THIS ENTIRE THING. 
          IT'S NOT JUST LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE RUN THE, THE FIRST STUDY STATE AND THAT'S THE BATCH PROCESS. 
          NO, IT'S, WE RUN THE STUDY STATE, WE DO THE REFINEMENT, WE GET TO THE TRANSMISSION PLAN FINALIZATION, AND THAT'S THE BATCH PROCESS. 
          SO IF THIS IS LIKE CLOSER TO THE SIX MONTHS THAT YOU ARE REFERRING TO, AND YOU, YOU CAN COMMIT TO THE REFINEMENT AND TRANSMISSION PLAN FINALIZATION AT THE END OF JANUARY,  Y YEAH. 
          LIKE LOOSELY, I GUESS THAT'S LIKE A 12 MONTH PROCESS RIGHT ON THERE. 
          YEAH. 
          WELL, O OKAY. 
          YEAH. 
          THE, THE SEMANTICS I THINK WE HAVEN'T BEEN CLEAR ON. 
          YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          I, I THINK IT IS IF YOU LOOK AT REALLY THAT JULY 15TH AS THE START DATE SAY FOR, FOR THAT, THAT THAT'S WHEN WE NEED THE INFORMATION. 
          YEAH. 
          AND EVEN REALLY, YOU KNOW, WE WE'RE PROBABLY STARTING IN JUNE TO BUILD THOSE CASES, UHHUH , UM, THE FINAL BOARD ENDORSEMENT OF THOSE PROJECTS ISN'T UNTIL SEPTEMBER OF 2027. 
          OKAY. 
          SO THAT, THAT PROCESS IS ACTUALLY MAYBE A 15 MONTH PROCESS. 
          YEAH. 
          BUT I THINK WHAT IS PROPOSED HERE IS THAT YOU'RE RUNNING THAT, CALL IT A 15 MONTH PROCESS ON A SIX MONTH CADENCE. 
          THAT'S FINE TOO. 
          I LIKE THE CADENCE OF GOING EVERY SIX MONTHS WITH A PROVIDED, YOU KNOW, IN THE NEXT SIX MONTHS WE HAVE THE BASELINE FROM THE PRIOR STUDY TO MAKE IT GO FORWARD. 
          I THINK, I THINK THIS QUE THE QUESTION HAS BEEN A SEMANTICS ISSUE. 
          'CAUSE I LIKE THIS, BUT THIS IS, YOU KNOW, CLOSER TO LIKE A 12 MONTH ACTUAL PROCESS PLUS THE BOARD TIME FOR APPROVAL. 
          SO MAYBE WE ARE ACTUALLY TALKING THE SAME THING HERE. 
          OKAY. 
          IT'S A SIX MONTH CADENCE, WHICH IS FINE. 
          CORRECT. 
          BUT IT IS A 12 ISH MONTH PROCESS THAT COMES WITH, UH, BATCH REFINEMENT AND TRANSMISSION PLAN FINALIZATION. 
          SO IF WE COULD JUST CLARIFY THAT SOMEHOW. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, . 
          YEAH. 
          O OKAY. 
          YEAH, WE'LL, WE'LL THINK ABOUT HOW TO COMMUNICATE THAT BETTER. 
          YOU KNOW, I, I THINK, UM, IN, IN THE, UH, LIKE PC CHAIRMAN SAID THIS EARLY AT, AT ONE OF THE, THE OPEN MEETINGS THAT THERE ARE TRADE OFFS HERE. 
          YEAH. 
          UH, IN, IN HOW WE DO THIS. 
          THE, THE, THE PARTICULAR TRADE OFF THAT WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE WITH A SIX MONTH CADENCE IS, UH, YOU HAVE SPEED, BUT THERE ARE THINGS THAT ARE RUNNING IN PARALLEL, RIGHT. 
          IF YOU DO THAT AND THAT, THAT PARALLEL, I, I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'VE HEARD FEEDBACK FROM, UH, THE, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, VARIOUS STAKEHOLDERS IN PREVIOUS WORKSHOPS IS THAT THAT PARALLEL EFFORT MEANS THAT THERE'S, UH, I, I THINK THAT'S MORE FROM A TRANSMISSION PERSPECTIVE IS I, I'M STARTING THIS BATCH WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT THE FINAL TRANSMISSION SOLUTION IS FROM THE PREVIOUS BATCH. 
          AND, AND THERE, THERE ARE, UH, CHALLENGES WITH DOING THAT. 
          UH, IF YOU'RE RUNNING A SIX MONTH CADENCE, YOU, YOU HAVE TO MAKE THAT TRADE OFF. 
          UM, I SEE IF YOU, WE COULD LENGTHEN THE CADENCE AND WE COULD DO IT NINE MONTH CADENCE OR 12 MONTH CADENCE. 
          UH, AND, AND MAYBE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE, WE, YOU KNOW, DON'T HAVE THAT TO MAKE THAT TRADE OFF THEN. 
          YEAH. 
          UH, WE'RE, WE'RE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO HAVE THAT UNCERTAINTY IN THE TRANSMISSION PLAN MM-HMM . 
          UM, BUT, AND THIS LONG-WINDED WAY OF SETTING UP A QUESTION BACK TO YOU 
          [01:45:01]
IS FROM A, A DEVELOPER PERSPECTIVE, FROM A LOAD PERSPECTIVE, UM, THAT, THAT TRANSMISSION CERTAINTY IS THAT IMPORTANT TO YOU IF IT DOESN'T CHANGE YOUR, YOUR MEGAWATTS? I THINK RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE PAST PROJECTS ARE CURRENTLY BEING TREATED AS FUTURE INDICATORS AT EASE BECAUSE THE LACK OF CERTAIN TRANSMISSION PROJECTS BEING COMPLETED HAS OBJECTIVELY AFFECTED MY ENERGIZATION. 
          SO I, AND, AND, AND THAT'S JUST A CONSEQUENCE I THINK, OF THE SIZE OF THE LOADS THAT ARE TRYING TO INTERCONNECT, RIGHT? SO I DON'T KNOW HOW WE CAN ENTIRELY SEPARATE THOSE TWO ISSUES. 
          I, I THINK WITHIN THIS PROCESS WITH YOUR REFINEMENTS, YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A PERFECT BASE MODEL IN THE FIRST SIX MONTHS AND, AND GO ON THE CADENCE AND THE REFINEMENT MAY BE ABLE TO CATCH IT. 
          SO THERE, THERE'S CERTAINLY SOME QUESTIONS FROM A PROCESS POINT, BUT I WOULD HAVE A VERY HARD TIME ACCEPTING A PROCESS THAT DOESN'T OFFER AT LEAST FIRM TRANSMISSION UPGRADES FOR, FOR RPG APPROVAL AT THE END OF THE REFINEMENT. 
          BECAUSE I CURRENTLY HAVE PROJECTS NOW THAT CANNOT ENERGIZE WITHOUT THOSE TRANSMISSION PROJECTS. 
          MM-HMM . 
          OKAY. 
          AND SO THAT'S, YEAH, I UNDERSTAND. 
          I UNDERSTAND WHEN Y'ALL SAY LIKE, WE'LL BE ABLE TO ENERGIZE IR RESPECTIVE OF THIS LIKE TRANSMISSION PIECE COMING OUTTA THERE AND SURE. 
          WITH THE, WITH YOUR SIX YEAR SORT OF BACKSTOP ON IT, THAT'S PROBABLY POSSIBLE. 
          I'M NOT GONNA SAY THAT BECAUSE IN THEORY YOU CAN GET MAYBE THE TRANSMISSION UPGRADES IN SIX YEARS. 
          I'M VERY SKEPTICAL BECAUSE THE CURRENT PROCESS IS DELAYING MY ENERGIZATION FOR PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN IN WAITING FOR OVER A YEAR IN RPG. 
          SO I THINK AS A, A SIX MONTH STUDY FOR PLUS BATCH PROCESS REFINEMENT AS A BATCH PROCESS, THAT'S FINE. 
          AND THEN TAKING THE BATCH PROCESS AND DO, AND STARTING IT ON A SIX MONTHS CADENCE IS ALSO FINE, BUT IT WILL BE HARD TO DIVORCE, LIKE BATCH ZERO NOT COMING OUT WITH FIRM TRANSMISSION AND BATCH PLAN FINALIZATION IN MAY. 
          AND TO ME THAT'S NOT A SIX MONTH STUDY, IT'S A 11TH MONTH PROCESS, CALL IT 15 WITH BOARD APPROVAL KIND OF THING. 
          AND THAT IT, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A SEMANTICS ISSUE. 
          IT'S UNDERSTANDING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT IS THE BATCH PROCESS, WHAT IS THE PROCESS I'M TAKING A PROJECT THROUGH, AND WHAT IS THE CADENCE OF ME TO SUBMIT DIFFERENT PROJECTS. 
          WHEN DO YOU HAVE APPROVAL TO ENERGIZE YOUR LOAD? WHEN, WHEN, WELL RIGHT NOW I HAVE APPROVAL TO ENERGIZE MY LOAD CONTINGENT ON TRANSMISSION UPGRADES. 
          SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING EXACTLY, THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING LIKE THE BATCH PROCESS TO ME IS THE SIX MONTH STUDY PLUS THE REFINEMENT, BUT THE CADENCE IN WHICH YOU'RE GOING THROUGH BATCHES IS, IS A SEPARATE THING. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          UH, NEXT BILL BARNES. 
          THANKS. 
          UH, JEFF, WHEN ARE TSPS IDENTIFIED FOR THE SPECIFIC PROJECTS IN THE PLAN COMING OUTTA THE BATCH STUDY REFINEMENT STUDY? IS THAT PART OF WHAT YOU'RE DOING? YOU'RE ASSIGNING TSPS EACH PARTICULAR PROJECT OR WHERE DOES THAT HAPPEN? YEAH, I LOST MY SLIDE. 
          UM, YEAH, SO THAT, UM, I THINK TODAY THAT HAPPENS AT, UM, UH, ACTUALLY I, I DON'T KNOW WHEN THAT HAPPENS. 
          I THINK IT'S, I THINK THAT HAPPENS AT RPG. 
          UH, I, I THINK THAT THAT'S WHEN THAT WOULD UM, OCCUR IS AT THE RPG PHASE. 
          I, I THINK IT'S, YEAH. 
          AND I'M, I'M SPEAKING A LITTLE BIT OUTTA TURN 'CAUSE I'M, I'M GOING BACK TO MY OLD TRANSMISSION PLANNING DAYS AND I THINK THAT THAT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE SPELLED OUT IN STATUTE NOW. 
          UM, UH, SO, UM, ACTUALLY I MIGHT NEED A TRANSMISSION PLANNING FOR END TO HELP ANSWER THAT. 
          BUT I, I THINK THAT THAT'S OCCURRING AT, AS PART OF THAT RPG PROCESS. 
          OKAY. 
          BECAUSE THAT'S, I WAS JUST THINKING ABOUT WHAT TAC AND THE BOARD IS APPROVING AND USUALLY THAT'S, UH, THE OUTCOME OF THE RTP WITH A TSP FILING A PROJECT TO, TO MEET THAT, UH, THAT NEED. 
          AND SO I'M JUST KINDA WONDERING, 'CAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE IN YOUR TIMELINE FOR WHAT PAC APPROVES, IT'S THE REFINEMENT STUDY PLAN. 
          SO IT FEELS LIKE THAT WOULD HAVE TO HAVE THE TSPS ALREADY IDENTIFIED IN THAT AND THE COST FOR TACKING THE BOARD TO APPROVE IT. 
          SO I'M JUST CURIOUS WHEN THAT HAPPENS. 
          AND ALSO WHAT HAPPENS IF TSPS DISAGREE ON WHO GETS WHAT SEGMENT. 
          YEAH, I THINK PROBABLY STEPPED UP TO THE MIC, SO I MIGHT PHONE A FRIEND THERE. 
          [01:50:02]
YEAH, PROBABLY NO MORE. 
          CUT. 
          SO THE, THE WAY WE, AT LEAST THE, IN P 1 45, THE WAY WE ARE THINKING ABOUT BATCH IS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT RPG IS IN THE CURRENT FORM. 
          SO, UH, WE ARE TRYING TO EXPEDITE THE PROCESS FOR THE BATCH PROCESS THAT'S LAID OUT IN PI THINK JEFF WILL PROBABLY TALK ABOUT IT LATER, BUT YOU KNOW, I KNOW PEOPLE ARE THINKING ABOUT THE CURRENT RPG CONTEXT AND THIS BATCH IS, THIS IS DIFFERENT. 
          THIS IS NOT, YOU KNOW, IT IS, IT'S, IT'S DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WE DO IN THE CURRENT RPG. 
          SO I THINK SOME OF THE THINGS WILL BE ANSWERED THERE. 
          BUT IF THERE ARE PROJECTS THAT WE CAN PROCESS THROUGH THE BATCH, THAT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT WHETHER IT HAS TO GO THROUGH A REGULAR RPG. 
          UH, I THINK IT'S ALL, IT'S, THAT'S MY INITIAL THINKING, BUT YOU KNOW, THAT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO DISCUSS. 
          OKAY. 
          SO TAC AND BOARD WILL APPROVE AN OVERALL TRANSMISSION PLAN THAT WILL SHOW COST AND WHAT TRANSMISSION IMPROVEMENTS NEED TO HAPPEN. 
          WE MAY NOT KNOW THAT IN THE TSPS FOR EACH SEGMENT UNTIL THEY KIND OF WORK THAT OUT AMONGST THEMSELVES AND FILE CCNS AT THE COMMISSION. 
          UH, YES AND I THINK THE WAY I'M IMAGINING THIS IS BATCH STUDY IS GONNA IDENTIFY PROJECTS THAT CAN BE BUILT AND THAT CAN BE, YOU KNOW, SORTED OUT IN THE PROCESS. 
          IF THERE ARE PROJECTS THAT CANNOT BE SORTED OUT IN THE BATCH PROCESS, I'M THINKING THAT, YOU KNOW, IT HAS TO GO THROUGH A SEPARATE PROCESS. 
          SO YEAH, I MEAN I'LL LEAVE IT THERE. 
          THANKS. 
          THANKS. 
          ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. 
          AND I'M PROBABLY GONNA GO AHEAD AND CUT THE QUEUE AT THIS POINT. 
          SO SAM JUNG IS THE LAST ONE IN HERE AND SEE IF WE CAN CLEAR OUT. 
          IT LOOKS BE ABOUT 15 QUESTIONS BEFORE, UH, NOON LUNCH. 
          SO ON WE GO. 
          ANGELA, YOU'RE NEXT. 
          HEY JEFF. 
          JUDDS HAD A QUICK CLARIFYING QUESTION ON SLIDE 37 ON DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENT. 
          SO MY QUESTION IS, DO ALL LOADS AND BADGES ZERO NEED TO MEET THE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT REQUIREMENTS AT THIS COMMITMENT STAGE? EVEN LOADS THAT ARE NOT SUBJECT TO ALLOCATION, I'M THINKING SPECIFICALLY FOR LOADS THAT ARE OPERATIONAL, UM, AND OR LOADS THAT ARE LATE STAGE AND CAN MEET ALL OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED A FIRM LOAD. 
          UM, DO THEY STILL HAVE TO SIGN THIS IA AND POST ALL THE SECURITIES LAID OUT ON 5 8 4 8 1? SO I, I THINK, UH, CONCEPTUALLY, UH, AND YEAH, A AJ OR CHRISTINA, YEAH, FEEL FREE TO CHIME IN IF I GO STRAIGHT HERE. 
          YEAH, JEFF, I'M HAPPY TO TAKE THIS ONE IF, IF YOU YEAH. 
          OKAY, THANKS AG. 
          UM, YEAH, SO ANGELA, THE, THE, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF LOADS THAT ARE, UH, OR BECOME OPERATIONAL PRIOR TO, UM, JULY 15TH AND THE CURRENT, UH, IN THE, THE FILE DRAFT OF THE PIGGER, UH, UM, OR LOADS THAT MAKE THE, THE MAY 1ST QUARTERLY STABILITY ASSESSMENT THIS YEAR, OR ONE OF THE INTERIM VOLTAGE RIDE THROUGH ASSESSMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN PERFORMED, UH, THOSE ARE THE ONLY LOADS THAT WOULD NOT NEED TO MEET THE, UH, INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENTS CRITERIA DEFINED IN SECTION 9 7 2. 
          UM, THE, THE THINKING THERE IS THAT THOSE LOADS WILL BE OPERATIONAL PRIOR TO JULY 15TH. 
          UM, OR IN THE CASE OF THE QSA WILL, UH, UH, BE ENERGIZED WITHIN, UH, THE, THE LAST QUARTER OF THE YEAR. 
          UM, ALL OTHER LOADS THAT HAVE A PATH TO TREATMENT AS FIRM IN THE STUDY WOULD NEED TO MEET THE, THE 9 7 2 INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENTS CRITERIA. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          UH, NEXT UP IS GODFREY ARTHUR. 
          YEAH, HELLO. 
          UM, I DID ASK THIS QUESTION EARLIER BEFORE THIS SECTION. 
          I WAS HOPING TO, UM, GET AN ANSWER AND IT KIND OF SIMILAR TO ANGELA'S QUESTION EXCEPT THAT I ASKED ABOUT THE INTERMEDIATE, UM, CRITERIA. 
          WERE SPECIFICALLY ASKING IF LOADS WERE PARTIAL STUDIES COMPLETE, WERE OBLIGATED TO, UM, MEET THE SAME FINANCIAL THAT'S A HUNDRED THOUSAND PER MEGAWATTS, UM, COMMITMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE BATCH ZERO PROCESS I SAW ON SLIDE 36, BUT THAT'S STILL, I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T, IT'S NOT TOO CLEAR FOR ME. 
          IF YOU GO TO SLIDE 36, UM, THE THIRD BULLETS I BELIEVE, YES. 
          SO, UM, I GUESS THE QUESTION STILL STANDS 'CAUSE I, I STILL CAN'T SEE THE ANSWER TO, UM, TO THE QUESTION FROM THE DISCUSSION SO FAR. 
          UM, UNLESS THE MOST RECENT ANSWER 
          [01:55:01]
STILL APPLIES TO IT, WHICH IS TO SAY THAT EXCEPT FOR THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN, UM, STUDIED IN THE MAY 1ST ACCURACY AND THOSE ENERGIZED IN JULY 15TH, UM, EXCEPT FOR THOSE ONES, EVERYBODY ELSE IS SUBJECT TO IT. 
          YEAH. 
          AND GOD, FRED, I I, UM, I HATE TO DO THIS TO YOU, BUT I'M GONNA TELL YOU TO HANG ON A LITTLE BIT LONGER TO THAT QUESTION 'CAUSE I, I THINK THIS, THIS AFTERNOON, UH, LATER SLIDES IN THIS DECK, I THINK WE'RE GONNA COVER THAT. 
          SO I, I APOLOGIZE FOR, UH, PUTTING YOU OFF AGAIN, BUT I I, I THINK THAT WE'LL GET TO THAT AND, AND HOPEFULLY YOU'LL BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN THAT BETTER WITH LATER SLIDES. 
          NO PROBLEM. 
          I'LL KEEP FINDING IT ON. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH, YOU'LL GIVE THE PATIENCE AWARD GOD FOR. 
          ALRIGHT, UH, HANE, STRADER, GO AHEAD. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          HANE STRADER WITH SKYBOX. 
          UM, JUST A QUICK QUESTION. 
          SO IF YOU GO TO, THIS GOES BACK TO KIND OF WHERE CHRIS WAS TALKING, BUT IF YOU GO BACK TO SLIDE, UH, SORRY, 32, JUST SO I'M CLEAR, YOU'RE SAYING, SO THE FINAL REPORT WILL GO OUT OR YOU'LL GET THE FINAL REPORT OUT IN, IN JANUARY, AND THEN THE LOADS WILL HAVE FEBRUARY TO MAKE THE FINANCIAL COMMITMENT AND AT THAT POINT THEY'RE LOCKED. 
          WHAT YOU WERE SAYING, JEFF IS AT THAT POINT, YOU'RE LOCKED IN THE AMOUNT OF MEGAWATTS, BUT THE TRANSMISSION PLAN WILL THEN HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE RRPG PROCESS AND YOU'RE JUST NOT GONNA KNOW PERHAPS EXACT DATES AND ALLOCATIONS UNTIL, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE SAYING HERE'S SEPTEMBER REALLY FOR FINAL APPROVAL. 
          IS THAT NO. 
          SO, SO WHAT, UM, THE REPORT THAT COMES OUT AT THE END OF JANUARY, IT WILL HAVE A MEGAWATT ALLOCATION BY YEAR AFTER THAT REPORT COMES OUT. 
          UH, THAT DOES NOT CHANGE FOR ANY LOADS THAT MEET THE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT CRITERIA. 
          SO, SO THAT, SO IT'S 250 MEGAWATTS IN 2029 AND 350 MEGAWATTS IN 2030. 
          NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS LATER IN THE PROCESS, THOSE MEGAWATT VALUES WILL NOT CHANGE. 
          OKAY. 
          AND I THINK THAT RAMP SCHEDULE DOESN'T CHANGE. 
          OKAY. 
          TWO QUICK FOLLOW UPS, BUT JUST SO WAS THE, CHRIS, WAS THE POINT OF CONTENTION THERE THAT JUST 'CAUSE THE DATES ARE ON PAPER WITH ERCOT, THERE MAY BE SOME DOUBT IN THE DELIVERY DATE ON A TRANS IF, IF THERE ARE TRANSMISSION UPGRADES REQUIRED WITH THOSE DATES. 
          WAS THAT, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I'M FOLLOWING THE CONCERN. 
          YEAH, I, I THINK THE QUESTION IS ONE, IT KIND OF RELATES BACK TO THE SURVEY QUESTION AND THE, THE, THE HUGE DIFFERENCE I THINK BETWEEN SIX MONTH AND 12 MONTH AND WHAT'S COMING OUT OF THAT WHEN WE DEFINE THE SIX MONTH PROCESS, I THINK AS ERCOT IS ACTUALLY DESCRIBING, IT'S REALLY JUST THE FIRST STEADY STATE PROCESS, RIGHT? AND NOT THE REFINEMENT PLUS THE UM, RPG UPGRADES. 
          BUT IF YOU ACCOUNT FOR THAT SECOND PART, YOU KNOW, AND THIS IS WHERE I THINK IT'S SOMEWHAT OF A SEMANTICS ISSUE, THAT PROCESS IS NOT THE SIX MONTH PROCESS THAT DEVELOPERS, I THINK BELIEVE IT IS ON THE CHECK. 
          IT'S ACTUALLY JUST THE FIRST STUDY STATE. 
          AND THAT THE WHOLE BATCH, IF YOU'RE GOING THROUGH BATCH ZERO WITH A LOAD, IT IS ACTUALLY CLOSER TO A 15 MONTH PROCESS LIKES DEFINED IN HERE. 
          BUT THEN THOSE BATCHES ARE RUN ON SIX MONTH CADENCES. 
          SO THE NEXT BATCH STARTS, CALL IT HALFWAY THROUGH THE ENTIRE PRO BATCH ONE STARTS, CALL IT HALFWAY THROUGH THE ENTIRE PROCESS OF BATCH ZERO. 
          AND SO IT, I THINK BASICALLY WHAT I WAS TRYING TO DO WAS TRY NOT TO BE AS HARSH IN MY CRITICISM, REALIZING WE MIGHT HAVE BEEN TALKING PAST EACH OTHER ON VERY SIMILAR ISSUES. 
          BUT I THINK THERE'S A BIT OF A MISUNDERSTANDING THAT LIKE SIX MONTHS IS WHAT THIS PROCESS IS AND YOU'RE, YOU'RE GOING TO BE DONE WITH IT WITH FIRM UPGRADES OR NOT. 
          SIX MONTHS IS JUST THE FIRST STABILITY SCREENING. 
          AND THEN WHEN WE'RE DONE WITH THAT, YOU HAVE THE DECISION PERIOD BEFORE YOU HAVE, UM, THE REFINEMENT STUDY IN THE RPG UPGRADES COME OUT OF IT. 
          SO THIS ENTIRE BATCH ZERO PROCESS IS, AND, AND EVERY SUBSEQUENT BATCH PROCESS IS ON THIS TIMELINE ON A SIX MONTH CADENCE. 
          IT IS A 15 MONTH BATCH ON A SIX MONTH CADENCE OF BATCHES. 
          GOT IT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN, AND THEN, SORRY, LAST, UM, PIECE IS JUST IF, UM, HOW, HOW DO YOU DETERMINE ONCE, ONCE A DEVELOPER'S COMMITTED TO THE FINAL REPORT? WHAT RISK IS THERE THAT THIS DOESN'T GET APPROVED DOWN THE LINE? THAT THE TRANSMISSION PLAN DOES NOT GET APPROVED? UM, I, YOU KNOW, I, I CAN'T STAND HERE AND SAY THAT THERE'S, THERE'S NOTICE TO THAT, BUT I THINK HISTORICALLY, UM, PROJECTS THAT HAVE, UM, THAT ERCOT HAS ENDORSED THOSE PROJECTS HISTORICALLY GET CONSTRUCTED. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S, 
          [02:00:01]
THAT, THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH MY UNDERSTANDING AS WELL. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          MICHAEL JEWEL? YEAH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          TAKING A LOOK AT SLIDE 30, PLEASE. 
          SO ON THE, UM, PRIMARY OUTPUTS THAT ARE COMING OUT OF THE, THIS PROCESS, UH, THIRD BULLET, WE'VE GOT ESTIMATED SECURITY REQUIREMENTS AND KAYAK OBLIGATIONS. 
          SO, SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WILL COME OUT OF THIS IS, YOU'LL KNOW WHAT YOUR KAYAK IS, IS YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO PAY, UH, WHEN YOU'RE SIGNING THE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT, CORRECT? UH, YES. 
          AND THEN THAT'S OUR EXPECTATION. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN THE, THE NEXT BULLET, THE DETAILED UPGRADE LIST AND ASSOCIATED LARGE LOADS IS THIS SAYING THAT, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S REMOTE TRANSMISSION UPGRADES, OTHER THAN WHAT'S NECESSARY TO IMMEDIATELY INTERCONNECT YOU, THAT THOSE WILL BE IDENTIFIED AND THEN THE COST OF THOSE, AND I, IT IS GONNA BE DETERMINED AS TO WHAT IS APPLICABLE TO WHICH LARGE LOAD, AND THEN THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO PRO PROVIDE THE FINANCIAL SECURITY FOR THOSE COSTS. 
          UH, THE WAY THAT WE ARE THINKING ABOUT THAT RIGHT NOW IS THAT, UM, WE NEED TO SUPPORT WHATEVER COMES OUT OF 58 41. 
          SO IF 58 41 ENDS UP REQUIRING THAT FINANCIAL SECURITY, THEN WE NEED TO HAVE THAT INFORMATION AVAILABLE IN THE FINAL REPORT. 
          OKAY. 
          BUT, BUT I, I THINK IT'S, UH, I, I THINK THAT IS A COMMISSION DECISION OR, OR CUTS, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MEET WHATEVER THE COMMISSION DECIDES IS APPROPRIATE. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S HELPFUL. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, NEXT. 
          CINDY KAR. 
          YEAH, A QUESTION ON THE 2033 REFERENCE, JUST A CLARIFICATION, UH, JUST GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS, I THINK ON SLIDE 32, IS IT THE, THE, THE TIMELINE IF, UH, TAKE AN EXTREME EXAMPLE, A LOAD IS IN THE QUEUE, GETS STUDIED, GETS ALLOCATED ZERO IN THE FIRST FIVE YEARS IN, AND IN YEAR SIX YOU GET ALL OF YOUR AMOUNT. 
          IS THERE ANYTHING STOPPING THAT LOAD FROM GOING AHEAD AND SIGNING AN AGREEMENT? UH, A I A AND FIRMING UP THAT 2033 CAPACITY AND IN PARALLEL THE TSP IS THEN FILING RPG PROJECT FOR 2033 OR, AND THEN DOES THAT GET LOCKED IN IN THE NEXT BATCH CYCLE? YEAH, SO, SO, UH, IN, IN THAT EXAMPLE, YEAH, THERE, THERE'S NOTHING THAT WOULD PREVENT THAT FROM HAPPENING. 
          YEAH. 
          SO IT'S TOTALLY ON THE DEVELOPER IF THEY WANT TO TAKE THE RISK OF PUTTING DOWN THE, THE COMMITMENT, NOT KNOWING WHETHER THEY'LL HAVE CAPACITY ON IN YEAR SIX OR NOT. 
          WE'RE, WE'RE MAKING AN ASSUMPTION THAT, YEAH, AGAIN, BASED ON HISTORY, WE'RE MAKING AN ASSUMPTION THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO GET THE TRANSITION BUILT TO SERVE THAT LEAD. 
          GOT IT. 
          THANKS. 
          UM, THAT'S, AND, AND SO THAT WAS IT FOR THE 2033 QUESTION. 
          THE, THE SECOND COMMENT WAS MORE FOR AWARENESS FOR THE GROUP. 
          UM, AS WE WERE THINKING THROUGH IT, UH, REALIZED THAT, UH, FOLKS WHO WILL BE WORKING ON AGREEMENTS WILL BE DOING KIND OF OVERTIME, RIGHT? THEY'LL BE WORKING ON IDEAS FOR THE, THE INTERIM AGREEMENTS FOR THE NEXT BATCH AND WORKING ON THE IAS FOR THE PREVIOUS BATCH. 
          AND SO WE FACTOR THAT INTO THAT 30 DAY THAT WE ARE PUTTING ON, UH, ON, ON, ON TSPS TO GET THOSE AGREEMENTS SIDE FACTOR THAT BOTH OF THEM HAVE TO GENERALLY MEET THAT, UH, SMALL WINDOW. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          UM, ABIJIT, GO AHEAD. 
          HELLO. 
          HI. 
          UH, SO MY QUESTION IS, UH, BASICALLY ON SLIDE 34, 31, THE PREVIOUS ONE, SORRY, 34. 
          31 31, YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          AB IF YOU SPEAK UP A LITTLE BIT, THAT'LL HELP. 
          THANKS. 
          IS IT CLEAR NOW? YES, THAT'S BETTER. 
          OKAY. 
          SO I HEARD THAT, UH, THERE'S AN OPTION FOR DSP TO CONDUCT STUDIES IN PARALLEL WITH THE BATCH STUDY. 
          IS THAT, UH, LIKE WHAT WILL BE THE IMPORTANCE OF THE STUDY? UH, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT DEVELOPER WILL GET OUT OF IT? WILL THERE BE ANY ADDITIONAL COST FOR THE STUDY? AND, UH, DOES ELCOT PLAN TO GIVE ANY DIRECTIONS TO TSP ON ON THOSE KIND OF STUDIES? YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          GOOD, GOOD CLARIFICATION. 
          SO TH THIS IS, UM, THIS IS NOT TO PRODUCE, UM, LIKE A, A PARALLEL, YOU KNOW, A DIFFERENT STUDY RESULT. 
          UH, OUR, OUR, OUR THINKING HERE IS BASED ON FEEDBACK THAT WE'VE GOTTEN FROM TSPS, IS THAT THEY MAY WANT 
          [02:05:01]
TO ALSO BE PERFORMING ANALYSIS SO THAT THEY CAN, UH, BETTER IDENTIFY WHAT ARE THE APPROPRIATE TRANSMISSION UPGRADES. 
          SO RATHER THAN WAIT FOR ERCOT TO SEND THEM THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY, IF THEY ARE IN PARALLEL STUDYING, THEN, THEN THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY AND, AND WORK ON SOLUTIONS, UH, FOR THE, THE, UH, CONSTRAINTS THAT WE, THAT WE WILL ALL SEE IN OUR ANALYSIS. 
          OKAY. 
          SO IT'S, IT'S AT THE DISCRETION OF THE, IT'LL BE AT THE DISCRETION OF THE TSP IF THEY WANT TO DO THAT STUDY, SOMETHING LIKE THAT FOR, FOR ANY OF THE DEVELOPERS, RIGHT? YEAH, I, I, I THINK THAT'S RIGHT. 
          I, I DON'T THINK THAT WE PUT A REQUIREMENT IN THE PICKER THAT THEY NEED TO, TO PERFORM A STUDY. 
          UM, I, I, I THINK, YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          THERE'S NOT A REQUIREMENT IN, IN THE PICKER THAT THEY PERFORM THAT STUDY. 
          MAYBE ANOTHER WAY TO SAY THIS IS THEY'RE DOING THE STUDY TO SUPPORT ERCOT NOT TO SUPPORT THE INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPER. 
          IS THAT WHAT YOU SAY? YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          DOES THAT HELP HELP G? ALRIGHT. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH, YEAH, THAT'S HELPFUL. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, NEXT QUESTION. 
          UH, ANDRES MENEZ GUYS HEAR ME? UH, THERE YOU'RE, YES, GO AHEAD. 
          HI, THIS IS ANDRES WITH CYPRESS CREEK. 
          UH, CAN YOU PLEASE GO TO SLIDE 28? THANK YOU. 
          CAN YOU PLEASE CLARIFY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PAGE 1 45 LANGUAGE AND THE STUDY HORIZON FROM THIS SLIDE? IT SEEMS LIKE ER'S ONLY STUDYING ON DOING MEGAWATT ALLOCATIONS FOR LOADS, UH, 2028 THROUGH 2032. 
          BUT THAT'S NOT HOW I'M READING THAT P LIKE IT, IT SEEMS LIKE IF LOADS DO NOT MEET THAT JULY 15 DEADLINE AND THE MAKE USA AND THE VALIDITY OF THE STUDIES, IT LOOKS LIKE THOSE LOADS WILL NOT QUALIFY AS BASE LOADS, AS BASE LOADS. 
          SO THEY WILL NEED TO BE INCLUDED IN THE BATCH. 
          SO WOULDN'T THAT MEAN THAT THE STUDY HORIZON SHOULD ALSO INCLUDE LOADS THAT DO NOT QUALIFY FOR THAT BASE LOAD CRITERIA? YEAH, JEFF, I CAN TAKE THIS ONE. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY, THANKS. 
          HEY ANDRES, IT'S AG. 
          UM, SO THE, THE CRITERIA FOR LOADS TO BE ASSESSED IN THE BATCH IS DEFINED IN SECTION, UH, 9.2. 
          UM, SO 9.2 DEFINES THE, THE BASE LOAD AND THEN, UH, THAT NEXT SECTION WOULD COVER WHO IS ASSESSED. 
          UM, AND THEN FROM THERE, UH, THE, UH, THE YEARS ASSESSED IN THE STUDY, I BELIEVE IS COVERED IN, UH, 9.3 0.2. 
          UM, SO HOPEFULLY THAT HELPS. 
          WELL, NO, I MEAN, I, I GOT THAT SECTION PULLED UP LIKE THAT SECTION THAT YOU MENTIONED. 
          9.21 HAS FOUR CRITERIA, RIGHT? CRITERIA NUMBER ONE LOADS UP ENERGIZED BETWEEN MARCH, 2022 AND JULY 15TH, 2026. 
          SECOND ONE IS THE MAY 1ST, QSA THIRD IS, UH, ALL THE, UH, LOAD SYNER ENERGIZING BY 2027 AND THEN FORWARD IS PAST 2028. 
          SO I GUESS THE QUESTION WHERE THE CONFUSION IS, IS LIKE IF A LOAD THAT DOES NOT MEET, LIKE JUST FOR EXAMPLE, A LOAD FOR END OF YEAR 2026 OR EARLY 2027, WELL THAT LOAD DOESN'T MEET CRITERIA NUMBER ONE, RIGHT? BECAUSE IT, IT, IT DOESN'T MEET THE JULY 15TH, 2026. 
          LET'S SAY THAT LOAD DOESN'T MEET THE MAY 1ST QSA AND IT DOESN'T MEET THE, AND, AND LET'S SAY IT HA IT ALREADY HAS AN IA, BUT IF ERCO DETERMINES THAT THOSE LOAD STUDIES ARE NO LONGER VALID, WHAT HAPPENS TO THAT LOAD? I MEAN, IS IS NOT GONNA BE INCLUDED AS BASE LOAD, BUT I MEAN IT'S STILL AT 20 26, 20 0.7. 
          LIKE IS THE BATCH GONNA CAPTURE 2026 AND 2027 LOADS, I GUESS IS THE QUESTION? SURE, YEAH. 
          I GET, YEAH, MAY MAYBE, UM, I THINK THIS IS A VARIATION OF SHANNON'S QUESTION, BUT LET, LET ME MAYBE TRY, UM, SHOWING IT IN, UM, IN, IN THE GANTT CHART. 
          SO IF YOU, UH, DON'T MEET THE CRITERIA TO BE, UM, THE, THE FIRM, THEN YOU WON'T KNOW THE STUDY RESULTS UNTIL JANUARY, 2027. 
          AND YOUR COMMITMENT WINDOW IS ROUGHLY FEBRUARY THE 1ST OF MARCH. 
          IT, IT, IT, UM, IF YOU MEET THAT COMMITMENT CRITERIA, THE NEXT POSSIBLE QSA FOR YOU TO GET INTO, BECAUSE WE, WE NEED TO STUDY THESE STABILITY IMPACT, RIGHT? THE, THE NEXT POSSIBLE QSA WOULD BE THE MAY 1ST QSA, WHICH WOULD, WHICH WOULD PUT YOUR EARLIEST ENERGIZATION INITIAL ENERGIZATION AS OCTOBER 1ST, 2027. 
          [02:10:02]
OH, THAT'S CLEAR TO ME. 
          JEFF. 
          WHAT I'M GETTING CONFUSED IS, EARLIER YOU GUYS SAID THAT THE BATCH, IT'S ONLY GONNA BE DOING MEGAWATT ALLOCATIONS FOR 20 28, 20 23 THROUGH 2032. 
          IS THAT NO LONGER THE CASE? 'CAUSE LIKE BASED ON WHAT YOU SAID, IT LOOKS LIKE WITH MY EXAMPLE FOR LOADS FOR 2026 AND 2027 THAT DON'T MEET THE CRITERIA FOR 9 2 1 1, THOSE LOADS WILL BE PART OF THE BATCH, RIGHT? LIKE, YEAH. 
          SO THEN, SORRY TO INTERRUPT ANDRE. 
          SO YEAH, I'D REFER YOU TO PARAGRAPH ONE A OF SECTION 9 2 1 2, UM, WHICH WOULD CATCH, CATCH THOSE LOADS THAT DON'T MEET 9 2 1 1, BUT HAVE THOSE CLOSE AND ENERGIZATION DATES AND UM, I MEAN I'M, I'M SORRY, WE, WE DON'T HAVE THE, THE FLOW CHART WE SHOWED AT THE LAST WORKSHOP IN THIS DECK. 
          BUT, YOU KNOW, EFFECTIVELY IF THOSE LOADS CANNOT DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY HAVE SUFFICIENT DEVELOPMENT PROGRESS TO MEET A 20, 27 OR EARLIER ENERGIZATION, UH, THEN THE, THOSE LOADS WOULD BE STUDIED FOR A 2028 OR LATER ENERGIZATION DATE IN THE BATCH. 
          AND THAT'S PARAGRAPH TWO OF SECTION 9 2 1 2. 
          SO EFFECTIVELY WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN IS, UH, THE LOADS WOULD BE INCLUDED AS STUDIED LOADS IN THE BATCH, BUT IT WOULD BE FOR A 2028 OR LATER ENERGIZATION TO EIGHT. 
          OH, I SEE. 
          SO YOU GUYS ARE NOT GONNA STUDY ANY LOADS FOR 20 26, 20 27 IN THE BATCH. 
          IF THEY DON'T MEET THAT BASE LOAD CRITERIA, THEY GET, THEY GET PUSHED TO THE NEXT MONTH, CORRECT. 
          'CAUSE THEY GET 2028. 
          CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, REAL QUICK, THE NEXT QUESTION I HAVE WAS, UH, IN REGARDS TO THE FINANCIAL SECURITY THAT WE JUST COVERED, THAT ER'S GONNA BE SUPPORTING 5 8 4 1. 
          UH, I GUESS THE QUESTION IS, ERCO EXPECTS FROM THAT COMMITMENT PERIOD ON THOSE 30 DAYS, I MEAN HERE, LIKE THAT RED BAR, UH, FOR DEVELOPERS TO POST THAT FINANCIAL SECURITY FOR NETWORK UPGRADES, THE WAY THE PFP IS RATED RATED RIGHT NOW WITH THE PCT, WHAT HAPPENS IF ERCOT OVER COLLECTS MONEY? LET'S SAY THERE'S 10 LOADS, 10 GIGAWATTS, LET'S SAY 500 MILLION ARE REQUIRED IN UPGRADES, AND YOU GUYS COLLECT THAT, BUT THEN YOU GUYS GO TO THE REFINEMENT PROCESS AND YOU GUYS DETERMINE THAT, HEY, HAVE THE LOADS DROPPED. 
          WE NO LONGER 500 MILLION IN UPGRADES, WE ONLY NEED TWO 50, BUT YOU GUYS COLLECTED 500 FROM DEVELOPERS. 
          ARE YOU GUYS GONNA GIVE THAT MONEY BACK? I, I I THINK THAT WOULD BE WHATEVER, 5 8 4 8 1 TELLS US TOO. 
          CHRISTINA, YOU WANNA ADD? YEAH, CHRISTINA SWITZER, ERCOT SENIOR REGULATORY COUNCIL. 
          UM, JUST TO CLARIFY, ERCOT WILL NOT COLLECT ANY MONEY THAT WILL DEF THAT WILL BE BETWEEN THE TSP AND THE INTERCONNECTING, UH, ENTITY, LARGE LOAD ENTITY. 
          UM, SO IT, IT WILL NOT BE ERCOT. 
          UM, AS FAR AS WE ENVISION IT RIGHT NOW, BASED ON THE DRAFT PFP, UM, THE, THE FINANCIAL SECURITY WILL BE BASED ON THE RESULTS OF THE BATCH STUDY. 
          NOTHING WOULD CHANGE AFTER THE BATCH REFINEMENT STUDY AS, AS WE READ THE DRAFT PFP. 
          RIGHT NOW, ALL THE REFUND OBLIGATIONS, UM, AND TERMS ARE, ARE BUILT IN BASED ON EITHER WITHDRAWING OR ENERGIZATION. 
          SO WE, WE DO NOT SEE THAT THERE'S A PERIOD FOR THAT AFTER THE REFINEMENT STUDY, BUT THAT COULD CHANGE. 
          OKAY. 
          SO JUST TO CONFIRM, ER'S NOT GONNA BE COLLECTING MONEY, IT'LL BE THE TSP, BUT I MEAN MAYBE THIS IS A TOPIC WITH THE P-U-C-T-I, I JUST WORRY THAT IF, IF, IF WE SIGN IN THAT COMMITMENT PERIOD WITHIN 30 DAYS AND WE POST SECURITY TO THE TSPS, LET'S SAY ALL DEVELOPERS POST FOR 500 MILLION OR 1 BILLION FOR UPGRADES, THE PROBLEM IS IT DURING THE REFINEMENTS IF, IF SOME PEOPLE DROP OUT AND THERE'S NOT ANOTHER DECISION POINTS, I MEAN WE STILL POST THE 500 OR 1 BILLION, EVEN THOUGH THAT'S NOT GONNA BE THE MONEY THAT'S GONNA BE NEEDED FOR THE FINAL, UH, RPG PROJECT. 
          THAT'S THE ONLY COMMENT I WANNA, I WANNA RAISE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, NEXT IS JOELLE. 
          JOELLE ABIAN AHEAD? YES. 
          HEY, THIS IS JOELLE WITH EPE. 
          CAN YOU ALL HEAR ME? YES, VERY WELL. 
          GO AHEAD. 
          OKAY, VERY GOOD. 
          QUICK QUESTION, UM, IN, IN THIS, UH, TOPIC, SO FINANCIAL SECURITY, THE A HUNDRED K PER MEGAWATT INTERMEDIATE, AND THEN AFTER THE BATCH WE HAVE THE FINANCIAL SECURITY AND KAYAK. 
          DID WE DEFINE IF THESE ARE REFUNDABLE? UH, CHRISTINA SWITZER, AGAIN, THE REFUNDABILITY IS BASED ON WHAT IS IN THE DRAFT PFP IN 58 4 81. 
          AND THOSE ARE REFLECTED IN SECTION 9 7 2 OF 1 45, WHICH IS DIRECTLY LIFTED FROM 58 41. 
          [02:15:03]
OKAY. 
          UM, WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET TO, SO THE FINANCIAL SECURITY THAT IS REQUIRED AFTER THE, AFTER THE RESULTS, RIGHT? UH, WITH THAT, WITHIN THAT COMMITMENT, THIS IS GOING TO INCLUDE NOT JUST THE TIFF, NOT JUST THE WHATEVER THEY NEED TO PHYSICALLY INTERCONNECT, BUT THIS WILL ALSO COVER UPGRADES, CORRECT? ? CORRECT. 
          WE TOOK WHAT IS IN DRAFT 58 41 AND PUT IT INTO PI 1 45. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          AND IS THERE, OR IS THIS ON THE TSP TO COME UP WITH AN ALLOCATION METHODOLOGY? HOW, HOW ARE THEY LIKE COST ALLOCATION? WE WILL ERCOT AS PART OF THE PLAN, WE'LL HAVE THE COST ESTIMATE THAT IT'S DEVELOPED WITH THE TSP AND THEN WOULD BE SPLIT AMONG THOSE THAT CONTRIBUTE TO THE SYSTEM UPGRADE. 
          THE NEED FOR THE SYSTEM UPGRADE. 
          I DON'T HAVE THE DETAILS ON THAT METHODOLOGY RIGHT NOW. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          I HAVE QUICK OTHER QUESTIONS WITH THE CASES. 
          I CAN SEE THAT, UH, IN SLIDE 31 WE MENTIONED THAT THEY ARE GOING TO BE POSTED ON MIS SECURE. 
          ARE THEY ALSO GONNA BE POSTED ON A MIS THE ONES THAT WE CAN, FOR EXAMPLE, SEE THE SSWG CASES OR NO? UM, WE WOULD, WOULD NOT BE ON MS PUBLIC. 
          UM, I, I THINK IT'S, IT'S MS CERTIFIED RIGHT NOW, BUT, UH, IT, IT'S, UM, BUT YEAH, I, I'M NOT SURE. 
          I, I APOLOGIZE. 
          I DON'T KNOW TODAY IF THAT'S, IF S WG IS MS CERTIFIED OR MS. SECURE? IT, IT'S, IT'S ON PUBLIC, THE SSWG CASES. 
          SO IS THERE ANY RECONSIDERATION ON KO'S PART FOR THIS SPECIFIC THING? YEAH, ACTUALLY I, I, I DON'T THINK THAT THEY'RE ON MIS PUBLIC. 
          I'M, I'M PRETTY SURE THEY'RE NOT. 
          'CAUSE THEY'RE EEC, E-C-E-I-I, RIGHT? THEY'RE ON MIS SECURE AND I THINK FOR THE BATCH PROCESS, WE'RE GONNA FOLLOW EXISTING PLANNING TYPE POSTINGS. 
          SIMILARLY NOT INTRODUCE NEW TOP NEW CONCEPTS. 
          ALRIGHT, SO SSWG CASES ARE ON MIS SECURE, BUT I THINK THERE'S A DISTINCTION BETWEEN SECURE AND CERTIFIED. 
          SO WILL THE CASES BE ON MIS SECURE THE SAME WAY SSWG CASES ARE? YEAH, SO I, I, UH, I BELIEVE THE DRAFT RIGHT NOW IS THAT IT'S ON MIS CERTIFIED. 
          UM, SO THAT, THAT'S THE, UH, I THINK THAT, THAT, THAT'S OUR PLAN RIGHT NOW IS, IS ON MIS CERTIFIED. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          UM, SO HERE FOR THE TRANSMISSION IMPROVEMENT ANALYSIS THAT WE SEE ON SLIDE 31, THIS IS WHERE ERCOT AND THE TSPR COMING UP WITH THE TRANSMISSION UPGRADES NEEDED, RIGHT? ALRIGHT. 
          UM, IN BATCH ONE, LET'S SAY, OR THE BATCH, SO THIS ONE IS SIX MONTHS, WE HAVE A COMMITMENT, THEN WE HAVE REFINEMENT, THEN THERE'S THE OTHER BATCH THAT STARTS THAT BATCH FOR LET'S SAY YEAR ONE. 
          YEAR ONE TO YEAR SIX, YEAR ONE. 
          WILL THEY, WILL IT ASSUME ALL THE UPGRADES IDENTIFIED IN BATCH ZERO AS IMPLEMENTED EVEN THOUGH RPG IS STILL IN PROCESS? NO, WE, WE'D FOLLOW THE EXISTING, UH, TRANSMISSION PLANNING PROCESSES WHERE, WHICH WOULD BE, UH, WE WOULD ADD THOSE IN TO THE CASES ONCE THEY ARE RPG APPROVED. 
          UH, BUT THAT DOES NOT PRECLUDE AN ENGINEER WHEN THEY SEE A PROBLEM FROM, UH, IN THAT SUBSEQUENT BATCH FROM USING THAT SAME IDENTIFIED TRANSMISSION SOLUTION AS AN OPTION TO RESOLVE THAT. 
          BUT WE DO NEED TO IDENTIFY, UH, WE DO NEED, DO NEED TO IDENTIFY THAT PROBLEM WITH, WITHOUT THAT PROJECT, SINCE THAT PROJECT'S NOT RPG UH, APPROVED. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          AND UNTIL, LET'S SAY SOMEBODY GAVE AN EXAMPLE, LET'S SAY THE RESULTS CAME BACK AS ZERO MEGAWATT FOR LET'S SAY FIVE YEARS, AND THEN ON YEAR SIX YOU HAVE SOME ALLOCATION. 
          WILL THE LOAD DEVELOPER BE ABLE TO BE NET ZERO ON THESE FIVE YEARS? OR IS THIS STILL BEING DISCUSSED AS PART OF THE BRING YOUR OWN GENERATION? OR IS THERE ANY PORTION WHERE, YOU KNOW, FOR THESE FIVE YEARS YOU HAVE ZERO, SO YOU CAN BE NET ZERO ON THE GRID? YEAH, I, I I THINK THAT'S, UH, YOU CORRECTLY IDENTIFIED THAT THAT'S STILL UNDER DISCUSSION AND I THINK WE'RE GONNA TRY TO HIT THAT, UH, LATER THIS AFTERNOON. 
          IRA. 
          THANK YOU EVERYBODY. 
          THAT'S IT. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          THANK YOU EVAN. 
          NEIL. 
          EVAN NEIL WITH LANING. 
          I JUST HAVE A FEW INTERRELATED, UH, QUESTIONS HERE. 
          UM, SO THE FIRST IS JUST, OOPS, SORRY, THE FIRST ONE IS JUST ABOUT THE CASES IN GENERAL. 
          UM, IS THERE GONNA BE ANY PROCESS TO KIND OF TALK ABOUT THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT GO INTO THOSE IN GREATER DETAIL? IS IT GONNA BE PART OF THE SSWG PUBLISHED CASES AND LIKE THERE'S GONNA BE A MANUAL APPROVED BY ROSS. 
          UM, AND THEN LIKE SPECIFICALLY IF, IF YOU GUYS KNOW ALREADY, I'M CURIOUS HOW OFFICER LETTER LOADS WILL BE TREATED IN THE BATCH ZERO BASE CASE? 
          [02:20:01]
YEAH, SO, UM, TO THE FIRST POINT, IT'S, THESE ARE NOT SSWG CASES, UH, SO WILL NOT BE POSTED WITH SSWG. 
          THEY'LL BE POSTED ON MS CERTIFIED, UH, IN, IN INTERNALLY. 
          WE'VE TALKED ABOUT TAKING THE STUDY ASSUMPTIONS TO RPG AND, YOU KNOW, TAKING COMMENTS AT, AT RPG, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT DIDN'T, DID NOT PUT THAT IN THE PICKER, BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK CONCEPTUALLY WE'RE, WE'RE OPEN TO THAT IDEA, UH, JUST TO GET STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK. 
          UM, AND THEN, UM, REMIND ME THE SECOND PART OF YOUR QUESTION, EVAN, DO YOU KNOW RIGHT NOW IF YOU'RE GONNA INCLUDE OFFICER LETTER LOADS AT THEIR FULL MODELED OR ARE YOU GONNA TURN TO ZERO? YEAH, SO, UM, SO OFFICER LETTER, UH, IS FOR LOADS, UH, LESS THAN 75 MEGAWATTS. 
          UH, TH THOSE WOULD BE INCLUDED, UH, AS, AS THE INFORMATION IS PROVIDED TO US BY THE TSPS. 
          UH, 75 AND GREATER WOULD BE BASED ON THE CRITERIA AS LAID OUT IN, UM, UH, THE ESSENTIALLY 9.2. 
          OKAY. 
          THANKS. 
          AND THEN, UM, FOR THE NET PEAK LOAD CASES SPECIFICALLY, UM, I AM, I'M JUST, WELL, LET ME BACK UP, BUT KEEP THE NET PEAK LOAD CASES IN MIND. 
          SO FOR THE REFINEMENT PERIOD, UH, THAT STUDY, DO YOU ANTICIPATE THERE BEING OUTCOMES OF THAT THAT CHANGED THE ENDPOINTS OF LINES THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED? OR I MEAN, HOW, HOW BIG OF A CHANGE CAN WE EXPECT? YEAH, I, I THINK THAT THAT COULD BE, UH, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WE WOULD WANT TO, UM, THE IDEA IN THAT REFINEMENT STUDY IS THAT YOU WANT TO, DO YOU WANNA HAVE A PROCESS THAT IS SIMILAR AS, AS PROBABLY NOT, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT EXACTLY THE SAME AS RRP G, BUT I THINK IT'S SIMILAR TO RPG TODAY WHERE WE'RE EVALUATING ALTERNATIVES AND, YOU KNOW, WANTING TO, UH, GET THE, THE BEST SOLUTION THAT WE CAN. 
          OKAY, GREAT. 
          I MEAN, AND, AND JUST TO THAT POINT, I WOULD ITERATE THAT SINCE THE DEVELOPERS HAVE TO PUT THEIR COMMITMENT UP BEFORE THAT REFINEMENT HAPPENS, JUST TO THE EXTENT THAT ANY LIKE CCN RISK COULD BE INTRODUCED BY CHANGING ENDPOINTS AND ALL THAT STUFF, I, I JUST WOULD HOPE THAT THE RPG AND TCC WOULD, WOULD ADDRESS THAT. 
          UM, AND THEN I, I GUESS SO IF YOU GET TO THE DECISION POINT AND SAY LIKE A QUARTER OR HALF OF THE LOADS HAVE END UP DROPPING OUT AND THEY DON'T PROCEED MM-HMM . 
          AND SO YOU HAVE A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT CHANGE TO MAKE, MAKE IN THE REFINEMENT PROCESS. 
          I'M THINKING ABOUT THE NET PEAK LOAD CASES, AND I'M THINKING THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO CONSIDERABLY CHANGE THE GENERATION ASSUMPTIONS THAT WOULD GO IN ASSUMING YOU'RE ADDING GENERATION TO THE PICKER 1 27 PROCESS. 
          YEP. 
          BUT IF YOU'RE TAKING THAT LOAD OUT AND YOU'RE TAKING GENERATION OUT, THEN WOULDN'T YOU BE CHANGING WHEN THE NET PEAK LOAD IS IN THE CASE? SO THE, UH, I'LL, I'LL SAY THE WAY THAT WE HAVE BEEN THINKING ABOUT IT UP TO THIS POINT IS THAT WE WOULD NOT CHANGE THE GENERATION IN THE CASE UNLESS THERE ARE NEW GENERATORS THAT HAVE MET SECTION 6.9 THAT WERE NOT ALREADY INCLUDED. 
          WE WOULD ADD THOSE INTO THE MODEL, BUT OTHERWISE WE WOULD NOT CHANGE THE, THE GENERATION IN THE CASE. 
          OKAY. 
          SO THE, THE REFINEMENT STUDY COULD HAVE GENERATION INCLUDED IN IT THAT WAS MODELED BASED OFF LOAD THAT IS NOT NO LONGER INCLUDED. 
          YES. 
          DO WE ANTICIPATE THAT THAT COULD SIGNIFICANTLY DRIVE THE TRANSMISSION OUTCOMES THAT ARE IDENTIFIED? UM, YEAH, I'LL SAY DON'T KNOW UNTIL WE GET INTO IT, BUT IT'S, UH, I IT'S A FAIR POINT. 
          WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT THAT. 
          OKAY, GREAT. 
          AND THEN JUST LAST ONE, I PROMISE IN, IN THAT SAME BREATH, I KNOW, I THINK, UH, HAYNES WAS KIND OF ASKING THIS EARLIER AND, AND I RECOGNIZE THAT AS FAR AS I'M AWARE THERE'S NOT, UH, TAC HAS NEVER VOTED NO ON AN RPG PROJECT, BUT WE'VE ALSO NEVER PROPOSED AN RPG PROJECT FOR BATCHES TO APPROVE THIS MUCH LOAD. 
          WE'VE NEVER DONE IT ON A NET PEAK LOAD CASE, AND WE'VE NEVER DONE IT WITH THE PERIOD 1 27 PROCESS. 
          AND SO HAS  JUST CONSIDERED THE POSSIBILITY THAT THERE COULD BE A NO VOTE SOMEWHERE OR SOME TYPE OF DELAY IN RPG AND HOW THAT AFFECTS THE OVERLAPPING TIMELINES THAT YOU GUYS HAVE FOR LIKE SUBSEQUENT BATCHES? UH, I, SO, UM, AGAIN, YOU NEVER KNOW UNTIL YOU GET THERE. 
          UH, I, I THINK HISTORICALLY, UM, TECH AND THE BOARD HAVE BEEN SUPPORTIVE OF PROJECTS THAT ARE BASED ON CRITERIA THAT IS LAID OUT IN NERC STANDARDS AND PLANNING GUIDE, UH, THE, THE PLANNING GUIDE. 
          UM, I, I, I THINK FOR BOTH OF THOSE, I, I FEEL LIKE WE'RE ON SOLID GROUND WITH THIS, IS WE, WE FOLLOWED THE PROCESS, THE CRITERIA AND THE PROCESSES THAT HAVE BEEN LAID OUT. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, I I, I THINK AGAIN, 
          [02:25:01]
BASED ON HISTORY, UH, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE'RE PRETTY CONFIDENT THAT WE COULD GET, UH, TRANSMISSION PROJECTS APPROVED. 
          OKAY. 
          AND, AND I'M HOPEFUL THAT THAT'S THE CASE. 
          I'M JUST THINKING CONTINGENCIES, WHICH I KNOW YOU CAN APPRECIATE AS A PLANNER. 
          I APPRECIATE THAT. 
          THANKS. 
          GOOD FUN. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, SHANNON HERE, WE, I WANT TO COME BACK TO THIS SLIDE, BUT COULD WE GO TO 42 FIRST? YOU KNOW, THERE WAS SEVERAL COMMENTS MADE EARLIER ABOUT IS THIS A SIX MONTH PROCESS OR NINE MONTH OR 12 MONTH OR WHATEVER, UNLESS I'M MISSING SOMETHING. 
          I THINK WHAT ERCOT IS PRESENTING TO US IS VERY CLEAR, AND I THINK IT WORKS, AND HERE'S WHY. 
          SIX MONTHS IS WHAT DEVELOPER SLASH LOADS, THAT'S, THAT'S FROM THE TIME YOU COME IN TO THE TIME YOU GET A, UM, YOU KNOW, PUBLISH RESULTS AND YOU HAVE 30 DAYS TO MAKE A COMMITMENT AT THAT POINT, UNLESS I'M MISUNDERSTANDING SOMETHING AS LOAD YOUR FIRM. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN THE REFINEMENT, MAYBE LET'S NOW GO BACK TO 31, BECAUSE WHAT YOU JUST DESCRIBED, OH, LET ME ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION ON THAT PIECE. 
          TO THE DEGREE THAT THE SET OF UPGRADES THAT WAS ASSUMED DURING THE SIX MONTH PROCESS, BECAUSE SOME LOADS DROP OUT INHERENTLY IT WILL BE A DIFFERENT SET LATER, BUT IT COULD ONLY BE A SMALLER SET BECAUSE LOADS CAN'T ADD, THEY CAN ONLY DROP OUT, RIGHT? CORRECT. 
          YEP. 
          SO AGAIN, I THINK THIS WORKS GREAT BECAUSE THE TSPS IN YOUR, IN THE MIDDLE PIECE, THEY'RE INVOLVED IN WORKING ALONGSIDE YOU ALL ALONG THE WAY ON THE SET OF UPGRADES THAT ARE GOING INTO THE SIX MONTH BATCH STUDY. 
          SO FOR THEM, THEY HAVE BEEN INVOLVED ALL ALONG, YOU COMMUNICATE THE RESULTS AND THEN THE SCOPE CAN ONLY GET SMALLER IF NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE LOADS COMMIT. 
          SO I THINK THIS WORKS JUST, JUST FINE AND, AND IT'S, AND SINCE THE LOADS, THE COMMUNICATING RESULTS TO THE LOADS IS NO LONGER TIED TO WHICH UPGRADES, UH, ULTIMATELY COME OUTTA THE REFINEMENT PROCESS, I THINK YOU'VE ACHIEVED, YOU'VE KIND OF THREADED THE NEEDLE AND ACHIEVED ALL THE OBJECTIVES, AND I THINK YOU'VE DONE IT REAL WELL. 
          AND THERE WAS A COMMENT BACK, UH, IN A PRIOR SECTION ON 22 ABOUT THE 12 MONTH VERSUS SIX MONTH RTP, AND MAYBE SOMEHOW IT COULD BE INFLUENCED HERE. 
          I THINK THERE'S NO PROBLEM WITH MOVING TO A SIX MONTH RTP AND THEN IT'S ALL ALIGNED. 
          I MEAN, YOU'RE, THIS IS REAL WELL LAID OUT. 
          I THINK YOU'RE SOLVING THE DEVELOPER'S PROBLEMS AND FOR THOSE WHO THINK, WELL, SOME OF THE UPGRADES MAY NOT BE THERE. 
          I'LL REMIND YOU THAT ERCOT IN REAL TIME HAS A WHOLE SUITE OF TOOLS THAT HAVE BEEN USED FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME, YOU KNOW, CONTINGENT, UH, MITIGATION PLANS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. 
          AND I'LL TAKE YOU WAY BACK IN TIME, THE CULBERSON LOOP, ALL THAT WEST TEXAS LOAD THAT WAS ADDED, IT WAS ADDED, AND LATER THERE WAS A DETERMINATION THAT A, IT EITHER TAKE A LITTLE LONGER OR YOU NEED A LITTLE MORE SCOPE. 
          AND ERCOT HAD AND ERCOT IN COMBINATION WITH THE TSPS, UM, CONTINGENCY MITIGATION PLANS THAT WERE USED UNTIL THAT TIME WAS FINISHED. 
          SO ERCOT HAS THOSE TOOLS AND THEY'VE GOT A RICH HISTORY OF USING THOSE, THOSE THEY AND THE TSPS, I, I DON'T SEE THE PROBLEM THAT, THE CONCERN THAT PEOPLE HAVE. 
          ALRIGHT, THANKS SHANNON. 
          DOWN TO THREE QUESTIONS BEFORE LUNCH HERE. 
          SO IT'LL BE KEVIN BROTH AND THEN SAM. 
          SO KEVIN, GO AHEAD. 
          YES. 
          UM, SLIDE THREE, TWO, PLEASE. 
          D UM, DOES THIS TIMELINE INCLUDE THE TIME FOR DYNAMIC STUDIES AS WELL FOR LARGE LOADS, OR DO WE NEED TO ADD THAT, OR DO WE NEED TO ADD THAT TIME AS WELL TO GET TO THE ACTUAL GO LIVE DATE FOR THE NEW LOAD? UM, YOU KNOW, WE, WE'VE GOT, SO THIS, UH, FACT TWO STABILITY THAT THIS IS OUR, UH, IN INTERNAL FULL STABILITY ANALYSIS. 
          SO, SO WE'LL, WE'LL DO A SCREENING STUDY FOR STABILITY, UM, AS IN, IN PART OF THIS TIMELINE. 
          BUT WE WILL DO THE FULL STUDY SUBSEQUENTLY. 
          DOES ARCHIVE ENOUGH STAFF THAT SAY IT'S, ASSUME WE GOT 50 LARGE LOADS TO LOOK AT IT. 
          DOES  HAVE ENOUGH STAFF TO GET THIS DONE IN THAT TIMEFRAME? UM, I, I, UH, I DON'T, I THINK FRED WOULD TELL ME THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE STAFF TODAY TO DO THAT. 
          UH, BUT WE WOULD, UH, PLAN TO RAMP UP THE STAFF TO DO THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND ONE ADDITIONAL QUESTION. 
          UM, RIGHT NOW WE'RE ASSUMING WE'RE USING THE FIGURE 1 27 LANGUAGE TO SUPPORT THE, UH, POTENTIAL ADDITIONAL GENERATION, WE NEED TO 
          [02:30:01]
SOLVE THE CASES. 
          WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE MOVE TO REALITY TIME, LET'S SAY 20 30, 23 1, AND LET'S SAY WE'VE ADDED IN THE MODEL, LET'S SAY WE ADDED A HUNDRED GIGAWATTS OF LOAD, BUT WE ONLY HAVE ENOUGH REAL GENERATION ON THE GRID TO SERVE 50 GIGAWATTS. 
          DO WE HAVE A PLAN IN PLACE FOR CURTAILMENT TO THE LARGE LOADS AT THAT POINT? SO, UM, I MEAN THE, THE, UM, TEXTBOOK ANSWER ON THAT IS, I MEAN, ABSOLUTELY SB SIX HAS RULES ON, ON, NOT CURTAILMENT. 
          I I, THIS IS MORE JEFF SPEAKING, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, WE, WE, WE HAVE A MARKET IN PLACE THAT I THINK IS GONNA TAKE CARE OF A LOT OF THAT. 
          WE'RE, WE'RE NOT, NOT NOT GOING TO HAVE A SITUATION WHERE WE'RE GONNA HAVE, YOU KNOW, CURTAILMENT FOR HUNDREDS OF HOURS A YEAR. 
          RIGHT. 
          I THINK THAT THE MARKET IS GOING TO SELF-CORRECT FOR THAT. 
          I'M JUST SUPER ASSUMING THE MARKET IS WORKING, LIKE THE MARKET SHOULD WORK. 
          I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU THERE, BUT OUR FALLBACK IS WE'LL USE THE KILL SWITCH HOURLY IF WE NEED TO. 
          UH, WE, THE, UH, LEGISLATURE GAVE KOTT TOOLS AND SB SIX, AND IF, IF WE NEED TO USE THOSE TOOLS IN REAL TIME, THEN WE WILL USE THOSE TOOLS. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          UH, DOWN TO BROTH AND THEN SAM YEAH, RA CRUSO. 
          MY QUESTION IS WITH REGARDS TO THE SUPPLY CHAIN AND PHYSICAL REALITIES OF THIS. 
          SO IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS RIGHT, UH, UNTIL WE SIGN THE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT AND RPG APPROVES IT, THE TSPS WON'T GO AND PROCURE THESE OR START CONSTRUCTION ON THE TRANSMISSION LINES, RIGHT? SO THAT WOULD BE SOMEWHERE NEAR JUNE, 2027? UH, WELL ULTIMATELY, YEAH. 
          UH, THAT, UH, BATCH REFINEMENT TRANSMISSION PLAN, YES. 
          UH, IT'S, LET'S ASSUME IT NEEDS BOARD ENDORSEMENT. 
          YEAH. 
          THAT BOARD ENDORSEMENT WOULD HAPPEN IN SEPTEMBER OF 27. 
          SEPTEMBER OF 27. 
          SO I THINK IF, I WOULD ASSUME MAJORITY OF THESE LOADS MAY REQUIRE TRANSMISSION UPGRADES. 
          SO IF WE KNOW THOSE DETAILS IN SEPTEMBER 27, THEN THE TSPS NEED TO START PROCURING LLE, YOU KNOW, WORK ON TRANSMISSION UPGRADES. 
          I'M THINKING AT LEAST 24 MONTHS, RIGHT? SO IT WOULD BE AROUND SEPTEMBER, 2029 THAT WE MAY BE ABLE TO ENERGIZE THE INITIAL LOAD RAMP. 
          SO THERE WILL NOT BE ANY 28 POWER FOR LOADS THAT GET IN HERE, IS MY UNDERSTANDING, UNLESS, YEAH, OBVIOUSLY THERE ARE SOME LUCKY LOADS WHICH DON'T REQUIRE ANY UPGRADES. 
          YEAH, YEAH. 
          UM, YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          SO I, I THINK, UH, I'LL SAY IT THIS WAY, UM, A COUPLE THOUGHTS THERE. 
          UM, THE, UH, TRANSMISSION UPGRADE SOLUTIONS NEED TO RESPECT THE, THE TIMELINE NEEDED, UH, WHICH THAT TIMELINE INCLUDES GETTING THAT ENDORSEMENT, WHICH, YOU KNOW, WE, SO WE NEED TO RESPECT, HEY, WE, WE MAY NOT GET ENDORSEMENT FOR THESE PROJECTS UNTIL SEPTEMBER OF 2027. 
          GOT IT. 
          UH, SO THAT WHATEVER TIMELINE WE COME UP WITH YEAH. 
          IT, IT HAS TO RESPECT THAT. 
          UM, ALSO RECOGNIZE THAT THERE ARE TRANSMISSION UPGRADES THAT ARE ALREADY IN FLIGHT. 
          YEAH. 
          UH, THAT, THAT WILL BE THERE, YOU KNOW, O OVER, YOU KNOW, THEY'LL BE IMPLEMENTED OVER TIME. 
          UH, YOU KNOW, WE ALL KNOW WE'VE GOT THE 7 65 AND, AND THERE, YOU KNOW, I I DON'T THINK ANY OF THOSE LINES WILL BE THERE IN 28, BUT, YOU KNOW, IN, IN, UH, YEARS AFTER THAT IT SAID THE, THE, THE STUDY SHOULD RESPECT ALL OF THAT. 
          IT SHOULD RESPECT THE TRANSMISSION PROJECTS ALREADY IN FLIGHT, SHOULD RESPECT THE TIMELINES FOR NEW, NEW TRANSMISSION PROJECTS, UNDERSTANDING WHEN THE ENDORSEMENT ALL HAPPEN, SUPPLY CHAIN CONSTRAINTS AND, AND ALL OF THAT. 
          SO THAT, THAT, THAT SHOULD, YOU KNOW, MY GENERIC ANSWER IS THAT THAT SHOULDN'T FALL OUT OF THE STUDY. 
          YEAH. 
          I THINK WHAT WOULD BE GREAT IS TO HAVE A CLOSE LOOP. 
          HONESTLY, WE CAN JUST CHANGE THAT TO LIKE, LIKE, I THINK WHAT WOULD BE GREAT IS TO HAVE A CLOSED LOOP BETWEEN THE OUTCOMES OF BAD ZERO PLUS THE PHYSICAL REALITIES THAT WOULD YOU WOULD GET FROM TSPS AND PRESENT A MORE CLEAR PICTURE OF THE REALITIES. 
          BECAUSE IF I SIGN, LET'S SAY FOR A EP, I'M JUST PICKING A EP BECAUSE IF I SIGN LOA, THERE MAY NOT BE TODAY, THERE MAY NOT BE A POWER AVAILABLE UNTIL 29 IF I SIGN TODAY. 
          NOW, IF I DO THAT IN 27 BECAUSE I NEED TO SIGN INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENTS AND EVERYTHING IN 27, THERE MAY NOT BE ANYTHING AVAILABLE UNTIL 29. 
          SO I THINK BAD ZERO OUTCOMES WOULD BE 29 PLUS IN MY OPINION, UNLESS I'M MISSING SOMETHING HERE. 
          [02:35:01]
OKAY. 
          YEAH. 
          AND I, I'M NOT, UM, PRESUMING THAT UNTIL THE STUDY TELLS ME. 
          YEAH. 
          WHAT DO YOU THINK? OOPS, SORRY, GO AHEAD. 
          SEE LAST ONE FOR LUNCH. 
          JUST NIX THAT. 
          HEY, THIS IS SAM JOHN FROM EPE. 
          UM, I GUESS UMM, MAYBE PIGGYBACKING ON BARTA'S QUESTION AND MAYBE SOME OTHERS, UH, I THINK SLIDE 28 IS THE BEST, UH, SLIDE FOR THIS. 
          UH, AND THIS MAY BE MORE OF A COMMENT THAN A QUESTION, BUT JUST TO CONFIRM, YEAR SIX, SO ACCORDING TO THIS YEAR SIX OF BATCH ZERO WOULD ALIGN WITH YEAR FIVE OR BATCH ONE, AND THEN CONSEQUENTLY, UH, YEAR FOUR OR BATCH TWO OR THREE, I GUESS, WHATEVER THAT ALIGN. 
          UM, IS THAT CORRECT? UH, APPROXIMATELY? YES. 
          UH, I DON'T HAVE THAT LAID OUT, BUT YEAH. 
          APPROXIMATELY, YES. 
          RIGHT. 
          SO THEN BASED ON, I GUESS WHAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED SO FAR, BATCH ONE WILL STUDY YEAR ONE THROUGH FOUR WITH THE LIMITED ALLOCATION THAT'S STUDIED IN BATCH ZERO, AND THEN THE YEAR FIVE OF BATCH ONE WILL BE LIKE THE FULL BLOWN LOAD PLUS WHATEVER THE TRANSMISSION UPGRADE'S BEEN IDENTIFIED. 
          AND THEN I GUESS, YOU KNOW, CONSEQUENTIALLY BATCH TWO OR THREE WILL HAVE YEAR ONE YEARS ONE THROUGH THREE WITH THE LIMITED ALLOCATION, AND THEN YEARS FOUR THROUGH FIVE STUDY WITH THE FULL BLOWN LOAD AND TRANSMISSION UPGRADES. 
          I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT'S LIKE THE CURRENT EXPECTATION SLASH PLAN. 
          YEAH, I, I, I THINK WHAT YOU SAID IS CORRECT, BUT MAYBE ONE CLARIFICATION IS THAT THIS IS MEANT TO BE AN ONGOING PROCESS. 
          SO, UM, AND AGAIN, YOU, WE WILL, UH, COME OUT WITH A, A PICKER AND THE OTHER REVISIONS REVISION REQUEST TO IMPLEMENT THE ONGOING BATCH, BUT I THINK AS ENVISIONED, UH, YOU WOULD, YOU KNOW, BY THE TIME YOU GET TO BATCH ONE, THEN YOUR, YOUR YEARS ONE THROUGH FIVE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE STILL IDENTIFYING WHATEVER TRANSMISSION UPGRADES THAT YOU CAN, UH, FOR THAT TIME PERIOD. 
          UM, BUT THEN YEAR SIX, YOU, YOU'LL STILL, YOU KNOW, 20, 20 34 WILL BE YEAR SIX AND, AND YOU WILL GET THE FULL ALLOCATION IN 2034 FOR, UH, BATCH ONE. 
          BUT YOU MAY, MAY, MAY NOT IN 2029 THROUGH 2033, BE ABLE TO GET FULL ALLOCATION DEPENDING ON WHATEVER TRANSMISSION UPGRADES ARE FEASIBLE. 
          GOTCHA. 
          BUT I THINK, YEAH, I THINK WHAT WE MEANT, THE YEAR SIX OF BATCH ZERO WILL BE IMPLEMENTED IN YEAR FIVE OF BATCH ONE. 
          I, I THINK THAT'S CORRECT. 
          THAT'S OKAY. 
          JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, WELL THAT TAKES US TO THE END OF THE QUEUE. 
          SO WE'RE GONNA BREAK FOR LUNCH. 
          HERE'S THE IDEA. 
          IT'S 10, 12, 10 RIGHT NOW. 
          SO TAKE AN HOUR AND FIVE MINUTE LUNCH. 
          WE'LL COME BACK AT ONE 15. 
          WE'RE GONNA RUN UNTIL TWO 30 ON THE ELIGIBILITY PIECE. 
          UH, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE AN HOUR FOR THE, UH, PRESENTER, FOR THE, UH, PEOPLE THAT FILED COMMENTS. 
          SO EACH GET 15 MINUTES AND THEN WE'RE GONNA SAVE THE LAST HOUR PURPOSELY FOR C-L-R-B-Y-O-G DISCUSSION, AND THAT'LL TAKE US TO FOUR 30. 
          SO AT THIS POINT WE'LL STAND ADJOURNED UNTIL ONE 15. 
          ALRIGHT, SO WE'RE GONNA START TO LAUNCH INTO ELIGIBILITY EXCITEMENT. 
          UH, WHAT I'M GONNA DO IS, AGAIN, START WITH THE, THE QUEUE'S GONNA REMAIN CLEAR. 
          IF YOU ASK TO GET IN THE QUEUE, YOU'RE NOT GETTING IN THE QUEUE BECAUSE THERE IS NO QUEUE. 
          ONCE HE'S DONE PRESENTING, THEN WE'LL OPEN THE QUEUE FOR QUESTIONS TO THEN HIT THIS. 
          YOU SAY, WHY DO WE DO THIS? IT'S BECAUSE HALF THE TIME THE QUESTIONS ARE EVENTUALLY ANSWERED. 
          SO, UM, AGAIN, WE'LL JUST HOLD THE QUEUE, UM, UNTIL JEFF SAYS OTHERWISE. 
          AND, UH, JEFF WILL TURN IT OVER TO YOU TO START TO RUN THROUGH. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          AND AGAIN, WE'RE HOPING TO TIME BOX THIS TO AN HOUR AND 15 MINUTES. 
          UM, ON OR AROUND, UH, TWO 30, UH, IS WHEN WE WANNA PIVOT OVER TO PEOPLE THAT FILED FORMAL COMMENTS. 
          SO OFF YOU GO, JEFF. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          OKAY, THANKS MATT. 
          SO, UH, JUST WANTED TO START REAL QUICK WITH WHAT OUR PRINCIPLES WERE. 
          UM, OBVIOUSLY FIRST OFF, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE, UH, INTERCONNECTING LOADS IN A RELIABLE MANNER, UH, SO THAT THAT RELIABILITY HAS TO, TO TO BE AT THE CENTER OF EVERYTHING THAT WE DO. 
          UH, WE ALSO ARE WANTING TO RESPECT THE SB SIX AND, AND THE, THE PUC UH, GATING RULES, UM, AND RESPECT, UH, TO THE EXTENT THAT IT'S, IT'S POSSIBLE AND DOESN'T CONFLICT WITH THE FIRST TWO PRINCIPLES, EXPECT THE, UH, RESPECT THE EXISTING, UH, PROCESSES AND, AND APPROVALS THAT HAVE HAPPENED. 
          UM, ALSO, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS AT THE, AT THE LAST WORKSHOP, BUT THINK FEEDBACK THAT WE'D HEARD FROM STAKEHOLDERS IS THAT THERE SHOULD BE A CHECK FOR LOADS THAT HAVE NEAR TERM ENERGIZATION, UH, THAT, THAT THEY ARE, UH, FEASIBLE TO BE, UM, UH, ENERGIZED. 
          AND THEN, UM, THE, THE, THE, THE LAST BULLET WAS, UM, SOMETHING THAT WE HAD IN, IN THE, UH, PREVIOUS WORKSHOP, BUT IT IS ACTUALLY, AS WE HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT IT, UH, YOU KNOW, HAVE DECIDED TO CHANGE THAT, THAT REALLOCATION 
          [02:40:01]
OF THE NON UTILIZED CAPACITY. 
          UH, SO IF YOU'LL NOTICE, UH, THE PIGGER ACTUALLY DOES NOT HAVE THAT CONCEPT. 
          WE, UH, REMOVE THAT. 
          AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THINK THERE'S A, A RISK THAT, UM, IF WE WERE TO REALLOCATE NON UTILIZED CAPACITY FROM EXISTING LOADS, UM, AND, AND THEN LATER THE 58 41 RULES CHANGED ON THAT THEN, UH, CAPACITY THAT WE HAVE CLAWED BACK COULD ACTUALLY THEN BE, UH, YOU KNOW, CONSIDERED FIRM IN THE FUTURE AND THAT THAT MAY PRESENT A RELIABILITY RISK FOR US, A RELIABILITY CONFLICT. 
          UH, SO IN OTHER WORDS, UH, AS AN EXAMPLE, UH, I THINK THIS IS AN EXAMPLE I USED LAST TIME. 
          IF YOU HAD A LOAD THAT HAD, UH, 500 MEGAWATTS, BUT UH, THEY HAD GONE THROUGH THE PREVIOUS PROCESS, UH, AND WERE 500 MEGAWATT LOAD, BUT WE'D ONLY SEEN THEM CONSUMING 300 MEGAWATTS, THEN WE WOULD, UH, YOU KNOW, CALL BACK THAT 200 MEGAWATTS AND REALLOCATE THAT. 
          BUT, UH, IF MAYBE THE RULE CHANGES AND, AND MAYBE THEY DON'T ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, THAT THEY, UH, YOU KNOW, WOULD, WOULD NOT QUALIFY FOR THAT, THAT REALLOCATION THEN IF WE HAVE ALL REALLOCATED THAT 200 MEGAWATTS AND THEN THEY ARE ALSO GRANTED THAT 200 MEGAWATTS BACK THEN, NOW WE'VE GOT A A RISK THERE. 
          AND SO, UH, WE'VE TAKEN THAT OUT OF THE PIGER, UH, AND I THINK WE'RE GONNA, UH, AT LEAST FOR BATCH ZERO, I THINK WE'RE GONNA HOLD ON THAT AND THEN WE'LL WAIT TO SEE WHAT COMES OUT OF 58 41 DOWN THE ROAD. 
          UH, SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE THINKING ON THAT. 
          UM, THIS IS A, UM, KIND OF A REVISION TO THAT FLOW CHART, UH, THAT WE HAD PREVIOUSLY ON. 
          UM, AND I, IT'S FOR THE MOST PART HASN'T CHANGED, UH, FROM THE, THE, UH, FLOW CHART THAT WE SHOWED EARLIER. 
          BUT THIS IS HOPEFULLY, UH, SLIGHTLY CLEAR, UH, WAY TO LOOK AT THIS, UM, WITH THE, UH, REFERENCES. 
          I THINK FOR THE SAKE OF TIME, I'M, I'M NOT GONNA WALK THROUGH THIS. 
          I'M, I'M JUST GONNA WALK THROUGH THE, UM, THE SUBSEQUENT SLIDES, BUT E ESSENTIALLY THERE ARE THESE KIND OF THREE, THREE BUCKETS ON THE RIGHT WHI, WHICH ARE LOAD THAT WOULD BE INCLUDED IN BATCH ZERO AS, UH, BASE LOAD. 
          UH, THEN THERE WILL BE LOADS THAT WILL BE, UH, STUDIED IN BATCH ZERO. 
          SO THEY'RE INCLUDED IN BATCH ZERO, BUT THEY ARE STUDIED AND, AND SUBJECT TO, UH, RECEIVING AN ALLOCATED, UH, MEGAWATTS. 
          UM, UH, SO, SO THE FIRST BUCKET, THE NUMBER ONE, THE GREEN, UH, IF YOU WILL, THAT, THAT ONE, IT'S BASE LOAD. 
          YOU'RE, WE'RE NOT REALLOCATING OR ALLOCATING MEGAWATTS. 
          UH, THE SECOND BUCKET IS YOUR STUDIED IN BATCH ZERO AND, AND YOU RECEIVE A, A LOAD ALLOCATION AMOUNT. 
          AND THEN THE THIRD BUCKET IS YOU'RE JUST NOT INCLUDED IN BATCH ZERO. 
          IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE PIGGER, THE, UM, THE SPECIFIC SECTIONS TO LOOK AT ARE, UM, NINE POINT FOR THAT FIRST BUCKET, 9.2 FOR THE SECOND BUCKET, AND 9.23 FOR THAT THIRD BUCKET. 
          UM, AND THEN WHEN WE GET INTO THE, UH, OR ARE THE STUDIES STILL CONSIDERED VALID? UH, THAT IS 9.24. 
          SO THOSE ARE KINDA THAT FOURTH SECTIONS UNDER 9.2 0.1 OR WHAT ONE FIRST SECTION IS INCLUDED AS BASE LOAD, SECOND IS INCLUDED AS STUDIED, THIRD IS NOT INCLUDED. 
          AND THEN THE, THE FOURTH IN THAT SECTION IS THE, UH, ARE THE STUDY STILL VALID? OKAY. 
          SO, UH, LET, LET'S, LET'S DEEP DIVE INTO THESE. 
          UM, OKAY, SO, UM, FOR LOADS THAT HAVE, UH, ALREADY RECEIVED INITIAL ENERGIZATION SOMETIME BEFORE MARCH 25TH, 2022, WHY, WHY IS THAT DATE SPECIAL? THAT IS WHEN WE STARTED THE INTERIM LARGE LOAD INTERCONNECTION PROCESS. 
          SO, UH, ANY LOAD THAT WAS ENERGIZED BEFORE THAT. 
          SO THE ID HERE IS, I, I, YOU KNOW, STEEL MILL THAT'S BEEN THERE FOR 30 YEARS, UH, YOU'RE, YOU'RE INCLUDED AS BASE LOAD, UH, SO THAT, OR YOU ACHIEVED INITIAL ENERGIZATION SOMETIME BETWEEN WHEN WE STARTED THE LARGE LOAD INTERCONNECTION PROCESS AND, UH, JULY 15TH OF THIS YEAR. 
          UH, AND ANY LOADS THAT ARE, UM, YOU KNOW, HAVE ACHIEVED THAT, UH, THEN YOU'RE INCLUDED AS, UH, BASE LOAD. 
          UM, AND THEN, UH, AND, AND THEN YOU ARE NOT SUBJECT TO, UH, BEING RESTUDIED, UM, AND YOU, FOR THE SAKE OF TIME, I'M NOT GONNA WALK THROUGH THE DETAILS ON THE RIGHT, BUT IT IS ESSENTIALLY, IT'S, UH, YOU KNOW, WE WILL LOOK AT VARIOUS WAYS TO, TO DETERMINE WHAT, UH, WHAT IS THAT LOAD AMOUNT, WHAT, WHAT IS THAT MEGAWATT AMOUNT, UH, SO THE LEFT IS KIND OF CRITERIA. 
          AND THEN WHAT, WHAT MEGAWATTS ARE WE INCLUDING? UH, IF YOU'RE A STEEL MILL THAT'S BEEN THERE FOR 30 
          [02:45:01]
YEARS, THEN IT'S GONNA BE THE, THE MEGAWATTS THAT, THAT WE HAVE IN, UM, USE IN OUR STUDY CASES, UH, IS, IS KINDA THE SHORT WAY OF SAYING THAT. 
          UM, AND THEN WHEN WE GET INTO QUESTIONS, IF, IF YOU WANNA GO BACK AND, AND ASK QUESTIONS ON THAT, HAPPY TO DIVE INTO THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, UM, OTHER LOADS THAT ARE INCLUDED AS BASE LOAD. 
          SO IF YOUR REQUESTED ENERGIZATION DATE IS, UH, BEFORE END OF 2027, AND YOU HAVE COMPLETE AND VALID INTERCONNECTION STUDIES, UH, AND THAT SPECIFICALLY IS, UH, REFERENCES, UH, 9.24, UM, AND YOU HAVE EXECUTED AN INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT, UH, BY, UH, JULY, UH, 15TH, UM, THEN YOU WILL BE INCLUDED AS, UH, BASE LOAD OR IF YOU'RE IN A CONNECTION OR YOUR INITIAL ENERGIZATION DATE IS AFTER THE END OF 2027, JANUARY 1, 20, 28 OR LATER, AND YOU HAVE, UM, YOUR COMPLETE INVALID INTERCONNECTION STUDIES AND YOUR EXECUTED INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT BY JULY 15TH, THEN AGAIN, YOU'RE INCLUDED AS, UM, UH, AS, UH, UH, BASE LOAD, UH, IN THIS CASE. 
          UH, I, I THINK I'VE FAILED TO MENTION IN THAT FIRST BUCKET ON THIS SLIDE, UH, YOU ALSO HAVE TO SHOW THAT YOU HAVE METHOD DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA. 
          UH, SO WE'RE, WE'RE DOING THAT CHECK TALKED ABOUT THIS AT THE LAST WORKSHOP, UM, BASED ON FEEDBACK FOR LOADS THAT ARE NEAR TERM ENERGIZATION, WHICH WE'RE DEFINING AS, UM, END OF 27, THEN, UM, THEN THAT IS A, UM, UH, WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA DO THAT CHECK. 
          UM, AND THEN I SEE A, A TYPO, UH, SOMEBODY MAY HAVE JUST, UH, I THINK ASKED THIS, UM, IS THIS, UH, AND THIS MAY BE AN AG QUESTION IF HE'S ONLINE OR, OR CHRISTINA, WE SAY EITHER, AND THEN WE HAVE AN AND ON I ON ON ONE AND TWO THERE. 
          UH, I DON'T REMEMBER WHICH IT IS. 
          IS IT EITHER OR OR IS IT, AND YEAH, SORRY, ON, ON THIS SECOND ONE HERE, IT'S AN, AND IT'S AN, AND SO EITHER THAT WORD EITHER SHOULD NOT BE THERE, RIGHT? OKAY. 
          YEAH, SORRY ABOUT THAT. 
          UM, OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, SO THOSE WERE THE LOADS THAT WILL BE INCLUDED AS, AS BASE LOAD. 
          SO, UH, SLIDES 45 AND 46, THESE, THESE ARE LOADS THAT WILL BE INCLUDED IN BASE LOAD AND BATCH SERIAL. 
          UM, AND THEN, UH, THE NEXT SLIDE IS WHAT ARE THE LOADS THAT WILL BE STUDIED IN BATCH ZERO? UH, AND, AND SO LOADS THAT WILL BE STUDIED, WERE ARE THOSE THAT, UH, IF YOU'RE, YOUR INITIAL ENERGIZATION DATE IS, UH, BY THE END OF 2027 BETWEEN NOW AND, AND, AND END OF 2027, UM, AND YOU DON'T MEET THE REQUIREMENTS THAT TO BE CONSIDERED BASE LOAD, UM, BUT YOU, YOU DO MEET THE INTER INTERMEDIATE AGREEMENT CRITERIA, UH, THEN YOU WOULD BE STUDIED IN BATCH ZERO AND YOU'RE, YOU'LL BE ALLOCATED WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, MEGAWATTS, THE STUDY SHOW CAN RELIABLY BE ACCOMMODATED. 
          UH, SO THEN, UM, IF YOUR INITIAL ENERGIZATION DATE IS ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1ST, 2028, THEN UM, WE WOULD LOOK TO SEE IF YOUR, UM, STUDIES MEET THE, UM, THE, UH, 9.2 0.4 UH, REQUIREMENTS, AND YOU HAVE YOUR INTERMEDIATE AGREEMENT, UM, UH, BY JULY 15TH, 2026. 
          UH, THEN THAT WOULD BE LOAD, THAT WOULD BE STUDIED IN BATCH ZERO. 
          UM, AND THEN, UH, SO THE, SO AGAIN, UH, 9.2 FOR THESE TWO SLIDES, 9.2 FOR THIS SLIDE, AND THEN NOW WE'RE GONNA GO TO 9.23. 
          UM, AND IF WE NEED TO GO OVER TO THE LANGUAGE THAT WE CAN, UH, BUT I'M GOING TO STILL CONTINUE WORKING THROUGH THIS SLIDE HERE. 
          UH, SO IF YOU DO NOT MEET THE CRITERIA, UH, LAID OUT IN 9 2 1 1 OR 9 2 1 2, UH, SO, SO ANY OF THOSE, THE, THE PREVIOUS SLIDES I JUST PRESENTED, IF, IF YOU DON'T MEET THOSE CRITERIA, UM, YOU ARE, UH, NOT INCLUDED IN BATCH ZERO, UM, OR IF YOUR, UH, STUDIES ARE, UM, THE, UH, SUFFICIENT FOR MEETING 9 2 1 4, BUT YOU DON'T MEET THAT CRITERIA IN, IN 9 2 1 2, UM, THE ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, THEN, THEN YOU'RE NOT INCLUDED. 
          UH, OR IF YOU 
          [02:50:01]
MEET THOSE, BUT, UM, UH, THE INFORMATION IS NOT SUBMITTED TO ERCOT BY JULY 15TH. 
          UH, THEN, UH, ALSO YOU WOULD, UH, NOT BE INCLUDED IN BATCH ZERO. 
          SO YOU CAN'T, YOU KNOW, COME BACK THREE MONTHS LATER AND SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, I WOULD'VE MET THIS, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE JUST DIDN'T TURN THE, THE DATA IN. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY THEN WE, WE COULDN'T INCLUDE YOU IN BATCH ZERO. 
          OKAY. 
          SO LET'S, UM, GET INTO THE, UM, UH, THE INTERCONNECTION STUDIES. 
          UM, SO, UM, AGAIN, THE WAY THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT YOUR INTERCONNECTION STUDIES ARE, DO WE, CAN WE SEE THAT WE CAN RELIABLY SERVE THIS LOAD? UH, DO WE KNOW, DO WE HAVE STUDIES THAT WE CAN POINT TO AND SAY, CAN WE RELIABLY SERVE THIS LOAD? UM, AND, AND THAT IS BASED ON ERCOT UNDERSTANDING OF HAVING THE STUDY THAT CAN SHOW THAT, UH, WE, WE, WE CAN MEET THAT CRITERIA OF, UM, BEING ABLE TO RELIABLY SERVE, UH, THE LOADS. 
          UM, AND, UH, I THOUGHT, SORRY, I THOUGHT WE HAD ANOTHER SLIDE ON THIS, BUT, UM, YEAH, MAY, MAYBE LET ME JUST, UM, LET ME POP OVER 'CAUSE I, UM, THIS MAY BE BETTER JUST TO GET INTO THE, THE LANGUAGE HERE AND HOW WE'RE THINKING ABOUT THIS. 
          OKAY. 
          AND ACTUALLY, LEMME DOUBLE CHECK AGAIN BECAUSE I, I THOUGHT WE HAD ANOTHER SLIDE ON THIS, BUT MAYBE I'M MISTAKEN. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, UM, THE, THE WAY THAT WE'RE THINKING ABOUT THIS IS, UM, THAT, UM, IF YOU LOOK AT PARAGRAPH THREE, WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO IS, UH, ON, UH, JULY 15TH, WE ARE GOING TO MAKE AN ASSESSMENT OF ALL OF THE LOADS THAT ARE MEETING THE CRITERIA FOR, UH, GETTING INTO BATCH ZERO, UH, AS BEING UNDER STUDY. 
          UH, AND THAT ASSESSMENT IS GOING TO LOOK AT THE PREVIOUS STUDIES THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED. 
          UM, AND THE, UM, AND, AND LEMME BACK UP TO I THINK THE FEBRUARY 3RD WORKSHOP WE HAD PROPOSED, UH, MAKING THE CUTOFF ON JANUARY 28TH, 2026, UH, SORT OF A RETROACTIVE CUTOFF. 
          AND SO ANY LOADS THAT DID NOT MEET THE, THE, UH, THE STUDIES DIDN'T MEET THE CRITERIA AS OF JANUARY 28TH, IF YOU'LL REMEMBER, WE SAID, OKAY, THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED A A, A GOOD STUDY AFTER THAT. 
          UM, I THINK THE FEEDBACK THAT WE GOT IS YOU, YOU NEED TO MAKE THAT DATE FORWARD LOOKING DATE, UH, AND YOU NEED TO GIVE A CHANCE FOR, UH, THE LOADS TO, TO MEET THAT CRITERIA. 
          UM, AND SO I THINK THE CHALLENGE THAT WE EXPRESSED AT THE TIME WITH THAT CONCEPT, UM, IS THAT IF YOU MAKE IT FORWARD LOOKING, THAT MEANS LOADS THAT, UM, MEET THAT AT A FUTURE DATE. 
          UH, YOU, YOU HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM THAT YOU HAVE TODAY IN THAT THERE MAY BE OTHER STUDIES THAT ARE HAPPENING IN PARALLEL THAT INVALIDATE, UH, THE, THE STUDIES INVALIDATE EACH OTHER. 
          UH, SO AS AN EXAMPLE, I HAVE TWO LOADS THAT ARE UNDERSTUDY, AND NEITHER OF THOSE LOADS INCLUDE THE OTHER ONE IN THE STUDY RESULTS. 
          THEN WHAT HAPPENS IF THEY BOTH SIGN THEIR INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT? THEY, THEY BOTH MEET 9.5 ON THE SAME DAY. 
          I, I NOW DON'T HAVE A STUDY THAT I CAN LOOK AT THAT ERCOT CAN LOOK AT AND SAY, WE KNOW THAT WE CAN RELIABLY SERVE BOTH OF THESE LOADS, UH, SO THAT THAT IS THE SAME RISK THAT EXISTS IN THE CURRENT PROCESS. 
          THAT RISK DOES NOT GO AWAY. 
          UH, SO BY HAVING A FORWARD-LOOKING JULY 15TH DATE, WE HAVE TO TAKE THAT RISK INTO ACCOUNT, UH, AND WE HAVE TO THEN COME UP WITH SOME SORT OF ORDERING FOR WHICH STUDY DO WE DETERMINE OVERRIDE OR, UM, OVERRIDE'S NOT THE RIGHT WORD, BUT, UM, SU SUPERSEDES, THANK YOU. 
          UH, SU SUPERSEDES THE, UH, THE, THE OTHER STUDY. 
          UH, AND SO THE WAY THAT WE HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS IS THAT IT, IT SHOULD BE BASED ON THE, UM, THE, THE STUDIES THAT ARE COMPLETED SOONER ARE THE STUDIES THAT WILL, UH, SUPERSEDE THE STUTTER STUDIES THAT COME LATER. 
          UH, AND THE, THE COMMITMENT THAT HAPPENS WILL SUPER, SUPER, UH, THE COMMITMENT THAT HAPPENS FIRST WILL SUPERSEDE LATER COMMITMENTS. 
          UM, AND, AND SO I THINK THAT IS JUST A CONSEQUENCE OF NOT HAVING A RETROACTIVE DATE, 
          [02:55:01]
IS THAT HAVING THAT FORWARD LOOKING JULY 15TH DATE, WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO HAVE SOME, SOME KIND OF ORDERING, UH, IN, IN HOW WE THINK ABOUT THESE STUDIES. 
          AND, AND SO, UH, THAT, THAT'S WHAT WE, UH, ARE ATTEMPTING TO DO WITH THE WAY THAT WE'VE CRAFTED THIS, UM, IS COME UP WITH THAT ORDERING. 
          UM, WE, UM, I THINK WE HAD A, A QUESTION EARLIER ABOUT RPG PROJECTS. 
          UH, AND THE, THE REASON WE CHOSE THE DECEMBER 15TH IS BECAUSE UNDER THE, THE PRIOR PROCESS OR THE INTERIM PROCESS IS THAT, UH, LOADS, UH, UH, TO, TO GET, UH, KIND FIRMED UP AND, AND REACHED THAT WHAT WE CALLED, UH, MUST STUDY STATUS, UH, PREVIOUSLY, UH, THEN THEY, UH, BEFORE THE UNBOXING OF, OF PIGGER ONE 15, WHICH HAPPENED ON DECEMBER 15TH, AND THEY COULD GO THROUGH, UH, A REGIONAL PLANNING GROUP PROCESS. 
          UH, BUT AFTER UNBOXING OF ONE 15, THEN THAT'S NO LONGER A PATH. 
          AND SO YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE, THE PIGGER ONE 15 PROCESS. 
          THAT'S WHAT WE ARE ATTEMPTING TO DO WITH THE WAY THAT WE'VE CRAFTED THIS, UM, IS COME UP WITH THAT ORDERING. 
          UM, WE, UM, MARKET PROJECTS, UH, IF THAT'S THE PAST OR THE FUTURE, WE CHOSE THE DECEMBER 15TH. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, OKAY. 
          SORRY. 
          OH, ARE WE MUTED NOW? OKAY. 
          ON THE PHONE. 
          CAN YOU CONFIRM? YOU CAN STILL HEAR ME? WE CAN HEAR YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, UM, YEAH, SO, SO, OKAY, SO THAT, THAT'S HOW WE, SO THE THOUGHT ABOUT, UM, OKAY, WHAT WHAT MAKES A COMPLETE AND VALID STUDY. 
          SO COMPLETE AND VALID STUDY IS, UM, I, I WAS ON IN THE, UM, INTERIM PROCESS AND I, UH, WENT THROUGH AN RPG PROJECT APPROVAL. 
          UH, SO AGAIN, THE THINKING THERE, JUST TO PUT IT IN LAYMAN'S TERMS, IS OKAY, ERCOT CAN LOOK AT THAT STUDY AND SAY, OKAY, AND RPG PROJECT WAS IDENTIFIED. 
          WE'D KNOW WHAT THAT SCHEDULE IS FOR THE RPG PROJECT, AND, AND WE, WE KNOW THAT WE CAN RELIABLY SERVE THIS LOAD BECAUSE I, I HAVE THAT STUDY. 
          UM, OR WE, WE CAN MEET THE, UM, OR HAVE NOW, UH, MOVED TO SECTION 9.9, NINE POINT 10, PREVIOUSLY NINE FOUR AND NINE FIVE IS, UH, I HAVE A STUDY THAT, UH, IT WENT THROUGH THE LARGE LINE AIR CONNECTION STUDY PROCESS AND THE LOADS MET THE, UH, WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY NINE FIVE, THE COMMITMENT CRITERIA AS LAID OUT IN NINE FIVE. 
          OKAY? SO IF IT MEETS THOSE CRITERIA, THEN WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO IS WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THIS LIST WHERE WE'RE GOING TO CREATE AN ORDER IN WHICH THE LOADS THAT MET THESE CRITERIA, HOW WHEN, WHEN THEY MET THAT CRITERIA WE'RE, UH, WE'RE, WE'RE ESSENTIALLY GONNA LAY THAT LIST OUT, AND WE WILL THEN WORK OUR WAY THROUGH THAT LIST, UM, WHERE WE WILL LOOK AT, OKAY, THE, THE LOADS AT THE TOP OF THE LIST, THOSE LISTS, WE WILL, WE CAN SAY, OR THOSE LOADS AT THE TOP OF THE LIST, WE CAN SAY, OKAY, THOSE LOADS, UH, WE KNOW THAT WE CAN RELIABLY SERVE THIS LOAD BECAUSE THAT LOAD WAS INCLUDED IN THIS STUDY AND, AND, UM, YOU KNOW, AND THAT STUDY IS STILL VALID. 
          UH, AND THEN WE WILL WORK OUR WAY DOWN THE LIST AND WE WILL LOOK AT ALL OF THE LOADS THAT ARE, UH, ABOVE THAT. 
          UH, SO, SO WHEN WE GET TO THE 12TH LOAD AND LIST, WE'LL LOOK AT THE 11 PREVIOUS LOADS AND SEE, OKAY, WERE ANY, WERE ALL THOSE LOADS INCLUDED IN THAT LOAD NUMBER 12, UH, IN, IN THE STUDY? AND WE'LL, WE'LL CONTINUE DOING THAT THROUGH, YOU KNOW, HOWEVER MANY HUNDRED PROJECTS WE HAVE THAT MEET THIS CRITERIA. 
          WE, WE WILL LOOK AT THAT, UH, THAT LIST IN THAT WAY. 
          AND SO THAT'S THE, THE KIND OF THE ORDERING. 
          SO, UH, AS AN EXAMPLE, IF YOU MEET THE 9 4, 9 5 REQUIREMENTS, IF YOU MET THAT ON JANUARY 28TH, THEN ANOTHER LOAD COMES IN ON JULY 14TH AND MEETS REQUIREMENTS, WE WOULD GIVE PREFERENCE TO THE LOAD THAT MET THE REQUIREMENTS ON JULY, UH, ON JANUARY 28TH OR JULY 13TH, OR, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, UH, AS OPPOSED TO THE ONES THAT COME IN RIGHT AT THE END. 
          UH, AND SO THE, AGAIN, THE PURPOSE THERE IS WE, WE CAN'T HAVE A SITUATION WHERE WE HAVE A BUNCH OF LOADS THAT, UH, MEET THE REQUIREMENTS EXACTLY ON JULY 15TH, UH, AND THEN THAT INVALIDATES EACH OTHER'S STUDIES. 
          WE, WE HAVE TO HAVE A WAY TO, TO, UH, KIND OF WORK THROUGH THAT ORDERING. 
          UM, SO THAT'S, THAT, THAT, THAT'S THE IDEA BEHIND HOW, HOW WE CAME UP WITH THIS, UM, UH, WITH, WITH THIS, UH, 9.2 0.1 0.4 AND, AND THIS, UH, ORDERING. 
          SO, UM, YEAH, I THINK I'M GONNA SWITCH BACK TO THE, UH, POWERPOINT PRESENTATION NOW. 
          UM, AND I'M GONNA CONTINUE TO WALK THROUGH, BUT YOU KNOW, I'M SURE THERE ARE QUESTIONS. 
          WE'LL, WE'LL COME BACK TO THAT. 
          [03:00:01]
OKAY. 
          SO, UM, WE, UM, I THINK HEARD SOME FEEDBACK ON THE DEMONSTRATED DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY AND, UM, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WANTED TO, UH, TRY TO IN INCLUDE THIS, UH, IDEA, UH, OF LOADS THAT, UM, ARE, UH, SAYING THAT THEY HAVE A 2026 OR 2027 ENERGIZATION DATE. 
          UM, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S ACTUALLY, UH, FEASIBLE. 
          UM, AND, AND, AND SO WE'RE PUT THESE CHECKS IN, UH, THE FIRST CHECK IS, UM, DOES THE LOAD, IS, IS THE LOAD IN THE QSA, UM, HAS THE, UH, LARGE LOAN ENTITY BEGUN SITE PREPARATION AND CONSTRUCTION, UH, TO MEET, UH, SUCH THAT IT CAN MEET THE INITIAL ENERGIZATION DATE AND HAS THE TSP AND DSP PURCHASED ALL NECESSARY, UH, ESSENTIALLY LONG, LONG LEAD TIME EQUIPMENT. 
          UM, AND IF NOT, THEN WE KNOW THAT THAT PROJECT IS NOT LIKELY TO BE ENERGIZED IN 2027. 
          UH, SO THERE, THERE'S THAT OR, UH, YOU KNOW, HAS, SO IF YOU DON'T, IF YOU'RE NOT IN THE, THE QSA, THEN, UM, OOPS, SORRY. 
          UH, THEN, YOU KNOW, DO YOU MEET THE, UM, DO YOU HAVE VALID STUDIES AND YOU KNOW, CAN YOU SHOW THAT YOU HAVE THIS INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT THAT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS IN 9 7 2, DO, DO YOU HAVE THIS DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY, UM, AND HAVE YOU PURCHASED THOSE LONG LEAD TIME EQUIPMENT? UH, SO THOSE ARE KIND OF THE TWO PATHS TO PROVING, UH, DEMONSTRATED DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY. 
          AND THAT'S BASED ON, I THINK WHAT, WHAT WE, WE THINK WE'RE, WE'RE MEETING THE, THE, UM, THE, THE FEEDBACK, UH, THAT WE GOT PREVIOUSLY ON THAT. 
          UM, YEAH. 
          AND THEN, UH, LAST LAST THING I JUST WANTED TO MENTION, UH, I THINK WE, WE'VE SAID THIS A COUPLE OF TIMES IS, UM, WHEN, WHEN WE WERE THINKING ABOUT THIS, THE COMMITMENT CRITERIA, UH, THERE WERE KIND OF TWO PATHS THAT, THAT WE CONTEMPLATED, UH, WITH 58, 41, UNDERSTANDING THAT, UH, AS IT IS TODAY, IT'S, IT'S A DRAFT, UH, PROPOSAL FOR PUBLICATION. 
          UM, AND WE WILL LIKELY SOMETIME IN THE FALL, UH, MAYBE LATE SUMMER OR FALL, WE'LL LIKELY HAVE FINAL RULE. 
          UM, SO WE COULD EITHER, UH, START, UH, OR WE, WE COULD EITHER, UH, KIND OF COPY 58 41 INTO PICKER 1 45. 
          UH, AND THIS IS THE PATH THAT WE CHOSE, IS TO COPY IT AS, AS IT WAS IN THE DRAFT, UH, UNDERSTANDING THAT IF IT CHANGES BETWEEN NOW AND WHENEVER WE GET TO, UH, FINAL STAKEHOLDER APPROVAL IN, IN MAY, IF IT CHANGES, THEN WE, WE CAN UPDATE THE, UH, THE LANGUAGE IN THE PIGGER. 
          UH, BUT WE WANTED TO HAVE THAT SO THAT THAT ALLOWS US TO THIS SUMMER START THE BATCH ZERO PROCESS, UH, SO THAT WE CAN HAVE RESULTS IN TIME, UH, TO, UH, ALLOW LOADS TO COMMIT IN TIME TO GET TO THE 2027 RTP IN INCLUDED IN THOSE BASE CASES. 
          UM, SO THAT, THAT, THAT IS ONE PATH, UH, THE OTHER PATH THAT WE CHOSE NOT TO DO. 
          BUT, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THIS IS, THIS IS STILL OPEN FOR DISCUSSION. 
          IT IS, WE COULD, UM, WAIT UNTIL 58 41 IS COMPLETE. 
          UH, AND, UM, YOU KNOW, BARKSDALE MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, THERE, THERE'S SOME CONTENTION WITH, WITH, WITH WHAT'S IN THE PFP. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, WE, WE COULD WAIT, BUT THE CONSEQUENCE OF WAITING IS THAT THAT MEANS THAT WE NEED TO WAIT TO START BATCH ZERO, UH, WHICH MEANS BATCH ZERO STUDY RESULTS ARE LIKELY NOT DONE IN TIME TO GET INTO THE 2027 RTP. 
          UH, SO THAT, THAT'S A, YEAH, AGAIN, ANOTHER SITUATION WHERE WE HAVE A TRADE OFF, WE'VE CHOSEN TO GO OPTION ONE, UM, BUT, YOU KNOW, OPEN TO FEEDBACK ON THAT AS WELL. 
          UM, SO, UH, WITH THAT, I WILL PAUSE AND, UH, SEE WHAT QUESTIONS THERE ARE. 
          ALL RIGHT, JEFF, THANK YOU AGAIN. 
          SO I'LL OPEN THE QUEUE FOR BUSINESS. 
          HERE WE GO. 
          ALL RIGHT, AND THE IDEA IS I WANNA RUN ABOUT 30 TO 45 MINUTES OF QUESTIONS, AND THEN AGAIN, WE'LL LET THE COMMENTERS, UH, THE PEOPLE THAT FILED COMMENTS, UM, PRESENT HERE FOR AN HOUR AFTER THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          HEY, MATT, THIS IS, THIS IS AJI I WANNA ADDRESS, UM, MICHAEL JULES QUESTION, UH, IN THE CHAT ABOUT, UM, ON ONE OF THE EARLIER SLIDES, THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER, UM, BOTH REQUIREMENTS WERE NEEDED OR, AND I'M SORRY, I DON'T REMEMBER THE, THE SLIDE NUMBER, UM, BUT MIKE, UH, MICHAEL POINTED OUT CORRECTLY THAT IN PARAGRAPH, UH, SECTION 9 2 1 1 PARAGRAPH EE RUMINANT TWO, UM, THAT IT SAYS, OR, AND THAT IS UNINTENTIONAL, UH, IT SHOULD SAY, AND BETWEEN THE FIRST REQUIREMENT AND THE SECOND REQUIREMENT. 
          SO, UH, JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT THE, UH, UH, LANGUAGE IN THE PIG WILL, UH, NEED TO BE CORRECTED THROUGH, THROUGH COMMENTS AS WELL. 
          ALRIGHT, THANKS FOR CLARIFICATION, AG. 
          ALRIGHT, SO LEE, CHER, YOU'RE UP FIRST. 
          [03:05:01]
THANKS. 
          UH, SO IN THE 9.2 0.1 0.4, UM, PROCESS, AS YOU ARE DETERMINING LOADS THAT ARE, UM, SEEKING TO BE, UH, FIRM IN BATCH ZERO, UH, ARE THE PUC PROJECT 5 8 4 8 1 INTERCONNECTION COMMITMENT CRITERIA USED IN THE ORDERING OF THOSE, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK YOU SAID THAT IT WAS BASED ON THE DATE THAT ERCOT RECEIVED FROM THE TSP THAT THE 9.4 AND 9.45 REQUIREMENTS WERE COMPLETE. 
          UM, IS THAT ALSO GOING TO BE KIND OF CHECKED UP AGAINST THE LOADS THAT ARE MEETING THE INTERCONNECTION COMMITMENT CRITERIA? OR HOW DOES THAT, HOW DO THOSE TWO THINGS INTERPLAY? YEAH, SO, UM, I THINK THE, UM, THE ANSWER TO THAT IS THAT THE, THE ORDERING IS, UH, STRICTLY BASED ON THE CURRENT REQUIREMENTS, WHICH, WHICH WOULD BE NINE FIVE TODAY OR NINE 10 IN PICKER 1 45, AND NOT ON THE, UM, THE TIMING ON WHEN THEY MEET THE 58 41, UH, REQUIREMENTS, UH, NOW 58 41, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT'LL BE A, UH, A, UH, NOT, NOT 58 41 ITSELF, BUT, UH, THE LANGUAGE THAT WE'VE COPIED, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT WILL BE A GATING CRITERIA THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, BY JULY 15TH, THEY'LL NEED TO MEET THAT. 
          BUT THE ORDERING OF WHEN THEY MET THAT IS, UM, DOESN'T FACTOR INTO THE, UH, THE ORDERING IN THE SECTION 9.24. 
          OKAY. 
          SO I JUST WAS WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU DO MEET THAT CRITERIA, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE STUCK BEHIND A LOAD THAT HAS MET THE 9.4 9.5 BEFORE YOU, BUT FAILED TO MEET THE PUC 5 8 4 8 1 INTERCONNECTION CRITERIA. 
          YEAH, I THINK THAT'S CORRECT. 
          YEAH. 
          SO, YEAH, SO IF THEY FAILED TO MEET THE 9 2 1 4, OR SORRY, IF THEY FAILED TO MEET THE INTERCONNECTION, UM, I THINK 9 2 7, CHRISTINA'S SHAKING HER HEAD, UH, IF THEY FAILED TO MEET 9 2 7, THEN YEAH, THEN, THEN THEY, THEY'RE OUT ANYWAY, SO I THINK IT'S A 9 7 2 9 7 2. 
          THANK YOU. 
          IS THE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT STANDARDS. 
          ALL RIGHT, NEXT SHANNON, UH, SLIDE 46 PLEASE. 
          THE LEFT COLUMN, SECOND BULLET. 
          UM, THE PIECE ABOUT COMPLETE AND VALID INTERCONNECTION STUDIES IS, THE WAY I'M UNDERSTANDING IT, AND PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, IS THAT'S VALID AND COMPLETE INTERCONNECTION STUDIES ARE COMPLETE AND VALID UP THROUGH JULY 15TH OR 14TH, AND THEN THEY'RE TAKEN IN ORDER, THEY COME, IS THAT CORRECT? OR THAT MEET THE SENATE BILL SIX OR THE MEET THE, UH, PC RULE REQUIREMENT 58 41? UM, I THINK IT'S, THEY, UH, THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY MEET, UM, NOT 58 41, THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY MEET P ONE 15, THEY MEET P ONE 15, BUT I WAS ONLY AT REASON, I WAS ADDING THAT LAST PIECE. 
          IS YOUR CLARIFICATION TO WHOEVER ASKED IT IS IF THERE WERE TWO AND AN EARLIER ONE DIDN'T MEET THE 58 41 INTERCONNECT REQUIREMENTS, THEN THEY'RE REMOVED. 
          IS THAT RIGHT? THEY, THEY WOULD FALL OUT OF THE LIST. 
          ALRIGHT, 40 NINES NEXT. 
          UM, LET'S SEE HERE. 
          I TELL YOU WHAT, YOU ALREADY ANSWERED MY QUESTION ON THAT, AND THEN IF WE CAN GO TO THE PC, OR EXCUSE ME, THE BIGGER, UH, RULE, UH, PAGE 18 ON THE SECTION THAT IS 9.2, 0.1 0.4, PARAGRAPH THREE I WHERE IT'S ACTUALLY, UH, SORRY, IT'S TOO LITTLE, LITTLE TOO. 
          I BIG A, SO IT'S WHERE THE DECEMBER 15TH CAME IN. 
          YEAH. 
          YOUR LOGIC FOR THAT A MOMENT AGO IS, HEY, THAT'S WHEN WE UNBOX BIGGER ONE 15, AND SO WE DON'T NEED TO GO BEYOND THAT. 
          PRACTICALLY SPEAKING, YOU, THERE'S NO TSP THAT, UH, CAN PREPARE, UH, RPG FILING THAT HASN'T WORKED ON, YOU KNOW, FOR ANYTHING OF SCOPE, YOU KNOW, SIZE THAT HASN'T WORKED ON THAT FOR MANY, MANY, MANY MONTHS, AND YOU HAD NO IDEAS THE TSP OR LOAD THAT WAS PART OF THAT PROCESS WHEN THE UNBOXING MIGHT EVENTUALLY OCCUR. 
          SO TO MAKE IT TO WHERE THEY 
          [03:10:01]
COULD HAVE CONCEPTUALLY BEEN WORKING ON SOMETHING FOR 7, 8, 9 MONTHS AND YOU WERE, AS A LOAD WERE A PART OF THAT, THAT AFTER THE DAY THAT YOU FINALLY UNBOX IT, SAY KING'S X, BUT YOU DON'T TELL 'EM KING'S X, THEN YOU WAIT TILL SIX, EIGHT WEEKS LATER AND SAY, OH NO, I'M LOOKING BACK TO THAT PRIOR DATE. 
          THAT DOESN'T SEEM LOGICAL. 
          UM, I UNDERSTAND YOU WOULD LIKE TO CLOSE THAT DOOR FULLY, THAT'S FULLY REASONABLE. 
          GOING BACKWARDS THAT FAR IN TIME, I DON'T THINK IS REASONABLE FOR TSPS THAT ARE CONTINUING, THAT HAVE BETWEEN THEN AND NOW SUBMITTED, UH, RPG FILINGS IN GOOD FAITH THAT THEY MAY HAVE BEEN WORKING ON FOR NINE, 10 MONTHS. 
          AND THE REASON THEY WERE WORKING ON THEM THAT LONG IS YOU HAD NO IDEA WHEN PIER ONE 15 WOULD EITHER PASS OR FINALLY GET UNBOXED. 
          SO I WOULD ASK YOU TO MAKE THAT SOMETHING MORE LIKE MAYBE MAKE IT THE FOURTH OF, UM, MARCH THE DAY YOU PUBLISH THIS OR SOMETHING. 
          OR I, I COULD MAKE THE CASE IT OUGHT TO GO THROUGH JULY 15TH, BUT, BUT I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE WANTING TO CLOSE THE DOOR. 
          I WOULD ASK YOU TO TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT AND DON'T DISRESPECT ALL THE HARD WORK BY THE TSP AND THE INTERCONNECTING ENTITIES THAT WENT THROUGH THAT WITH THIS ARBITRARY LOOK BACK. 
          UM, IT'S IN THERE NOW. 
          OKAY. 
          THANKS FOR THE COMMENTS. 
          ALRIGHT, NEXT WHO HELP ME, UH, ANDREW CHOPPER. 
          HEY GUYS. 
          ANDREW CHOPPER. 
          UM, ONE QUICK QUESTION. 
          I GUESS MAYBE FOR ERCOT ON THIS SAME PROVISION, UH, THREE TWO A AND B, WHAT IS YOUR PLAN TO GET, UH, COMMITMENTS FROM THE LOAD THAT THEY'RE UNDER CONSTRUCTION WHILE YOU'VE GOT THIS LOOK BACK PERIOD THAT YOU'RE CONTEMPLATING THAT WOULD, I THINK TAKE US THROUGH THE THIRD QUARTER OF THIS YEAR? HOW, HOW'S THAT GONNA WORK? YEAH, I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION. 
          WELL, TO GET INTO THE BASE LOAD TO BE FIRM, YOU'RE REQUIRING THAT THE CUSTOMERS PROVIDE A CONSTRUCTION AND PROCUREMENT AT A STATION, WHICH THEY WOULD NEED A FIRM LOAD QUALIFICATION TO MAKE THAT ATTESTATION TO YOU, WOULD THEY NOT? HOW IS, HOW IS SOMEBODY GOING TO START CONSTRUCTION IF THEY'RE NOT SURE IF THEIR LOAD IS FIRM? YEAH, I I I THINK THAT'S THE SAME THAT, THAT'S THE SAME ISSUE AS TODAY, RIGHT? IS IS YOU'RE, YOU'RE AT RISK TODAY. 
          SO I THINK OUR, OUR ASSUMPTION HERE IS THAT YOU, UH, AND AGAIN, THIS IS BASED ON FEEDBACK AND YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE OPEN TO, TO, UH, YOU KNOW, ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK, BUT, UH, THE FEEDBACK IS THAT IF YOU ARE ENERGIZING IN, UH, I THINK 2026 IN YOUR EXAMPLE, THEN YOU WILL HAVE ALREADY STARTED YOUR CONSTRUCTION. 
          WHAT ABOUT YOU SHOULD ALREADY BE ABLE TO MAKE THAT, BE ABLE TO MEET THAT ATTESTATION PRE 2027, END OF 2027, YOU'RE REQUIRING THE SAME CONSTRUCTION ATTESTATION AS DRAFTED, IS THAT RIGHT? CORRECT. 
          AND SO YOU'VE GOT FOLKS WHO HAVE SATISFIED NINE FOUR AND NINE FIVE THE LEGACY, OR NINE NINE AND NINE 10 WHO COULD BE UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND HAVE ALREADY RELEASED THE UTILITY OR ARE ABOUT TO RELEASE THE UTILITY FROM NOW THROUGH THE END OF, YOU KNOW, THROUGH, THROUGH, UH, JULY 15TH. 
          WHAT, WHAT, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN FOR THEM? IF, HOW, HOW, HOW ARE THEY SUPPOSED TO OPERATE IN LIMBO CONTINUING CONSTRUCTION IF THEY'RE NOT SURE IF THEIR STUDIES ARE VALID? HOW'S THAT GONNA WORK? YEAH, I I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND THAT YOUR, YOUR QUESTION THERE, UH, I GUESS LOW CUSTOMERS ARE OPERATING AS IF MEETING 9 4 9 5, LEGACY 9 4 9 5 MEANS THEIR LOAD IS FIRM AND THEY'VE, THEY'VE MADE BINDING COMMITMENTS TO THE UTILITY BASED ON THAT. 
          AND SO THERE ARE CUSTOMERS IN THIS RULE WHO HAVE MET THAT CONDITION, OR YOU'RE SAYING YOU ARE GONNA LOOK BACK AT THEIR STUDIES TO SEE IF THEY'RE VALID OR NOT. 
          IS, AM I READING THAT WRONG? YEAH, I, I THINK THAT'S CORRECT. 
          THAT'S, IS IT JUST THAT ERCOT DOESN'T BELIEVE THERE'S ANY INVALID STUDIES IN THAT BUCKET? I, I GUESS I'M, I'M HAVING A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING WHY THAT'S NOT CONSIDERED AN ISSUE. 
          YEAH. 
          HEY, ANDREW, UH, THIS IS AJI. 
          MAYBE I CAN, UH, STEP IN YEAH, PLEASE. 
          AND ADD TO JEFF WHAT JEFF HAS SAID. 
          UH, 
          [03:15:01]
I, I THINK IT IS, YOU, YOU NOTICE IN THIS PARAGRAPH THERE'S TWO PATHS INTO, UM, THE, THE, AND THIS ALSO I GUESS GETS BACK TO SHANNON'S COMMENT, UM, UH, PRIOR TO YOURS, UH, THERE'S TWO PATHS INTO THIS KIND OF REVIEW. 
          UM, ONE IS THROUGH THE RPG AND THE, UM, THE REASON THAT THERE IS THE DECEMBER 15TH CUTOFF DATE, THAT THAT'S NOT AN ARBITRARY DATE. 
          THE CURRENT PLANNING GUIDE, UH, DISALLOWS LARGE LOAD INTERCONNECTION WITHOUT GOING THROUGH THE LARGE LOAD INTERCONNECTION STUDY PROCESS. 
          SO, UM, YOU KNOW, AFTER DECEMBER 15TH, THE, UH, THERE'S ONLY ONE PATH FOR LARGE LOADS TO PROCEED FORWARD, AND THAT'S THROUGH THE SECTION NINE PROCESS. 
          UM, BUT BECAUSE THERE WAS AN INTERIM PROCESS FOR THREE YEARS AND SOME OF THE RPG SUBMISSIONS HAVE BEEN IN FLIGHT FOR A WHILE, UM, WE NEED TO REVIEW ALL OF THE LOADS THAT HAD A VALID PATH INTO THE, UH, POTENTIALLY A VALID PATH INTO THE STUDY. 
          AND, UH, THAT MEANS THAT, UH, LOADS THAT HAVE MET NINE FOUR AND NINE FIVE UNDER THE CURRENT PLANNING GUIDE, WHICH AS YOU POINT OUT ARE, ARE RECLASSIFIED NINE NINE AND NINE 10. 
          UM, WE HAVE TO REVIEW THAT IN, IN CONTEXT WITH THE OTHER STUDIES THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, THAT VALID PATHWAYS PRIOR TO DECEMBER 15TH. 
          UM, AND I, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT I, I GUESS I WOULD CHARACTERIZE THAT AS A CONSEQUENCE OF HAVING A FORWARD LOOKING CUTOFF DATE HERE OF JULY 15TH. 
          THAT, WELL, THAT'S, SORRY TO INTERRUPT. 
          ONE, ONE FINAL QUESTION OR POINT ON THIS AG, BUT LIKE, ISN'T THAT WHAT ERCO T'S LLI TEAM IS CURRENTLY DOING WHEN THEY'RE REVIEWING THESE STUDIES AND ISSUING COMPLETENESS NOTIFICATIONS? THAT'S WHAT'S CONFUSING. 
          I, I GUESS SO. 
          I'LL YIELD THERE. 
          GO AHEAD. 
          EVERYBODY'S IN THE QUEUE. 
          CONTINUE. 
          YEAH, I, I THINK, UM, YEAH, AND MAY MAYBE, UM, I'M, I'M THINKING TO THE, THE COMMENTS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED AND, AND I'M, I MAY BE READING MORE INTO THAT, BUT YOU KNOW, I, I THINK THE IMPORTANT THING TO UNDERSTAND HERE IS, IS, UM, I THINK WHAT YOU'RE ALLUDING TO IS THE ISSUE WITH THE CURRENT PROCESS, WHICH IS APPROVED STUDIES, IS, IS NOT, UH, DOES NOT MEAN WHAT I THINK PEOPLE HAVE INTERPRETED IT TO MEAN. 
          AND THAT'S THE PROBLEM THAT THAT'S WHY WE HAVE TO GET OUT OF THE CURRENT PROCESS BECAUSE YOU, YOU REALLY DON'T HAVE FIRMNESS UNTIL YOU GET APPROVAL TO ENERGIZE UN UNDER THE CURRENT PROCESS. 
          AND, AND SO I THINK WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS A CONSEQUENCE OF THE, THE ISSUE WITH THE CURRENT PROCESS WHERE WE'RE GET CONSTANTLY STUCK IN THESE RE-STUDY LOOPS BECAUSE YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT, YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT AS FIRM AS YOU THINK YOU ARE FROM THE CURRENT PROCESS. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND, UM, I PUT IN THE NOTES HERE THAT WE'RE STOPPING THE QUEUE FOR NOW. 
          WE'RE 20 PEOPLE IN THE IN LINE, SO WE'RE GONNA SEE HOW BRIEF AND AMAZING WE CAN BE ON SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS. 
          SO MICHAEL, JEWEL, YOU'RE UP. 
          UH, THANK YOU FIRST OFF, THANK YOU AG FOR CLARIFYING THAT, UH, TYPO IN THE, UM, IN THE DRAFT RULE THAT THAT TOOK CARE OF ONE QUESTION. 
          UH, THE NEXT QUESTION ACTUALLY FOLLOWS INTO SECTION NINE E TWO WHERE THERE'S SEVERAL PARTS WHERE THE, WHETHER YOU'RE GOING TO BE, HOW YOU'RE GONNA BE STUDIED, HOW MUCH LOAD IS GOING TO BE LOOKED AT, DEPENDS ON WHETHER OR NOT YOU ARE IN THE 2026 RTP WHEN IT'S A LESSER OF, UH, LIKE IF YOU LOOK AT SLIDE 45 ON THE PRESENTA ON THE PRESENTATION, UM, HEY MICHAEL, I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT, BUT COULD YOU REPEAT WHICH UH, SECTION REFERENCE YOU WERE, WERE TALKING ABOUT THERE? SURE. 
          IT'S, UH, PAGE 17 OF THE, UH, OF BIGGER 1 45. 
          IT IS SECTION NINE E AS IN ELEPHANT TWO. 
          AND THEN ESPECIALLY LOOKING AT LIKE B ONE, LITTLE I TWO, LITTLE I, THE AMOUNT OF, WHEN THEY'RE LOOKING AT THE LARGE LOADS LEVEL OF PEAK DEMAND, IT'S THE LESSER OF WHAT WAS IN THE, UM, ANNUAL, THE REQUEST FOR INFORMATION IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE 2026 RTP OR, UH, PEAK DEMAND INDICATED IN THE MOST RECENT LOAD COMMISSIONING PLAN. 
          WHAT HAPPENS IF THE LOAD IS NOT IN THE RTP 2026 RTP GIVEN ALL THE DIFFERENT MOVING PARTS THAT HAVE BEEN HAPPENING BECAUSE THEN IT WOULD BE 
          [03:20:01]
ZERO. 
          UH, SO, SO MICHAEL, IF, IF I COULD REPEAT BACK WHAT I THINK I'M HEARING, IT'S THAT YOU'RE CONCERNED THAT THAT LANGUAGE AS IT'S CURRENTLY WRITTEN, MIGHT, UH, PRECLUDE A LOAD FROM BEING INCLUDED IF IT MEETS THE APPLICABILITY CRITERIA, BUT DID NOT GET INCLUDED IN THE 2026 RTP, CORRECT? YEAH, I, I, I, I'LL JUST SAY I, I DON'T THINK THAT WAS THE INTENT, SO WE'D CERTAINLY BE OPEN TO COMMENTS CORRECTING THAT. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, NEXT IN QUEUE, UH, VJ, I VJ YOU THERE? ALL RIGHT, WE'LL COME BACK. 
          ANDREAS MAN, MANES. 
          HI, THIS IS ANDREAS WITH CYPRESS CREEK. 
          UM, QUICK QUESTION. 
          I JUST WANT TO ECHO ANDREW'S POINT ON LOADS FOR 2026 AND 2027 WITH APPROVED STUDIES SIGNED I AND COMMITMENTS WITH THE UTILITIES, LIKE JUST TO LIKE TRIPLE CHECK, LIKE IS ERGOTS PLAN TO LIKE, NOT PLAN, BUT LIKE CAN ERCOT INVALIDATE THOSE STUDIES BASED ON THE DEFINITION OF THOSE LIKE VALID STUDIES AND THE PRIOR LIST, EVEN THOUGH THERE'S A SIGN IA AND COMMITMENTS WITH THE UTILITY? YEAH, AND AGAIN, ANDREAS SAID, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE, THE POINT THERE IS THAT THOSE, UM, YOU ARE ALREADY AT RISK TODAY WITH THOSE STUDIES IN THE CURRENT PROCESS OF BEING INVALIDATED THAT THIS IS, THIS IS NOT A NEW CONCEPT. 
          WE'RE, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO PUT A DEADLINE ON WHEN THAT COULD HAPPEN. 
          GOT IT. 
          OKAY. 
          I GUESS NEXT QUESTION, UH, BACK TO THAT LIST THAT YOU MENTIONED EARLIER, JEFF. 
          UM, JUST TO CONFIRM, LIKE, THAT LIST WILL BE FINALIZED BY JULY 15TH, IS THAT RIGHT? UH, OR WE'LL RECEIVE THAT INFORMATION BY JULY 15TH AND THEN WE HAVE TO THEN MAKE THAT DETERMINATION SUBSEQUENTLY. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, AND THEN FOLLOW UP ON THAT, IF, IF A LOAD IS LIKE ALREADY LIKE MET THE 2025 RTP OR IT'S BEEN INCLUDED IN A PREVIOUS RPG, DOES THAT MEAN THEY GET AUTOMATICALLY VALID STUDIES? 'CAUSE LIKE IN THE PERIOD IT ONLY SAYS LIKE THE LOADS AT THE TOP OF THE LIST WILL GET VALID STUDIES. 
          AND, AND I GUESS ANOTHER FOLLOW UP QUESTION, DO WE KNOW OR HAVE AN IDEA OF LIKE HOW, HOW LONG THAT LIST WILL BE? BECAUSE I REMEMBER LIKE WHEN YOU GUYS PRESENTED ON ZERO A AND ZERO B, THERE WAS LIKE A REALLY NICE SLIDE THAT SHOWED ER'S EXPECTATIONS OF PROJECTS MEETING SPECIFIC CRITERIA. 
          YEAH, SO WE, WE TALKED ABOUT THAT, UH, FOR THIS PRESENTATION. 
          UM, I THINK THE, THE CHALLENGES THAT, THAT, BECAUSE IT'S A FORWARD LOOKING DATE, WE, WE DON'T HAVE ANY IDEA OF WHICH LOADS ARE GONNA QUALIFY. 
          WE, THERE'S ALSO THE, THE FINANCIAL COMMITMENT AND, AND THE, UH, SITE CONTROL, YOU KNOW, THE, THOSE SORTS OF THINGS THAT, UH, INFORMATION THAT WE DON'T HAVE TODAY. 
          UH, AND SO THERE, THERE REALLY WASN'T A WAY FOR US TO, UM, YOU KNOW, BE, BE ABLE TO PUT TOGETHER A LIST. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE ARE, IT, IT'S A LARGE NUMBER THAT COULD QUALIFY WHAT WILL ACTUALLY QUALIFY, YOU KNOW, I WOULD EXPECT WOULD BE MUCH SMALLER. 
          GOT IT. 
          OKAY. 
          BUT IF, IF A LOAN MEETS THE RTP, LIKE THE THE 2025 OR 2026 RTP, DOES THAT MEAN THAT THEY'LL BE AT THE TOP OF A LIST AND THEY'LL GET VALID STUDIES? WAS NOT NECESSARILY, YEAH, NOT, NOT NECESSARILY. 
          UM, I, I THINK THE, UM, WE DID NOT INCLUDE THE CONCEPT OF IF YOU'RE IN 2025 RTP OR 2026 RTP, UM, THAT, THAT WASN'T, THOSE WEREN'T ONE OF THE VALID STUDIES, UM, IN 9 2 1 4. 
          GOT IT. 
          OKAY. 
          ONE LAST QUESTION. 
          A AND B HERE. 
          YEP, GO AHEAD. 
          UM, IF, IF A LOTUS INCLUDED AS BASE LOAD, UM, ON THAT SLIDE 46, DO THEY STILL NEED TO MEET THE INTERMEDIATE AND IA AGREEMENT FROM THE 5 84 84 FROM THE PUCT? SO, UM, SAY THAT AGAIN, IF, IF A LOT IS INCLUDED AS BASE LOAD, UM, ON SLIDE 46 AND 45, LIKE DO THEY STILL NEED TO MOVE THE PUCT UM, CRITERIA FOR INTERMEDIATE AGREEMENTS AND, UM, INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENTS? I THINK IT DEPENDS ON HOW THEY COME THROUGH AS BASE LOAD. 
          IF THEY'RE ALREADY ENERGIZED, UM, I DON'T HAVE THE LANGUAGE UP IN FRONT OF ME, BUT THERE'S LANGUAGE IN THERE IF THEY'RE ALREADY ENERGIZED, THEY DO NOT HAVE TO MEET THAT REQUIREMENT. 
          IF THEY HAVE NOT YET ENERGIZED, THEY WILL HAVE TO MEET THE 58 4 81 INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT, THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO MEET THE INTERMEDIATE AGREEMENT. 
          [03:25:04]
GOT IT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          VIJAY, YOU BACK ONLINE YET? YEAH. 
          CAN YOU, CAN YOU ALL HEAR ME NOW? YES, WE CAN GO AHEAD. 
          YEAH. 
          THANKS. 
          UM, JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE UPDATED FLOWCHART HERE, UM, IN TERMS OF CATEGORIZING WHETHER THIS IS A BATCH ZERO BASE LOAN VERSUS BATCH ZERO STUDIED. 
          SO MAYBE I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS THERE. 
          UM, FIRST QUESTION, IF, UH, I HAVE A PROJECT TARGETING IZATION END OF 2027 AND BASED ON THIS FLOW CHART AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT, UH, YOU ALL HAVE SHARED, WE BELIEVE THAT IT QUALIFIES, UH, TO BE BASE LOAD, BUT WHEN WILL WE KNOW FOR CERTAIN THAT THAT IT IS, UH, IN FACT THE CASE AND, AND HOW WILL WE, UH, GET THAT COMMUNICATION? YEAH, VJ, THAT, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. 
          I, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT. 
          I THINK THE QUESTION WAS, SORRY, SORRY, BJ, THERE WAS A, A PLANE FLYING OVER, UH, THE BUILDING RIGHT WHEN YOU WERE TALKING, BUT I, UH, LET ME REPEAT WHAT I THINK I HEARD. 
          THE QUESTION WAS IS IF A LOAD IS INCLUDED AS BASE LOAD, HOW, HOW WOULD THE LOAD KNOW? WHEN, WHEN WOULD THEY KNOW THAT? UM, I, I DON'T THINK THAT WE HAVE, UM, UH, TALKED ABOUT DIRECT COMMUNICATION WITH THE, THE LOADS. 
          UM, BUT THAT I THINK WE, WE WOULD EXPECT THAT WE WOULD COMMUNICATE THAT INFORMATION TO THE TSPS, UM, AND THE TSP COULD COMMUNICATE THAT, UH, DIRECTLY TO THE CUSTOMER. 
          BUT IF, IF SOMEBODY HAS A, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER IDEA, I KNOW, I KNOW THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION EARLIER ABOUT, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, HAVING A, A PORTAL OR SOMETHING. 
          UH, I, I DON'T THINK THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE THAT, UH, SET UP BY THIS SUMMER. 
          UM, I'M HOPING THAT WE WILL HAVE THAT KIND OF A, A SITUATION SET UP BY THE TIME WE GET TO THE ONGOING BATCH PROCESS, BUT I THINK IT'S UNLIKELY WE HAVE THAT BY THIS SUMMER. 
          UM, AND SO I THINK OUR, OUR INTERIM PLAN WOULD BE TO COMMUNICATE THAT TO THE TSP AND, AND MAKE SURE THAT THE TSPS HAVE THAT INFORMATION, UM, BUT HAVEN'T REALLY CONTEMPLATED ANYTHING MORE THAN THAT, BUT OPEN TO SUGGESTIONS. 
          I APPRECIATE THAT. 
          UH, MY, THAT, THAT'S PART OF MY QUESTION. 
          BUT, UH, THE OTHER PART IS, UH, WHAT IS THE TIMELINE? IS IT IN JUNE THAT WE WOULD KNOW FOR SURE THAT, UH, THIS LOAD HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN THE BASE LOAD? IT, IT'S PROBABLY, UM, ROUGHLY EARLY AUGUST? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH, SO, SO WE WON'T KNOW UNTIL, UH, WE WON'T, ERCOT WON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION UNTIL JULY 15TH, AND THEN IT WILL TAKE US SOME NUMBER OF WEEKS TO PROCESS ALL OF THAT INFORMATION. 
          UH, SO I THINK OUR, OUR TIMING IS WE'RE, WE'RE THINKING WE'LL HAVE THAT SORTED OUT BY EARLY AUGUST. 
          YEAH. 
          AND JEFF, IF I, IF I COULD JUST ADD TO THAT, THIS IS AG SPRINGER. 
          UM, YEAH, I THINK SOME OF THE COMMENTS TODAY HAVE, HAVE REVEALED THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE, THERE'S MAYBE SOME SHARPENING THAT COULD BE HAD ABOUT THE, THE FLOWS OF INFORMATION PRIOR TO THE INITIATION OF THIS STUDY. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, SO EFFECTIVELY WHAT, WHAT IS COMMUNICATED TO ERCOT ON JULY 15TH, AND THEN WHAT INFORMATION NEEDS TO BE DISSEMINATED BACK OUT AS A RESULT OF THAT. 
          UM, SO I THINK WE'RE CERTAINLY OPEN TO, TO CLARIFYING THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND MAYBE ONE MORE FOLLOW UP QUESTION ON THAT. 
          SO ONCE WE KNOW THAT, UH, THIS LOAD IS INCLUDED IN THE BASE LOAD, ARE THERE OTHER MILESTONES THAT WE HAVE TO WAIT FOR IN TERMS OF MAYBE COMPLETION OF THE BAT ZERO STUDIES, ET CETERA, BEFORE WE KNOW THAT? UM, I DON'T THINK THERE'S, UH, CAPACITY IMPACT, BUT FROM AN IZATION, UH, TIMING PERSPECTIVE, WHEN CAN WE GET BACK TO DEVELOPMENT PROCESS IF WE ARE, HAVE TO BE IN A HOLDING PATTERN? BECAUSE THERE IS THIS UNCERTAINTY RIGHT NOW. 
          I, I'M SORRY, BJ, I'M NOT SURE I FULLY UNDERSTOOD THAT QUESTION. 
          YEAH. 
          BEYOND KNOWING THAT WE ARE INCLUDED IN THE BASE, UH, BASE LOAD, ARE THERE OTHER MILESTONES THAT WE HAVE TO WAIT FOR BEFORE WE KNOW THAT, UH, THE DECEMBER 20, 27 IZATION IS CONFIRMED? SO IF, IF THE, UM, IF THE PROJECT IS INCLUDED AS BASE LOAD, THEN IT IS NOT SUBJECT TO FURTHER ASSESSMENT. 
          AND SO IF IT WAS SEEKING A 2027 OR EARLIER DATE, THE ONLY PATH TO BE BASE LOAD WOULD BE TO MEET THOSE, THAT DEMONSTRATION OF DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY THAT I THINK IS IN 9 2 1 1, THINK LIKE SUB PARAGRAPH D UM, UH, AND SO THAT, THAT THOSE DEMONSTRATIONS WOULD'VE BEEN MADE IN ORDER 
          [03:30:01]
FOR THAT LOAD TO BE INCLUDED AS BASE LOAD. 
          AND THE INTENT AT THAT POINT WOULD BE, IT WOULD NOT BE SUBJECT FURTHER TO FURTHER ASSESSMENT. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT, THAT IS HELPFUL. 
          SO THE, THE BIG DECISION POINT IS THAT AUGUST TIMEFRAME WHERE, WHERE WE KNOW EITHER DIRECTLY FROM  OR THROUGH THE T-T-D-S-P THAT WE ARE INCLUDED IN THE BASE LOAD. 
          YES. 
          I WILL ADD THOUGH THAT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE PROJECT WILL STILL NEED TO MEET ALL THE EXISTING REQUIREMENTS TO PROCEED TO OPERATION. 
          SO THAT WOULD INCLUDE, YOU KNOW, THE QUARTERLY STABILITY ASSESSMENT, THE APPROVAL TO ENERGIZE PROCESS. 
          BUT FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE BATCH ZERO STUDY, UH, IT WOULD, WOULD NOT BE SUBJECT TO FURTHER ASSESSMENT IF IT MET THE ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR BEING BASELOAD. 
          UNDERSTOOD. 
          UNDERSTOOD. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, SO VIJ, WE'RE GONNA NEED TO MOVE ON, AND I'M GONNA SAY AS WE GO THROUGH, LET'S LIMIT IT TO TWO QUESTIONS. 
          IF YOU HAVE FIVE, PICK THE TWO, BUT THERE'S STILL 18 PEOPLE IN LINE, 20 MINUTES, WE'RE JUST NOT GONNA MAKE IT. 
          SO CHOOSE WISELY. 
          THANKS, VIJ. 
          UM, HANE STRAIGHTER YOUR NOTE. 
          THANKS. 
          UM, WHEN YOU'RE PRIORITIZING LOADS FOR BASE LOAD AND YOU ARE SAYING, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE A VALID STUDY BASED ON THIS VALID CRITERIA PROVIDED, WHAT HAPPENS IF THERE HAVE BEEN SUBSEQUENT RES STUDIES TO YOUR ORIGINAL VALID STUDY AND YOU'RE IN A, MAYBE YOU'RE IN A RE STUDY OR THERE'S BEEN MORE THAN ONE, BUT IF YOU WERE TO GO REORDER THE STUDIES AND YOU WENT BACK TO THE, THE ORIGINAL ONE, PRIOR TO THE SUBSEQUENT REQUESTS THAT HAVE COME IN AND, AND YOU KNOW, WERE, CAUSE WERE THE CAUSATION OF THE RESTUDIES YEAH. 
          IS THAT HOW THAT'S GONNA WORK OR IS IT GONNA BE BASED ON WHATEVER THE LATEST RE STUDY IS BASED ON? LIKE H HOW DO YOU COME TO PEACE WITH THAT ONE WAY OR ANOTHER? YEAH. 
          UM, AG, I, I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT IT. 
          I DON'T REMEMBER THAT ANSWER THAT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. 
          CAN YOU HELP WITH THAT ONE? SORRY, I, I WAS HAVING SOME AUDIO DIFFICULTY. 
          I APOLOGIZE, BUT COULD YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? YES. 
          SO IF, IF, IF YOU SUBMITTED A VALID STUDY, ACCORDING TO THE CRITERIA IN HERE AND IN THIS IN PGRR 1 45, AND THEN THE, YOU'VE HAD SUBSEQUENT RE STUDIES SINCE THAT FIRST STUDY WAS APPROVED, VALID, AND GOOD, AND THE SUBSEQUENT RE STUDIES MAY HAVE ADDED TRANSMISSION REQUIREMENTS OR OTHER, OTHER THINGS TO ACCOMMODATE SUBSEQUENT LOADS, BUT THEN YOU'RE GOING BACK AND PRIORITIZING WHEN THOSE LOADS WERE ACTUALLY PUT IN. 
          AND WHEN THE, WHEN YOU KNOW, YOU'RE, YOU'RE GIVING SOME PRIORITY TO THE DATE THAT THOSE STUDIES WERE VALID, HOW ARE YOU PRIORITIZING WHICH STUDY IS VALID AND WHICH ISN'T? AND WHAT SHOULD WE BE ASSUMING? AND I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE, LIKE IF WE HAVE A PROJECT THAT REQUIRED ZERO TRANSMISSION UPGRADES AND WE HAD A GOOD VALID STUDY, AND THEN SUBSEQUENTLY THERE HAVE BEEN THREE RE STUDIES AND NOW THERE'S A BUNCH OF TRANSMISSION UPGRADES 'CAUSE OF SUBSEQUENT LOADS. 
          HOW DO YOU RECONCILE THAT THROUGH THIS PROCESS? I THINK THE INTENT IS FOR IT TO BE THE DATE OF THE LAST RE-STUDY. 
          AND YOU KNOW, AGAIN, UNDER THE CURRENT PROCESS, THE, THE STUDY IS NOT FINALIZED UNTIL THE PROJECT HAS ALSO MET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 9.5. 
          SO THE, THE INITIAL STUDIES, YOU KNOW, MAY, MAY NOT HAVE BEEN BEEN CONSIDERED FINAL AS A RESULT. 
          BUT, YOU KNOW, I WOULD ADD TO THAT, THAT BECAUSE THOSE LATER RE STUDIES INCLUDED MORE LOAD, IT WOULD ALSO RAISE THE LIKELIHOOD THAT THEY'RE STILL VALID. 
          UH, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          I, I THINK THAT, I THINK THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          I'LL, I'LL KEEP MOVING. 
          UM, BUT I THINK MAYBE DIGGING INTO THAT A LITTLE MORE WOULD BE HELPFUL. 
          UM, I'VE GOT A COUPLE OTHERS, BUT I'LL DO ONE. 
          UM, SO 9.7 0.4, UH, WHICH IS THE NON UTILIZATION CLAUSE AT THE END IS A, IS A HUGE PROBLEM, UH, PARTICULARLY FOR PROJECTS THAT ARE UNDER CONSTRUCTION BECAUSE A SIX MONTH WINDOW, UH, DID I GET IT WRONG? DID I GET THE SECTION WRONG? YEAH. 
          NON UTILIZATION. 
          YEAH. 
          SO NO LATER THAN, UH, SO YOU'VE GOT A SIX MONTH WINDOW TO BE DELAYED. 
          AND JUST IN THE CONSTRUCTION WORLD, THAT'S, THAT IS NOT A VIABLE TIME PERIOD TO MISS, YOU KNOW, INITIAL INTERCONNECTION. 
          AND FURTHERMORE, OFTEN IT'S NOT THE, THE LOAD'S FAULT THAT A DATE MAY HAVE BEEN MISSED, PARTICULARLY NOT WITH THIS PROCESS. 
          UM, BUT OFTEN IT COULD HAVE SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE TRANSMISSION DELAY OR A, A PROBLEM WITH YOUR, YOUR TSP. 
          THERE NEEDS TO BE A MUCH MORE REASONABLE PROCESS HERE, AND THERE HAS TO BE AN ABILITY TO CURE. 
          UM, I, I GET THE INTENT IF IT'S LIKE A 30-YEAR-OLD OR IT'S A 5-YEAR-OLD BUILDING THAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE OPERATIONAL, IT'S NOT DRAWING ANY LOAD. 
          I GET THAT. 
          BUT I THINK WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 
          [03:35:01]
THESE LARGE LOADS THAT ARE COMING ONLINE NOW, IT'S JUST, IT'S VERY NUANCED. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, HANS, LET ME TAKE THAT BACK BECAUSE I, I THINK I MISSPOKE EARLIER. 
          I I THOUGHT THAT WE HAD TAKEN THIS OUT. 
          UM, I, I THINK WE NEED TO CIRCLE BACK UP INTERNALLY ON THIS, 'CAUSE I, I THINK THERE ARE SOME, UH, CHALLENGES WITH THIS, BUT LET, LET'S THINK ABOUT THAT AND WE'LL COME BACK TO THE NEXT WORKSHOP. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          UH, DOUG GOLDEN, I'M ONLY ASKING ONE QUESTION. 
          SO I'LL SELL MY OTHER SPOT TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER , UH, DOUG GOLDEN CORE SCIENTIFIC, JEFF ON SLIDE 50, SHOULD THAT SECOND POINT UNDER NUMBER ONE BE DECEMBER 31ST, 2027? I, I THINK IT WAS, UM, I MIGHT NEED HELP WITH THE TEAM, BUT I, I THINK IT WAS INTENDED TO BE THIS YEAR. 
          I, I THINK THERE WAS A DISTINCTION BETWEEN, UM, LOADS THAT ARE ENERGIZING IN 26 VERSUS LOADS THAT ARE ENERGIZING IN 27. 
          UH, SO, SO IF YOU ARE IN A, IF YOU ARE IN THE MAY 1ST QSA, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY THIS BULLET, UM, UH, OR BEFORE THEN YOU HAVE A DECEMBER, UH, YOU'RE ENERGIZED BY END OF 26 VERSUS IF YOU'RE COMING IN LATER. 
          UH, SO I THINK THERE WAS A DISTINCTION BETWEEN 26 ENERGIZATION AND 27 ENERGIZATION. 
          YEAH, THIS IS A G YEAH, THAT'S CORRECT. 
          JEFF IS THE QSA, THE MAY 1ST. 
          QSA WAS A STAND IN FOR BASICALLY SAYING THIS IS THE, THE SORT OF LAST PATH TO ENERGIZING IN 2026. 
          AND THEN THE, THE, UH, UH, SECOND ONE IS, UM, FOUR LOADS THAT WOULD WANT TO ENERGIZE IN 27, UH, WOULD HAVE TO MEET THE, THE MILESTONES AND WHAT WAS, WHAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE LABELED TWO ON THIS SLIDE. 
          OKAY, THANKS. 
          ALRIGHT, ONTO CHRIS MATTIS. 
          CHRIS MARTOS, GOOGLE. 
          UM, I THINK THIS IS PROBABLY GONNA BE BEST CAPTURED IN 44. 
          SO PART YOU, WE ARE SETTING UP A BROADER MARKET PROBLEM WITH VRT IN HERE, AND THE INSISTENCE OF PUSHING IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY REMOVE SOME OF THAT RISK THAT LOADS HAVE SO LOADS THAT CANNOT MEET THE INTERIM VRT REQUIREMENT. 
          AND RIGHT NOW, GOOGLE AT LEAST FILE COMMENTS TO THE EFFECT THE EXTREME CASES, WHICH ACCOUNT FOR LESS, LESS THAN 10% OF ISSUES, MOST WE BELIEVE MOST LOADS CANNOT MEET, WILL THEN PUT US INTO A CATEGORY THAT GETS US STUDIED FOR BATCH ZERO SHORE, BUT SUBJECTS THEM TO THE SYSTEM-WIDE CAPS AT THAT POINT AS WELL FOR ENERGIZATION, WHICH DON'T HAVE ANY SORT OF REFINEMENT IN TERMS OF REGIONALIZATION OR TIME OF DAY OR ANY OF THAT, BECAUSE ALSO EQUALLY COMPLICATED PROBLEM. 
          SO CAN, CAN I, YEAH, SORRY TO CUT YOU OFF, CHRIS, BUT I WANT CLARIFY. 
          SO THE, THE REQUIREMENT HERE IS NOT THAT YOU MEET THE VRT REQUIREMENTS AS LAID OUT IN 2 82, IT, IT'S ONLY THAT YOU ARE ASSESSED, YOUR VRT IS ASSESSED. 
          SO, SO IN OTHER WORDS, WE, WE HAVE TO, UH, TODAY WE, WE HAVE TO MAKE AN ASSESSMENT OF WHETHER THE LOAD CAN RIDE THROUGH OR NOT. 
          SO THE, THE GATE HERE IS NOT INTENDED TO SAY IF, IF YOU CAN'T RIDE THROUGH, THEN YOU GO THROUGH THIS OTHER PROCESS. 
          THE GATE IS JUST WHETHER YOU HAVE MA YOU'VE GONE THROUGH THAT ASSESSMENT OR NOT. 
          OKAY, WE ARE THEN GONNA RISK ENERGIZING THAT LOAD AND IT BECOMES SUBJECT TO THE CAP AS PROPOSED. 
          SO YES. 
          YEAH, THAT YES, YOU, YEAH, THAT, THAT IS, UM, THAT IS STILL A RISK FOR LOADS THAT CANNOT RIDE THROUGH, BUT THAT, THAT'S NOT A BATCH CLASSIFICATION ISSUE. 
          OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          NEXT IS JOHN ROSS, SUB JOHN SUBURB WITH TIC. 
          COULD YOU GO TO SLIDE 46 PLEASE? I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM WHETHER THE LARGE LOADS 
          [03:40:01]
THAT EITHER HAVE REQUESTED INITIAL ENERGIZATION, UH, BEFORE OR AFTER THOSE DATES, IF THE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT THAT IS BEING REFERRED TO IS ONE THAT MEETS THE 5 8 4 8 1 REQUIREMENTS, OR IS IT, OR DE LOADS WITH AN EXISTING INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT QUALIFY? UM, IF YOU ARE, I THINK NOT ONE OF THESE, THEN THE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT CONTEMPLATED HERE IS THE, UM, THE COPY, UH, COPY PASTE FROM 58 4 81. 
          OKAY. 
          BECAUSE ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE, IT SPEC SPECIFICALLY SAYS THAT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS AND HERE IT DOESN'T. 
          SO I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT DISCREPANCY ON THE SLIDES. 
          THANKS. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, YEAH, AND, AND, AND MAYBE, UM, I SHOULD, UH, I SHOULD HAVE MADE THIS DISCLAIMER UPFRONT, UH, TO THE EXTENT THAT THE SLIDES AND THE BIGGER LANGUAGE DO NOT AGREE, THE BIGGER LANGUAGE IS WHAT IS SUBMITTED AND WHAT WILL ULTIMATELY BE VOTED ON. 
          THANK YOU. 
          SO YEAH. 
          ALRIGHT, UH, WE'RE GETTING DOWN CLOSER TO TWO 30. 
          AT TWO 30, I AM GONNA PAUSE TO LET THE COMMENTERS DO, UH, THEIR LITTLE PIECE AND THEN WE'LL PICK UP THE QUEUE AGAIN. 
          SO IF WE CUT OFF AT TWO 30, JUST KEEP YOUR QUESTION ON A PIECE OF PAPER, UH, ONTO BLAKE KING. 
          HI, BLAKE KING, GALAXY POWER. 
          UH, I, YOU KNOW, I HAVE TO SAY I'M PRETTY APPALLED AT SORT OF WHAT I'M HEARING SO FAR, WHICH IS THAT A APPROVALS AS UNDERSTOOD BEFORE ARE NOT FIRM, WHICH I FEEL LIKE ERCOT HAS SORT OF GUIDED TIME AND TIME AGAIN THAT REACHING A MUST STUDY MILESTONE PUTS YOU AS FIRM. 
          SO I, I I DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT TO SAY TO THAT. 
          I, I THINK THAT'S FAIRLY SURPRISING TO EVERYONE AT THE WORKSHOP, OR AT LEAST I HOPE IT IS. 
          UH, I I HAVE A QUESTION, WHICH IS, WHENEVER YOU'RE MAKING THIS LIST AND YOU'RE COMPARING TO RPG BASED PROJECTS, IS THE DATE GONNA BE THE RPG SUBMISSION DATE FOR COMPARISON, OR IS IT GONNA BE THE RPG ACCEPTANCE DATE AND I'M LOOKING AT THREE EIGHT ROMAN NUMERATE TWO CAPITAL A. 
          JEFF, CAN YOU GO TO, UM, THIS IS IN 9 2 1 4. 
          YEAH. 
          YEAH, SO, UM, THE, YEAH, THE CAPITAL A THERE PLACE. 
          YEAH, THE PLACEMENT IN THE REVIEW IS BASED ON THE DATE OF, OF RPG ACCEPTANCE OR ERCOT ENDORSEMENT, DEPENDING ON THE TIER LEVEL OF THE PROJECT. 
          UM, HOWEVER THE SUBMISSION DATE WOULD HAVE RELEVANCE IN THE EVENTS. 
          AND THIS IS, UH, YEAH, THE TIE BREAK, RIGHT? YOU'RE BREAKING A TIE. 
          EXACTLY. 
          GOT IT. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, SO, OKAY. 
          MY NEXT QUESTION THEN IS, UM, IF, IF, IF YOU'RE POTENTIALLY MAKING THIS LIST, THEN I FEEL LIKE IF, IF FOLKS ARE GETTING INDICATIONS THAT THEY'RE NOT FIRM EVERY DAY THAT GOES BY, THAT THIS LIST ISN'T SHARED WITH FOLKS, COULD BE A DAY THAT FOLKS ARE SPENDING MONEY ON PROJECTS THAT THEY THOUGHT WERE FIRM, BUT ARE NOT FIRM. 
          AND SO I THINK IF, IF THE INTENTION IS TO DO THIS, THEN PEOPLE NEED TO SEE THIS LIST IMMEDIATELY SO THAT WE CAN MAKE DETERMINATIONS AND THEN FEEL ABOUT HOW WE STAND ON THESE PROPOSALS. 
          UH, RIGHT. 
          AND SO I THINK, YEAH, I, I COULD PROBABLY TALK ON AND ON ABOUT THIS. 
          I, I, I'M KIND OF AT A LOSS FOR WORDS, BUT I'LL, I'LL STOP HERE. 
          ALL RIGHT, EVAN, NEIL, EVAN, NEIL LANCIA, I HAVE A COUPLE COMMENTS HERE, SO TRY TO GET THROUGH THEM QUICKLY AND MAYBE FIND A QUESTION SOMEWHERE TO ASK. 
          UM, SO I, I THINK FIRST WHAT SHANNON WAS TALKING ABOUT, AND I, I GUESS HE LEFT THE ROOM, BUT THAT, THAT WAS, I THINK, PRETTY IMPORTANT AND SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. 
          AND THEN, UH, ABOUT THE RPGS AND THAT DECEMBER 15TH CUTOFF, UM, BECAUSE I THINK WE'VE SEEN SOME STUFF THAT'S BEEN SUBMITTED AFTERWARDS AND TO SHANNON'S POINTS AND THAT STUFF COULD HAVE BEEN UNDER WORKS FOR, YOU KNOW, THE LAST 6, 7, 8 MONTHS. 
          UM, AND TO THE POINT, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND WHY YOU GUYS PICKED DECEMBER 15TH TO ALIGN WITH PICK ONE 15, AND I'VE HEARD A COUPLE TIMES IT SAID THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT IS THE ONLY VALID WAY TO CONNECT A LOAD. 
          NOW, I MEAN, I THINK I JUST WANNA POINT OUT THAT, THAT WE'RE ALL CONGREGATED HERE TO FIGURE OUT A PROCESS THAT DOESN'T ALIGN WITH THAT, YOU KNOW, QUOTE UNQUOTE VALID WAY TO INTERCONNECT A LOAD RIGHT NOW. 
          AND SO I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD CONSIDER THAT OUT OF THE SCOPE OR, OR THAT DATE HAVING ANY SIGNIFICANCE WHEN THE REALITY IS THAT AN RPG SUBMITTED ON THE 14TH AND 
          [03:45:01]
RPG SUBMITTED ON THE 16TH ARE GONNA BE THE SAME STUDY AND ARE GONNA, YOU KNOW, ACHIEVE THE SAME THING. 
          SO IF OUR GOAL IS ACTUALLY APPROVING LOADS BASED OFF OF ACTIONABLE TRANSMISSION PLANS, AND I THINK WE SHOULD CONSIDER THAT. 
          UM, AND THEN I ALSO KIND OF WANT TO ECHO OR, OR MAYBE JUST TALK THROUGH THE, THE LIST APPROACH FOR FIGURING OUT WHAT STUDIES ARE VALID AND THEN MAYBE JUST EXPRESS SOME CONCERN THAT, YOU KNOW, I THINK ANYBODY WHO HAS BEEN THROUGH THE LLI PROCESS AS IT EXISTS TODAY HAS EXPERIENCED SOME FORM OF, OF NEEDING TO UD TO INCLUDE A NEW LOAD, YOU KNOW, THE PROBLEM WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS. 
          AND SO IT'S A LITTLE CONCERNING TO ME TO HEAR THAT MY LOAD COULD BE ASSESSED EVEN THOUGH I'VE MET 9.4, 9.5 INVALID BECAUSE, UM, THERE'S ANOTHER LOAD THAT WASN'T CONSIDERED, AND IN MY VIEW THAT WAS SCOPE CONTROLLED BY ERCOT. 
          AND SO IT SEEMS A LITTLE BIT OUT OF MY CONTROL AS A LOAD DEVELOPER WHETHER OR NOT, UM, THAT WAS ACHIEVED OR NOT. 
          AND IT SEEMS MORE LIKE IT'S, IT'S ON ERCOT HANDS. 
          UM, AND THEN ALSO JUST THINKING THROUGH THE LIST AND HOW IT'S KIND OF TIERED RIGHT NOW WITH, WITH LARGE LOADS, UH, THAT WENT THROUGH LILLIS AND RPG SUBMITTALS, IF I'M THINKING ABOUT IT, RIGHT, THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANY RPG ACCORDING TO THIS PROCESS THAT HAS VALID STUDIES BECAUSE HOW A LILLIS IS STUDIED, I MEAN, THAT LOAD'S NOT GONNA BE MODELED UNTIL IT MEETS THAT 9.4 OR NINE 5.5 CRITERIA, SO IT WOULDN'T, WOULDN'T BE IN THOSE BASE CASE MODELS THAT RPGS WERE ASSUMED ON. 
          AND SO I THINK IF, YOU KNOW, THAT'S GONNA BE THE OUTCOME, WE SHOULD REALLY CONSIDER THIS HERE. 
          AND I, I, I GUESS I'M JUST CURIOUS IF YOU GUYS HAVE KIND OF GAMED OUT THIS LIST PROCESS AND KIND OF HAVE AN IDEA OF HOW IT SHAKES OUT ALREADY OR IF THIS IS KIND OF THE FIRST GO AT IT. 
          SO IF YOU'RE ASKING, HAVE WE MADE THE LIST BASED ON WHAT WE THINK TODAY, WE, WE HAVE NOT, UM, WE HAVE WALKED THROUGH THE SCENARIOS AND, AND TRIED TO LAY OUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT, HOW THAT WOULD WORK. 
          BUT HAVE WE PUT ACTUAL PROJECTS ON A LIST? WE HAVE NOT. 
          OKAY. 
          I, I THINK, YOU KNOW, ACTUALLY GAMING THAT OUT COULD BE SOME VALUABLE INSIGHT INTO WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY ACHIEVING WITH BATCH ZERO. 
          AND JUST LASTLY, WOULD WANT TO POINT OUT THAT TO ME, IT SEEMS LIKE A BIT OF A CONTRADICTION IN TAKING THIS APPROACH OF LOADS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN APPROVED IN THE PAST AND UNDOING THEM, UM, BECAUSE WE THINK MAYBE THEIR STUDY'S NOT VALID OR WE CAN'T SERVE THEM WHEN WE'RE TAKING THE OPPOSITE APPROACH IN BATCH ZERO AND SAYING, WELL, WE'LL GIVE YOU YOUR FULL AMOUNT ON SOME DATE AND WE'LL FIGURE THE TRANSMISSION SOLUTION OUT LATER. 
          THOSE SEEM TO BE OPPOSITE APPROACHES TO ME. 
          WELL, I THINK IT'S NOT BECAUSE IN, IN THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT YEAR SIX, RIGHT? AND SO YOU HAVE TIME TO GET THAT TRANSMISSION IN PLACE. 
          WE'RE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT LOADS THAT MAY BE ENERGIZING IN 2028. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T HOPE THAT THE TRANSMISSION IS GOING TO BE THERE. 
          WE, WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO LOOK AT STUDIES AND KNOW THAT THOSE LOADS THAT ARE COMING IN, IN 2028, THAT WE CAN RELIABLY SERVE THOSE. 
          AND, AND SO I THINK THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE, THE BASIS OF, OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE. 
          AND I'LL SAY, UH, HEAR THE FEEDBACK. 
          I THINK CONCEPTUALLY WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO IS, UM, UH, IF, IF YOU HAVE A LOAD THAT HAS MET 9, 4, 9 5, THEN THAT, AND, AND YOU'VE MET THAT PREVIOUSLY, LIKE THAT LOAD IS LIKELY GOING TO BE, UH, CONSIDERED BASE LOAD, UH, IN ASSUMING YOU MEET THE OTHER CRITERIA, RIGHT? UM, IT, IT'S, I THINK WHAT WE'RE, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO WITH THIS LANGUAGE IS THE STUFF THAT COMES IN ON JULY 14TH, JULY 15TH, WE HAVE TO KIND OF SORT THAT SO CON CONCEPTUALLY THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE HERE. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, IF, IF Y'ALL HAVE A BETTER WAY OF DOING THAT, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, OUR, OUR FOCUS BY HAVING THIS, THIS KIND OF, UH, LANGUAGE HERE IS, IS TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN RELIABLY SERVE THE LOADS THAT ARE, UM, YOU KNOW, MEETING THE, THE, THE BASE LOAD CRITERIA. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH, I THINK THAT CONTEXT WAS VERY HELPFUL AND WAS DIFFERENT FROM MY READ OF THIS LANGUAGE. 
          UH, I THINK WE COULD GET TO SOMETHING THAT'S MUCH CLOSER TO WHAT YOU DESCRIBED WITH SOME, SOME EDITS THAT CLARIFY THAT TO BE A MORE NEXT FEW MONTHS TYPE PROBLEM WE'RE ADDRESSING RATHER THAN RETROACTIVELY, UM, SAYING WE'RE ON IMPROVING A 9.5 LOAD BECAUSE IT DIDN'T CONSIDER, YOU KNOW, THIS OTHER LOAD FARTHER AWAY. 
          SO. 
          OKAY. 
          THANKS JEFF. 
          ALRIGHT, 
          [5. Market Comments filed on NPRR/PGRR (if any)]
SO IT'S TWO 30, SO WE'RE GONNA PARK 10 PEOPLE IN THE LOT HERE ON QUESTIONS SO THEY CAN COME BACK TO, UH, JEFF AND I ARE GONNA SWITCH POSITIONS PART TO GET 'EM OFF THE HOT SEAT AND THEN I'M GONNA 
          [03:50:01]
OPEN UP, UM, WE'RE GONNA GO THROUGH, UM, COMMENTS THAT WERE FILED. 
          ONE WAS JUST AN EMAIL AND ONE WAS FILED THIS MORNING, BUT I WASN'T VERY GOOD GETTING MY MATERIALS TOGETHER. 
          SO WE'LL HAVE SOME GRACE FOR THIS ONE, BUT WE'LL GO SHOPPER ENERGY CONSULTING FIRST AND I'LL OPEN THE, AT THE PODIUM THERE, FOLLOWED BY BILL BARNES, FOLLOWED BY, UH, MIKE DEBREE, FOLLOWED BY ROTH, FOLLOWED BY TYLER. 
          LOOKING TO SEE 10 MINUTES UNINTERRUPTED TO GET THE QUESTIONS OUT THERE IN FIVE MINUTES OF QUESTIONS AFTERWARDS IF NEEDED. 
          AND LEMME GET TO THE PODIUM. 
          ALL RIGHT, SO THESE ARE IN THE ZIP FILE WITH THE POSTING. 
          ALL RIGHT, ANDREW, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR FOR 10 MINUTES. 
          ALRIGHT, THANKS MATT. 
          ANDREW, SHOPPER, SHOPPER ENERGY CONSULTING, I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT HERE. 
          UM, WE DID PUT COMMENTS OUT FOR PICKER 1 45 AND MOST OF OUR COMMENTS ARE DIRECTED AT THE SECTION 9.24. 
          UM, SO JUST QUICKLY, UM, YOU KNOW, THE PUC ON THE RECORD HAS SAID THAT THE CURRENT PLANNING GUIDE REMAINS IN FULL FORCE IN EFFECT, AND WE'VE HEARD THE SAME FROM ERCOT ON THIS, ON THIS MATTER. 
          UH, AND SO OUT OF THIS, WE WOULD ASK ERCOT TO REAFFIRM, UH, THIS POSITION TODAY AND CONFIRM THAT APPROVALS UNDER SECTION NINE FOUR AND NINE FIVE LEGACY, UH, WOULD CONSTITUTE BASELOAD QUALIFICATIONS AND OTHER STUDIES AND BE RESPECTED IN ANY SUCCESSOR FRAMEWORK. 
          WE WANNA MAKE A COUPLE POINTS HERE, UH, AND THIS IS GONNA DEVIATE A LITTLE BIT FROM THESE BIGGER COMMENTS. 
          UH, RETROACTIVE MODIFICATION OF THE APPROVALS ALREADY GRANTED WILL INFLICT MATERIAL FINANCIAL HARM ON CUSTOMERS WHO RELIED ON THE CURRENT PLANNING PROCEDURES. 
          UH, THESE CUSTOMERS HAVE ISSUED NOTICES TO PROCEED AND EXECUTED, UH, BINDING NON TERMINABLE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENTS. 
          THEY'VE PROCURED LONG LEAD EQUIPMENT AND THEY'VE COMMENCED CONSTRUCTION IN MANY CASES. 
          SO THIS IS HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS DEPLOYED UNDER THE RULES CURRENTLY IN EFFECT, UH, IF THOSE APPROVALS ARE NOW SUBJECT TO REVISITATION, THE CONSEQUENCES WILL BE PRETTY SEVERE. 
          ERCOT SHOULD NOT ADOPT, AND THE PUC SHOULD NOT SANCTION RULES THAT RETROACTIVELY UNDERMINE APPROVALS THAT THE MARKET RELIED UPON TO MAKE MAJOR CAPITAL INVESTMENTS. 
          SECOND, AND, AND KIND OF A KEY PIECE OF, UH, THIS BIGGER COMMENT HAS TO DO WITH, UH, THE CIRCULARITY WITH, WITH THIS PART OF THE RULES. 
          SO IN 9.2 0.14, IT'S ENVISIONED THAT ERCOT WOULD HAVE THIS LOOK BACK PERIOD AT THE PRIOR STUDIES TO SEE IF THEY ARE VALID. 
          HOWEVER, UH, ERCOT IS ASKING FOR BINDING COMMITMENTS FROM CUSTOMERS IN THE FORM OF PROCUREMENT AND CONSTRUCTION ATTEST STATIONS, WHICH WOULD MEAN THAT THEY WOULD BE BUILDING FACILITIES BEFORE THEY UNDERSTOOD THAT THEY WERE FIRM OR NOT. 
          UM, AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE ABSOLUTE FOR, FOR CUSTOMERS. 
          IT HAS TO BE EITHER YOU ARE FIRM OR YOU ARE NOT. 
          98% FIRM IS NOT FIRM. 
          UM, SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT REQUIRES FINALITY FROM ERCOT AND I THINK THE MARKET PARTICIPANTS, UH, YOU KNOW, HAVE BROUGHT THIS POINT UP A COUPLE TIMES. 
          BUT, YOU KNOW, I, I'LL ALSO JUST SAY THAT FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, JUST THE MERE INCLUSION OF SECTION 9.4 IS, IS DEEPLY DAMAGING TO MARKET CONFIDENCE. 
          IT SIGNALS THAT ERCOT VIEWS THESE COMPLETED APPROVALS AS PROVISIONAL RATHER THAN FINAL, AND THAT FREEZES INVESTMENT. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, IF ERCOT IS NOT GONNA HONOR THE RULES CURRENTLY IN EFFECT, THEN STAKEHOLDERS DON'T HAVE A BASIS TO TRUST THE NEW RULES UNDER THE BATCH FRAMEWORK AND THAT DAMAGE IS HAPPENING NOW AND IT EXTENDS TO EVERY OTHER RULE SET UNDER CONSIDERATION. 
          UM, I THINK WE'VE KIND OF TOUCHED ON THE CIRCULARITY AROUND THE CONSTRUCTION ATTESTATION, BUT MAYBE JUST TO BE MORE POINTED ON THIS, YOU KNOW, FOR THOSE PROJECTS THAT HAVE TO ENERGIZE PRE DECEMBER 31ST, 2027, AND THAT'S THEIR SCHEDULE, THEY EFFECTIVELY HAVE TO BE UNDER CONSTRUCTION RIGHT NOW. 
          AND SO FOR THEM TO WAIT UNTIL AUGUST AS WAS SUGGESTED TO UNDERSTAND WHETHER THEY'RE FIRM OR NOT IS SIMPLY NOT ACCEPTABLE. 
          IT'S, IT'S, UH, IT'S, IT IS ITS OWN CONTRADICTION WITHIN THIS PIGGER. 
          SO THAT'S OUR MAIN POINT HERE. 
          UM, AND WE WOULD JUST, WE WOULD JUST URGE ERCOT TO CONSIDER THE, YOU KNOW, MARKET IMPLICATIONS FOR THIS AS WELL AS THE IMPLICATIONS FOR FOLKS WHO ARE ALREADY UNDER CONSTRUCTION RELYING ON THOSE CURRENT APPROVALS. 
          SO I'LL YIELD THE REST OF MY TIME TO ANYBODY THAT'S NEXT HERE. 
          EXCELLENT, THANK YOU ANDREW. 
          ALRIGHT, 
          [03:55:02]
WANT ME TO PULL UP BILL BARNES COMMENTS? YEAH, WHAT WE'LL DO IS JUST KINDA MOTOR THROUGH THESE COMMENTS AND THEN THAT MAY MAKE ROOM FOR MORE TIME ON THESE QUESTIONS. 
          ALRIGHT BILL. 
          THANKS MATT. 
          UM, THESE ARE IN I THINK A CLARIFYING EDIT, BUT, UH, WANNA MAKE SURE, UM, THROUGHOUT THE CRITERIA, UH, LISTING FOR BATCH ZERO, IT, IT TALKS ABOUT HAVING, UH, COMPLETED INTERCONNECTION STUDIES, UH, SECTION 9 1 9 2 1 4 AS PART OF THE FORMER 9.4, 9.5, UH, FIGURE ONE 13, UH, INTERCONNECTION STUDIES. 
          PART OF THOSE RULES ALSO ALLOW A, UM, LARGE LOAD THAT'S CO-LOCATED WITH THE NEW GENERATION RESOURCE THAT GOES THROUGH THE FULL INTERCONNECTION STUDY FOR A-G-I-N-R TO HAVE THAT FIS FULFILL THE LLIS REQUIREMENTS OR ACT IN LIEU OF AN LOIS. 
          SO WE ARE JUST CONFIRMING THAT THAT IS INDEED THE FACT. 
          AND SO WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT, UM, HAVING COMPLETED, UH, INTERCONNECTION STUDIES, THAT THAT INCLUDES THAT COMPONENT AS WELL. 
          UM, AND MAKING SURE THAT'S CLEAR THAT THAT PROJECTS THAT HAVE A-G-I-N-R COMPLETED FIS STUDY BY JULY 15TH WOULD ALSO BE INCLUDED IN BATCH ZERO, UM, AS BASE LOAD, JUST LIKE ALL THE OTHER LOAD PROJECTS THAT GO THROUGH THE LIS. 
          AND I MUST TO ASK ANDREW, BUT I'LL ASK YOU, DO YOU HAVE PROPOSAL LANGUAGE HERE FOR THIS PART? WAS THERE A I DO PARAGRAPH. 
          CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT PAGE THAT WAS ON IF HANDY OR WHAT, UH, IS IN SECTION 9.2 E? GOT IT. 
          THANK YOU SIR. 
          THIS IS ALSO THE PARAGRAPH WHERE, UH, WASN'T SURE WHAT THE, IF IT WAS AN OR OR AN AND 'CAUSE IT SAYS IN E ALL OF THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS, BUT THERE IS AN OR SEPARATING THE PARAGRAPH. 
          SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THE OR SHOULD BE AN AND UM, THIS EDIT COULD BE INSERTED IN MULTIPLE DIFFERENT PLACES IN THE PIGGER. 
          I PUT IT HERE JUST TO MAKE IT CLEAR, BUT UM, UNDER EI WHERE IT SAYS THE ERCOT HAS DETERMINED THE LARGE LOAD HAS A COMPLETE AND VALID SET OF INTERCONNECTION STUDIES, IT CAN ALSO BE INCLUDED IN 0.9 0.4 AS WELL JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT'S CLEAR. 
          SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR. 
          ALRIGHT, THANK YOU BILL. 
          YEP. 
          AND ANDREW, I HAD READ YOUR COMMENTARY THIS MORNING, UH, BUT I FORGOT, DID YOU HAVE ANY RED LINE LANGUAGE IN YOUR REVISIONS? I DID. 
          IT WAS MOSTLY A SAFE HARBOR LANGUAGE THAT WAS TO BE INSERTED IN SECTION 9 2 1 4. 
          UM, IT'S, UH, PROVISION THREE. 
          THE MAIN CHANGE WAS TO REMOVE THE MAJORITY OF THIS SECTION AND SIMPLY PUT A SAFE HARBOR FOR THOSE FOLKS WHO HAVE MET NINE FOUR AND NINE FIVE AS THE CURRENT, AS THE CURRENT RULE. 
          BUT WE WOULD, WE WOULD CONSIDER SOME SORT OF ALTERNATIVE THERE, SO LONG AS IT COMMUNICATED THAT CLEARLY. 
          VERY GOOD. 
          ANY QUESTIONS ON THE LANGUAGE CHANGE PROPOSED AGAIN FOR CLARITY. 
          ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT, AND THEN MIKEY, SO, ALRIGHT. 
          YEP, GO AHEAD. 
          I MEAN, FIRST MY APOLOGIES THAT I DIDN'T FOLLOW THE DUE PROCESSES. 
          SORRY, ARE YOU SPEAKING? GET CLOSER TO THE MICROPHONE. 
          UH, THAT HELPS. 
          CAN YOU, ALRIGHT, CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW OR THAT IS A LITTLE BETTER. 
          YES, GO AHEAD. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          UH, SO, UH, WELL THE FIRST COMMENT WAS, UH, WELL FIRST I'M GONNA SAY THAT AGAIN, SORRY FOR, I MEAN, MY APOLOGIES FOR NOT BEING PROCESSING, UH, FOLLOWING THE DUE PROCESS, UH, AND ACCEPTING THE EMAILS AS MY COMMENTS. 
          UH, THE FIRST COMMENT IS ABOUT, UH, BASICALLY WHAT ANDREW TALKED ABOUT. 
          IT'S KIND OF VERY SIMILAR. 
          UH, WE DO BELIEVE THAT THERE HAS TO BE SOME SORT OF A SAFE HARBOR THAT, UH, UH, GIVES SOME SORT OF A EXCEPTION TO THE PROJECTS THAT HAVE MET SECTION 9.4 OR THE LEGACY SECTION 9.4 AND 9.5. 
          UH, AND TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE, UH, CONCERNS THAT, UH, I GUESS JEFF BROUGHT UP, UH, WE CAN PROBABLY HAVE A DATE IN THERE THAT ANY PROJECT THAT, UH, MET THE SECTION 9.4 OR 9.5 AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS BEFORE, UH, TO BE DETERMINED DATE, UH, BASICALLY 
          [04:00:01]
THEY SHOULD BE INCLUDED AS A BASE LOAD. 
          UH, BUT THAT'S KIND OF CONSISTENT WITH WHAT I THINK ANDREW WAS TALKING ABOUT. 
          NOW WE CAN DEBATE WHERE THE LANGUAGE SHOULD BE, BUT, UH, WE HAVEN'T PROPOSED ANY LANGUAGE. 
          UM, SO THAT WAS MY FIRST, UH, COMMENT. 
          UM, THE, THIS SECOND COMMENT WAS, UH, SECTION 9 4 3 AI, UH, VERY TALKS ABOUT, UH, A DYNAMIC LOAD MODELS AND THE FACT THAT, UH, TSPS, THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE A WRITTEN STATEMENT THAT THE DYNAMIC LOAD MODEL IS THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF IT IS THAT IS BASICALLY CONSISTENT WITH WHAT HAS BEEN USED FOR THIS STUDIES. 
          UH, THE BACKGROUND IS, I MEAN, MANY LOADS HAVE BEEN, HAVE BEEN THROUGH THIS L-L-L-I-S PROCESS FOR LAST YEAR OR SO, AND THEY HAVE SUBMITTED THE LOAD MODELS, UH, MANY MONTHS BEFORE, AND THOSE LOAD MODELS HAVE BEEN USED TO PERFORM THE ANALYSIS. 
          AND AS, AS YOU MAY RECALL, A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, THERE WAS NO, UH, SPECIFIC, UH, LARGE LOAD MODELS IN THE INDUSTRY FOR VERY LONG TIME. 
          PEOPLE WERE USING WHAT NERC HAD PUT TOGETHER FOR A DATA CENTER LOAD, SOME SORT OF A TYPICAL, UH, LOAD, UH, UH, MIXED PERCENTAGES. 
          UH, AND THEN AFTER THAT, IEE STARTED THINKING ABOUT WHAT THOSE DYNAMIC LOADS SHOULD BE. 
          UM, SOME PEOPLE THEY KIND OF DEVELOP THEIR OWN USER DEFINED MODELS. 
          SOME UM, SOME, I MEAN SOME THEY JUST CONTINUED USING THE COMPLEX MODEL. 
          AND THEN FINALLY, I GUESS A FEW WEEKS OR A FEW MONTHS AGO, ERCOT KIND OF RECOMMENDED ANOTHER LOAD MODEL DEVELOPED IN COLLABORATION WITH EPR. 
          SO THAT PROCESS HAS BEEN EVOLVING PROCESS AND NOW SUDDENLY PUTTING THAT REQUIREMENT THAT THE MOST RECENT LOAD MODEL HAS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THOSE LOADS THAT HAVE BEEN STUDIED BEFORE, I THINK THAT'S NOT, UM, THAT'S NOT THE RIGHT APPROACH. 
          WE BASICALLY REQUEST THAT INSTEAD OF USING, UH, A VERBIAGE OF CONSISTENCY, WE, WE, UH, KIND OF, UH, UH, INTRODUCE A CRITERIA THAT SAYS, UH, TSB OR ANY THIRD PARTY OR THE INTERCONNECTION, UH, OR THE INTERCONNECTING LARGE LOAD ENTITY, THEY HAVE TO PERFORM CERTAIN, UH, ANALYSIS TO SHOW THAT THE PERFORMANCE OF THE MOST RECENT, UH, LOAD MODELS HAS NOT MATERIALLY CHANGE OR IS NOT ADVERSELY IMPACTING THE, BASICALLY THE STABILITY OF THE GRID. 
          UH, SOME KIND OF SENTENCE IN THAT, IN THAT, I MEAN IN THAT DIRECTION. 
          BUT JUST, UH, SAYING THAT IT HAS TO BE CONSISTENT. 
          UM, UH, BESIDES THE FACT THAT BEING CONSISTENT IS KIND OF VAGUE IN MY OPINION. 
          WHAT I MEAN WHAT CONSISTENCY MEANS, THAT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE EXACT MODEL, DOESN'T HAVE TO BE EXACT PARAMETERS, BUT I THINK WE HAVE TO FOCUS ON THE PERFORMANCE JUST OTHER THAN THE, THE MODEL ITSELF. 
          UH, SO THAT WAS MY, UH, SECOND COMMENT. 
          AND THEN I HAVE TWO MORE QUESTION, WHICH ONE OF THEM IS HERE AND ONE OF THEM I JUST, UH, UH, CAME TO MY MIND DURING TODAY WORKSHOP. 
          UH, THE QUESTION IS ABOUT A LARGE LOAD. 
          UH, THIS MIGHT HAVE BEEN DEFINED SOMEWHERE AND IF IT HAS, UH, MY APOLOGIES FOR KIND OF, UH, IGNORING THAT, BUT I FEEL LIKE THERE HAS TO BE A, A SPECIFIC DEFINITION OF WHAT LARGE LOAD ENERGIZATION MEANS. 
          IS IT ENERGIZATION OF THE SUBSTATION OR IS IT ACTUALLY ENERGIZATION OF, OF LET'S SAY IN THE CASE OF DATA CENTER IS GONNA BE DATA CENTER WAREHOUSES. 
          UH, I THINK THAT HAS, UH, UH, A WEIGHT ON HOW SOME OF THESE LANGUAGES WILL BE, UH, WILL BE INTERPRETED. 
          UH, SO THAT'S A QUESTION AND WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE AN ANSWER NOW, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING JUST TO CONSIDER. 
          UH, AND THE LAST POINT WAS, UH, AND I KIND OF BROUGHT THAT, UH, AS A COMMENT TODAY, WAS WHAT IS THE RATIONALE BEHIND THE FACT THAT ERCOT IS KIND OF, UH, CONSIDERING POSTING THE, UH, BASE CASE DATA FOR THE BATCH ZERO AND FOLLOWING BATCHES INTO A, UH, UH, MIS UH, SECURITY OF SITE? UH, WHEREAS THE ENTIRE OBJECTIVE WAS, I GUESS TO INCREASE THE TRANSPARENCY. 
          AND I FEEL LIKE NOW THAT, UH, A LARGE LOAD CUSTOMERS THAT HAVE TO WAIT AT LEAST SIX MONTHS TO FIND OUT WHAT IS THE RESULT OF THEIR PROJECT, THEY SHOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO UH, UH, PERFORM SOME SORT OF ANALYSIS, I MEAN AT THEIR OWN, UH, TO KIND OF DE-RISK SOME OF THIS PROJECT BEFORE THEY, UH, ENTER THE MARKET AND THEY ENTER THE QUEUE AND WAIT AT LEAST FOR SIX MONTHS TO KIND OF HEAR BACK, UH, AND POSTING THOSE MODELS IN A BASICALLY SECURED AREA. 
          I DON'T THINK THAT'S GONNA ALLOW THAT BECAUSE THE SECURE AREA IS ONLY, 
          [04:05:01]
IS ACCESSIBLE BY ERCOT AND TO MY UNDERSTANDING TSP, UM, SO MAYBE, UH, AIRCO CAN COME UP WITH A WORKAROUND TO, IF THERE IS ANY CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT CANNOT BE DISCLOSED, REMOVE THOSE FROM THE CASES. 
          AND BASICALLY THOSE CASES BE POSTED ON A, UH, ON A MIS UH, THE OTHER CATEGORY KIND OF ESCAPE MY MIND, BUT, UH, THERE WAS A, ANOTHER AREA IN THE MI THAT WE CAN BASICALLY USE, UH, THAT BASICALLY PROVIDES BROADER ACCESS. 
          UH, SO THAT WAS IT FROM MY SIDE. 
          ALRIGHT, THANK YOU MIKE. 
          UM, ON THE LARGE LOAD ENERGIZATION, I DON'T KNOW IF WE MAY NEED TO TAKE THAT BACK IF THERE'S A SHARP DEFINITION OF THAT OR NOT, BUT, UM, ANY OTHER OR CAUGHT THOUGHTS AT LEAST? YEAH, I'M SORRY, MIS CERTIFIED VERSUS SECURE. 
          I JUST TOTALLY, UH, MISSED THAT, THAT, BUT, BUT I'M SURE YOU ALL, UH, CUT CONCEPT. 
          YEAH, YEAH. 
          ON THE POSTINGS, RIGHT, IT'S I A SECURE MS CERTIFIED, CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          . 
          SO ON THE LARGE LOAD YEAH. 
          ON LAR, THIS IS AGING SPRINGER, UH, ON, ON THE LARGE LOAD IZATION, UH, I GUESS IS, IS THERE, IS THAT TERM USED IN THE PIGGER THAT, THAT WE MIGHT HAVE MISSED? THE INTENT WAS TO USE INITIALIZATION, WHICH IS A DEFINED TERM IN THE PROTOCOLS. 
          UH, UH, NO, AND, AND PROBABLY I SHOULD NOT USE THE, UH, CAPITAL PILLAR HERE, BUT IT WAS, UH, MANY PLACES THAT IT SAYS LIKE ENERGIZATION OR LARGE ENERGIZATION. 
          UH, AND, AND TO ME THAT WAS KIND OF CONFUSING THAT, IS IT ENERGIZATION OF THE SUBSTATION THE WAY WE, WE ALL KNOW IT, FOR EXAMPLE, FOR THE GENERATION ASSETS? OR IS IT ACTUALLY ENERGIZATION OF THE, OF THE, UH, DATA WAREHOUSES? YEAH, I, I, I THINK THE INTENT WAS TO USE INITIALIZATION THE DEFINED TERM IN AS MANY PLACES AS POSSIBLE FOR THAT CLARITY. 
          SO IF THERE IS A SPOT WHERE WE FAILED TO DO THAT, AND IT IS AMBIGUOUS, UH, CERTAINLY WE'RE, WE'RE OPENING TO CORRECT, OPEN TO CORRECT THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN, AND THEN CAN YOU PLEASE REMIND ME WHAT IS SHARP ENERGIZATION? UH, WELL, I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE SECTION TWO PULLED UP IN FRONT OF ME, SO I'LL JUST STATE THAT UP FRONT. 
          BUT IT'S THE, THE DATE AT WHICH THE LOAD BEGINS CONSUMING POWER FOR THE FIRST TIME. 
          OKAY. 
          SO THE LOAD BEGINS CONSUMING POWER. 
          OKAY. 
          MAKES SENSE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          THANK YOU AG. 
          THANK YOU MIKE. 
          ALRIGHT, AND THEN WE'LL GO TO HOW'S MIKE? SO DEBORAH ROTH, LEMME GET YOUR COMMENTS OPEN. 
          THANKS, MATT. 
          YOU'RE WELCOME. 
          SO I FILED FOUR COMMENTS FOR THE FIRST TWO. 
          I WANNA WALK THROUGH A SCENARIO. 
          UM, SO I HAVE A LOAD THAT HAS 9.4 9.5 APPROVED. 
          I SIGN INTO CONNECTION AGREEMENTS, EVERYTHING IS SET, AND I HAVE A Q3 27 ENERGIZATION DATE, RIGHT? SO NOW I'M WORKING ON, YOU KNOW, SECURING A TENANT, STARTING CONSTRUCTION SITE CONTROL. 
          NOW I'VE BEEN TOLD TO WAIT UNTIL AUGUST OR SEPTEMBER OF 2026 TO KNOW IF THE LOAD, UH, THE MEGAWATT AMOUNT IS FIRM OR NOT. 
          SO THAT DOESN'T LINE UP WITH THE ENERGIZATION, RIGHT? I MEAN, SO TO GET TO Q3 OR Q2 OR Q4 27 ENERGIZATION, I, I THINK ANDREW ALLUDED TO THIS, I NEED TO START ENERGIZATION NOW OR START THE CONSTRUCTION NOW. 
          SO IF I KNOW MY MEGAWATT AMOUNT IN AUGUST OF 26, THAT MEANS I'M LOOKING AT SOMEWHERE IN Q4 28 OR 29. 
          SO THE LOAD THAT GOT APPROVED FIRM IN THE CURRENT BIGGER ONE 15 PROCESS NOW STANDS IN LIMBO UNTIL AUGUST 1ST. 
          THAT MEANS WE ARE PUSHING OUT ENERGIZATION BY MORE THAN ANY YEAR, OR, YOU KNOW, SO THAT'S KIND OF ADDRESSING MY FIRST AND SECOND COMMENTS THAT THIS, THIS SHOULDN'T BE THE CASE, THAT WHATEVER LOADS THAT HAVE BIGGER ONE 15 APPROVED, UH, SHOULD BE GRANDFATHERED IN INTO BADGE ZERO AS BASE LOAD. 
          AMEN. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, AND THEN FOR THE RPG CUTOFF, UH, AGAIN, I AM NOT, I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S THE DATE FOR BIGGER ONE 15 PROCESS TO BE, YOU KNOW, UNBOXED. 
          BUT ANOTHER SCENARIO, I, I HAVE A LOAD THAT'S GOING THROUGH LLI PROCESS FOR LET'S SAY YEAR AND A HALF, A YEAR BEFORE THE BIGGER ONE 15 UNBOXING. 
          NOW, AS PER THIS CRITERIA, UH, SECTION 9.24, IT 
          [04:10:01]
SAYS THAT IF THERE IS AN RPG PROJECT FILED ON DECEMBER 15TH, THEN MY LOAD THAT HAS BEEN RESTUDIED BY ACOT FOR MORE THAN A YEAR, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT RPG PROJECT TAKES A PRIORITY OVER THIS LOAD THAT HAS BEEN RESTUDIED AND IT MAY BE SUBJECT TO, UM, REST STUDY. 
          SO AGAIN, I THINK MY OVERARCHING GOAL IS THAT BIGGER ONE 15 PROCESS SHOULD BE, UH, THAT'S THE CURRENT LAW AND SHOULD BE RESPECTED. 
          AND THOSE LOADS WITH 9.4 AND 9.5 SATISFIED, UH, SHOULD BE GRANDFATHERED IN. 
          SO THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I'M TRYING TO MAKE A POINT HERE AS WELL. 
          UM, AND THEN I THINK FOR, YEAH, I, I HEARD JEFF SAY THAT IF WE SIGN INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENTS, IF WE ARE GOING INTO BASE LOAD AS IN BADGE ZERO, THEN WE SHOULDN'T BE SUBJECTED TO THIS CRITERIA, RIGHT? SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I HEARD. 
          I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT I, THAT IS THE CORRECT PATH IS THAT, BUT THAT KIND OF REFLECTS HERE THAT, I MEAN, AGAIN, 5 4 81, MY UNDERSTANDING, AND IT'S WHAT I READ IS FOR THE NEW LOADS. 
          SO APPLYING THEM THESE CRITERIA TO LOADS THAT HAVE ALREADY SIGNED INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENTS OR PAID KAYAK IS KIND OF PAYING IN A, DOING A DUPLICATIVE CHARGES ON THOSE LOADS. 
          YEAH. 
          ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? I, HEY BRAD, THIS IS AG. 
          I, I MAY, I'M NOT SURE IT JANICE OR MATT, IS THERE A QUEUE FORMING? I'M NOT SURE. 
          NO, WE WERE KINDA HOLDING QUE, BUT IF YOU HAVE A CLARIFYING QUESTION JUST TO KIND OF ERCOT RESPONSE TO WHAT'S GOING ON BEFORE. 
          YES. 
          I JUST WANTED TO, TO CLARIFY ONE THING, AND I THINK IT WAS YOUR COMMENT THREE, UM, THAT THE INTENT IS NOT TO PRIORITIZE RPG OVER LILLI. 
          UM, AND I THINK IN THE EXAMPLE YOU GAVE THAT IF AN RPG WAS SUBMITTED ON THE 15TH, THAT IT WOULD BE PRIORITIZED OVER LILLI. 
          IN FACT, I WOULD KINDA ARGUE THAT WAS PROBABLY THE, THE T OPPOSITE IN THAT IT WOULD HAVE TO HAVE COMPLETED RPG ACCEPTANCE OR ERCOT INDEPENDENT REVIEW BY JULY 15TH TO EVEN BE ON THE LIST. 
          AND EVEN THEN IT WOULD BE THE ACCEPTANCE DATE THAT WOULD DETERMINE ITS PLACEMENT. 
          SO, UH, IT WOULD, IT, IT WOULD BE REVIEWED IN CONTEXT OF ALL THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED LILY'S, UM, AHEAD OF IT. 
          SO I JUST WANNA MAKE THAT CLARIFICATION THAT THE INTENT IS NOT, UM, THE INTENT IS NOT TO PRIORITIZE RPG OVER LILLI EXCEPT FOR IN THE EVENT THAT THEY BOTH REACHED COMPLETION ON THE SAME DATE THAT THAT IS IN THE TIEBREAKER RULES. 
          CAN CAN YOU GO TO THAT SECTION? THAT WHICH PART? SORRY? UH, THE TIEBREAKER SECTION. 
          I THINK THAT'S KIND OF, THAT'S HELPFUL AG, BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE. 
          IS THAT NINE TWO? I THINK IT'S, IT'S 9 2 1 4 4. 
          YEAH, I THINK IT'S PARAGRAPH THREE OR, OR, UH, SORRY, ONE, ONE. 
          YEAH, KEEP GOING DOWN. 
          OH, YOU PASSED IT PAST IT. 
          9 2 1 3 OR SHOULD I GO 9 2 1 4. 
          COOL. 
          9 2 1 4. 
          SO WE GO DOWN. 
          GOTCHA. 
          I THINK IT'S PARAGRAPH FOUR. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, OOPS. 
          OH, SORRY. 
          UH, THIS IS MY LANGUAGE, BUT, UH, 9 2 1 4 3 C HERE. 
          YEAH, SO, SO IF WE COULD LOOK AT, WE, IF WE COULD LOOK AT A FIRST. 
          YEAH. 
          YEP. 
          SO IF YOU LOOK HERE, SO IT, IT'S A LARGE LOAD THAT MEETS PARAGRAPH A TO A, IT'S A LARGE LOAD THAT WAS INCLUDED IN RPG STUDY THAT WAS SUBMITTED BY DECEMBER 15TH. 
          AND IF YOU READ ALL THE WAY THE END, THAT PARAGRAPH, IT ALSO ACHIEVED ACCEPTANCE OR ORCON ENDORSEMENT. 
          UH, MATT, IF YOU COULD SCROLL DOWN JUST A LITTLE BIT. 
          OH, SORRY. 
          HERE IT'S, UH, ON OR BEFORE JULY 15TH. 
          SO THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S HOW IT'S, UM, IT SAYS R HERE. 
          THAT'S THE CONFUSION, I THINK. 
          YEAH. 
          AND THEN IF WE GO DOWN TO, UM, IN A POWER, 
          [04:15:01]
SORRY, GO AHEAD. 
          IN A, UH, LINE NUMBER FOUR, IT SAYS RECEIVED RRPG ACCEPTANCE OR  ENDORSEMENT. 
          RIGHT. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH. 
          AND THAT'S, THAT'S INTENDED TO BE DEPENDENT ON THE TIER, YOU KNOW, UH, THE TIER CLASSIFICATION OF THE PROJECT. 
          SO THAT'S, THAT, THAT'S, UH, THE REASON FOR THE REFERENCE TO THE PROTOCOLS THERE. 
          YEAH. 
          SO, SO SOME, SOME PROJECTS, UM, GET A, UH, RPG ACCEPTANCE AND SOME GET ERCOT ENDORSEMENT. 
          YEAH. 
          IS THE IDEA FINE? I THINK THAT'S NOT WHERE I WAS LOOKING AT. 
          GO AHEAD, AJ. 
          YOU WERE EXPLAINING SOMETHING ELSE. 
          YEAH, UH, SORRY. 
          UH, AND THEN, UH, IF WE LOOK AT PARAGRAPH, UH, B, UH, I THINK THIS, SORRY, THE, THE MAIN PARAGRAPH BI, UH, UH, I'LL TAKE FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CONFUSING STRUCTURE OF THE, THE REFERENCES HERE. 
          UM, I THINK IT IS, I THINK WE COULD PROBABLY CLARIFY HERE THAT IT'S THE DATE OF RPG ACCEPTANCE ORCO ENDORSEMENT THAT DETERMINES THE PLACEMENT THERE. 
          IT WAS INTENDED TO BE CLEAR FROM, FROM THE PARAGRAPH ABOVE WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT. 
          BUT UM, YEAH, IN, IN LOOKING AT IT ON THE SCREEN, I CAN, I CAN SEE WHY THAT IS, UH, IS UNCLEAR. 
          I THINK IT'S THIS SECTION C THAT I HAD CONFUSION ABOUT, BUT WE CAN DISCUSS MORE, BUT THAT'S WHERE I WAS LIKE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, RIGHT, C FOUR OR C3. 
          YEAH. 
          SO THE, THE, THE REASON THAT THESE TIEBREAKER RULES ARE THERE, AND THIS I THINK SPEAKS TO ONE OF THE ISSUES IN THE CURRENT PROCESS IS, UH, THAT THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A LILLIS LOAD THAT RECEIVED NINE FIVE COMPLETED 9.5, AND ON THE SAME DAY POTENTIALLY THERE WAS A RPG STUDY THAT DID NOT INCLUDE THE LILLIS LOAD, 'CAUSE LILLIS LOAD HADN'T COMPLETED THOSE SECTIONS OF THE LILLIS PROCESS. 
          AND THERE ARE RPG LOADS, LOADS FROM THE RPG SUBMISSION THAT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN INCLUDED IN THE LILLIS 'CAUSE THEY WERE SUBMITTED AS, UH, OFFICER LETTER FOR EXAMPLE. 
          IF THOSE WERE TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE LAID OUT IN THE, IN THE INSURANCE CRITERIA, A COUPLE PARAGRAPHS UP ON THE SAME DAY, NEITHER STUDY IS REALLY IS POTENTIALLY V VALID, RIGHT? IT IS, YOU KNOW, THEY EACH COMPLETED SEPARATE PROCESSES WITHOUT INCLUDING EACH OTHER. 
          AND THAT'S ONE OF THE ISSUES WITH THE CURRENT CURRENT STRUCTURE. 
          THAT'S ALSO, I THINK ONE OF THE CONCERNS, AT LEAST I HAVE TO, THE SUGGESTION THAT WE, UM, ALLOW FOR RPG SUBMISSIONS THAT OCCURRED AFTER SECTION NINE OF THE PLANNING GUIDE BECAME EFFECTIVE TO ALSO ENTER INTO THIS LIST. 
          UM, I THINK THAT JUST EXACERBATES THAT PROBLEM. 
          UH, BUT THAT'S WHY THERE'S THIS NEED FOR TIE BREAKERS. 
          'CAUSE THE ALTERNATIVE WOULD BE BASICALLY TO, UH, TU BOTH OF THEM. 
          UM, SO, SO THAT, THAT'S WHY THAT STRUCTURE IS THERE. 
          SO BOTH OF THEM ARE APPROVED ON THE SAME DAY. 
          CORRECT. 
          IS THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE THE TIME BREAKER. 
          CORRECT. 
          IN THE EVENT THAT TWO LOADS, UH, MEET ONE OF THE ABOVE CRITERIA ON THE SAME DATE DETERMINING KINDA WHICH HAS PRIORITY. 
          YEAH, I HAVE OBJECTIONS TO THAT FOR RPG, BUT OKAY, THANKS. 
          HEY MATT, THIS IS BARKSDALE. 
          UM, I APOLOGIZE. 
          MY ATTENTION WAS TURNED ELSEWHERE BY A COMMISSIONER REQUEST. 
          I UNDERSTAND THERE WAS A QUESTION EARLIER ABOUT THE NEWER EXPANDING LOAD. 
          IS THAT RIGHT? OKAY. 
          UM, SO THAT LANGUAGE COMES FROM, DIRECTLY FROM PURA 37 0 5 6 1 SUBSECTION C TALKS ABOUT THE STANDARDS OR APPLYING TO CUSTOMERS REQUESTING A NEW OR EXPANDED INTERCONNECTION WHERE THE TOTAL LOAD EXCEEDS THE THRESHOLD. 
          AND SO THAT'S WHY IT'S NOT JUST APPLYING TO NEW LOADS. 
          SO DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? NO, I MEAN, SO IF THERE IS A LOAD, I UNDERSTAND IF YOU'RE APPLYING FOR EXPANSION AT CERTAIN THAT LOAD, THEN THESE RULES WILL APPLY. 
          RIGHT? BUT IF THESE LOADS ARE ALREADY IN THE PROCESS OF INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENTS AND PAID KAYAK, WHY DO THEY ALSO NEED TO PAY ADDITIONAL AMOUNTS? UH, AS PER 5 8 4 8 1? 
          [04:20:04]
YEAH, I THINK I, I THINK THAT'S A LEGITIMATE QUESTION AND I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT, UM, STAFF WOULD LOVE TO HEAR STAKEHOLDERS OPINIONS ON. 
          UM, AND AS WE CONTINUE TO REFINE THE CRITERIA FOR WHAT I'M, YOU KNOW, IN MY OWN HEAD CALLING KIND OF THE GRANDFATHERHOOD OR WHATEVER YOU WANNA CALL IT, UM, IF THERE ARE REASONABLE PROPOSALS TO, UM, DEFINE A SET OF PROJECTS THAT HAVE GONE THROUGH SOME PREVIOUS PROCESS THAT HAVE DEMONSTRATED PROJECT DEVELOPMENT, AS JEFF AND THE TEAM HAVE LAID OUT, THE FACT THAT THE CURRENT REVISION REQUESTS DIRECTLY CITE BACK TO THE DRAFT PFP AND 5 8 4 8 1, UM, SHOULD BE VIEWED ONLY AS ERCOT ATTEMPT TO FOLLOW THE PUCS LEAD HERE AND NOT NECESSARILY AS ERCOT ATTEMPT AT DRAWING A PARTICULAR LINE, WHICH MAY BE CODE FOR FILE COMMENTS AND TALK TO YOUR FRIENDLY NEIGHBORHOOD SPIDER-MAN. 
          OKAY, THANKS. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          AND IN, SO WITH THAT, THANK YOU FOR THE RED LINES AND THEN WE WILL OPEN THE LAST SET OF COMMENTS THAT WERE FILED THIS MORNING DURING THE MEETING. 
          LET SEE IF I CAN GO GRAB THOSE. 
          THIS IS TYLER AT FROM ROSE CITY PARTNERS. 
          YEAH. 
          TYLER, IF YOU CAN SPEAK UP A LITTLE BIT, WE CAN BARELY HEAR YOU, BUT YOU'RE THERE. 
          YES. 
          THIS IS TYLER ALL FROM ROSE CITY PARTNERS. 
          IS THAT BETTER? YES. 
          GREAT. 
          SO THIS IS MY, MY COMMENTS WERE REALLY JUST A FOLLOW ON TO, UH, ANDREW BARATH AND, AND MIKE'S COMMENTS. 
          I THINK IT'S VERY SIMILAR. 
          UM, COMMENT ON SECTION 9.2, 0.1 0.4, UM, IT'S A REALLY IMPOSSIBLE STANDARD TO BE ABLE TO NAVIGATE SITE CONTROL, CONSTRUCTION AND, UH, EQUIPMENT PROCUREMENT ALL WHILE YOU'RE, YOU'RE IN THIS LIMBO OF, ARE WE FIRM OR NOT FIRM? IT'S, IT WAS, JEFF, IT WAS GREAT TO HEAR THAT. 
          IT SOUNDS LIKE THE, THE PART YOU'RE TRYING TO PROTECT AGAINST IS KINDA THOSE LAST, LIKE, LAST LIKE 15, 30 DAYS WHERE YOU'LL, YOU MIGHT HAVE SOME LAST MINUTES, 9.4, 9.5 AND, AND, UM, APPROVALS AND WANTING TO SORT THROUGH THOSE. 
          AND SO IF THE LOOK BACK CAN BE LIMITED TO SAY 30 DAYS THAT I THINK THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD GO A LONG WAY. 
          UM, AND I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS JUST TO, TO EMPHASIZE IS 9.5 AND 9.5 IS A REALLY DIFFICULT STANDARD. 
          THERE'S NOT, THERE'S NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO'VE MADE IT THROUGH IN THE CURRENT PARADIGM. 
          AND I IMAGINE THOSE ARE PROBABLY A LOT OF THE SAME GROUPS WHO WILL BE IN BATCH ZERO, RIGHT? IT TAKES A, A LEVEL OF EXPERIENCE SOPHISTICATION TO, TO MAKE IT THROUGH THAT. 
          AND, UM, I THINK IF, IF THOSE GROUPS SPENT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON A PROJECT ONLY TO HAVE THE, THE RUG PULLED OUT FROM THEM WHEN THEY THOUGHT THEY WERE, THEY HAD 9.4 DONE, THEY HAD 9.5 DONE, THEY POSTED WITH THE UTILITY, THEY GOT SIDE CONTROL, THEY DID ALL THESE THINGS, AND THEN TO FIND OUT THAT THEY WEREN'T FIRM AFTER SPENDING MONIES FOR AN EXTRA SIX MONTHS, I THINK THAT WOULD DESTROY A LOT OF CONFIDENCE. 
          AND, AND I, I, AND IT WOULD SPECIFICALLY I THINK HARM A LOT OF TRUST THAT SOME OF YOUR MOST EQUIPPED CUSTOMERS, UM, HAVE IN THIS PROCESS PART AND IN THE BATCH PROCESS GOING FORWARD. 
          SO, UM, BEFORE WE IMPLEMENT THIS NINE MONTH PROCESS, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO KEEP THE TRUST OF, OF THE MARKET PARTICIPANTS AND I THINK A, A A A LIMITED LOOKBACK TO SOLVE FOR YOUR ISSUE. 
          I THINK, YOU KNOW, I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY YOU'D WANT THAT. 
          SO IF THAT'S 30 DAYS, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT EVERYONE COULD PROBABLY STOMACH. 
          BUT GOING BACK MONTHS ON THE LOOKBACK, I THINK WHILE YOU'RE STILL REQUIRING SITE CONTROL, UH, UTILITY POSTING, CONSTRUCTION, COMMENCING, EQUIPMENT PROCUREMENT, ALL THOSE THINGS IS JUST A REALLY, IT'S JUST AN IMPOSSIBLE, UH, PROBLEM TO SOLVE. 
          SO, UM, APPRECIATE YOU SPEAKING, SHARING YOUR SIDE OF IT EARLIER. 
          AND I THINK THAT IT, IT WAS HELPFUL TO HEAR THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE MOSTLY CONCERNED WITH KIND OF THOSE, THOSE LAST, UH, THE VERY END OF, OF THIS AND, AND IT MIGHT BE A LOT COMING AT THE END, BUT LIMITING THAT LOOK BACK TO SAY 30 DAYS, I THINK WOULD GO A LONG WAY TO, UM, TO BUILDING EVERYONE'S, UH, TRUST THAT THESE, THESE RULES REALLY DO MATTER. 
          AND IF YOU FOLLOW THEM PRECISELY THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE, UH, YOU KNOW, YOU'LL BE REWARDED, NOT, NOT, UH, NOT PUNISHED FOR THAT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, THANK YOU TYLER. 
          UM, SO WITH THAT, WHAT I MAY DO IS GO BACK TO THE QUEUE THAT WE LEFT OFF WITH, UM, AND I'LL SEE IF JEFF'S GONNA MAKE IT BACK IN THE ROOM. 
          HEY, GOOD TIMING, JEFF. 
          HEY BUDDY. 
          YOU WANNA COME BACK UP IN THE HOT SEAT HERE? I CAN DRIVE FROM UP HERE. 
          [04:25:01]
ACTUALLY, I'M TERRIBLE AT KNOWING WHERE THINGS ARE ON THIS PICKER RIGHT NOW. 
          BE A TRAINING DAY. 
          UM, SO WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS, WHILE YOU'RE OUT, UM, WE WRAPPED UP THE FIVE SETS OF COMMENTS. 
          SO WE'RE GONNA GO BACK TO THE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS, PICK UP THE LAST 10 IN THE QUEUE, UH, AND THEN AT THREE 30 IS WHEN WE WANT TO PIVOT OVER TO THE THREE 30 TO 41 HOUR DISCUSSION OF THE BRING YOUR OWN GEN STUFF. 
          WE'LL FIGURE IT OUT. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, SO, UH, BAR, IS THAT WHERE WE LEFT OFF, NIKKI? YEAH, I THINK I MADE MY POINT ABOUT TIMELINES THAT THEY DON'T WORK. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY, THANKS. 
          SO NEXT IN THE QUEUE IS BIANCA. 
          HI THERE. 
          HERE'S BIANCA WITH SERENA ENERGY. 
          UM, JUST A FEW QUESTIONS ON THE, THE CRITERIA FOR GETTING INTO THE BED, ZERO STUDIES. 
          UM, JUST TO BE, JUST MAKE SURE THAT FOR THE LOADS THAT ARE GETTING INTO 2028, THEY DO NOT NEED TO HAVE THE STUDY STATED AND THE STABILITY APPROVED, JUST PRESENTED JUST ONE OF, ONE OF EACH. 
          BUT FOR THE LOADS THEY'RE GETTING INTO THE 2027, UM, IF THEY DO NOT HAVE BOTH STUDIES, THEY ARE ALREADY RULED OUT OF ANY, ANY, UH, TO GET INCLUDED IN THE BED. 
          ZERO. 
          THIS SEEMS TO BE LIKE THEY'RE NOT COMPRISING ALL OF IT. 
          YEAH. 
          SO, UH, I NEED AG TO HELP WITH YEAH, I CAN, I CAN TAKE THAT, JEFF. 
          UM, SO I GUESS LET ME, LET ME ASK A QUICK CLARIFYING QUESTION. 
          ARE YOU ASKING ABOUT LOADS THAT ARE INCLUDED AS BASE LOAD OR LOADS THAT ARE INCLUDED PER STUDY? NO, FOR STUDY. 
          UM, MATT, CAN WE GO UP TO SECTION 9 2 1 2? YEAH. 
          THANKFULLY JEFF IS DRIVING NOW, SO, OKAY. 
          YES, HE IS. 
          UM, EXCUSE ME. 
          UM, SO THERE, THERE'S BASICALLY KIND OF TWO, TWO PATHS INTO STUDIED LOAD. 
          THE FIRST IS A LOAD THAT ONCE IS REQUESTING ENERGIZATION BEFORE THE END OF 2027. 
          THAT'S PARAGRAPH A, BUT THAT DID NOT MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS TO DEMONSTRATE THE FEASIBILITY OF THAT. 
          UM, IF THEY HAVE INTERMEDIATE, IF THEY HAVE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENTS, THEN THEY'RE INCLUDED AS, AS ASSESSED LOAD. 
          THE OTHER PATH IS, UM, LOADS THAT ARE, UH, REQUESTING SERVICE ON 2028 OR LATER. 
          UM, THEY NEED TO MEET THE INTERMEDIATE AGREEMENT AND, UH, THE UH, UH, HAVE, UH, IF WE SCROLL DOWN JUST A LITTLE BIT, JOE, UM, EITHER THEY, THEY WERE KICKED OUT OF THE EVALUATION OF THE VALID STUDIES, SO THEIR STUDIES WERE NOT VALID OR THEY HAVE AN APPROVED STUDY STATE OR STABILITY STUDY UNDER THE LEGACY PROCESS. 
          YEAH. 
          SO THERE WOULD BE DIFFERENT CRITERIA FOR THIS STUDIES FOR THE, IF YOU HAVE A 2027 OR IF YOU HAVE A 2028, THE POINT IS JUST THAT IT SEEMS THAT YOU'RE GONNA RULE OUT, UM, IF YOU SURE HAVE A CLOSER DATE, BUT YOU DO NOT HAVE LIKE, BOTH STUDIES APPROVED, BUT YOU'RE GIVING A PREFERENCE IF YOU HAVE A 2028 DATE YES. 
          TO NOT HAVE IT APPROVED. 
          SORRY, I, I I MISUNDERSTOOD YOUR QUESTION. 
          SO YEAH, LET ME, UH, ADD, ADD I GUESS A LITTLE BIT TO THAT, THAT, UM, THE UNDERLYING ASSUMPTION, AND THIS IS BASED ON THE STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK, UH, THAT WE RECEIVED FROM THE LAST FEW WORKSHOPS, IS THAT THE TREATMENT OF 2027 AND EARLIER NEEDS TO BE BASED ON WHAT IS REALISTIC. 
          AND, UH, THE FEEDBACK WE RECEIVED IS THAT LOADS THAT DON'T EVEN HAVE APPROVED STUDIES TODAY FOR 2027 LIKELY DO NOT HAVE A REALISTIC PATH. 
          AND SO, UH, 2027 FALLS OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF BAT ZERO. 
          UM, AND SO LOADS THAT WISH TO BE INCLUDED WILL BE, YOU KNOW, EITHER 2027 THAT, UM, DID NOT HAVE A VIABLE PATH OR 2028 AND LATER, BUT EVEN THE 2027 AND LOADS WILL BE STUDIED FOR A 2028 ENERGIZATION OR LATER. 
          YEAH. 
          BUT THERE IS A SCENARIO THAT YOU HAVE THE, THE STEADY STATE APPROVED, BUT NOT THE STABILITY, AND YOU HAVE LIKE A LATE DATE IN 2027. 
          SO THERE WOULD BE ENOUGH TIME FOR YOU TO COMPLETE THE FULL STUDIES 
          [04:30:01]
BEFORE YOUR ENERGIZATION DATE. 
          UM, BUT IN THIS SCENARIO, CONSIDERING THIS THIS REQUIREMENT, YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE, EVEN IF YOU HAVE LIKE A DECEMBER 20, 27 DATE, YOU'LL NOT BE ABLE TO GET IN JUST BECAUSE OF ONE MONTH. 
          IF MY DATE WAS JANUARY 1ST, 2028, I COULD GET IN WITH JUST ONE OF THE STUDIES. 
          YEAH, I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. 
          THAT THERE, THERE IS A POTENTIAL GAP THERE. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, I WOULD ALSO JUST ADD THAT THERE IS TIME, YOU KNOW, IN THIS TIMELINE THROUGH JULY 15TH FOR THE PROJECT TO, UM, UPDATE ITS REQUEST TO REQUEST A 2028 IZATION. 
          BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE IS THAT 2026 AND 2027 ENERGIZATION WILL NEED TO BE, UH, ACCOMPANIED BY COMPLETED STUDIES AND EVIDENCE THAT THE, UH, PROJECT HAS MET THE DEVELOPMENT MILESTONES. 
          OKAY. 
          AND JUST ONE LAST QUESTION SLASH STATEMENT, UM, ON THE 2028 DATE ABOUT HAVING THE, THE STUDIES APPROVED, UM, IT, I UNDERSTAND IT HAS TO BE PRIOR TO THE JULY 15TH DATE. 
          UH, BUT WHAT WOULD BE THE SENSE OF HAVING THEM APPROVED IF YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO REST STUDY THEM DURING THE BATCH PROCESS? IT'S JUST TO HAVE A MORE FIRM, OR DOES IT MAKE MUCH SENSE TO HAVE THEM ALREADY APPROVED? UH, SO PARAGRAPH TWO, CAPITAL B THERE ON THE SCREEN ONLY REQUIRES, UM, ONE STUDY TO BE APPROVED. 
          IT DOES NOT NEED TO BE A FULL APPROVAL OF STUDIES IN ORDER TO BE INCLUDED FOR A STUDY UNDER THE BATCHES. 
          SO IT'S REALLY, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S, AS WE'VE SHOWN IT, SOME OF THE LARGE LOAD WORKING GROUP WORKSHOPS AND TAC MEETINGS, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE MANY, UH, MANY HUNDREDS OF MEGAWATTS OF LOADS FOR WHICH WE HAVE NOT EVEN RECEIVED INITIAL STUDIES. 
          UM, AND SO THIS IS, IS TRYING TO CAPTURE SOME PROGRESS THROUGH THE CURRENT PROCESS. 
          UH, YOU KNOW, WITH, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE GOAL OF BATCH ZERO IS, IS TO, UM, ASSESS EVERYBODY AT ONCE AND, AND GIVE SOME ANSWERS MM-HMM . 
          BUT WE HAVE CASES WHERE THE TSP HAS ALREADY SUBMITTED THE STUDIES TO AIR, BUT THEY HAVE NOT BEEN APPROVED IT YET. 
          SO AIR CODE WILL MAKE THE GOAL OF GOING THROUGH ALL OF THEM PRIOR TO THE JULY 15 DATE. 
          OR THERE IS A SCENARIO THAT I HAVE THE STUDY SUBMITTED, NOT STILL PENDING ON AIR CODE APPROVAL, UM, THAT MIGHT NOT MEET THIS DEADLINE BECAUSE AIR CODE HAS NOT ANALYZED THAT. 
          SO THE CURRENT PLANNING GUIDELINE PROCESS REMAINS IN EFFECT. 
          UM, AND THAT PROCESS IS GOVERNED BY, UH, TIMELINES FOR THE REVIEW OF STUDIES AS THEY COME IN. 
          SO THOSE, THOSE STUDY, THOSE TIMELINES WILL CONTINUE TO REMAIN IN EFFECT. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          NEXT IS ERIC GOFF. 
          UM, ON, UM, SLIDE 45, UM, WHY, UM, THE LESSER OF, INSTEAD OF THE, THE GREATER OF IN, IN BOTH CASES ON THE RIGHT, IS THAT A LIKE IT? YEAH, SO I, I THINK IT IS, UM, IF, UM, SO, SO IF YOU WENT THROUGH A, UM, LOAD COMMISSIONING PLAN AND IT SAID, UM, FOR THE NEXT THREE YEARS, IT'S 200, 400, 600 MM-HMM . 
          BUT THEN WHAT YOU, UH, COME BACK AND, AND TELL US WITH THE MOST RECENT INFORMATION AND THE, UM, SAYING THAT 2026 RTP IS 100 300 500, THEN I, I THINK THAT WE WOULD THINK THAT THAT IS, UH, MORE UP TO DATE, UH, BECAUSE YOU, YOU'VE GIVEN US, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING. 
          SO, SO THAT GATES, IT'S THE LESSER OF BECAUSE THAT 2026, WE WOULD ASSUME THAT THAT WOULD BE MORE UP TO DATE THAN WHAT WAS IN YOUR CT. 
          THAT'S LATER NOT LESSER OF IT. 
          IT IS, WELL, UH, OKAY. 
          IT THAT IN THAT CASE IT'S LESSER OF, IF IT'S OPPOSITE IT, IF IT'S, I HAVE A LOAD COMMISSIONING PLAN THAT IS 200, 400, 600, BUT IN 26 RTP YOU TELL ME NO, IT'S 400, 600 800. 
          UH, I DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN JUST BECAUSE YOU TOLD ME IN THE 2026 RTP, I DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN RELIABLY DO THAT. 
          I, SO I HAVE TO GO TO THE LESSER, WHICH IS THE 
          [04:35:01]
LOAD COMMISSIONING PLAN. 
          BUT, BUT ISN'T THE GOAL TO SERVE THE LOAD THAT WAS REQUESTED? UH, YES, BUT IF I DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN, THIS IS BASE LOAD UHHUH, RIGHT. 
          UHHUH. 
          IF, IF I DON'T HAVE A STUDY THAT SHOWS THAT I CAN DO THAT, THEN I CAN'T ASSUME OKAY. 
          AND THEN I CAN'T ASSUME THAT, UM, PHILOSOPHICALLY MAYBE IS THE WAY I WOULD APPROACH THE NEXT QUESTION. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, BUT, UM, THE GOAL OF STUDYING BASE LOAD IS TO RECOMMEND TRANSMISSION PROJECTS TO SERVE THE ALREADY APPROVED LOAD IN THE EVENT. 
          OKAY. 
          NO, NO. 
          IT BATCH STUDY IS LOOKING AT LOADS THAT ARE COMING IN IN ADDITION TO THAT BASE LOAD UHHUH . 
          SO IT IS WHAT TRANSMISSION. 
          SO AGAIN, PHILOSOPHICALLY, THE THEORETICALLY, WE ALREADY HAVE PREVIOUS STUDIES TO SHOW US HOW, HOW WE NEED TO SERVE THAT BASE LOAD. 
          RIGHT NOW WE'RE STUDYING, BUT WE, WE DON'T HAVE STUDIES FOR THE ADDITIONAL LOAD. 
          AND SO NOW WE'RE STUDYING THAT ADDITIONAL BATCH ZERO LOAD THAT IS UNDER STUDY AND BATCH ZERO. 
          AND THAT LOAD IS, SO WE'RE TRYING TO IDENTIFY TRANSMISSION PROJECTS FOR THAT ADDITIONAL LOAD. 
          SO IF THE ALREADY STUDIED LOAD IS APPROVED CONTINGENT ON WAITING FOR A TRANSMISSION, BUT THERE'S NOT A TRANSMISSION PLAN, WHAT HAPPENS? UM, THE, UH, UNDER TODAY'S PROCESS, RTP IS LOOKING AT WHAT, WHAT, WHAT IS THE TRANSMISSION THAT'S NEEDED TO SERVE THAT LEAD? OKAY. 
          IT, I FEEL LIKE THERE'S KIND OF A, MAYBE A DO LOOP PROBLEM HERE WHERE THERE'S NOT A PROCESS FOR THAT LOAD TO GET APPROVED. 
          AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS IN THE PIGGER, EITHER WHERE, WHERE THERE'S A PROBLEM, I THINK IF THE LOAD WAS APPROVED AND THEREFORE IT'S BASE LOAD, BUT THERE WAS NEVER A TRANSMISSION PLAN THAT'S DEVELOPED AND THE APPROVAL WAS CONTINGENT ON A TRANSMISSION PLAN BEING DEVELOPED. 
          AND THEN, UM, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE REDUCING THE LOAD HERE BASED ON THE RTP POTENTIALLY IT, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THERE'S POTENTIALLY A, A REDUCTION IN APPROVED LOAD THAT COULD OCCUR FROM THIS SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          LET ME, LET ME REPEAT BACK WHAT I THINK I'M HEARING. 
          OKAY. 
          IS THE, THE ISSUE IS, UH, UNDER THE EXISTING PROCESS, UHHUH,  HAVE A LOAD COMMISSIONING PLAN THAT SAYS THAT THIS LOAD CAN, UH, INCREASE ITS CONSUMPTION ONCE THIS CERTAIN TRANSMISSION PLAN IS IN PLACE. 
          BUT THERE'S RIGHT NOW, THERE, THERE'S NO PLAN TO ACTUALLY, UH, CONSTRUCT THAT CERTAIN TRANSMISSION PROJECT. 
          RIGHT. 
          UM, YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          I YEAH, UNDERSTAND THAT. 
          UM, YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH, I THINK WE, WE NEED TO, YEAH, IT, IT'S A GOOD POINT. 
          THAT'S A VALID POINT. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, I NEED TO THINK ABOUT THAT. 
          AND THAT'S ALL I WANTED AND OPEN TO, UM, IDEAS ON, ON HOW TO ADDRESS THAT. 
          BUT YEAH, I, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. 
          OKAY. 
          THANKS. 
          BOB KING, BOB KING HERE FOR TRACK TODAY. 
          UM, REAL QUICK, UM, IT WASN'T CLEAR 'CAUSE A LOT OF LANGUAGE HAS BEEN REMOVED, BUT IN 9.21 E IF YOU, UM, OR ENERGIZING AFTER 28, YOU HAVE A SIGNED INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT, IS THERE ANY OTHER AGREEMENT REQUIRED TO ENERGIZE AT THAT POINT? I GUESS IT'S NOT. 
          UM, SO ENERGIZATION BE NORMAL LIKE IT IS TODAY BASICALLY ONCE YOU GET TO THAT POINT. 
          YEAH. 
          SO, SO YOU HAVE A LARGE LOAD WITH YOUR ENERGIZATION DATE IS 2028 OR LATER. 
          YEAH. 
          AND SO YOU, UM, HAVE COMPLETE INVALID STUDIES AS DEFINED IN 9 2 1 4, UM, OR WE HAVE A SIGNED IA. 
          UM, YEAH, OR, OR YEAH, YOU MEET THE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT REQUIREMENTS AND 9 7 2. 
          YEAH, 
          [04:40:01]
SO, AND SO I THINK WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS, UM, I HAVE A LATER DATE. 
          I, I MEET THE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT REQUIREMENTS. 
          UM, THEN YOU WILL BE, UH, YOU'LL BE CONSIDERED BASE LOAD THEN. 
          I, I THINK THAT'S, I THINK YOU'RE, WHEN YOU GET TO YOUR ENERGIZATION DATE, I MEAN, WE'RE GONNA LOOK, I, AND WE'RE GONNA CHECK YOUR OKAY. 
          DO YOU HAVE YOUR INTERCONNECT AGREEMENT? BUT YEAH, I THINK THAT'S, BUT IT'S, NO, I THINK YOU'RE BASE LOAD AT THAT POINT. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          JUST NO ADDITIONAL AGREEMENT SINCE, AND, AND, UM, I'M SORRY I SHOULD HAVE DONE THIS BEFORE, BUT BACK ON SLIDE 46, JUST TO COMMENT, I THINK YOU HAVE A TYPO, UM, THE SECOND PARAGRAPH ON THE LEFT COLUMN. 
          YEAH, I THINK WE, YEAH, I THINK WE NOTED THAT EARLIER. 
          YEAH. 
          IS IT EITHER OR, IS THAT WHAT YOU MEANT? UM, I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT WE SAID. 
          I, I THINK IT'S NOT EITHER. 
          I, I I THINK IT'S, IT'S AN AND IT IS AND IT'S AN, AND, UM, AND THEN FINALLY WHEN YOU'RE, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED TOO ABOUT THIS ORDERING BUSINESS BECAUSE SOMETIMES YOU, YOU'RE NOT LIKE KNOCKING OUT PEOPLE WHOSE STUDIES ARE NO LONGER INVALID NECESSARILY, BUT THEY GO INTO THE BATCH AND THEN ARE GIVEN PRIORITY AND THE BATCH PROCESS. 
          IS THAT WHAT THAT MEANS, THAT THEY'D BE CONSIDERED BEFORE THE OTHER ONE IN CAPACITY? OR ARE YOU REALLY KNOCKING OUT IT, IT'S A GATING, LIKE TWO PROJECTS COME IN THE SAME DAY WITH VALID STUDIES. 
          THEY'RE BOTH JUST INTO BATCH ONE. 
          IT, IT'S A, UH, GATING CRITERIA TO DETERMINE WHICH STUDIES ARE VALID AND WH WHICH STUDIES SUPERSEDE OTHER, OTHER STUDIES. 
          WHEN, WHEN THERE'S A CONFLICT, THEN WE NEED TO KNOW WHICH, WHICH STUDIES SUPERSEDE OTHER STUDIES. 
          BUT'S TRYING TO GET AT THE STUDY IS STUDYING STUFF. 
          SO WOULDN'T IT. 
          YEAH. 
          AND THIS IS, UM, I, I THINK, UH, AND YOU KNOW, MY, MY TEAM KEEP ME HONEST ON THIS, BUT I, I THINK IT'S, IT IS ONLY A GATING CRITERIA FOR WHETHER YOU'RE CONSIDERED BASE LOAD. 
          OH, OKAY. 
          'CAUSE IF THEY'RE IN BATCH, THEY WOULD, THEN YOU'RE UNDERSTUDY FINE. 
          YEAH. 
          IF IF YOU'RE UNDERSTUDY, THEN YOU'RE UNDERSTUDY. 
          BUT IT'S A, IT'S A, OKAY, OKAY. 
          GATING CRITERIA FOR WHETHER YOU'RE BASE LOAD OR NOT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND THE FINAL POINT REAL QUICK, UM, YOU WERE ALSO GIVING KIND OF A SOPHIE'S CHOICE HAVING TO DO WITH, UH, UM, 5 8, 4 8 1 AND HOW TO, HOW TO MARRY UP WITH THAT APPROPRIATELY. 
          COULD WE TAKE THE, THE FINAL PUBLISHED ONE FOR AUGUST, BUT FOR THE COMMITMENT, WHICH ISN'T GONNA TAKE PLACE UNTIL 27, USE THE FINAL, BECAUSE NOW YOU'RE ASKING ME FOR HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS AND IF WE GO FROM A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS A MEGAWATT TO 50, EVEN THAT'S A BIG DIFFERENCE. 
          SO IS THAT THE PLAN THAT WE WOULD TAKE THE FINAL FOR THE COMMITMENT PART, WHICH IS LATER? YEAH, I, I, I THINK IF I UNDERSTOOD YOUR, YOUR QUESTION, IT IS, UM, SO, SO MAYBE I'LL MAKE THIS A, A STATEMENT. 
          WHAT OUR INTENTION IS, IS IS TO START BATCH ZERO THIS SUMMER, UH, BEFORE 58 41 IS FINAL. 
          SO THE GATING CRITERIA ON WHICH LOADS ARE CONSIDERED UNDERSTUDY AND WHICH LOADS ARE CONSIDERED BASE LOAD, UH, WE ARE, UH, TAKING A, A COPY OF WHAT IS DRAFT FOR 58 41 AND TO, WE WILL APPLY THAT CRITERIA. 
          BUT WHEN WE GET TO, UH, FIRST QUARTER OF NEXT YEAR, THEN WE EXPECT THAT 58 41 WILL BE FINALIZED. 
          SO THE COMMITMENT CRITERIA TO BE CONSIDERED, UM, YOU, YOU A A LOAD HAS COMMITTED FOR SUBSEQUENT STUDIES THAT THAT WOULD BE BASED ON THE FINAL 58 41, NOT NECESSARILY BASED ON, UH, WHAT WE KNOW TODAY. 
          WHAT, WHAT GOES IN BIGGER 1 45? THAT FINAL COMMITMENT WILL BE BASED ON 58 41, RIGHT? THE FINAL 58 41. 
          YEAH, A MINUTE. 
          UM, OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          SO WE'VE GET COMMONLY GET THE QUESTION HOW TO PRINT ALL BRANCHES FOR CONTINGENCY ANALYSIS. 
          SO UNDER BASE CASE AND CONTINGENCY MONITOR BRANCHES, HOW ABOUT ALL MONITORING BUSES? IS THERE A SIMILAR WAY OF DOING THAT? BECAUSE I'VE TRIED KIND OF SIMILAR THING WITH RESPECT TO SETTING ZERO TO THE, SORRY FOR THE SPEAKER ON THE PHONE. 
          YOU'RE COMING THROUGH HERE. 
          I'M TRYING TO MUTE YOU SETTING IN OUR, BUT WE HEAR YOU ABOUT YOUR BRANCHES AND THERE WE GO. 
          OKAY. 
          JAMES THOMAS AT POWER JAM. 
          ALRIGHT, 
          [04:45:01]
FINE. 
          OKAY. 
          DID WE FINISH THAT QUESTION? SORRY THAT THAT WAS IN THE PAUSE, WASN'T IT? SO, UH, WE ARE COMING UP ON THREE 30 HERE IN FIVE MORE MINUTES, SO WE'LL KEEP RUNNING THE QUEUE AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN. 
          UM, BILL BARNES IS NEXT. 
          A QUICK ONE, JEFF, JUST TO CONFIRM, UH, SECTION 9 2 1 2 OF THE PLANNING GUIDE, THIS IS THE ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR INCLUSION OF LARGE LOADS TO BE STUDIED AND ALLOCATED IN BATCH ZERO. 
          UM, UNDER SUBPARAGRAPH B, IF YOU HAVE AN ENERGIZATION DATE AFTER JANUARY 1ST, 2028, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A SIGNED A NOTARIZED ATTESTATION THAT YOU'VE SIGNED YOUR IN INTERMEDIATE AGREEMENT AND ERCOT HAS RECEIVED APPROVAL OF STEADY STATE OR STABILITY STUDIES BY JULY 15TH. 
          THERE'S NO REAL DEADLINE THERE. 
          THE, THE PARAGRAPH TWO SAYS THE ERCOT HAS TO RECEIVE THE LOAD COMMISSIONING PLAN BY JULY 15TH, BUT WHAT ARE THE DATES FOR WHEN ERCOT NEEDS TO SEE THE ATTESTATION FROM THE DSP ON THE INTERMEDIATE AGREEMENT AND WHETHER THE SUBMITTED STUDY STATE OR STABILITY STUDIES OR THAT ERCOT HAS RECEIVED THEM AND THEN GIVEN APPROVAL BACK TO THE INTERCONNECTING ENTITY, WHAT DATE APPLIES TO THOSE TWO THINGS? HEY BILL, I, UH, THIS IS A, I I THINK YOU ARE CORRECT. 
          IT'S NOT QUITE CLEAR FROM WHAT'S ON THE PAPER, BUT THE INTENT IS FOR, UM, BOTH OF THOSE DEADLINES TO BE MET BY JULY 15TH. 
          GREAT, THANKS AG. 
          ALRIGHT, JENNY, THANK YOU. 
          THIS IS JENNY, SHE FROM SAUNA. 
          I JUST HAVE TWO QUESTIONS REGARDING THE ELIGIBILITY TO BE INCLUDED IN A BATCH ZERO, UH, FOR TWO DIFFERENT SCENARIOS. 
          THE FIRST SCENARIO IS IF WE HAVE A 74 MEGAWATT LOAD PROJECT THAT'S UNDERGOING INTERCONNECTION STUDIES BY THE INTERCONNECTING UTILITY CURRENTLY AND WOULD LIKE TO UPSIZE THE PROJECT BY 26 MEGAWATT AND MAKING IT A 100 MEGAWATT PROJECT, UM, AND THE PROJECT HAS AN ENERGIZATION DATE BEFORE DECEMBER, 2027, WOULD THIS PROJECT, UH, WOULD THIS UPSIZING QUALIFY TO BE INCLUDED AS EITHER THE BASE LOAD OR STATIC LOAD IN BATCH ZERO? SO IF I'M UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY, FIRST OF ALL, I GUESS TO, YOU KNOW, MAYBE TO CLARIFY, I THINK THE POINT THAT WE'VE KIND OF DANCED AROUND, BUT, UH, THERE IS NO PATH FOR A LOAD WITH A 2027 ENERGIZATION DATE TO BE STUDIED IN BATCH ZERO. 
          MM-HMM . 
          UM, EVEN LOADS THAT HAD A 2027 ENERGIZATION DATE THAT END UP IN THAT STUDY CRITERIA WILL BE STUDIED, UM, FOR 2028 OR LATER MM-HMM . 
          EXTENT. 
          SO, UM, IT IS, THE PROJECT HAS THE ENERGIZATION DATE BEFORE, UM, DECEMBER, 2028. 
          THEN WOULD THIS QUALIFY? I I THINK WITHOUT, WITHOUT SEEING THE SPECIFICS OF THE PROJECT, IT, IT'S HARD TO SAY FOR SURE, BUT, UM, IF IT MEETS THE MILESTONES, IF IT MEETS THE ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, UM, IN EITHER 9 2 1 1 OR 9 2 1 2, IT WOULD BE INCLUDED AS, AS LISTED. 
          AND WILL IT, WOULD THAT BE A BASE LOAD OR A STUDY LOAD? IT WOULD DEPEND UPON WHICH CRITERIA THE PROJECT MET. 
          GOT IT. 
          UM, AND THE NEXT QUESTION IS YOU, IF WE HAVE A, UM, A PROJECT THAT'S UP RUNNING AND WE WANT TO EXPAND IT BY ANOTHER 200 T AND ENERGIZED BY 2028, UM, WOULD THIS EXPANSION QUALIFY TO BE STUDIED IN BATCH ZERO? IT WOULD BE UNDER THE CURRENT PLANNING GUIDE, UM, AS WELL AS THE, THIS PICKER WOULD BE TREATED AS A NEW INTERCONNECTION REQUEST UNDER SECTION NINE, AND SO IT WOULD NEED TO MEET THE APPLICABLE MILESTONES, UH, FOR INCLUSION AS EITHER BASE LOAD OR STUDY LOAD BY JULY 15TH. 
          GREAT, THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, SO WE'RE GONNA PARK, UM, SO JANICE, IF YOU CAN SNAP THE, UH, PEOPLE IN THE QUEUE AND SET 'EM ASIDE FOR A MINUTE, 
          [6. Discussion of CLR and BYOG concepts]
WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS EXPLORE THE WORLD OF CLRS AND BRING YOUR OWN GIN. 
          UM, JEFF AND I ARE TALKING, WE, SOME OF US WOULD BE WILLING TO SAY FOUR 30 TO FIVE JUST TO RUN THROUGH THE QUEUE. 
          SO, UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'RE ACCEPTING MORE QUESTIONS IN THE QUEUE, BUT WE'RE WILLING TO TRY AND ANSWER EVERYONE'S QUESTION AS BEST WE CAN. 
          SO JUST A LITTLE PSA, UM, SO THIS IS BACK TO THE SURVEY EARLY, IT 
          [04:50:01]
SEEMS LIKE DAYS AGO WE TALKED ABOUT A SURVEY BEFORE WE STARTED THIS MEETING AND IT WAS WHAT WERE SOME OF THE KEY FINDINGS? SO WE CUT THAT SURVEY IN HALF AND BROUGHT IT DOWN TO THIS SECTION, WHICH IS WHAT ABOUT THIS CONTROLLABLE LOAD RESOURCES AND BRING OUR OWN GEN? UM, WHAT KIND OF QUESTIONS DID WE ASK? WHAT KIND OF RESPONSES DID WE GET? UH, IN TERMS OF BRING YOUR OWN GEN, LEMME JUST JUMP INTO IT. 
          UM, WHICH CO-LOCATION CONFIGURATIONS, EXAMPLE, LOAD PLUS BATTERY LOAD PLUS SOLAR SHOULD ERCOT PRIORITIZE WIND DEFINING, BRING YOUR OWN GEN RULES. 
          SO WE DID SEE A HIGHER LEVEL OF LOAD WITH DISPATCHABLE THERMALS, BUT WE STILL SAW SOME MORE LOAD WITH THERMAL PLUS STORAGE HYBRID, UM, OTHERS. 
          SO IT WAS KIND OF A, YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING IS IN PLAY IF POSSIBLE. 
          UH, BUT THE STRONGER SIGNALS THAT WE'VE SEEN ARE AT LEAST THE TWO ON THESE PIECES IN TERMS OF FOR BRING YOUR OWN GEN IS THE SELF-LIMITING FACILITY CONCEPT ADEQUATE, AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT MORE ABOUT THAT IN A MINUTE, BUT IN OTHER WORDS, THAT'S BRING YOUR OWN GEN SITE AGREES TO FIXED INJECTION WITHDRAWAL LIMITATION UNTIL TRANSMISSION IS BUILT. 
          AGAIN, BACK TO THAT EXAMPLE, WHAT IF YOU'RE GIVEN ALMOST NOTHING? CAN I HAVE A LOAD THAT CONSUMES A LOT OF POWER THAT'S FED BY A LOCAL GENERATOR AND WE'LL JUST SELF-LIMIT TO WHERE WE NEVER NET, UM, YOU KNOW, NEVER PUSH, NEVER PULL ANY MORE FROM THE GRID, THEN SOME LOW LEVEL. 
          AND SO IT WAS A, A LOT OF PEOPLE SAID, YES, THIS BYOG IS A VIABLE, UH, CONSTRUCT FOR US. 
          UH, NUMBER THREE, IF BATCH ZERO PROVIDES LESS FIRM CAPACITY THAN YOU REQUESTED, WOULD YOU CONSIDER USING THE CONTROL LOAD RESOURCE STATUS TO CONSUME POWER ABOVE YOUR FIRM ALLOCATION WHILE UPGRADES ARE BEING BUILT? SO AGAIN, THIS IS THE IDEA. 
          YOU REQUESTED A BIGGER RAMP, YOU GET A HAIRCUT, AND THEN WHILE YOU'RE GOING FORWARD IN TIME, WOULD YOU WANT TO USE THAT EXTRA CAPACITY IN NON-BINDING HOURS, UH, TO CONSUME MORE? AND SO AGAIN, 80% SAID YES, THAT WOULD BE A GREAT IDEA. 
          I'M NOT GONNA READ THE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, BUT Y'ALL CAN. 
          UM, AND THEN THE CLR CONCEPT EXPANSION, UH, WHEN DEFINING BRING YOUR OWN GENERAL RULES, SHOULD CONTROL LOAD RESOURCES BE EXPANDED TO EXPLICITLY INCLUDE AS A CO-LOCATION CONFIGURATION OPTION. 
          AND THE ANSWER WAS YES. 
          LET'S DO THAT ALSO. 
          AND THEN, UM, SHOULD LARGE LOAD CUSTOMERS INCLUDED IN BATCH ZERO HAVE THE OPTION TO PRE-REGISTER NON FIRM ALLOCATED LOADS AS ACL R? UM, AFTER THE STUDY RESULTS ARE RELEASED TO OPERATE THOSE MEGAWATTS AS CONTROLLABLE LOAD UNTIL FIRM CAPACITY IS AVAILABLE. 
          MAY NOT HAVE READ THAT, RIGHT? SHOULD LARGE LOAD CUSTOMERS INCLUDED IN BATCH ZERO HAD THE OPTION, THAT'S THE WORD I MISSED TO PREREGISTER, NON FIRM ALLOCATED MEGAWATTS. 
          SO AGAIN, YES. 
          SO, UM, LEMME JUST SLOW DOWN. 
          I'M GONNA PURPOSELY TALK SLOWER BECAUSE IT'S ONLY FOUR SLIDES AND THEN MAYBE THERE'LL BE LESS QUESTIONS AND YOU KNOW, UH, SO THE FIRST ONE IS A LOAD ONLY CONTROLLABLE LOAD RESOURCE. 
          WE HAVE A SLIDE FOR EACH OF THESE. 
          UH, WE WOULD DESCRIBE THIS AS KIND OF A PURE LOAD ONLY. 
          UH, IT WOULD HAVE NO GEN, NO BATTERIES BEHIND THE POINT OF INTERCONNECTION. 
          THIS WOULD BE WHERE A LARGE LOAD REGISTERS ENTIRELY, ENTIRELY AS CONTROLLABLE LOAD RESOURCE AT THE POINT OF INTERCONNECT. 
          UH, NO GENERATION OF STORAGE ELECTRICALLY CONNECTED IN A WAY THAT SYNCHRONIZES WITH OR IS IN PARALLEL TO OR EXPORT TO THE GRID. 
          UM, ERCOT POSTURE ON THIS ONE IS POTENTIALLY FEASIBLE. 
          IT'S A, MAYBE WE'RE NOT SURE IF WE CAN PULL THIS OFF. 
          AGAIN, THIS IS FOR MARKET RULES AND A DESIGN TO GO TO THE JUNE ONE BOARD. 
          THE COUSIN, THE CLR KIND OF A, A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT VERSION OF THE SAME THING IS A CLR WITH NON SYNCHRONOUS BACKUP GENERATION. 
          THAT'S THE IDEA OF A LARGE LOAD REGISTERS AS A CLR BUT ALSO UTILIZES BEHIND THE METER BACKUP GENERATION. 
          THAT'S NOT SYNCHRONIZED WITH THE ERCOT GRID. 
          UH, WE'LL TALK MORE ABOUT THAT ONE. 
          ALSO A POTENTIALLY FEASIBLE AND THEN A BRING YOUR OWN GENERATION SELF-LIMITING FACILITY. 
          I KIND OF DESCRIBED IT'S UH, TWO THINGS BEHIND THERE THAT NET OUT, UH, AS IT POTENTIALLY FEASIBLE. 
          AND THEN THIS CONCEPT NETTED NETWORK KEEPS GETTING THROWN AROUND. 
          UH, SI MORTY, THAT'S KIND OF A NEXT GENERATION DESIGN, UH, REALLY THAT IS FOCUSED ON ANCILLARY SERVICES AND ENERGY OFFERS INTO THE MARKET. 
          YES, IT'S A NEAT THING, BUT THE CONCEPT HASN'T BEEN DEFINED. 
          THERE'S NO REAL WAY TO GET TO THAT. 
          AND SO WE JUST HAVE THAT AS NOT FEASIBLE RIGHT NOW. 
          THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE CAN'T HAVE THIS SELF-LIMITING FACILITY CONCEPT, BUT IN TERMS OF A NETTED NETWORK, UH, WE HAVE A PICTURE THAT'LL HELP HOPEFULLY. 
          OKAY, SO LET'S START WITH THE FIRST ONE. 
          LOAD ONLY CLR. 
          WE'VE KIND OF SET THIS UP ON THE RIGHT SIDE AS A, HERE IS A LOAD THAT WANTS A THOUSAND MEGAWATTS AND THEY'RE GONNA GET IT IN YEAR FIVE. 
          MAYBE THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN A YEAR SIX EXAMPLE FOR OUR DISCUSSIONS. 
          BUT THE IDEA IS AFTER THE STUDY IS RUN, THE RAMP IS FLATTENED OUT TO ONLY BE A HUNDRED MEGAWATTS. 
          THAT'S ALL, UH, THE LOAD CAN GET. 
          AND SO THE IDEA WOULD BE IS WITH THAT, UM, 
          [04:55:01]
SCENARIO, IF THEY ARE A LOAD THAT CAN, IS DYNAMIC ENOUGH TO MOVE THEIR LOAD AROUND, THEY COULD PARTICIPATE AS A DISPATCHABLE DEMAND AND FOLLOWS SKID BASE POINTS. 
          AND THAT WOULD BE LIKE A BITCOIN MINER. 
          TODAY. 
          IT'S CONTROL LOAD THAT FOLLOWS UP, FOLLOWS DOWN. 
          UM, THERE'S NO ASSURANCE THAT SERVICE WOULD BE AWARDED ABOVE THE MEGAWATTS. 
          UH, SO THERE'S NOT A GUARANTEE THAT BECAUSE YOU HAVE THIS A HUNDRED THAT ED'S GONNA LET YOU ROLL ALL THE WAY TO THE TOP, WHETHER IT'S A LOCAL CONSTRAINT OR ANOTHER CONSTRAINT. 
          BUT THE IDEA IS IN OFF OTHER HOURS THAT WEREN'T IN THE PLANNING STUDY. 
          COULD YOU GET UP TO THAT POINT? UM, ERCOT WOULD BE OBSERVING AND VERIFYING THEIR PERFORMANCE TO MAKE SURE THEY ADHERE TO, UH, SC INSTRUCTIONS MUST MEET EXISTING CLR TELEMETRY AND DISPATCH PERFORMANCE MUST REGISTER OPERATIONALLY, UH, CAPABILITY FOR THAT AMOUNT ABOVE, UH, THE FIRM LOAD SUBJECT TO REAL-TIME DISPATCH. 
          AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THE ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE ON THE LEFT IS, YEAH, IT'S 150 MEGAWATTS IN YEAR ONE. 
          SO KIND OF THE PLANNING AMOUNT WOULD BE ZERO TO A HUNDRED. 
          THAT'S WHERE THEY COULD OPERATE ANYTIME, ANYWHERE THAT'S THEIR GUARANTEED. 
          AND THEN IT'S THIS LOW POWER CONSUMPTION WOULD BE AT A HUNDRED AND UP TO 150. 
          THAT 50 MEGAWATTS IS THE SWING. 
          THAT'S THE ONE THAT THEY COULD OFFER IN AS CONTROLLING UP AND CONTROLLING DOWN, UH, IN THIS WAY. 
          WHAT'S GONNA MAKE THIS DIFFERENT FROM ANOTHER EXAMPLE IS YOU'VE BEEN STUDIED AT A HUNDRED, BUT IF THERE'S NO TRANSMISSION CONGESTION AND THIS WOULD HAVE A SCD ENHANCEMENT TO IT, THAT SCED WOULD ALLOW YOU TO GO UP AND HIGHER AND THEN SC WOULD ALSO MOVE YOU DOWN WHEN THERE'S CONGESTION. 
          UH, SO WHAT WE'RE LEVERAGING IS NPR 1255 HAD SOME ENERGY STORAGE MITIGATION, IT'S A PROJECT THAT'S NINE TO 12 MONTHS. 
          IT MAY FIT INTO THIS CONSTRUCT. 
          UH, WE EVEN HAVE LANGUAGE FOR IT. 
          SO WE THINK THIS IS A VIABLE OPTION ON THE GROUND BECAUSE A LOT OF THE PIECES ARE ALREADY IN PLACE, BUT THERE'S STILL A LOT OF DETAILS TO TAKE CARE OF. 
          SO WHAT I'LL DO IS I'M GONNA GO THROUGH ALL FOUR OF THESE AND THEN SEE IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS ON THESE UH, PIECES. 
          IN TERMS OF THE ONE B, THIS IS A CLR WITH NON SYNCHRONOUS BACKUP GENERATION. 
          IF YOUR I IS DRAWN TO THE RED X, IT'S FOR A REASON. 
          WHAT WE CAN'T HAVE IS A CLR WHERE IT'S A LOAD IN THE CAPITAL R RESOURCE. 
          IF IT'S OVER 10 MEGAWATTS, IT'S REGISTERED WITH ERCOT AND WE CAN'T JUST PRETEND IT'S NOT THERE AND PUT A BLOB AROUND IT AND SAY IT'S A CONTROLLABLE LOAD. 
          SO THIS IMMEDIATELY BECOMES A CO-LOCATION, BRING YOUR OWN GEN SCENARIO THAT CAN BE SUPPORTED. 
          IT JUST CAN'T BE SUPPORTED AS ACL R. 
          SO THE AGENT EXAMPLE WAS WE HAVE ALL THESE DIFFERENT TYPES OF FACILITIES IN ONE PLACE. 
          CAN WE PUT A CIRCLE AROUND IT AND CALL IT ACL R? THAT MAY BE THE WAY OF THE FUTURE, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE HAVE FOR BATCH ZERO. 
          UM, SO, BUT IF IT'S BACKUP GENERATION THAT'S NOT CONNECTED TO ERCOT, IN OTHER WORDS, ERCOT CAN'T EVEN SEE THIS DIESEL GENERATOR OR THIS STACK OF BATTERIES OR WHATEVER IT IS. 
          BUT WHEN SCED SEES THE LOAD AND IT'S CONSTRAINED, IT'S GONNA SEND A SIGNAL TO DROP LOAD AND ERCOT DOESN'T KNOW HOW. 
          BUT IF THE IDEA IS THE LOAD IS COMING OFFLINE AND SWITCHING TO BACKUP GEN, THAT'S UP TO WHAT'S GOING ON BEHIND THE FENCE. 
          THAT'S NOT US. 
          BUT THIS LOAD IS DISAPPEARING WITH THAT GENERATION THAT'S NOT CONNECTED TO ERCOT. 
          UM, SO AGAIN, TO QUALIFY UNDER THIS CONSTRUCT, UH, BACKUP GENERATION MUST NOT BE SYNCHRONIZED OR OPERATE IN PARALLEL TO THE GRID. 
          UM, WE'LL MODEL THE FACILITY AS A LOAD ONLY TRANSMISSION STUDIES STILL REMAIN BINDING LOAD MUST FOLLOW THE SCALE. 
          SO IT'S, IT'S LIKE THE OTHER ONE. 
          SO THAT'S IT FOR THAT ONE. 
          AND THEN HERE'S THE BRING YOUR OWN SELF-LIMITING FACILITY. 
          THIS IS THE IDEA ON THE RIGHT HERE OF A LOAD WITH FIVE GENERATORS OR MAYBE IT'S ONLY TWO GENERATORS, BUT SOMEHOW THIS LOAD IN THIS CASE IS A THOUSAND MEGAWATT LOAD BEING SERVED BY FIVE BY TWO 50, UH, INDIVIDUAL UNITS. 
          UM, WHAT'S INTERESTING ABOUT THIS ONE IS IF THEY HAVE OVERBUILT, THIS BECOMES A, YOU HEAR THE N MINUS ONE G MINUS ONE IN CERTAIN STUDIES OR CONSTRAINTS, THIS WOULD STILL BE A G MINUS ONE, A THOUSAND MEGAWATTS SERVING A THOUSAND MEGAWATTS. 
          UM, SO THAT'S GONNA BE THE ONE THAT MAY BE THE MORE OPTIMAL UM, CONSTRUCT. 
          THERE'S ALSO THE IDEA OF WHETHER OR NOT IT'S JUST TWO BIG TWO BY 500 GENERATORS TO SERVE A THOUSAND MEGAWATTS FOR G MINUS ONE COMPLIANCE. 
          IN SOME STUDIES THAT MAY BE A LIMITATION, BUT I'M NOT HERE TO SPEAK TO THAT. 
          WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN INTO ALL THE DETAILS, BUT JUST ACKNOWLEDGING THE DIFFERENT STUDIES. 
          SO NOW BOTH THE LOAD AND THE GENERATION WOULD BE REGISTERED WITH ERCOT. 
          UH, THE INTERCONNECTION LIMIT WOULD APPLY TO THE NET MEGAWATT AT THE POINT OF INTERSECT, POINT OF INTERCONNECT. 
          AND SO THAT WOULD BE A LIMITED FACILITY. 
          UH, NPR 10 26 ALREADY HAS THIS FOR GENERATORS. 
          IT'S THE IDEA OF EXPANDING THAT TO BE FOR LOADS ALSO. 
          UH, AND THEN THE FACILITY, THAT PARTNERSHIP, THAT WHATEVER AGREEMENT IS, AND I KNOW I THINK CLAYTON HAD A AN NPR ABOUT THIS. 
          WHAT DOES AN OPERATING AGREEMENT LOOK LIKE BETWEEN TWO ENTITIES THAT DO THIS? THAT THAT INJECTION WITHDRAWAL NEVER EXCEEDS THE POINT 
          [05:00:01]
OF INTERCONNECT AT THE EXPENSE OF THE OTHER PARTY IN THIS ARRANGEMENT. 
          AND SO THE TRANSMISSION PLANNING DOES NOT ASSUME SIMULTANEOUS FULL LOAD OF THE GENERATION. 
          UM, AND THAT THE FULL PARTICIPATION ON BOTH SIDES IS NOT PERMITTED UNLESS STRUCTURED IS SOMETHING ELSE BUT IS NOT ALLOWED. 
          UM, AND THEN THAT LARGEST MODEL CONTINGENCY, UH, DEPENDS ON OTHER CONFIGURATION LIMITATIONS. 
          SO, UH, AGAIN, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER WAY TO SEE THIS IS KIND OF A SELF-LIMITING PRIVATE USE NETWORK. 
          WE CAN WORK ON BRANDING AROUND THIS, BUT CLEARLY SELF-LIMITING FACILITY. 
          WE WOULD LIKE TO FORKLIFT THE SELF-LIMITING GENERATION RULES INTO THE SELF-LIMITING LOAD RULES AND HOW TO FIT THAT TOGETHER INTO THIS COMPOSITE UM, PIECE DESIGN CONSTRUCT. 
          AND THEN THE LAST PIECE AGAIN IS THE NETTED NETWORK. 
          UM, THE MAIN ADVANTAGE OF THIS, IT IS JUST LIKE THE ONE WE SHOWED BEFORE, BUT IT'S THE IDEA OF BEING ABLE TO SIMULTANEOUSLY PARTICIPATE IN ENERGY AND ANCILLARY SERVICE MARKETS. 
          AGAIN, THIS IS KIND OF A, A BRIDGE TOO FAR FOR US TO GET TO. 
          IT'S A GOOD WAY TO HELP MONETIZE THE ASSETS WE HAVE ON THE GROUND. 
          BUT OUTSIDE OF THIS RELIABILITY, YOU KNOW, SERVING LARGE LOADS, THAT'S A FRINGE BENEFIT IF WE COULD GET THERE. 
          BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE SHOOTING FOR. 
          SO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO DO IS ERCOT IS LOOKING TO DEFINE A CLR CONSTRUCT AND A BRING YOUR OWN GEN CONSTRUCT KIND OF DOWN THIS LINE OF SIGHT. 
          SO THE LITTLE ONLY C LRS WOULD BE WITH NPR 1188 GOING IN AND WE CAN GIVE MORE DETAILS THAN THIS IN THE NEXT ROUND. 
          UM, WITH SOME OTHER NPR SCED MITIGATION. 
          STEP TWO MITIGATION THAT IF THERE'S A NEARBY CONSTRAINT AND IT WILL AGAIN, UH, PREVENT THIS LOAD FROM MELTING LINES. 
          THAT'S THE NAME OF THE GAME. 
          SO A NORMAL CLR TODAY. 
          AND HERE'S IF YOU TAKE NOTHING ELSE AWAY ON CLRS, THIS IS NOT A NORMAL CLRA BITCOIN MINER CAN RUN UP AND DOWN ALL DAY LONG. 
          IT'S ABOUT THE MONEY. 
          THIS IS TRANSMISSION CONSTRAINED. 
          SO BRANDING WISE WE COULD CALL THIS A TRANSMISSION LIMITED CLR. 
          WE CAN, YOU KNOW, I THINK AGAIN CLAYTON HAD ANOTHER WORD FOR IT, GUARD GUARDRAILS OR SOMETHING. 
          SO WE'RE OPEN TO TERMINOLOGY BUT SOMETHING IS DIFFERENT ABOUT THE CLR AND I WANT UM, THAT TO BE UNDERSTOOD. 
          SO WITH THAT, I'LL JUST PAUSE AND SEE ARE THERE ANY JUST KIND OF QUICK QUESTIONS ON THE LOADS AND WHAT WE'RE BRINGING FORWARD. 
          I'M GONNA KIND OF CUT IN THE QUEUE. 
          I KNOW WE HAD ALL THAT OTHER STUFF, BUT IF WE WANNA RUN KIND OF A FEW QUESTIONS THROUGH THE QUEUE RIGHT NOW ABOUT JUST THE CLR AND BRING YOUR OWN JEN, BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. 
          YEAH, WE HIT A QUEUE FORM. 
          SO BARACK FIRST. 
          HEY, SO JUST FOR CLR OR OR CAN I ASK FOR BYOG AS WELL? BOTH OF THESE, YES. 
          OKAY. 
          SO ARE YOU ENVISIONING THIS TO BE IN PAL TO BADGE ZERO JUNE 1ST BOARD OR WHAT'S THE TIMELINE THERE? THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HOPING. 
          OKAY. 
          NOW WHAT YOU HAVEN'T SEEN YET FROM US IS HOW ARE WE MODELING THIS IN THE STUDIES AND ALL THAT? WE HAVEN'T FIGURED ALL THAT OUT YET. 
          YEAH, WE'LL GO TO THE LARGE LOAD WORKING GROUP ON FRIDAY TO KICK AROUND PROBLEMS, RISKS IN THIS. 
          BUT YES, THIS IS WHERE WE'RE HEADED. 
          YEAH, I THINK I ALLUDED TO THIS. 
          UH, WE REQUIRE A SEPARATE WORKSHOP FOR THIS TO KIND OF DRAFT LANGUAGE AND TO BE IN THE JUNE 1ST TIMEFRAME. 
          I'M, IF WE NEED AN EXTRA ONE WE CAN, SO I'M HOPING THE LLWG HELPS A LITTLE BIT. 
          AND THEN WE HAVE THREE WORKSHOPS IN A ROW AHEAD OF THE APRIL ONE WAS KIND OF OUR FIRST WEEK OF APRIL IS OUR TARGET FOR TRYING TO FILE SOMETHING. 
          OKAY. 
          SECOND QUESTION IS FOR BYOG, IF YES, SO I KNOW OTHER IS SOURCE ARE PRETTY MUCH DOING THIS RIGHT? UH, LIKE SPPS HILDA PROCESS AND YOU KNOW, ZERO INJECTION MISO AND OTHERS. 
          SO IS THERE A WAY WHERE, I MEAN THIS IS NET ZERO OR IF I'M NET MEGAWATT ZERO AT A POI MM-HMM  RIGHT? SIMILAR TO OTHER EYES. 
          SO PROPOSALS, CAN WE HAVE AN ACCELERATED STEADY PROCESS THAN THE BAD ZERO PROCESS? SO, SO I BRING IN MY GENERATION MM-HMM  ONE GIGAWATT FOR EXAMPLE, AND I APPLY FOR A LOAD ONE GIGAWATT OUR CART AT THE POI WILL NOT SEE ANYTHING, BUT I APPLY FOR THIS LOAD TO FIRM UP OVER FIVE YEARS. 
          CAN I GET THE APPROVAL TO BILL NOW WHILE I WAIT FOR THE TRANSMISSION TO COME AND GET THE LOAD? IS YOUR SCENARIO CO LOADED CA WITH EXISTING GEN? NO. 
          THE OTHER WAY AROUND OR THE, YOU THINK ABOUT BOTH OF THESE AS BEING NEW? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          SO I'M SORRY IF SOMEBODY ELSE IS GETTING THIS JUMP IN. 
          YEAH, NO, THE QUESTION, SO I BRING IN MY GENERATION, I BRING IN MY LOAD, I APPLY, I APPLY FOR FIRM TRANSMISSION OVER A PERIOD OF NEXT FIVE YEARS. 
          MEANWHILE, YOU ONLY SEE ZERO MEGAWATTS AT THE POI. 
          CORRECT. 
          IT'S AS IF WE HAD AWARDED YOU A ZERO RAMP RATE. 
          EXACTLY. 
          BUT YOU CAN STILL OPERATE. 
          YEAH. 
          CAN I GET ACCELERATED STEADY PATH SO THAT I COULD START BUILDING TODAY OR WHENEVER IN THE NEAR TERM AND NOT WAIT UNTIL 
          [05:05:01]
WHAT? SEPTEMBER, 2027. 
          OH, SO DO YOU NEED THE ZERO LOAD RAMP APPROVAL? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE, SO SO, 'CAUSE HERE'S THE OTHER PART OF THE STUDY IS DO YOU STILL WANT TO KNOW THAT SOMEDAY ERCOT WILL INTERCONNECT THIS FACILITY? YEAH, BUT THAT'S FOR THAT YOU'RE STUDYING IN BAD ZERO. 
          CORRECT. 
          SO, SO FOR EXAMPLE, TO LAY THIS TIMELINE OUT, RIGHT, SEPTEMBER 27, I KNOW THAT, OKAY, 29 I'LL HAVE 300 AND YOU KNOW, SO AND SO, BUT, BUT THE FACT THAT I COULD BRING THE GENERATION AND BUILD THE LOAD TODAY, THAT MEANS I CAN OPERATE UNTIL 29 WITHOUT PHONE TRANSMISSION SERVICE AND I CAN START BUILDING NOW WOULD BE SUPER HELPFUL. 
          MM-HMM . 
          YEAH. 
          SO I THINK THOSE ARE DETAILS FOR LATER OR GO AHEAD JEFF. 
          YEAH, JUST, UM, MY INITIAL THOUGHT IS, UM, I THINK YOU'RE, UM, AND, AND IT'S KIND OF A PROCESS QUESTION, BUT THE, I THINK THAT THERE'S UM, TWO, I THINK TWO PROCESS CHALLENGES OF THAT. 
          SO ONE IS THAT WE NEED TO UH, WHEN WHEN ARE YOU MAKING THAT COMMITMENT? UM, I THINK YOU'RE MAKING THAT COMMITMENT AT THE END OF BATCH ZERO. 
          UM, IT, AND SO WE HAVE TO, I, I THINK SO. 
          I THINK SO I THINK WE HAVE TO FOLLOW THAT PROCESS WHERE YOU MAKE THAT COMMITMENT AT THE END OF BATCH ZERO. 
          AND, AND I THINK THE OTHER PIECE IS BECAUSE THE GENERATION IS SYNCHRONOUSLY CONNECTED, UM, WITH THE GRID, THEN WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE GENERATION INTERCONNECTION STUDY PROCESS AS WELL. 
          AND, AND, AND SO I THINK THIS CONCEPT IS GONNA END UP BEING, BUT BOTH THE LOAD AND THE GENERATION HAVE TO MEET AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE. 
          AND THEN, AND THAT'S WHEN YOU MAKE YOUR COMMITMENT. 
          YEAH. 
          SO I'M NOT GOING TO CONNECT THE GENERATION TO THE GRID, BUT IT'S, IT STILL IN LATER SYNCHRONOUSLY CONNECTED, WHICH HAS A STABILITY AND, AND UM, YEAH, SHORT CIRCUIT IMPACT. 
          SO I THINK THIS IS WHY I'VE REQUESTED A WORKSHOP SO WE COULD IRON OUT A LOT OF THINGS MM-HMM . 
          UH, ON HOW THE STUDIES WOULD LOOK LIKE. 
          AND AS I SAID, OTHER EYES HAVE ALREADY HAD THESE THINGS IN PLACE SO WE COULD KIND OF USE THOSE AS A, YOU KNOW, BENCHMARK AND GO FROM THERE ON HOW THIS WOULD LOOK LIKE IN TERMS OF TIMELINES AND UM, WHEN WOULD THE GENERATOR CONNECT TO GRADE AND WHEN ARE WE EXPECTING THE FIRM TRANSMISSION SERVICE, THOSE KIND OF THINGS. 
          BUT THE GOAL IS I BRING THE NECESSARY CAPACITY TO SERVE MY LOAD IN THE SHORT TERM AND THEN WAIT FOR THE TRANSMISSION SERVICE LATER. 
          BUT IN THE SHORT TERM, IF I GET AN QUICK STUDIES AND APPROVAL FROM ERCOT, I COULD START BUILDING THIS WHILE THE FIRM SERVICE COMES. 
          THAT'S THE MAIN OBJECTIVE OF BYOG IN GENERAL. 
          YEP. 
          OKAY. 
          YEP. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          AND THEN Q, WHO'S THAT? BILL BARNES. 
          WE'VE GOT A FEW. 
          UM, MATT, SLIDE 60 PLEASE. 
          AND, UM, I GUESS TO BEGIN, THANK YOU GUYS. 
          WE ASKED FOR SOME THOUGHTS FROM THE ERCOT TEAM ON WHAT THESE COULD LOOK LIKE AND CLARITY ON THE CONFIGURATIONS. 
          I KNOW YOU GUYS ARE SWAMPED WITH A BUNCH OF THINGS, SO JUST THANK YOU FOR PUTTING SOME THOUGHT INTO THIS. 
          IT HELPS US TREMENDOUSLY. 
          UH, THE NETTED NETWORK THREE, THAT SOUNDS LIKE THAT IS A, A CO-LOCATED CLR AND GENERATION RESOURCE, CAN WE CALL IT THAT? I, I'M NOT SURE WHAT BOTH PARTICIPATE IN THE MARKET MEAN OTHER THAN THE LOAD IS ACL R. 
          YEAH, WHAT SIDE DESCRIBED WAS MAXIMIZING ANCILLARY SERVICES BEHIND IT DEPENDING ON WHICH RESOURCES ARE MAYBE AND OR CONTROLLED LOAD. 
          SO YES. 
          WILL HE BE AT THE LLWG ON FRIDAY? I'M KIND OF CURIOUS. 
          HE IS, YES. 
          HE'LL BE ALL RIGHT. 
          I'LL, AND THERE'S CHEMISTRY YOU TOO. 
          HE MAY NOT HAVE, SO I'LL SAY THAT QUESTION FOR THEN. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, AND THE NEXT SLIDE IS, I THINK THAT'S THE DISTRICT, THE OLD SCHOOL CLRS. 
          IT'S BASICALLY CRYPTO OR, OR A LOAD THAT CAN RESPOND TO SCED DISPATCH WITHOUT ANY TYPE OF RESOURCE OR BEHIND THE METER, UH, SUPPLY. 
          THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          THEN THE NEXT SLIDE, THIS ONE, THIS WAS MY CONCERN IS THAT I THINK WE NEED TO UNPACK THIS SCENARIO A LITTLE BIT MORE. 
          THERE'S A COUPLE THINGS THAT WEREN'T COMPLETELY JIVING WITH ME AND THIS ELABORATES QUITE A BIT ON IT. 
          ONE IS THE REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS. 
          SO THE, TO NOT BE A GRID REGISTERED RESOURCE, YOU HAVE TO BE 10 MEGAWATTS OR SMALLER. 
          SO THE, I SEE WHERE YOU'RE SAYING YOU CAN SEGMENT, SEGMENT THOSE OUT, BUT I THINK THAT'S ONLY SPECIFIC TO WHETHER YOU ARE SELLING AT WHOLESALE. 
          SO IF YOU'RE NOT EXPORTING, I THINK YOU COULD PROBABLY BE A-S-O-T-S-G SETTLEMENT ONLY TRANSMISSION SELF GENERATOR WHERE YOU ARE ONLY SELF-SERVING THE LOAD, YOU'RE NOT EXPORTING AT ALL. 
          AND YOU COULD, I THINK YOU CAN EXCEED THAT 10 MEGAWATTS. 
          [05:10:01]
BUT THAT NEEDS TO BE LIKE, PUT THAT ON THE PUNCH LIST ON THINGS TO TALK ABOUT. 
          FOR THIS SCENARIO, THE QUESTIONS THAT WE HAVE REALLY REVOLVE AROUND WHAT HAPPENS WHEN, LET'S SAY THIS IS A YOU, YOU'RE USING A BATTERY, BASICALLY YOU'RE, THE GENERATION THAT'S NON SYNCHRONIZED IS A BATTERY AND THAT'S THE SECOND TO LAST BULLET. 
          IF IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE BACKUP GENERATION FAILS, BUT THERE'S NO DURATION. 
          YEP. 
          CORRECT. 
          THERE'S NO STATE OF CHARGE LEFT IN THE BATTERY AND NOW YOU'RE, YOU'RE IN, THERE'S SOME TYPE OF TRANSMISSION CONSTRAINT AND YOU'RE GETTING DISPATCH SIGNALS TO CURTAIL AND YOU CAN'T WHAT HAPPENS? NO, YOU WILL , I MEAN YOU'RE DROPPING LOAD. 
          SO THERE'LL THE TSPS GONNA DROP YOU, I'M SORRY, BREAKER PUT THAT ON YOU GUYS, BUT IT A, THAT WAS SO THEN THE SAME, I HAD THE SAME QUESTION IN A LOAD. 
          SHE SCENARIO IT, I ASSUME THESE GUYS ARE GETTING DISCONNECTED AT THE POI IN EITHER A LOAD SHE SCENARIO OR IF THEY'RE NOT RESPONDING TO PRICES, UM, AS A RESULT OF, UH, SC DISPATCH FOR CONGESTION. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S THAT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND THEN THE NEXT, SORRY, I'VE GOT SHANNON CARE'S A LIST OF QUESTIONS HERE, UM, ON, I'LL, I'LL STOP AFTER THIS ONE. 
          UM, THIS IS EXACTLY, LITERALLY EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IN TERMS OF WHAT KIND OF SPECIFICATIONS FOR HOW THIS WOULD LOOK COMPLETELY DOABLE AND WORKABLE. 
          MAKES SENSE. 
          YOU CAN OVERSIZE THE GENERATION RESOURCE. 
          SO IN A G MINUS ONE, I'M LOOKING AT THE TOP RIGHT CHART. 
          IN A G MINUS ONE SCENARIO, YOU CAN STILL SERVE THE FULL LOAD AND THAT AND GET FULL ALLOCATION. 
          THE QUESTION THAT WE HAVE, WHICH IS RELATED TO THE COMMENTS WE FILED ON THE, ON THE, UH, PLANNING GUIDE, IS WHY DOES THE CONFIGURATION THE TOP RIGHT EVEN NEED TO GO THROUGH A BATCH PROCESS? YOU HAVE A A 1,250 MEGAWATT GENERATION RESOURCE THAT'S GOING TO GO THROUGH THE GENERATION INTERCONNECTION PROCESS, HAVE A FULL INTERCONNECTION STUDY, THE INTERCONNECTION FACILITIES WILL BE SIZED TO HANDLE THAT AMOUNT OF GENERATION. 
          THE LOAD IS SMALLER. 
          WHY DO YOU NEED TO GO THROUGH THE BATCH STUDY IF YOU'VE OVERSIZED YOUR GENERATION FOR A CO-LOCATED SITE? YEAH. 
          AND WHY DO YOU NEED DURO? I MEAN, YEAH, IT'S A, NO, IT'S A GOOD QUESTION. 
          IT'S LIKE WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO HAVE THAT INTERCONNECT PROTECTED? SO I THINK THOSE ARE SOME OF THE DETAILS WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT. 
          YES. 
          'CAUSE YOU'RE RIGHT, IT'S A HOW DO WE PLAN FOR IT IF YOU'RE GOING IN, IN THESE TYPES OF SITUATIONS, IF YOU'RE GOING THROUGH A FULL GENERATION INTERCONNECTION STUDY AND FIS AND DOESN'T THAT FULFILL THE SAME, UH, STUDY REQUIREMENTS. 
          SO THAT'S ANOTHER ONE. 
          UH, THAT IS A TBD. 
          AND THEN I'M ASSUMING WE'LL TALK MORE ABOUT, UH, THESE SUBJECTS ON FRIDAY. 
          IT LOOKS LIKE WE GOT AN HOUR AND A HALF AT THE LLWG, SO SOUNDS GOOD. 
          THANK YOU. 
          LOOK FORWARD TO IT. 
          ALRIGHT, NEXT QUESTION, SAM, BRANDON. 
          SO MATT, CAN I JUST, OH YEAH, KENNETH, SORRY, A COUPLE THINGS BACK ON YOUR FIRST OF 15 QUESTIONS. 
          , UM, THE NET OF NETWORK, YOU MAY HAVE SAID THIS MATT, BUT I DIDN'T HEAR IT, IS IT'S NOT REALLY GONNA HELP YOU WITH YOUR SPEED OF INTERCONNECTION. 
          IT'S JUST THAT ABILITY TO SHOW YOUR CAPABILITY AT ERCOT IN A DIFFERENT WAY THAN WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY. 
          AND THEN I THINK YOUR QUESTION ON THE BRING YOUR OWN GIN OF WHY DOES IT NEED TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS IS ONE THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT. 
          UH, AND I THINK YOUR EXAMPLE WAS REALLY GOOD. 
          YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU'RE BRINGING EXCESS MEGAWATTS TO WHAT YOUR LOAD IS BACK THEN AND WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO THAT. 
          SO THANKS. 
          ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. 
          AND SAM, GO AHEAD AND SORRY IF I MISCHARACTERIZED ANY KIND OF EXAMPLES. 
          . 
          NO, I APPRECIATE IT. 
          UH, AND NO, THESE SLIDES OVERALL ARE SUPER HELPFUL. 
          SO, UH, TO QUICKLY GO THROUGH MY, UH, THREE QUESTIONS HERE. 
          SO FOR SLIDE 62, UH, OR ACTUALLY IT MIGHT BE 61. 
          YEAH, 61. 
          SO FOR THAT GRAPH, OR SORRY, SIX. 
          YES, SIX. 
          YEAH. 
          THIS ONE WITH THE GRAPHIC IN THE BOTTOM RIGHT. 
          SO FOR, OH, SORRY. 
          YEAH, IT'S 61. 
          IT'S 61. 
          IT'S THE ONE WITH THE CR. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          WITH THE GRAPH ON IT. 
          OKAY, GOT IT. 
          YEP. 
          YES, . 
          UH, SO, UH, IS THIS CHART MEANT TO IMPLY THAT ONE CLRS WOULD BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY WHERE TREATED THE FIRM DELIVERY OF CAPACITY MIGHT BE LUMPED INTO KIND OF THE CATCHALL LAST YEAR? SORRY, YOU CUT OUT THERE RIGHT AT THE END. 
          SAY SAY IT ONCE MORE. 
          OH, SORRY. 
          YEAH, SO JUST BY THE WAY THAT THIS GRAPHIC IS, IS SHOWN, I WASN'T SURE IF IT'S MEANT TO INTEND THAT ERCOT IS IMPLYING THAT FIRM SERVICE FOR CLRS MIGHT BE LUMPED INTO ALL BEING DELIVERED IN THAT LAST KIND OF CATCHALL YEAR, YEAR SIX, OR I GUESS IT'S SHOWN AS YEAR FIVE HERE, BUT YES, THE IDEA WAS THEY WOULD BE ELIGIBLE TO CONVERT FROM A CLR TO NORMAL LOAD CONTINGENT ON THE TRANSMISSION UPGRADES BEING COMPLETE. 
          YES. 
          OKAY. 
          [05:15:01]
BUT THAT, THAT COULD BE LIKE PHASED IN OVER THOSE FIVE YEARS RATHER THAN JUST ALL BEING DELIVERED IN ONE GO. 
          YES, THERE COULD BE THE POSSIBILITY OF GE ASKING FOR REESE STUDIES TO SEE IF YOU CAN INCREASE YOUR BASE OVER TIME. 
          YEP. 
          OKAY. 
          GOTCHA. 
          OKAY. 
          MATT, UH, THIS IS AG SAM. 
          IF, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING YOUR QUESTION IS, UM, THE GRAPH ON THE, ON THE SLIDE IS NOT INTENDED TO SAY THAT IF A LOAD IS REQUESTING TO REGISTER AS ACL R, THAT IT WOULD JUST BE ALLOCATED ITS FIRM AMOUNT IN THE LAST YEAR AUTOMATICALLY? THE ANSWER IS NO. 
          IT, YOU KNOW, OUR THINKING CURRENTLY IS THAT WE WOULD STILL ASSESS WHAT COULD BE SERVED ACROSS EACH OF THE YEARS. 
          SO, UM, IT MAY BE THAT IT CAN, UH, POTENTIALLY HAVE MORE FIRM LOAD IN EARLIER YEARS. 
          IT JUST WOULD DEPEND ON WHAT THE BATCH STUDY SHOWED. 
          YEAH, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WAS ASKING. 
          THANK YOU AG. 
          UM, AND THEN BASICALLY THE INVERSE OF THAT QUESTION, ALTERNATIVELY, AT THE, AT THE PRIVATE DEVELOPER'S DECISION, UM, IN YEAR ONE, COULD THEY ADVANCE WITH TAKING ALL REMAINING 900 MEGAWATTS AND OPERATING THAT AS A CLR RATHER THAN PHASING IN THE CLR CAPACITY AS SHOWN IN THIS CHART? MM-HMM . 
          YEAH, WE STRUGGLE WITH THAT ONE. 
          WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S UPPER LIMITS, WHETHER THERE'S DYNAMIC LIMITS, WHETHER THERE'S OTHER, OTHER LIMITS OTHER THAN YOUR RAMP REQUEST OTHER THAN WHAT YOUR CAPABILITY IS IF YOU SHOWED UP EARLY. 
          SO THOSE ARE DETAILS WE HAVE TO WORK OUT STILL. 
          I, I FIGURED THAT WOULD BE THE CASE. 
          YEAH. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND THEN ON THE NEXT SLIDE, UM, SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY, UM, THE, THE, THE LANGUAGE IN THIS SLIDE, SO TO BE SURE IS THIS ISN'T, THIS ISN'T TO SUGGEST THAT A CO-LOCATED GENERATOR OR ENERGY STORAGE RESOURCE SEPARATELY METERED BEHIND THE SAME POI ISN'T ALLOWED. 
          IT'S JUST SAYING THAT UTILIZING THAT SYNCHRONOUS RESOURCE AS THE COMPLIANCE MECHANISM FOR BEING A CLR IS NOT ALLOWED. 
          IS THAT RIGHT? UM, I THINK SO, YEAH. 
          I MEAN THIS, THIS BACKUP GENERATION IS NOT A INTERCONNECTED RESOURCE TO ERCOT. 
          RIGHT. 
          BUT YEAH. 
          WHAT'S THAT EVAN? EVAN, GO AHEAD. 
          IF YOU KNOW WHAT HE'S, HOLD ON. 
          I WANNA CONFIRM THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE LOWER DIAGRAM. 
          NO, SO I'M BASICALLY SAYING, UM, I, SO THERE COULD BE A SITUATION WHERE A CLR LOAD, WHICH IS GOING TO BE CAPABLE OF CURTAILING UNDER ITS OWN CAPACITY IS CO-LOCATED BEHIND THE SAME POI WITH A SEPARATELY METERED GENERATION RESOURCE. 
          AND SO I JUST WANTED TO, UM, CONFIRM THAT THAT WASN'T,  NOT SAYING THAT'S, THAT'S NOT FEASIBLE. 
          YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU CANNOT USE THAT CO-LOCATED SYNCHRONOUS RESOURCE AS THE MECHANISM BY WHICH YOU QUALIFY THE LOAD AS ACL R, CORRECT? I THINK THAT'S RIGHT, YES. 
          AGREED. 
          OKAY. 
          YEP. 
          OKAY, GREAT. 
          NO, WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE. 
          AND THEN MY VERY LAST QUESTION HERE IS JUST ON THE BYOG SCHEME, IS IT, IS IT ERCOT VIEW THAT FOR ANY BYOG SCHEME YOU WILL HAVE TO PURSUE THIS SELF-LIMITING FACILITY FRAMEWORK? SO LIKE EVEN IN THE UPPER RIGHT HAND CORNER, THAT EXAMPLE SATISFIES THIS G MINUS ONE CASE THAT WILL BE STUDIED AND THAT'S BASICALLY LIKE THE SCENARIO THREE BYOG CASE THAT'S BEEN REFERENCED IN PREVIOUS DECKS. 
          UM, BUT YOU'RE SUGGESTING THAT EVEN THOUGH THIS CONFIGURATION WOULD THEORETICALLY SATISFY THAT G MINUS ONE CRITERIA WHILE STILL SERVING THE FULL LOAD, THERE WOULD STILL NEED TO BE A SELF-LIMITING, UM, FRAMEWORK PUT ON THE, ON THE FACILITY. 
          CORRECT. 
          THIS IS A SET IT AND FORGET IT FOR THE YEAR TYPE THING. 
          SO IF THE, IF THE, IF THEY'VE ONLY BEEN RATED OR ALLOWED TO WITHDRAW 50 MEGAWATTS, THAT'S IT. 
          AND WE WOULD PROBABLY EVEN REQUEST TO HAVE A RELAY THERE THAT WILL OPEN IF YOU EXCEED THAT. 
          SO IT IS A HARDWIRED THING FOR EVERY HOUR, NOT JUST DURING, NOT JUST AN OFF PEAK OR ON PEAK TYPE THING. 
          GOTCHA. 
          YEP, THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          THIS IS EASY. 
          I JUST WANNA ADD ONTO WHAT MATT SAID. 
          YOU KNOW, I THINK THE OPERATIONAL PIECE OF HOW THIS, THIS STRUCTURE WILL FUNCTION, IT WILL, YOU KNOW, I THINK OUR CURRENT THINKING IS IT WOULD BE A MODIFICATION TO THE EXISTING SELF-LIMITING FACILITY CONCEPT, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, IN THIS CASE, BECAUSE WE'RE, WE'RE KIND OF USING THAT GENERATION TO BE CREDITED TO SERVING THE LOAD, UH, THERE, THERE'S ALSO A, YOU KNOW, SORT OF A, A HIGHER RELIABILITY IMPACT TO ALL THIS. 
          AND SO REALLY WE'RE GOING TO NEED CLEAR DEFINITIONS OF WHAT IT IT MEANS, YOU KNOW, FOR THE LOAD TO, UH, THE, THE SITE TO NEVER EXCEED ITS LIMIT AT THE POI AND WHAT WE MEAN OPERATIONALLY. 
          WHEN IF, IF THAT'S EXCEEDED, IF IT'S SOMETHING LIKE A REVERSE POWER RELAY, HOW FAST DOES THAT NEED 
          [05:20:01]
TO BE? UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, I THINK WE'RE OUR THINKING IS THAT, THAT THAT'S GONNA NEED TO BE DEFINED AS PART OF THIS. 
          GOTCHA. 
          NO, THAT, THAT'S SUPER, UH, SUPER CLEAR. 
          UM, AND I GUESS LASTLY I'LL JUST SAY TO, TO CLARIFY MY POINT FROM THE LAST WORKSHOP, I WAS JUST HIGHLIGHTING THAT IF THERE IS A LOAD THAT UNDER ITS OWN CAPACITY IS CAPABLE OF BEING ACL R, THEN THAT REALLY NEGATES THE NEED TO EVEN CONSIDER THESE WHOLE, THIS NOTION OF CO-LOCATION. 
          YEAH. 
          BECAUSE AS LONG AS THE LOAD IS ACL R, IT'S COMPLETELY A PRIVATE DECISION IF YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE GENERATION CO-LOCATED OR NOT. 
          AH, YES. 
          SO, YEP. 
          THANK YOU. 
          APPRECIATE IT ALL. 
          YEP, THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, MONICA. 
          HI. 
          THANKS ERCOT FOR DOING WORK ON THIS. 
          CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? YES, VERY WELL. 
          OKAY, GREAT. 
          UM, I WAS WONDERING IF ON THIS SLIDE, THE SLF MODEL REQUIRES, UM, YOU TO NET THE LOAD PERMANENTLY OR WOULD IT BE LIKE, WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO HAVE A DYNAMIC CAP WITH A SORT OF INTERIM NON FIRM TRANSMISSION SERVICE SITUATION THAT NO, WE HAVE NOT CONSIDERED THAT AT THIS POINT. 
          WE'RE NOT CLOSING THE DOOR ON THAT FOREVER, BUT FOR BATCH ZERO IT'S TO GO WITH A SIMILAR CONSTRUCT OF WHAT WE HAVE TODAY. 
          SO IT'S JUST A SET, A SET LIMIT. 
          OKAY, GOTCHA. 
          AND THEN, UM, ARE YOU CONTEMPLATING IF YOU AGREE TO THIS SELF-LIMITING FACILITY CONSTRUCT THAT YOU HAVE SOME SORT OF EXPEDITED, UH, INTERCONNECTION PROCESS AS A RESULT OF BEING FLEXIBLE? THAT'S WHAT WE'RE EXPLORING. 
          OKAY, GREAT. 
          MM-HMM . 
          AND LIKE I SAID, THE WORST CASE IS YOU GET A RAMP OF ZERO AND THIS IS A WAY TO MITIGATE THE RAMP THAT YOU DON'T LIKE. 
          SO. 
          YEP. 
          GO AHEAD. 
          SORRY. 
          NO, YOU'RE GOOD. 
          THAT'S HELPFUL. 
          UM, LAST QUESTION. 
          THE NETTED NETWORK CONCEPT, UM, IS IT NOT FEASIBLE RIGHT NOW OR EVER? IT'S NOT FEASIBLE RIGHT NOW. 
          THANKS FOR CLARIFYING THAT. 
          WHEN WE SAID THE, UH, THIS LITTLE SCORECARD HERE WAS, THIS IS FEASIBILITY AS IT RELATES TO BATCH ZERO POTENTIAL, POTENTIAL POTENTIAL AND THEN NOT OKAY. 
          UM, ARE, IS THAT STILL SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE EXPLORING? NOPE. 
          FOR IMPLEMENTATION ON A, ON THE LONGER TERM? UH, S MORTY MIGHT TALK ABOUT THAT, THE LARGE LOAD WORKING GROUP, BUT FOR THIS, FOR THIS GROUP, NO, WE'RE NOT EXPLORING IT IN TERMS OF A, UH, A FAST TRACK TO UM, THE INTERCONNECTION ISSUE. 
          OKAY. 
          GOTCHA. 
          THANK YOU. 
          YOU BET. 
          UH, NEXT, I THINK WE HAVE FOUR OR FIVE LEFT. 
          UH, KEVIN HANSON. 
          YEAH. 
          FOR ONE B, I'M CURIOUS, WHAT IS THE OPERATIONAL DURATION REQUIRED FOR THAT OPTION? WELL, IT'S NOT AN US THING, IT'S A THEM THING. 
          SO IF IT'S A DIESEL, IT'S STILL, IT RUNS OUT OF DIESEL. 
          IF IT'S A BATTERY, IT'S WHEN IT RUNS OUTTA JUICE. 
          BUT HERE'S THE FUNNY PART. 
          SO THE VAULT SEND VAULT, SO THE VAULT OPTION WITH 300 HOURS, IF IT'S A WHAT THE NEW TECHNOLOGY OUT THERE THAT THE VAULT, I THINK IT'S THE VAULT THAT'S 300 HOURS OF OPERATION. 
          THAT WOULD BE YOUR LIMITATION. 
          IT'S YOUR OWN LIMITATIONS, IT'S YOUR OWN LIMITATION, IT'S YOUR OWN RISK. 
          OKAY. 
          I THINK IT WAS AG OR SOMEONE SAID TO ME, IT'S LIKE WE'RE LOOKING AT THE LOAD AND WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT'S BEHIND IT. 
          WE JUST KNOW THAT IT GOES AWAY. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THAT'S THE SER THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SERVING. 
          OKAY. 
          AND IF EVERYTHING FAILS BEHIND THE FENCE, THAT THING STILL GOES DARK. 
          OKAY. 
          THANKS. 
          YOU BET. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          AFTER KEVIN WAS KELLEN KILLING ARD. 
          HEY, CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? YES, THERE YOU ARE. 
          YES. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          YEP. 
          SORRY, I WAS HAVING TROUBLE WITH THE MUTE. 
          UH, I GUESS MY QUESTION'S BACK ON SLIDE 63 ON THE BYOG SELFING FACILITY. 
          SO THEORETICALLY IF YOU WERE ABLE TO, UM, GET INJECTION WITHDRAWAL LIMITS, ARE YOU, SO FOR IN THE FIRST EXAMPLE, COULD YOU POTENTIALLY GET A NET INJECTION LIMIT UP TO YOUR GENERATOR NAMEPLATE OF THAT 1250 MEGAWATTS AND THEN ALSO HAVE A NET WITHDRAWAL LIMIT OF A THOUSAND MEGAWATTS DEPENDING ON HOW THE STUDY RESULTS COME OUT? YEAH, IT MAY COME UP WITH AN UPPER BOUNDARY ON THE LOAD PLANNING SIDE AND AN UPPER BOUNDARY ON THE INTERCONNECTION SIDE. 
          WE HAVEN'T FIGURED OUT HOW TO MARRY THOSE TWO PROCESSES TOGETHER. 
          SO IN OTHER WORDS, IF IT WAS JUST A GENERATOR OR JUST A LOAD THAT THERE WILL BE THIS NET THAT ISN'T AGREED TO VALUE, THAT YOU DON'T EXCEED, ESPECIALLY ON THE LOAD SIDE FOR THIS PIECE, UH, YEAH, KENNETH IS GONNA HELP ME OUT. 
          HE, HE THINKS LIKE THIS. 
          THE OTHER THING IS THERE'S A LINK TO WHAT THAT SELF LIMIT FOR THE FACILITY IS TO WHAT'S IN THE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, YOU NEED THE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT TO SAY, HERE'S THE LIMIT ON WITHDRAWAL, HERE'S THE LIMIT ON INJECTION AND THAT'S WHAT YOU NEED TO FOLLOW. 
          YEAH, YEP. 
          THAT, THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          BUT THEORETICALLY IT COULD BE UP TO YOUR 
          [05:25:01]
NAME PLATE, IT COULD BE UP TO WHAT YOU DRIFTED OFF ON THE END THERE, UH, THAT YOUR NAME PLATE. 
          SO IN THIS NAME PLATE, FIRST EXAMPLE UP TO A THOUSAND MEGAWATTS OR BELOW, WELL THE LIMIT WILL BE DETERMINED BY THE STUDIES OF, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH INJECTION IS. 
          OKAY. 
          AND SAME, SAME WAY ON THE OTHER SIDE, BASED ON THE STUDY, THERE'S A LIMIT TO HOW MUCH YOU CAN WITHDRAW. 
          AND THAT'S, THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          YEAH. 
          AND THAT'S KIND OF WHERE WE LEFT IT. 
          IF WE HAVEN'T ANSWERED ALL THOSE, HOW DO WE STUDY THIS THING AND HOW DO WE APPROVE WHAT THOSE LIMITS ARE? YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN MY, MY NEXT QUESTION IS, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE WAS BETWEEN BYOG AND THE NETTED NETWORK, UM, IT'S BASICALLY THE DIFFERENCE IS THE, THE NETTED NETWORK, IT WOULD JUST ALLOW FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE ANCILLARY SERVICES NET, UM, MARKET. 
          YEAH, SIMULTANEOUSLY. 
          I THINK THERE'S STILL SOME PARTICIPATION YOU CAN DO IN, I'M NOT GONNA EVEN GO THERE. 
          LET'S, IF YOU WANNA, IF YOU WANNA LOG INTO THE UH, LLWG ON FRIDAY, WE'LL HAVE THE RIGHT PEOPLE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. 
          BUT IT WAS DEFINITELY THE NET NETWORK WAS I THINK, ANCILLARY SERVICES TO THE FULL CAPABILITY FOR EACH RESOURCE OR CLR BEHIND THE FENCE. 
          WHEREAS THERE'S LIMITATIONS IN OTHER SCENARIOS, BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT APPLIES TO OUR BRING YOUR OWN SELF-LIMITING FACILITY. 
          UH, I'LL SAY THIS, WE WANT TO KEEP THIS SIMPLE AND STUPID. 
          I, I DON'T MEAN TO BE RUDE ABOUT IT, BUT WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO TO FAST TRACK THIS ANCILLARY SERVICES AND ENERGY SURPLUS SALES ARE A DISTRACTION THAT COULD PUT US IN THE DITCH AND WE'D RATHER FOCUS ON, EVEN IF IT'S KIND OF A, A SET IT AND FORGET IT LIMIT BOX, UM, THAT'S PROBABLY WHERE WE WANT TO GO AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN RIGHT NOW. 
          HEY MATT, I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT, WE HAVE NINE PEOPLE STILL IN THIS QUEUE AND WE HAVE 13 IN THE QUEUE LEFT OVER FROM BEFORE. 
          SO I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT, YEAH, I GUESS ON THE LOAD SIDE, I CARVED OUT AN HOUR TO EXPLORE THIS. 
          ARE Y'ALL GUYS, I'M SORRY, THIS IS, I DON'T KNOW. 
          KEEP GOING. 
          OKAY, WE'RE GONNA CLEAR THE BYOG AND THEN FOUR 30 TO FIVE CAN BE THE, WE GO BACK TO THE OTHERS, BUT WE'LL SEE IF WE CAN EXHAUST THIS LIST, UM, ESPECIALLY SINCE IT'S ALSO NEW. 
          MONICA, KEVIN, KEVIN, SHANNON, SHANNON, I WANTED TO TELL Y'ALL THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU'VE PUT TOGETHER HERE ON SLIDE 63. 
          UM, I THINK THIS GOES A LONG WAY TOWARDS WHAT WE WERE ALL ASKING FOR. 
          I HAD A COUPLE CLARIFYING QUESTIONS. 
          UM, IN THE, IN THIS EXAMPLE ON THE G MINUS ONE, I'M PRESUMING THAT ERCOT INTENT IS TO TREAT IT, UH, THE G MINUS ONE HERE THE SAME WAY YOU DO IN THE PLANNING STUDIES WHERE LIKE, UM, HYPOTHETICALLY A THREE ON ONE UM, COMBINED CYCLE, YOU WOULD LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE CTS OUT PLUS ITS UH, RATIO SHARE OF THE STEAM TURBINE, BUT IT, THE OTHER TWO OUTTA THREE WOULD REMAIN IN THAT CASE. 
          OKAY, THAT'S, I'M GETTING A NOD OF YES FROM JEFF. 
          THAT'S GOOD. 
          YES, CORRECT. 
          AND THEN SIMILARLY, LIKE IF THE CTS ALL HAVE BYPASS STAMPERS, THEN YOU WOULD LOOK AT THE STEAM TURBINE ONLY OUT, BUT THE CTS STILL BEING THERE. 
          IS THAT CORRECT AS WELL? YES, THAT'S THE INTENTION, YES. 
          PERFECT. 
          AND THEN BACK TO, I THINK IT WAS MATT'S COMMENT ABOUT THE UH, RELAY, YOU KNOW, TO LIMIT YOU ON, UM, OH YEAH, I THINK YOU'RE ON THE WRONG SLIDE. 
          63 ON UH, PULLING MORE THAN WHAT UM, YOU KNOW, UNDER THE G MINUS ONE SCENARIO IT FEELS LIKE WE SHOULD HAVE SOME AMOUNT OF TIME DELAY ON THAT. 
          AND IT'S NOT LIKE MICROSECONDS IT'S, AND IT'S NOT 10 MINUTES, BUT THE WAY I, MY LOGIC ON THIS IS IF IT'S LESS THAN THE 125% OF THE LIMIT TYPE THING ALREADY TODAY, YOU ALLOW SC TO UH, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S QUICK START CTS OR DEPLOYING BATTERIES, THERE'S IMPLICIT IN HOW WE DISPATCH RESOURCES TODAY. 
          THERE IS AN IMPLIED TIME, UM, TO WHAT THE RAMP CAN BE. 
          SO I THINK ON THE FLIP SIDE OF THIS, TO GIVE AN EXAMPLE IS IF WE WERE AT THE TOP SCENARIO, THE TOP RIGHT AND WE HAD 1,250 OF GENERATION, I THINK ONLY A THOUSAND OF THE LOADS SHOULD BE FIRM, BUT MAYBE 1250 COULD RUN OF LOAD EXCEPT THAT LAST TWO 50 IS NON FIRM AND IT NEEDS TO BE OFF WITHIN X SECONDS OR YOU KNOW, TENS OF SECONDS WITH BEFORE THE RELAY, YOU KNOW, HAVE SOME RELAY TO RUN IT BACK SLASH TRIP IT. 
          IF THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          WE'VE DEFINITELY BEEN THINKING ABOUT THE OPERATIONAL RISKS AND WHAT KIND OF PROTECTIONS WE NEED TO PUT IN FOR UPSIDE AND DOWNSIDE IF WE LOSE THE LOAD, IT IS THE OVERSHOOT. 
          IF IT'S THE GEN, IT'S THE UNDERSHOOT AND HOW FAST AND HOW QUICK IF IT'S 2000 MEGAWATTS IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE, THAT'S GONNA DO THE OVERSIGHT OVER THE UPSIDE ON THE GIN. 
          IF THE LOAD TRIPS, 
          [05:30:02]
I GUESS IF THIS IS NOT IN SC YOU WOULD NOT HAVE A WAY, MAYBE YOU COULD JUST DO A BDI OR SOMETHING. 
          WE DON'T WANT THE CONTROL ROOM CONTROLLING THE SKY. 
          SO THE IDEA IS NO, I JUST MEAN WHERE THE LOAD TRIPS IN YOUR SCENARIO BECAUSE THE GENERATOR IN THAT CASE IS PROBABLY GONNA, IF IT GRID CAN'T HANDLE IT, THEY'LL BE GETTING A VERY NEGATIVE PRICE. 
          WE DON'T WANT THIS TO BE SKI DISPATCHABLE NECESSARILY. 
          I MEAN THAT'S WHY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS BEING A, THE SELF FL AND KENNETH, YOU CAN REEL ME BACK. 
          I FEEL LIKE I JUST WALKED OUT ON THIN ICE THERE. 
          , LET ME SAY TODAY WE HAVE THIS SELF-LIMITING FACILITY CONCEPT FOR SITES THAT ARE NOTHING BUT GENERATION AND THEY ARE LIMITED ON, THEY CAN'T EXCEED THAT INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT QUANTITY. 
          AND I THINK WE USE THE WORD INSTANT IN THE CURRENT PROTOCOLS. 
          SO THAT'S WHERE WE'RE STARTING TODAY WITH A GENERATION SITE. 
          THE IDEA OF HAVING LOAD THERE TOO, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO THINK THROUGH THE SAME PARAMETERS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. 
          HOW QUICKLY DO YOU NEED THIS, YOU KNOW, HOW 10, HOW LONG CAN THIS LIMIT BE EXCEEDED? YEAH, MAYBE SAME TENS A SECOND CONCEPT THE OTHER WAY AS WELL. 
          YEAH, THAT'S A GOOD POINT. 
          THANKS. 
          ALRIGHT, UH, SHANNON, EVAN, AND THEN SARAH AND THEN WE'LL TRY TO WRAP UP THIS PART. 
          EVAN, GO AHEAD. 
          UM, THANKS MATT. 
          SO I, I THINK I HEARD THIS EARLIER, BUT THERE'S NOT A LIMIT ON GENERATION TYPES FOR EITHER THE BRING YOUR OWN GENERATION OR THE CLR THAT'S KIND OF GOT THE NON SYNCHRONOUS GENERATION THERE IN TERMS OF, SORRY, IN TERMS OF TECHNOLOGIES, YES. 
          I DUNNO WE'VE GOTTEN TO THAT LEVEL YET. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S OKAY. 
          UM, MAYBE IF WE CAN JUST DOUBLE CLICK THEN ON THE CLR PART, JUST WITH THAT IN MIND. 
          RIGHT. 
          I I THINK I HEARD YOU SAID IT DOESN'T MATTER AS LONG AS IT GOES AWAY, LIKE WE'RE SAYING OKAY FOR BATTERIES OR DIESEL SETS OR WHATEVER, BUT READ THIS ONE. 
          IF CLRS COULD STILL PROVIDE ANCILLARY SERVICES AND LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, IF IT'S A BATTERY DOING THAT, THEN WE'RE GONNA TAKE INTO ACCOUNT DURATION OF THE BATTERY FOR ANCILLARY SERVICES. 
          AND SO I'M NOT SAYING WE NEED TO FIGURE IT OUT, I'M JUST KIND OF FLAGGING THIS AS LIKE MAYBE THIS GETS A LITTLE BIT MORE COMPLICATED AND AND IT NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED. 
          I I THINK HE WANTS THE OTHER PICTURE THAT'S, UH, WITH A MIX. 
          YEAH, THANKS KEN. 
          SO THAT BACKUP GENERATION, WHATEVER IT IS, BATTERY OR DIESEL, RIGHT? BUT THE PROCESS IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE, WE NEED TO SEE THAT THE LOAD GOES AWAY. 
          YOU MAY HAVE TAKEN THE LOAD OFF AND THEN COVERED IT WITH YOUR BACKUP GENERATOR. 
          THAT'S OKAY. 
          BUT FROM US IT NEEDS TO BE, WE DON'T, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU DID, BUT YOU TOOK THE LOAD AWAY AS WE NEEDED IT. 
          YEAH. 
          SO I GUESS WHAT I'M SAYING, KEN, IS I COULD ALSO PROVIDE AN ANCILLARY SERVICE WITH THAT CLR AND IF I AM DOING WHAT YOU JUST DESCRIBED WITH, UH, ASYNCHRONOUS BATTERY FOR EXAMPLE, THEN I DO HAVE A DURATION ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. 
          AND IF THIS WAS AN ESR, WE WOULD TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THAT DURATION OR THE STATE OF CHARGE FOR THAT ANCILLARY SERVICE. 
          WHEREAS HERE WE WOULD NOT. 
          AND SO I'M, I'M JUST FLAGGING THAT MAYBE IT'S A NON-ISSUE BUT IT JUST OCCURS. 
          SO I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE THAT BACK YEP. 
          AND TALK THROUGH IT SOME MORE BECAUSE REALLY WE HAVE CONSISTENTLY RESISTED THE IDEA OF A BLOB AND I THINK YOU WERE TRYING TO MOVE TOWARDS THAT BLOB AND WE'LL BE CAREFUL. 
          I'M NOT TRYING TO MOVE TOWARDS THE BLOB, I'M JUST FLAGGING THAT THE BLOB EXISTS AND IT'S A LITTLE SCARY. 
          OKAY, THANKS. 
          YEAH, THAT JUST OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD AND, AND NEED TO THINK ABOUT THIS MORE, BUT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I THINK THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A A BATTERY AND IF YOU'RE USING A BATTERY IN THIS SITUATION IS A, A BATTERY, ONCE IT RUNS OUTTA JUICE, THEN IT'S, IT'S OUT HERE. 
          IT IS ONCE YOU RUN OUTTA JUICE THAT THAT RISK IS ON YOU BECAUSE THAT MEANS NOW YOU HAVE TO FLIP THE SWITCH AND TURN OFF YOUR LOAD AND YOU, YOU CAN ALWAYS TURN OFF YOUR LOAD EXCEED IT'S LOADED OR CONNECTION CHARGING. 
          YEAH, IT'S GOTTA IT'S GOTTA EXCEED ITS LOADED INTER DIRECTION CHARGING. 
          I THINK WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT IT. 
          LWG. 
          UM, OKAY, . 
          SO, UH, SORRY TO TO PULL ON SOME MORE THREADS THAT KIND OF WENT ON A TANGENT. 
          UM, DOES THE SELF-LIMITING BRING YOUR OWN GENERATION CONCEPT? DOES THAT NEED NEW LANGUAGE TO BE IMPLEMENTED? SO I UNDERSTAND LIKE THE SELF-LIMITING ASPECT WOULD, BUT IF YOU KNOW SOMEONE'S GOING THROUGH THE BATCH PROCESS WITH A LOAD AND THEY HAVE A CO-LOCATED, YOU KNOW, YOUR FIVE GEN SETS THERE AND THE THE TOP RIGHT EXAMPLE AND THEN YOU JUST STUDY IT G MINUS ONE. 
          DOES IT NEED, DO, DO WE NEED ANYTHING TO SAY THAT WE, WELL CAN'T DO THAT. 
          MAYBE IT'S COUSIN IS THE PRIVATE USE NETWORK WHICH DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE LIMITS. 
          SO IT'S THE IDEA OF A SELF-LIMITING SOMEHOW AROUND THIS RIGHT. 
          FOR TRANSMISSION PURPOSES. 
          RIGHT. 
          [05:35:01]
BUT BUT WHY WOULD I SELF LIMIT MYSELF? LIKE SAY THOSE ARE ALL, ALL JUST THERMALS LIKE, UH, DISPATCHABLE, LIKE WHY WOULD I SELF LIMIT MYSELF IF I CAN GET A GIGAWATT OF CAPACITY ACCREDITED IN THE PLANNING STUDY IN A G MINUS ONE SCENARIO THERE? I'M NOT FOLLOWING WHAT, SORRY KENNETH, CAN I JUST BACK UP? SO YEAH, OUR FIRST VIEW IS WE DO NEED SOME PROTOCOL LANGUAGE CHANGES BECAUSE THE SELF-LIMITING FACILITY NOW IS KIND OF CENTERED AROUND GENERATION ONLY. 
          NOW WE WANT TO HAVE A SITE THAT'S GOT SOME LOAD IN THERE. 
          SO WE KNOW WE NEED TO DO THAT. 
          I THINK THE OTHER THING IS, IS WHAT I'VE HEARD IS HISTORICALLY WHEN WE LOOK AT A NORMAL PRIVATE USE NETWORK, WE STUDY IT AS IF ALL THE GENERATIONS GONE, CAN WE HANDLE ALL THE LOAD THERE? THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE A CHANGE ON OUR PART TO SAY OKAY, THEY'VE PROMISED US THAT THEY'RE NOT GONNA HAVE ANY TYPE OF WITHDRAWAL AT THIS SITE AND WE NEED A DIFFERENT WAY TO STUDY THAT. 
          THAT THAT'S KIND OF EXACTLY WHAT I'M ASKING KEN. 
          AND, AND THANKS FOR BRINGING THAT UP, IS THAT, UM, WHY WOULDN'T WE JUST STUDY IT IN A G MINUS ONE CONFIGURATION? 'CAUSE SAY I JUST UM, TOOK THAT LOAD AND INTERCONNECTED IT LIKE AT THE BUS BELOW THAT X AND SO ALL OF A SUDDEN IT'S NOT SETTLED NETTED IT'S SETTLED STANDALONE, BUT IT'S THE SAME PHYSICAL CONFIGURATION MINUS WHERE A METER IS. 
          WE WOULD STUDY THAT A LOT DIFFERENTLY THAN WHAT YOU JUST EXPLAINED. 
          SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO TAKE BACK AND STUDY A LITTLE BIT MORE. 
          IF YOU MAKE A PROMISE, YOU HAVE AN ATTESTATION, UH, AND YOU'VE INFORMED US THROUGH A SELF-LIMITING FACILITY REGISTRATION, THEN MAYBE THAT'S WHAT WE CAN DO. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN JUST LAST POINT ON THAT, I WOULD FLAG THAT IF WE DO WHAT YOU SAID WHERE WE TURN IT ALL OFF FOR ANY INSTANCE WHERE IT'S CO-LOCATED IN A BATCH CONFIGURATION, ARE WE TURNING OFF ALL GENERATION THAT IS CO-LOCATED IN THE BATCH? BECAUSE THEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TURNING OFF POTENTIALLY QUITE A LOT OF GENERATION. 
          THAT'S WHAT WE HAVEN'T FIGURED OUT HOW TO MODEL ALL THIS YET IN THE BATCH. 
          LIKE WE HAVEN'T EVEN, LIKE THIS IS SO NEW WE HAVEN'T FIGURED OUT ALL THE OTHER PIECES. 
          I AGREE BUT I UM, SORRY MATT, I THINK THIS QUESTION PERTAINS TO LIKE NOT IMPLEMENTING SOME, SOME NEW BYOG RULE. 
          'CAUSE I JUST HEARD THAT THE STATUS QUO IS WE WILL TURN OFF ALL CO-LOCATED GENERATION AT A, AT A REQUESTED INTERCONNECT. 
          AND SO I'M JUST CONCERNED IF WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, LOADS SUBMITTED IN THE BATCH THAT ARE WITH, YOU KNOW, 10 TOTAL GIGAWATTS OF CO-LOCATED GENERATIONS, SAY IT'S EXISTING GENERATION. 
          ARE WE TURNING ALL OF THAT GENERATION OFF TO STUDY THE BATCH? I THOUGHT WE HAVE TO BECAUSE THAT'S THE WAY WE'LL GET TRANSMISSION OUT TO THE AREA. 
          YEAH, BECAUSE WE, SO THE PLAN, THAT'S WHY THE PLANNING STUDY BLOWS MY MIND SOMETIMES, BUT THE PLANNING STUDY IS WE WANNA SERVE THIS LOAD SOMEDAY WITHOUT THAT GENERATION. 
          SO IT'S LIKE HOW TO STUDY, RIGHT? SO MAYBE IF I'M EXPLICIT, SAY YOU PUT A, A LOAD INTERCONNECT AT BOTH NUKES AND THE THREE BIGGEST THERMAL PLANTS AND YOU'RE GONNA, YOU'RE GONNA ASK FOR APPROVAL THERE, THEN WHEN YOU DO THAT STUDY, YOU'RE GONNA SAY, ALRIGHT, WELL IN OUR CASE WE NEED TO TURN OFF BOTH NUKES AND ALL THE THERMAL PLANTS AND WE NEED TO BUILD TRANSMISSION TO SERVE ALL OF THOSE LOADS CONSIDERING THAT ALL THE NUKES AND THE THERMAL PLANTS ARE OFFLINE. 
          LIKE I THINK THAT'S A DISCONNECT. 
          OKAY, LET'S MAKE SURE BEFORE HE LEAVES TODAY WE GET A BETTER IDEA OF WHAT HIS QUESTION IS AND WE CAN BE READY FOR FRIDAY OR SOMETHING. 
          YEAH. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          I'M ELUSIVE SO YOU GOTTA CATCH ME . 
          ALL RIGHT, SARAH JOHNSON, LAST QUESTION ON THE BYOG SIDE. 
          GO AHEAD. 
          HEY, CAN YOU, CAN YOU GUYS HEAR ME? YES. 
          OKAY, GREAT. 
          UM, SO I JUST WANTED TO ASK A, A CLARIFYING QUESTION ON SLIDE 62. 
          UM, I BELIEVE I'VE HEARD THE LANGUAGE THAT MAYBE HAS THE ANSWER, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE, UM, STRAIGHTFORWARD. 
          SO THE BACKUP GENERATION IN THIS CONFIGURATION WOULD NOT HAVE TO GO THROUGH A-G-I-N-R, IS THAT CORRECT? I WANNA SAY YES AS I LOOK AROUND THE ROOM AT PEOPLE YES. 
          THIS BECAUSE IT'S NEVER CONNECTING TO ERCOT. 
          OKAY. 
          BUT, SO THEN, UH, I'M, I'M NOT SURE, OH, SORRY, YES FOR THIS I, I APOLOGIZE. 
          THIS IS AG AND I, I WAS, I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT THE SLIDE HAD CHANGED. 
          I APOLOGIZE. 
          I I AGREE WITH WHAT MATT SAID. 
          OKAY, PERFECT. 
          AND THEN JUST, UM, AGAIN, AS A CLARIFICATION, SO BECAUSE IT'S NOT GOING THROUGH THE GI NR PROCESS, UM, WHAT, IF ANY, DETAILS ABOUT THE BACKUP GENERATION HAS TO BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THE LOAD BEING STUDIED? OR DOES IT NOT? IT DOES NOT. 
          I MEAN, WE'RE STILL LOOKING AT THAT, BUT AGAIN, WE'RE LOOKING AT THE LOAD TO DISAPPEAR AND IT'S UP TO THE TECHNOLOGY AND MECHANISMS FOR THE LOAD TO ABIDE BY THE CONTROLS THAT ARE CAUGHT. 
          SEND IT SO WHEN SCED TELLS IT TO GO DOWN, IT HAS TO GO DOWN. 
          JEFF, GO AHEAD. 
          [05:40:01]
YEAH, SO, UM, UH, WITH AN ASTERISK THAT, UH, I THINK 58 41 HAS SOME, UM, UH, INFORMATION, UH, THERE, THERE'S SOME REQUIREMENTS THAT THE LOAD TELL US ABOUT THEIR BACKUP GENERATION IN THE DRAFT PFP. 
          SO HOWEVER THAT ENDS UP, UM, WE WILL, WE'LL BE REQUESTING THAT INFORMATION. 
          OKAY. 
          PER, PER 58 41. 
          PERFECT. 
          THAT'S ALL I HAVE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, SO MATT, THERE WERE A, A FEW MORE PEOPLE IN THIS QUEUE. 
          OH, DO YOU WANNA I HAVEN'T REFRESHED MINE. 
          YEAH, SCROLL DOWN. 
          OOPS, SEE. 
          WHOA. 
          OH WOW. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, ANO, I, I BUTCHERED IT. 
          ANA? YES. 
          HELLO, THIS IS ISMAIL FROM, FROM MCKENNA SIDE. 
          YES, I DO HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING SLIDE 63. 
          UM, FOR THE SELF LIMITING FACILITIES, EH, MY UNDERSTANDING IS CURRENTLY THERE IS NOT AN, A PROCESS AT TURCO TO TRANSITION AN ALREADY OPERATING FACILITY TO A SELF-LIMITING FACILITY. 
          EH, SO THIS BEING, THIS MEANS THAT THIS PROCESS WILL EXCLUDE ALREADY EXISTING GENERATORS AND IT'S ONLY APPLICABLE FOR NEW REQUEST OR A CIRCUIT. 
          AND, UH, PLANNING TO DEVELOP A RULE TO TRANSITION ALREADY EXISTING GENERATORS TO CELEBRATING FACILITIES AG. 
          I REMEMBER YOU SPOKE TO THIS IN YOUR SLIDE. 
          GO AHEAD. 
          UH, UH, YEAH, THIS IS AG SPRINGER. 
          SO, UM, IT IS CURRENTLY POSSIBLE TO TRANS, UH, TRANSITION AN EXISTING FACILITY, UH, TO A SELF-LIMITING FACILITY THROUGH SUBMISSION OF AN I AND R. 
          UM, HOWEVER, OUR, OUR CURRENT THINKING ABOUT HOW THAT WOULD IMPACT BATCH IS, UH, THAT THAT WOULD PROVIDE NO, NO BENEFIT TO THE BATCH STUDY. 
          THAT THIS WOULD ONLY BE A PATH TO ADD GENERATION TO THE SYSTEM IN, IN COMBINATION WITH LOAD. 
          UH, SO A, A LOAD GOING BEHIND THE METER OF AN EXISTING GENERATION RESOURCE, UH, WOULD NOT RECEIVE, UH, ANY KIND OF BENEFIT UNDER WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING HERE. 
          OKAY. 
          PERFECT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          CLEAR. 
          ALRIGHT, NEXT. 
          BOB KING. 
          I BELIEVE ALL MY QUESTIONS GOT ANSWERED. 
          UM, ONE THING THOUGH WAS MENTIONED, UH, SELF OR I MEAN A, UH, SETTLEMENT ONLY GENERATOR, TO BE CLEAR, THEY DO EXPORT. 
          THAT'S NOT A NON-SPORTING RIGHTS. 
          YOU BROUGHT THAT UP. 
          SETTLEMENT ONLY SELF GENERATOR IS AN S IN THERE. 
          IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT SELF GENERATOR, BUT THAT CAN STILL EXPORT, BUT WHEN CAN'T SELL A WHOLESALE, BUT YOU CAN SELF-SERVE. 
          OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          LUKE HANSON, UH, A COUPLE QUESTIONS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, THE FIRST IS, ARE, ARE WE SAYING THAT, UM, AND, AND I THINK YOUR SURVEY MAYBE MEANS THAT, THAT YOU DON'T KNOW YET, BUT ARE WE SAYING THAT FOR, TO QUALIFY FOR THIS SELF-LIMITING, UM, CONCEPT WITH BIOG THAT WE NEED TO HAVE ALREADY COMPLETED AN SGIA FOR THAT GENERATOR? OR, UM, DO WE NEED TO BE STARTING THAT PROCESS, YOU KNOW, IMMEDIATELY OR, UH, YOU KNOW, SOMEWHERE ALONG THE WAY IN ORDER TO QUALIFY TO UTILIZE THIS? THIS IS SUCH YEAH, GO AHEAD JEFF. 
          I, I WAS GONNA WAIT TO SEE IF AG WANTED TO YEAH, SORRY, I TAKE ONE. 
          I WAS JUST WAITING FOR, UH, I, SO YEAH, I, I DON'T THINK IT'S BEEN DEFINED YET. 
          UM, I, I THINK WE, WE WILL HOPEFULLY HAVE SOMETHING MORE CONCRETE TO SAY THERE. 
          UM, BUT YOU KNOW, I THINK THE OVERALL CONCEPT THAT WE VOICED AT THE LAST FEW WORKSHOPS IS THAT THERE WOULD BE THIS LINK BETWEEN THE LARGE LOAD REQUEST, UH, AND THE GENERATION INRS THAT IT'S ASSOCIATED WITH. 
          AND SO, UM, IF THE ONE PHASE OF THE PROJECT BEHA FALLS BEHIND, THEN YOU KNOW, THE GENERATION FALLS BEHIND THE LO LOAD WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO COME ON THE SYSTEM BECAUSE IT WAS STUDIED AS HAVING NO IMPACT OR, OR HAVING A LIMITED IMPACT THROUGH THIS SELF-LIMITING FACILITY CONCEPT. 
          OKAY. 
          LET ME INTERPRET THAT AS, WE SHOULD MOVE IT AHEAD TO AT LEAST GETTING TO A FILED GI NR UM, PENDING MORE INFORMATION. 
          SECOND RELATED IS, UH, ARE, ARE WE SAYING THAT THE, THE LOAD THAT'S SUPPORTED NEEDS TO BE G MINUS ONE AND TRANSMISSION AND MINUS ONE OR JUST G MINUS ONE AND TO THE  TEAM? I KIND OF THREW THAT IN THE SLIDE OF THIS IS CONTINGENCY 
          [05:45:01]
CONSTRAINED OF SOME SORT, BUT THAT G MINUS ONE MAY HELP IN SOME STUDY. 
          SO I WASN'T TRYING TO, SO I'LL PUT A DISCLAIMER ON THAT. 
          I ALMOST PUT THE WORD DRAFT ON THIS SLIDE 'CAUSE IT CAME OUT KIND OF QUICK, BUT YEAH, UH, UH, YEAH, WE, WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT THAT SOME MORE. 
          YEAH. 
          AND THEN LAST RELATED IS, UH, ARE WE SAYING THAT THE GENERATOR AND THE LOAD ARE GONNA EACH INDEPENDENTLY SETTLE SO THE GENERATOR'S GONNA SETTLE WITH ERCOT OR THAT THE GENERATOR'S GONNA SETTLE WITH THE LOAD? NO, WE WOULD STILL BE DOING SETTLEMENT AT THE POINT OF INTERCONNECT SO THAT WHATEVER THE NET IS AT THAT POINT OF INTERCONNECT. 
          OKAY. 
          THE, JUST THE NET NOT, UH, SO THE GENERATOR WILL EFFECTIVELY SETTLE WITH THE LOAD IF IT'S NOT EXPORTING. 
          YEAH. 
          AND IN FACT WHEN THE SITE IS NET INJECTION, THEN IT'S A NODAL PRICE AND WHEN IT'S A NET WITHDRAWAL, IT'LL BE A ZONAL PRICE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, VERY GOOD. 
          UH, CHRIS MEADOWS. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          CHRIS MATOS WITH GOOGLE. 
          I, I ACTUALLY THINK MAYBE WE MISSED THE MARK BY, UM, EMPHASIZING THREE SUB COMPONENTS OF WHAT FUNCTIONALLY IS A NETTED NETWORK AND THEN DISCOUNTED NOW TO WHAT NETWORK. 
          AND MY LOGIC BEHIND THAT IS REALLY THESE LOADS, AT LEAST THE DATA CENTER AND A AI LOADS, WE HAVE ONE INPUT AND THAT IS ELECTRICITY. 
          UM, SO THE, THE RESOURCE ITSELF IS NOT CATEGORICALLY SERVING SOME THERMAL ALLEGATION FOR A SECONDARY PROCESS WITHIN IT. 
          WE, WE CONSUME ELECTRICITY TO RUN COMPUTE POWER BEHIND THE METER. 
          AND SO IT KIND OF STRIKES ME THAT IN AN AREA WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO ENCOURAGE THE BUILDING OF, YOU KNOW, GRID SCALE CAPACITY, THAT WE WANT TO ENTIRELY DISCOUNT THE ABILITY OF ERCOT TO HAVE POTENTIALLY FIVE GENERATORS SUBJECT TO ITS DISPATCH AND SKET OPERATIONS PROVIDING THE SERVICES THAT IT NEEDS BEHIND THE METER OR AT A, AT A POI, IN MANY WAYS, RIGHT? THE LOAD JUST WANTS TO BE A LOAD AND JUST WANTS TO BE CONSUMING, UM, OR AT LEAST GOOGLE FOR ITS PART WANTS ITS LOAD TO BE BEHIND THE METER AND TO BE CONSUMING AND, AND IS DOING ITS BEST TO, YOU KNOW, BUILD GENERATION ON ITS OWN AND, AND CONTRACT FOR GENERATION ON ITS OWN AND OPTIMIZE THE LOCATION OF ITS DATA CENTERS WITH SOME OF THAT GENERATION. 
          AND THAT GENERATION IS GRID QUALITY GENERATION. 
          IT IS, YOU KNOW, WHOLESALE STORAGE, SRS, IT'S WIND AND SOLAR FACILITIES. 
          IT WILL BE THERMAL FACILITIES AS WELL WITH WITH CCS. 
          AND SO IN MANY WAYS, THE LONG-TERM VISION WILL END UP BEING THAT ONCE THESE TRANSMISSION UPGRADES ARE THERE, RIGHT, THESE RESOURCES ACTUALLY GO TO THE NETWORK OR PART OF THE NETWORK AS PART OF WHOLESALE SALE. 
          SO WHY DO A BUNCH OF DUPLICATIVE WORK WHEN THE NETTED NETWORK CONCEPT CAN WORK WITH CLR? IT CAN WORK WITH, UM, A SELF-LIMITING STRUCTURE, BUT AT THE SAME TIME ACTUALLY GIVES ERCOT THE CONTROL OF GENERATING ASSETS AND THEIR DISPATCH BEHIND THE METER. 
          YEAH, LET ME JUST SAY THIS WAS FOR BATCH ZERO THAT WE ARE SAYING NOT NOW. 
          IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT. 
          CHRIS. 
          I, I DON'T DISAGREE. 
          IF WE HAD OUR MARKET FOLKS IN HERE AND SI MORTY AND DAVE MAGGIO, THEY'D SAY THIS IS THE WAY TO GO, BUT WE JUST CAN'T GET THERE IN 60 DAYS TO THE COMMISSION. 
          WELL I DIDN'T ASK THIS QUESTION 'CAUSE I THOUGHT WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT IT ON FRIDAY THOUGH. 
          ARE YOU SAYING IT'S NOT, WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT IT. 
          YOU CAN TALK ABOUT WHATEVER YOU WANT, BUT IN TERMS OF THAT ZERO ERCOT ISS NOT GONNA PICK UP THE PEN AND TRY TO SOLVE FAST TRACK NETTED NETWORKS RIGHT NOW WITH EVERYTHING ELSE GOING ON. 
          NOW THE MARKET DESIGN FOLKS MAY, BUT YOU'RE TALKING TO A GROUP WHO'S BEEN ASKED TO SOLUTION SOMETHING FOR JUNE 1ST. 
          AND I WANNA BE CLEAR, IT'S ACTUALLY REALLY ONLY A PLANNING CRITERIA CHANGE, RIGHT? BECAUSE NO, WE'RE GONNA PLAN WITH OPERATIONAL UNDERSTANDING WHAT WE'RE IMPLEMENTING. 
          SO WE HAVE TO SEE THE OTHER SIDE OF IT. 
          WELL, AND TO, TO EVAN'S POINT, RIGHT? IF THAT LOAD WAS CONNECTED IN FRONT OF THAT ME OR ON A DIFFERENT, SAME, SAME STU SUBSTATION BUT HAD FIVE GENERATORS, YOU WOULD MODEL FIVE GENERATORS IN THE LOAD SEPARATELY. 
          AND NOW THEY'RE BEHIND ONE POI THEY ARE GRID SCALE GRID QUALITY RESOURCES BECAUSE OF THE, AND THERE ARE MULTIPLES OF THEM BECAUSE THESE ARE NOT SMALL LOADS, THEY'RE MULTI GIGAWATT LOADS. 
          SO THERE ARE USUALLY MULTI GIGAWATT SETS OF RESOURCES THAT WE ARE TRYING TO COLOCATE WITH THEM. 
          SO IT'S, TO ME IT'S ACTUALLY IN SOME WAYS THE SIMPLER VERSION BECAUSE IT GIVES ERCOT TRADITIONAL CONTROL OVER GENERATING RESOURCES. 
          AND ALL 
          [05:50:01]
WE'RE ASKING IS A CHANGE IN THE PLAN. 
          A VERY SIMPLE CHANGE IN PLANNING HERE TO SAY LIKE YOU WANT GRID, YOU WANT NERC COMPLIANCE GRID QUALITY MARKET DISPATCHABLE RESOURCES THAT PROVIDE ANCILLARY SERVICES INTO THE GRID. 
          FINE, I JUST WANT THE ENERGY. 
          I DON'T NEED THE, I DON'T NEED THE LOAD OR I DON'T NEED IT TO DO ANYTHING ELSE BUT BE OPTIMIZED WITH WHOLESALE MARKET DISPATCH. 
          SO I GUESS WHAT I'M SAYING IS LIKE, I THINK Y'ALL REALLY SHOULD REEVALUATE THAT AND THAT STRUCTURE BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO GIVE YOU THE MOST RELIABILITY. 
          THE MARKET PRODUCTS WE HAVE DEVELOPED THAT THE MARKET TEAM HAS DEVELOPED SHOULD BE REFLECTIVE OF RELIABILITY IN THE GRID. 
          AND IF WE ARE NOT DOING THAT, WE HAVE A PROBLEM, RIGHT? WHY, WHY ELSE DO WE HAVE REGULATION, UPPER REGULATION DOWN OR, OR VOLTAGE AND, AND ALL OF THESE SUPPORTS. 
          SO I I THINK WE'VE KIND OF MISSED THE MARK BY DISCOUNTING THE NET AND NETWORK CONCEPT BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT'S THAT HARD. 
          I THINK YOU JUST MODEL THE SYSTEM AS IF YOU'RE, IF I'M WILLING TO SAY ERCOT GENERATORS ARE YOURS, I DON'T, I DON'T ACTUALLY CARE ABOUT THE GENERATORS. 
          AND YOU'RE, AND THE MARKET GENERALLY IS CONCERNED ABOUT A RESOURCE ADEQUACY CONSTRUCT. 
          WHAT BETTER WAY THAN TO, TO ACHIEVE IT IN THIS, IN THIS MOMENT? I MEAN, YOU MAKE A COMPELLING ARGUMENT EXCEPT FOR THE TIME LIMITATION. 
          I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD AJ. 
          THIS IS YOUR . 
          YEAH, BUT I, I WOULD ALSO ADD THAT IT IS, THERE'S A, A TRANSMISSION SECURITY ASPECT THAT WE'RE GIVING CREDIT FOR HERE AS WELL. 
          I MEAN, WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED IS THAT WE ARE GOING TO ASSUME THAT THE LOAD IS COMPLETELY SERVED BY THE GENERATION AND WE'LL LOOK AT THE G MINUS ONE SCENARIO TO DETERMINE HOW MUCH WE WOULD HAVE TO LOSE SERVE IF, IF THERE'S ONE LOAD THAT TRIPS. 
          AND SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT, IT'S NOT JUST THE RESOURCE ADEQUACY PIECE THERE. 
          WE'RE ALSO MAKING, FROM WHAT WE DISCUSSED IN THE PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS, SIGNIFICANT ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT THAT THE SITE WOULD, YOU KNOW, THE SITE AS WE'VE KIND OF DRAWN IT OUT WOULD NOT HAVE, UH, ANY SUBSTANTIAL IMPACTS ON TRANSMISSION SECURITY TOO. 
          AND I THINK THAT BECOMES MUCH MORE COMPLICATED IF WE GO TO AN EDIT NETWORK. 
          BUT YOU, YOU WOULDN'T DO THAT IF AGAIN, THOSE FIVE RESOURCES WERE ALL IN OR AROUND AT THE EXACT EXACT SAME POI, RIGHT? YOU WOULD MODEL MAYBE ONE OF THE GENERATORS IN THAT AREA GOING OUT. 
          AM I, AND, AND LIKE, HONESTLY, TELL ME IF I'M WRONG, I'M A LITTLE OVER MY SKIS HERE, BUT IF I THINK CAN I, I, I, UM, I THINK THE, THE DIFFERENCE IS IF, IF I HAVE FIVE OTHER LOADS IN THAT AREA AND THEY'RE, THEY'RE ALL HAVE A SIMILAR SHIFT FACTOR TO WHATEVER CONSTRAINT IT IS, THEN THEY MAY ALL GET REDUCED MEGAWATTS. 
          IF, IF I'M TREATING THAT AS SEPARATE. 
          BUT I THINK WHAT WE'RE CONTEMPLATING HERE IS WE GIVE CREDIT TO THE LOAD THAT IS CO-LOCATED SO THAT THAT REDUCTION IN MEGAWATTS FROM LOAD ONLY OCCURS WITH THOSE THAT ARE NOT CO-LOCATED. 
          I DON'T, I DON'T THINK I'M DISCOUNTING SELF-LIMITING AND, AND WHAT THAT ALSO CAN ENTAIL IN THIS PROCESS. 
          I JUST THINK IT'S A LOT SIMPLER OR MAYBE MORE ELEGANT IN A NETTED NETWORK CONFIGURATION THAT ALLOWS FOR THE FULL CAPABILITIES OF EITHER OF THE LOAD AND THE GENERATION IN THAT SI IN THAT ENVIRONMENT. 
          FOR THOSE WHO WANT CLR, THEY CAN HAVE CLR FOR THOSE WHO DO C SELF-LIMITING, THEY DO SELF-LIMITING. 
          UM, AND FOR THOSE WHO, YOU KNOW, BRING NETWORK RESOURCES TO THE TABLE, BRING NETWORK RESOURCES TO THE TABLE. 
          YEAH, I, I AGAIN WE'RE UM, THERE MAY BE COMPELLING REASONS WHY WE WANT TO DO THE NETTA NETWORK. 
          I, I THINK THAT THERE ARE COMPLICATIONS THAT ARE NOT, WE'RE WE DON'T THINK THAT WE'RE ABLE TO OVERCOME THOSE COMPLICATIONS IN, IN WRITING THE RULES AND GETTING THAT IMPLEMENTED. 
          WE, WE DON'T THINK THAT WE CAN DO THAT IN THE NEXT 60 DAYS. 
          I DON'T KNOW. 
          KENNETH CAN PROBABLY SPEAK BETTER THAN I CAN TO THAT. 
          YEAH, I, I WOULD SAY WE'VE RECOGNIZED ALL THE THINGS YOU'VE LISTED. 
          I THINK FROM AN ERCOT PERSPECTIVE, THE NET NETWORK LETS US SEE THE FULL CAPABILITY AND CAPACITY AND ANCILLARY SERVICES THAT ARE THERE THAT WE'RE NOT SEEING TODAY. 
          AND IT ALSO WOULD LET THE RESOURCE OWNER MONETIZE THE ASSET BETTER. 
          MM-HMM . 
          BUT I THINK WE HAVE A TIME ISSUE HERE. 
          WE DON'T THINK WE CAN IMPLEMENT THAT QUICK ENOUGH FOR THIS LOAD TO GET ON THE SYSTEM. 
          SO I THINK MATT'S GOT IT ON THE LIST. 
          IT WAS IMPORTANT THAT WE KEPT IT ON THE LIST, BUT WE DON'T THINK THAT'S WHERE WE NEED TO SPEND OUR TIME HERE IN THE NEXT TWO MONTHS. 
          SO I'M, I'M JUST GONNA SAY I FLAT DISAGREE WITH THAT, BUT DONE FOR TODAY, RECOGNIZE, RECOGNIZE THE TIME. 
          YEP. 
          AND, UH, SO SOMEBODY SAY WE'RE TALKING PAST EACH OTHER. 
          IF ANYONE WANTS TO STRAIGHTEN THIS OUT AT THE LARGE LITTLE WORKING GROUP, GO FOR IT. 
          SO THANK Y'ALL. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, WE HAVE TWO 
          [05:55:01]
LEFT ON THIS TOPIC. 
          WE'RE GONNA CLOSE THE QUEUE ON THIS 'CAUSE WE'RE JUST ABOUT OUTTA TIME. 
          JOEL DAVIS AND THEN IAN. 
          SO I HAVE A QUESTION ON THIS SLIDE AS WELL. 
          ON THE UPPER RIGHT, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY THAT THAT CONFIGURATION NEEDS TO BE A SELF-LIMITING FACILITY AT ALL. 
          BECAUSE IF, IF THO THAT LOAD AND THOSE FIVE GENERATORS WERE SEPARATE, THEY WERE, THEY WERE NOT OWNED BY THE SAME ENTITY AND THEY JUST CONNECTED TO THE SAME BUS, ERCOT WOULD WOULD STUDY THAT LOAD WITH THAT GIN AND THAT WOULD BE A, A STABLE CONFIGURATION. 
          YOU WOULD STUDY THE G MINUS ONE N MINUS ONE, IT WOULD WORK AND YOU WOULD, YOU WOULD ALLOCATE THAT LOAD IT'S FULL ALLOCATION. 
          IT, HEY JOEL, THIS IS AG. 
          I THINK THAT THE REASON THAT WE ARE THINKING THAT IT NEEDS TO BE A SELF-LIMITING FACILITY IS TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE NOT THEN HAVING TO SERVE THE FULL LOAD FROM THE SYSTEM IN OPERATION. 
          AND SO THAT, YOU KNOW, EFFECTIVELY WHAT WE'D ENVISION THERE IS THAT THE SITE WOULD BE A SELF-LIMITING FACILITY WITH A WITHDRAWAL LIMIT OF ZERO MEGAWATTS. 
          BUT, BUT WHY WOULDN'T YOU ALLOW SCAD TO DISPATCH THAT GENERATION DOWN DURING TIMES WHEN THE SYSTEM CAN SERVE THAT LOAD? UH, BECAUSE WE, AT LEAST IN THE PLANNING HORIZON, WE'LL NOT ASSESS, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, AND MAYBE, MAYBE IT'S GOTTEN A LITTLE BIT LOST IN THE CONVERSATION, BUT THE, THE IDEA AND WHAT, YOU KNOW, WE, WE BELIEVE WE'VE BEEN ASKED TO DO IS IDENTIFY A PATH THAT MIGHT ALLOW FOR, UH, UH, PRIORITIZATION OF, UH, OR NOT, NOT NECESSARILY PRIORITIZATION, BUT A, A FASTER STUDY PROCESS FOR LOADS THAT ARE BRINGING THEIR OWN GENERATION. 
          AND SO PART OF THAT IS THAT WE WOULD ONLY ASSESS THAT G MINUS ONE SCENARIO, UM, IN PLANNING. 
          AND SO, YOU KNOW, KIND OF BY DEFINITION, RIGHT? BUT, BUT IF THAT, IF YOU ASSESS THAT G MINUS ONE IN PLANNING AND IT SAYS THE GEN HAS TO BE ONLINE ALL THE TIME, THEN SCED WILL DISPATCH THE GYM ALL THE TIME. 
          YEAH, I, I OPERATIONS I THINK THERE'S, THERE'S MORE NUANCE THERE THAT WE'RE GONNA NEED TO, TO WORK OUT. 
          YEAH, I MEAN THIS GOES BACK TO JANUARY WHEN WE WERE INTERVIEWING COMPANIES SORT LIKE, LOOK, IF I CAN JUST CONTRACTUALLY AGREE TO OPERATE WITH A LOAD AND A LOAD WITH THE GENERATOR, LET ME JUST GO OUT AND START BUILDING AND BUILD ME THE WIRES. 
          SO WE'VE LOOKED AT THIS THROUGH THE LENS OF HOW DO WE BUILD A BRIDGE TO ENERGIZATION AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE? AND WHEN IT COMES TO OPTIMIZATION AND MONETIZING THE WHOLE THING, WE GET THAT, BUT WE'RE JUST TRYING TO FOCUS ON THE MINIMUM WAY TO GET THERE. 
          SO, SO IS THERE AT LEAST A A AN EXIT STRATEGY FOR THIS SELF-LIMITING WHERE YOU COULD SAY, OKAY, YEAH, TO GET US ENERGIZED, TO GET US GOING, WE'LL ACCEPT THIS SELF-LIMITING FACILITY, BUT WE WANT YOU GUYS TO DEVELOP THE MARKET STRUCTURE THAT WILL ALLOW THIS GEN TO BE BACKED OFF AT TIMES WHEN THE SYSTEM CAN SUPPORT OUR LOAD AND WE'LL REMOVE THAT SELF-LIMITING CONSTRAINT. 
          YES. 
          SO TWO THINGS. 
          WE CAN ALWAYS CHANGE MARKET RULES AS WE GO THROUGH TIME AND THEN ALSO AS TRANSMISSIONS BUILT OUT TO THAT AREA, MAYBE IT IS RELEASED OUT OF THIS, UH, IN TIME. 
          WELL I'M SAYING THERE ARE LOTS OF SITUATIONS WHERE YOU WOULDN'T EVEN NEED TRANSMISSION BUILT FOR, YOU KNOW, 99% OF THE HOURS YOU DON'T NEED TRANSMISSION BUILT. 
          YOU COULD BACK THAT GIN OFF AND JUST, YOU JUST NEED THE GIN THERE AND IT NEEDS TO BE DISPATCHABLE BECAUSE THAT'S HOW YOU'RE GONNA GET THE LOAD OFF THE SYSTEM DURING THOSE 1% OF HOURS OR 1% OF CONTINGENCIES THAT WILL CAUSE A CONSTRAINT. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL THANK YOU FOR THE FEEDBACK. 
          I MEAN, WE'LL TALK MORE ABOUT THIS. 
          SO AGAIN, THIS IS, THIS IS READING NUMBER ONE. 
          WE'RE OPEN TO LEARNING AND FIGURE OUT WHAT WORKS BEST. 
          ALRIGHT, UH, I THINK I LOST TRACK OF THE QUEUE HERE. 
          IS IT, THERE'S ONE MORE. 
          IAN? IAN? YES. 
          HOW COULD I FORGET? IAN? THANKS MATT. 
          IAN HALEY, MORGAN STANLEY. 
          UM, REALLY APPRECIATE YOU WRITING ALL THESE OUT. 
          WE ARE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF CLR AND BYOG. 
          UM, THE QUESTION I HAD IS, IS AT THIS POINT IS ER CAP PLANNING TO WRITE THESE RULES AS BATCH ZERO CLR OR JUST BATCH CLR? UH, I DON'T REALLY, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION AND IT'S, IT'S FINE EITHER WAY. 
          I'M JUST, I'M TRYING TO THINK THROUGH IT. 
          UM, AND THEN MY, MY SUGGESTION ON THIS, UH, WELL TWO SUGGESTIONS. 
          ONE IS, UM, WE NEED A NEW TERM FOR CLR FOR THESE, UM, I'VE BEEN THINKING 
          [06:00:01]
OF IT AS BATCH APPROVED CLR. 
          SO A BA CLR WOULD THEN HAVE TO FOLLOW ALL THE RULES OF ACL R. 
          UM, AND THEN MY OTHER THOUGHT IS I AM MUCH MORE HOPEFUL TO GET IN SOMETHING THAT COVERS 75% INTO BATCH ZERO THAN I AM TO NOT GET ANYTHING IN STRIVE FOR A HUNDRED PERCENT. 
          UM, SO I JUST, UM, APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S THOUGHTS, BUT THAT'S JUST WHERE MY HEAD IS RIGHT NOW. 
          ALRIGHT, VERY GOOD. 
          ALRIGHT, AND SO WE DO HAVE 20 MINUTES LEFT, SO IF YOU WANNA KEEP WORKING THE QUEUE, 19 MINUTES IF YOU'RE WATCHING, UM, AS WE DO WRAP UP, IF WE START TO LOSE PEOPLE, UH, THE IDEA IS AT THE END OF THE WORKSHOP, UH, WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY GONNA RIP A A I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A QUESTION LIST FOR A SURVEY, BUT WE ARE GONNA ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO FILE COMMENTS AND I'LL SEND A NOTICE ABOUT THIS AFTER THE MEETING OR TOMORROW IS WE WOULD LIKE THE MARKET COMMENTS, UH, TO BE SOMETHING. 
          SO IF YOU SUBMIT COMMENTS TO THE PICKER BY FRIDAY BEFORE THE TUESDAY MEETING, THEN WE CAN BRING THOSE AND VET THEM HERE. 
          SO I WANTED TO KIND OF, ERCO WILL DO ITS DUE DILIGENCE TO GET STUFF OUT AHEAD OF TIME, BUT THEN ALSO FOR THE MARKET TO FILE COMMENTS WILL HELP ERCOT RECONCILE THE COMMENTS, UH, AS WELL AS EVERYBODY ELSE CAN SEE EVERYBODY ELSE'S COMMENTS, UH, AT LEAST A BUSINESS A AHEAD OF THE MEETING. 
          SO THANK YOU. 
          WE'LL TALK MORE. 
          ALL RIGHT, SO JEFF, YOU HAVE A QUEUE, JANICE, YOU CALL THE NEXT JAN, YOU SURE IS IT OR YEAH, GOING BACK TO THE PREVIOUS YEAH, NITIN GUPTA. 
          GIVE THAT TOUGH SORRY. 
          DID YOU LOSE HIM FOR SHOP? MARTHA, THANKS. 
          UM, MARTHA HENSON WITH ENCORE. 
          I WAS, I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT SOME OF THE ATTESTATION PROVISIONS THAT ARE IN THE, YOU KNOW, SECTIONS, UH, IN THE PIGGER AND IT TALKS ABOUT THE INTERCONNECTING LOAD PROVIDING EVIDENCE TO THE TSP OR DSP THAT IT HAS PURCHASED EQUIPMENT OR HAS BEGUN THE SITE PREP ACTIVITIES, CERTAIN SITE PREP ACTIVITIES. 
          UM, WE'RE ACCUSTOMED TO DOING ATTESTATIONS WITH CUSTOMERS BUT NOT COLLECTING EVIDENCE RIGHT NOW. 
          SO I, I JUST KIND OF WANTED TO FLAG THAT AND SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING SPECIFIC YOU HAVE IN MIND THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR HERE. 
          'CAUSE I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'RE IN A POSITION EITHER TO LIKE TRY TO VALIDATE WHAT THEY GIVE US, HOPING THAT IT MEETS WHAT ERCOT IS LOOKING FOR. 
          UM, YOU DON'T HAVE TO ANSWER THAT RIGHT NOW, I'M JUST KIND OF PUTTING IT OUT THERE. 
          SOMETHING WE NEED TO THINK SOME MORE ABOUT. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, AND I JUST ACTUALLY MATT, A QUESTION FOR YOU. 
          YOU'RE SAYING THAT TO GET COMMENTS, UH, SORT OF DISCUSS THAT THE NEXT WORKSHOP WE NEED TO SEND THEM TO STAKE STAKEHOLDER SERVICES FILE 'EM FORMAL YEAH. 
          THROUGH STAKEHOLDER SERVICES BY FRIDAY THE 20TH. 
          BY NEXT FRIDAY, NOT THIS FRIDAY. 
          NEXT FRIDAY THE 20TH. 
          YES, FRIDAY THE 20TH. 
          SO NOT THAT THEY HAVE TO BE POSTED BY FRIDAY, BUT THEY JUST HAVE TO BE EMAILED IN BY FRIDAY. 
          IT'D BE NICE IF THEY'RE POSTED BY FRIDAY. 
          SO MAYBE I SHOULD SAY BY NOON BY FRIDAY, SO I DON'T MAKE CERTAIN PEOPLE CRAZY OVER THERE. 
          COREY'S SHAKING YOU ON. 
          OKAY. 
          I LIKE KEEPING COREY HAPPY. 
          YEAH. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          YEAH, AND, AND, UM, I WAS GONNA SAY THIS AT THE END, BUT I'LL SAY IT NOW. 
          UM, I, I THINK, UM, WE'VE HEARD SOME GOOD FEEDBACK TODAY. 
          UH, THERE ARE A FEW THINGS THAT WE WILL LIKELY CHANGE BASED ON THE FEEDBACK, UH, AS, AS WELL AS I THINK THERE ARE SOME CORRECTIONS, UH, THAT, THAT WE NOTED EARLIER. 
          UH, AND SO, UH, WE ARE GOING TO TRY TO BY EARLY NEXT WEEK, GET SOME ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FILED. 
          UH, UM, HOPEFULLY THAT'D BE HELPFUL. 
          ALL RIGHT, NEXT IN THE QUEUE. 
          UM, CHRIS HENDRICKS, THANK, SORRY. 
          THANKS. 
          SO FOR, UM, LARGE LOADS THAT ARE PART OF THE DISTRIBUTION SERVICE LEVEL AND THEY'RE INCLUDED IN THE 2026 RTP, WOULD THOSE TYPE OF LOADS BE INCORPORATED INTO THE BATCH ZERO STUDY? KINDA THE, THE STUDY PROCESSES? IT, IT, UM, IF IT'S A LARGE LOAD, THEN IT WOULD NEED, NEED TO MEET, UM, TO BE INCLUDED AS BASE LOAD IT WOULD NEED TO MEET THE 9 2 1 1 REQUIREMENTS. 
          OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          SHANNON, YOU'RE UP. 
          THIS IS GOING BACK TO, UH, THE GRANDFATHERED. 
          YOU KNOW, ANDY BARAT, ERIC, A BUNCH OF PEOPLE MADE COMMENTS ABOUT THE 9 4 9 5 GRANDFATHERING THAT SHOULD BE THERE AND I WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE WITH THAT. 
          ONE THING THAT I WANTED TO TAKE US OVER TO THE, UH, PFP ITSELF, UM, AND I'VE GOT IT HERE, I'LL JUST READ IT, BUT THERE'S A, ON PAGE TWO OF THAT, THERE'S A SECTION THAT'S GROWTH IMPACT STATEMENT AND IT SAYS, YOU KNOW, THE AGENCY PROVIDES THE FOLLOWING GOVERNMENTAL GROWTH IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE PROPOSED RULE. 
          IT'S DETERMINED 
          [06:05:01]
THAT FOR EACH YEAR OF THE FIRST FIVE YEARS OF THE PROPOSED RULES, IN EFFECT, THE FOLLOWING STATEMENTS WILL APPLY AND THERE'S A BUNCH OF THEM, BUT I TAKE YOU TO NUMBER SIX, SEVEN, AND EIGHT. 
          NUMBER SIX IS THE PROPOSED RULE WILL NOT EXPAND, LIMIT OR REPEAL EXISTING REGULATION. 
          SO TODAY WE HAVE BIGGER ONE 15 IN PROCESS. 
          WE'VE SAID IT'S, IT'S LIVE AND REAL AND IT WAS ERCOT PROPOSAL IN THE FIRST PLACE ALL THE WAY THROUGH JULY 15TH. 
          IF WE COMPLY WITH THAT BY NINE FOUR, YOU KNOW, GET AN LLI, WE'VE MET NINE FOUR MET NINE FIVE, WE SHOULD NOT BE THINKING THAT 58 4, UM, 4 81 SOMEHOW IS GONNA UNDO IT IF THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE THAT THE AGENCY HAS DETERMINED THIS. 
          SO GRANDFATHERING MUST BE PRESUPPOSE THERE. 
          THE NEXT STATEMENT IS, THE PROPOSED RULE WILL NOT CHANGE THE NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS SUBJECT TO THE RULES APPLICABILITY. 
          SO IF I'VE GOT A 2024 UH, INTERCONNECT AGREEMENT, I'VE ALREADY BEEN THROUGH THE LLI PROCESS IN 25, THERE SHOULD BE NOTHING ABOUT APPLYING THIS THAT GOES AND UNDOES THAT TO THE DEGREE IT'S COMPLETELY COMPLIANT WITH CURRENT RULES OR OTHERWISE. 
          THIS STATEMENT IN 58 4 ONES, IT'S NOT REALLY VALID. 
          AND THEN THE LAST ONE IS NUMBER EIGHT ON THERE. 
          SO IT'S LINE 22, BOTTOM OF PAGE TWO, THE PROPOSED RULE WILL NOT AFFECT THE STATE'S ECONOMY. 
          SO THAT ALSO NEEDS TO BE TRUE. 
          IF I'VE BEEN THROUGH ALL THIS PROCESS, I'VE HONORED THE EXISTING RULES, MADE IT THROUGH, IT WOULD DEFINITELY IMPACT THE STATE'S ECONOMY. 
          IF YOU COME BACK AND SAY, WELL, I DON'T KNOW IF THOSE ARE VALID ANYMORE, I NEED TO GO RESTUDY IT. 
          THAT'S WHAT YOUR BATCH ZERO BASE PARTS FOR IS FOR YOU TO CLEAN THAT UP THROUGH THE PROCUREMENT OF THE EXACT TRANSMISSION THAT YOU NOW DO NEED, NOT GO BACK AND INVALIDATE, UH, PREVIOUS STUDIES THAT ARE COMPLIANT WITH THE CURRENT RULES. 
          THANKS SHANNON. 
          DO YOU NEED A RESPONSE THAT'S, YOU'RE JUST MAKING A LEGAL STATEMENT, I ASSUME? WELL, I'M, I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE COMMON SENSE HERE. 
          YOU'VE GOT ERCOT PROTOCOLS THAT ARE IN PLACE ARE, HONESTLY, I THINK ERCOT IS SAYING THEY INTEND TO FOLLOW THEIR EXISTING ERCOT PROTOCOLS, WHICH IS, UH, AND WHICH COVERS PLANNING GUIDE SECTION NINE AS IT'S WRITTEN TODAY. 
          AND WE KEEP TALKING IN SOME VAGUE GENERALITIES. 
          ABOUT 58 41 WILL BE THE RULE, THE LAW OF THE LAND WHEN IT HAPPENS. 
          IT'LL BE THE LAW OF THE LAND WHEN IT HAPPENS IN THE CONTEXT OF THESE STATEMENTS THAT ARE IN THE PROPOSED RULE MAKING OR, UH, PFP OR OTHERWISE. 
          THEY'RE NOT TRUE STATEMENTS, WE'RE JUST SAYING THEM FOR NO GOOD REASON. 
          SO WE SHOULD NOT BE UN GRANDFATHER, YOU KNOW, WE SHOULD HONOR GRANDFATHERING BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE VERY RULE ITSELF SAYS ON PAGE TWO. 
          ALRIGHT, THANKS SHANNON. 
          OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT, NEXT. 
          KEVIN HANSON. 
          YEAH, UM, QUESTION I JUST WANT CLARITY ON, ARE ALL LOADS AND RPG PROJECTS PRIOR TO DECEMBER 15TH, 2025 CONSIDERED TO BE APPROVED LOADS? IS THAT, AM I READING THAT IN THE LANGUAGE CORRECT? HEY, KEVIN, THIS IS AG SPRINGER. 
          UH, IT, IT WOULD DEPEND ON IF THE RPG HAS, UH, THE RPG SUBMISSION HAS RECEIVED EITHER RPG ACCEPTANCE OR, OR ERCOT ENDORSEMENT BEFORE JULY 15TH. 
          AND ALSO, UH, I THINK THE LANGUAGE ALSO REFERENCES THAT THE LOAD IN QUESTION WAS USED AS PART OF THE, UH, DEMONSTRATION OF NEED FOR THE TRANSMISSION PROJECT. 
          SO I, I GUESS FOR CLARITY, THAT DOESN'T TIE BACK TO ANY OF THE 7 65 APPROVAL, CORRECT? UH, YEAH, I, I'M NOT SURE. 
          OKAY. 
          'CAUSE I, I'M NOT SURE, REMEMBER IF IT WAS A 150 GIGAWATTS OR WHATEVER THAT NUMBER WAS, WE USED FOR SUPPORTING THOSE DECISIONS, BUT I WOULD THINK BY DEFAULT THAT LANGUAGE WOULD SORT OF ASSUME ALL THAT LOAD INCORPORATED THERE WOULD BE APPROVED. 
          SO WITH THAT LANGUAGE. 
          YEAH, AND I GUESS I WOULD, I WOULD ALSO ADD THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE THEN PROVISIONS IN, UH, SECTION 9.2 0.1, 
          [06:10:01]
UH, THAT DETERMINE IF THAT LOAD IS GOING TO BE INCLUDED IN BATCH ZERO. 
          SO IT'S NOT JUST A MATTER OF HAVING THE VALID STUDIES, YOU ALSO HAVE TO DEMONSTRATE, UH, YOU'VE MET, YOU KNOW, FULL INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENTS AND IN SOME CASES EVIDENCE OF SETTLEMENT ACTIVITY. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, CLAYTON GREER MY QUESTIONS IN 9.4 IN THAT, UH, PART THREE, UH, WHERE YOU'RE GOING THROUGH THE RRPG PROCESS. 
          UM, WE HAD ONE OF THOSE LATE COMING PROJECTS THAT WAS, UM, THAT WE SUBMITTED IN 2000, UH, 2023. 
          UM, AND IT'S DEPENDENT ON, IN PART ON THE, UM, THE, THE 2024 RTP PROJECTS THAT ENCORE PUT TOGETHER IN THAT MASSIVE, UH, FILING THAT THEY DID. 
          I KNOW THAT THE RPG WAS SUPPOSED TO ORIGINALLY APPROVE THAT IN MAY. 
          THAT SENT, THEN MOVED TO Q3, WHICH STARTS IN JULY, BUT JULY 21ST IS THE FIRST Q3 MEETING FOR OUR RPG. 
          SO, UM, WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS WITH THOSE PROJECTS? AND THEN I'VE GOT ANOTHER ONE TO FOLLOW UP WITH. 
          YEAH, I MEAN, UNDER THE CURRENT LANGUAGE THAT, THAT WOULD BE AFTER JULY 15TH. 
          AND SO EVEN THOUGH I, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE'S PART OF IT THAT WAS APPROVED WITH THIS CURRENT SET OF PROJECTS, UH, THAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE APPROVED IN MARCH. 
          AND THEN THE SECOND PART OF THAT WAS, WAS IN THE SECOND SET OF PROJECTS. 
          YOU'RE SAYING THAT BECAUSE IT WAS NOT APPROVED IN TIME, UM, THE THAT'LL GO INTO BATCH ZERO AS A NON BASE LOAD LOAD, IS THAT WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING? EVEN THOUGH IT WAS SUBMITTED IN 2023 WITH A 2026, UH, IN SERVICE? YEP. 
          AS, AS CURRENTLY YOU DRAFTED? THAT'S CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN MY OTHER ONE IS, UH, I THINK SOMEBODY BROUGHT IT UP BEFORE, BUT WE HAVE, WE HAVE A PROJECT THAT'S GOT CONDITIONAL APPROVAL, UH, BUT THE LOAD RAMP IS DEPENDENT ON CERTAIN PROJECTS. 
          SOME OF THOSE PROJECTS ARE ALREADY IN THE RPG PROCESS AND SHOULD BE APPROVED SOON. 
          THE OTHER ONE HAS NOT BEEN INITIATED BECAUSE IT'S WAITING ON THIS LOAD TO BE APPROVED, YOU KNOW, THE STUDIES TO BE APPROVED SO THAT THEY CAN START THE RPG PROCESS. 
          SO HOW DOES THAT GO IN? YEAH, I DON'T HAVE A GOOD ANSWER FOR THAT ONE RIGHT NOW. 
          I'LL HAVE TO TAKE THAT ONE BACK. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN ON THAT, ON THAT RPG PROJECT, THAT, OR THE PROJECT THAT'S NOT YET BEEN SUBMITTED, WE ARE LOOKING TO BUY BREAKERS. 
          IS THAT A BAD IDEA TO MOVE THAT PROJECT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT CAN MEET ITS TIMELINE? SO I MEAN, IS THIS A GIANT BLENDER OR HOW DOES THAT WORK? HEY CLAYTON, IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL IF YOU SEND US THESE HYPOTHETICALS, UM, SO WE CAN WORK THROUGH THEM WITH THE BIGGER OKAY, I CAN DO THAT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, WE'RE DOWN TO FIVE PEOPLE IN FIVE MINUTES. 
          SEE HOW THIS GOES, LEE BRATCHER. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          JOEL DAVIS. 
          DID WE GET SOMEONE THERE, LEE? OR JOEL? SORRY, JOEL. 
          YEAH, GO AHEAD JOEL. 
          UNLESS, UNLESS LEE'S STILL HERE, THEN HE CAN GO FIRST. 
          UM, SO MY QUESTION FOR THE EARLIER IS LOADS THAT ARE GOING TO BE GO INTO BATCH ZERO AS AS FIRM AS BASE LOAD, BUT WHICH ARE NOT, UH, CURRENTLY ABLE TO CONSUME IT, THEY'RE FULL MEGAWATTS BECAUSE THEY'RE, THEY'RE ON AN LCP. 
          HOW ARE YOU GUYS GONNA HANDLE THE TIMING OF THOSE LCPS? BECAUSE A LOT OF THOSE LCPS ARE ELEMENT CONSTRAINTS, NOT DATE CONSTRAINTS. 
          SO WHEN X TRANSMISSION PROJECT IS COMPLETE, NOT IN 2028. 
          YEAH, SO YEAH, JOE, YEAH, GO AHEAD JOE. 
          WELL, YEAH, UM, AND IJ CHRISTINA, FEEL FREE TO, UM, JUMP IN AS WELL, BUT, UH, UH, YEAH, I THINK WE HEARD THAT COMMENT EARLIER. 
          UM, I, I THINK THAT, UH, MY, MY INITIAL THOUGHT IS BASED ON THE WORDS THAT ARE WRITTEN, UH, IF THE, IF THE LCP SAYS, UH, THAT THE, THE LOAD IS ABLE TO GO TO THIS HIGHER LOAD LEVEL BASED ON THIS TRANSMISSION PROJECT, WE WOULD LOOK AT WHEN WE THINK THAT THAT TRANSMISSION 
          [06:15:01]
PROJECT WILL BE PUT IN PLACE. 
          UM, BUT, YOU KNOW, UNDERSTAND WE MIGHT NEED TO WRITE SOME CLARIFYING WORDS HERE. 
          WELL, AND THE REASON I ASK IS 'CAUSE SOME OF THOSE TRANSMISSION PROJECTS, THE TDS PS HAVE TOLD US DATES THAT ARE LONGER THAN SIX YEARS FROM NOW, SO IT WOULD ACTUALLY BE BENEFICIAL TO GO INTO BATCH ONE OR TO BADGE ZERO ALLOCATED BECAUSE WE GET A GUARANTEED SIXTH YEAR ALLOCATION. 
          YEAH. 
          OH, OKAY. 
          NOTED THAT. 
          ALRIGHT, EVAN NEIL, UM, JUST A QUESTION ON, IN THE SECTION ABOUT THE LIST AND YOU'RE EVALUATING IF THERE'S CONFLICTING, UM, STUDY ASSUMPTIONS, LIKE THE LANGUAGE WAS SOMETHING LIKE, UM, WITHIN THE STUDY SCOPE OF THE OTHER LOAD, AND I'M JUST CURIOUS IF WE KNOW WHAT THAT DEFINITION IS. 
          IS IT LIKE A SHIFT FACTOR BASED THING, A LOCATION BASED THING? AND ARE WE CONSIDERING, UM, DISCUSSING THAT CRITERIA IN THE LANGUAGE? SO, UM, CURRENT THINKING IS WE ON PURPOSE, UM, LEFT THAT, UH, OPEN TO INTERPRETATION BECAUSE, UM, WE WANT TO, UH, HAVE SOME ENGINEERING JUDGMENT IN THAT. 
          UM, I THINK THAT THAT'S HOW THE PROCESS WORKS TODAY IS, UH, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOT A SPECIFIC SHIFT FACTOR KIND OF ANALYSIS. 
          UM, IT, IT'S REALLY, UM, THERE'S ENGINEERING JUDGMENT THAT GOES INTO THAT TODAY. 
          AND SO WE WANTED TO PRESERVE THAT, THAT JUDGMENT GOING INTO THIS. 
          OKAY, THANKS. 
          YEAH, I, I ASKED BECAUSE I KNEW THAT'S HOW IT WAS TODAY AND I THINK THAT ENGINEERING JUDGMENT IN THE SENSE WHEN THAT ENGINEERING JUDGMENT CHANGES FROM MONTH TO MONTH HAS CAUSED SOME ISSUES. 
          SO IT'S JUST MAYBE THE MORE TRANSPARENT WE CAN BE HERE WOULD BE AN IMPROVEMENT. 
          YEAH. 
          AND YEAH, IT, IT, AND YOU KNOW, AGAIN, O OPEN TO IDEAS FOR IF, IF THERE'S A WAY TO OBJECTIVELY DO THAT, THAT THAT COULD BE ACCOMPLISHED IN SHORT ORDER, THEN I THINK WE'RE OPEN TO THAT. 
          BUT WE, WE DID NOT COME UP WITH ANYTHING. 
          OKAY. 
          THANKS. 
          ALRIGHT, DOWN TO THE LAST TWO HERE. 
          CINDY BOKAR AND THEN VISH ROOT. 
          YEP. 
          THANKS. 
          CINDY BOKAR WITH EL C. 
          SO BETWEEN MARCH OF 2022 AND DECEMBER 15, 25, RIGHT. 
          WE WERE UNDER THAT INTERIM MARKET NOTICE PERIOD AT THAT TIME WE HAD SEVERAL PROJECTS THAT WENT THROUGH DIFFERENT PROCESSES. 
          SOME OF THEM WERE STUDIED AS OFFICER LETTER LOADS, AND I THINK IT WAS 2025, MID MID-YEAR 2025 WHEN THE BIGGER ONE 15 RULES GOT KIND OF SETTLED AND YOU COULD ACTUALLY EVEN THINK OF SUBMITTING IES. 
          SO WITH THE WAY IT'S LAID OUT TODAY, IF THERE WERE PROJECTS THAT WERE EVALUATED DURING THOSE THREE, FOUR YEARS VIA RTP BUT DIDN'T NECESSARILY GET A STANDALONE LLIS FOR WHATEVER REASON, DO THEY GET EVALUATED AS ALLOCATED LOAD IN BAD ZERO OR WOULD YOU LOOK AT IT AND SAY, HEY, THERE IS NO STUDY, NOT EVEN PARTIALLY COMPLETE STUDY AND SO IT SHOULD BE BATCH ONE? YEAH. 
          UM, YEAH, MIGHT NEED HELP ON THAT BECAUSE I'M, I'M NOT SURE I FOLLOWED ALL OF THAT, BUT YEAH, I THINK YOU, YOU COULD STILL, UM, IT, IT, IT, A PROJECT COULD GO THROUGH LLIS, BUT BEFORE PICKER ONE 15, IT WAS JUST UNDER THE INTERIM, BUT MAYBE A AG WAS, UM, ABOUT TO CHIME IN. 
          SO MAYBE I SHOULD BE QUIET AND LET HIM NO, I I WAS ALSO GONNA ASK FOR CLARIFICATION OF THE QUESTION. 
          UM, BUT IT, YOU KNOW, UH, SO SANDEEP, LET ME GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY IF YOU COULD CLARIFY PLEASE. 
          YEAH, SHORT, SHORT QUESTION. 
          THE MARKET NOTICE ALLOWED RTP TO BE A VALID WAY TO EVALUATE A LARGE LOAD, UH, DURING THE INTERIM PERIOD. 
          AND UH, NOW WE ARE SAYING RTP IS NO LONGER THAT VALID STUDY. 
          UM, AND THE ONLY OTHER WAY TO DO IT NOW IS EITHER FILE RPG, WHICH WILL, WELL NO, BECAUSE IT WILL BE AFTER DECEMBER 15. 
          SO THE ONLY OTHER THING LEFT IS I REALIZE THAT I'LL HAVE TO FILE FOR THEM TO BE CONSIDERED FOR BAT ZERO. 
          ALMOST SEEMS UNFAIR FOR SOME OF THOSE LOADS THAT HAVE BEEN WAITING PATIENTLY SAYING, HEY, WE, WE DID WHAT THE MARKET NOTICE SAID WE WOULD, SHOULD DO, UH, BUT COME 2025, YOU'LL BE OUT OF THE BAD ZERO. 
          WELL, I, I, I GUESS, UM, I'M NOT SURE I AGREE WITH THE STATEMENT THAT RPG NOW DOESN'T MATTER. 
          I, 
          [06:20:01]
I THINK IN THE, THE KIND OF CRITERIA TO GET INTO THE LIST THAT'S IN PARAGRAPH A, WHICH IS JUST A, YOU KNOW, WHO, WHOEVER'S GOT THE COMPUTER, IF YOU SCROLL UP JUST SLIGHTLY. 
          UM, UH, SO, UH, THERE IS A PATH FOR RPG LOADS THAT WERE INCLUDED IN RPG, UH, THAT WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE DECEMBER 15TH, WHICH IS WHEN THAT CEASED BEING A, A VIABLE PATH, UH, AS LONG AS IT RECEIVES APPROVAL OR ENDORSEMENT, UH, BEFORE JULY 15TH, 2026. 
          SO THERE, THERE IS STILL A PATH PROVIDED THOSE LOADS ALSO MEET THE, THE OTHER CRITERIA IN 9 2 1 1 THAT ARE APPLICABLE. 
          YEAH, NO, I, I, I MEANT, UH, LOADS THAT ARE NOT INCLUDED IN ANY RPGS THAT WERE SUBMITTED BEFORE THIS DECEMBER 15, OR STRICTLY SPEAKING OF LOADS THAT WERE ONLY EVALUATED VIA THE REGIONAL TRANSMISSION PLAN TILL DATE. 
          UH, SORRY, SANDY, I I DIDN'T REALIZE, I I THOUGHT YOU HAD SAID RRP G UH, YEAH. 
          YES, THAT'S CORRECT. 
          THERE'S, THERE'S NOT A, UH, PATHWAY IN THIS, IN THIS, UH, PIGS FILED FOR THOSE LOADS TO BE BASE LOAD. 
          GOT IT. 
          YEAH. 
          AND I WILL ENCOURAGE US TO THINK ABOUT THOSE LOADS THAT CAME IN EARLY AND ARE WILLING TO MEET, ARE ABLE TO MEET THE INTERMEDIATE OR INTERIM OR INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT CRITERIA THAT IS SITE CONTROL AND SECURITY. 
          IF THEY ARE WILLING TO MEET THAT, THEY SHOULD AT LEAST BE EVALUATED AS BATCH, AS ALLOCATED LOADS. 
          AND THEN IF, IF THERE IS NO CAPACITY AVAILABLE FOR THEM, THAT'S FINE. 
          THAT CAN BE, UH, PUSHED TO BATCH ONE. 
          YEAH, I, I THINK WE'D CERTAINLY BE OPEN TO, TO RED LINES IN THAT AREA IF, IF, UH, STAKEHOLDERS HAVE SUGGESTIONS. 
          GOT IT. 
          THANKS FOR THAT. 
          I, I DID HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION, BUT I'LL PASS IT ON TO THE NEXT GOOD. 
          THANK YOU MEHAN WAY TO READ THE ROOM. 
          OKAY. 
          VISH ROOT LAST ONE, VISH ROUTE. 
          SORRY, IT QUICK. 
          UH, YES, THAT'S CORRECT. 
          UM, FOR FIGURE, UH, IN SECTION 9.2, 1.2, SUBSECTION ONE B2B, THE, THE ONE THAT DESCRIBES THE APPROVAL OF THE STUDY STATE OR STABILITY STUDY, UM, YES. 
          SO ASSUMING WE CAN GET EVERYTHING ACROSS TO ERCOT AND ERCOT ASKED US TO UD THINGS THAT'S NOT REALLY UNDER OUR CONTROL, IS THERE A POSSIBILITY FOR THIS TO BE MODIFIED SUCH THAT ERCOT HAS RECEIVED THE STEADY STATE AND STABILITY OR STABILITY STUDY RATHER THAN SECURING ERCOT APPROVAL? BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY UP TO ERCOT, AND OF COURSE ERCOT IS UP TO ITS GUILDS IN TRYING TO APPROVE THINGS RIGHT NOW. 
          YEAH, I, I, I THINK OUR CONCERN WITH THAT WOULD BE THAT WE WOULD SEE A AVALANCHE OF STUDIES SUBMITTED TO US ON JULY 14TH. 
          AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE, THE REASON THAT, UH, THERE IS THE LANGUAGE AS APPROVED IS THAT, UM, IT DEMONSTRATES THAT THE, THE STUDY HAS, YOU KNOW, KIND OF PASSED, UH, SORT OF A, A BASIC LEVEL OF, OF, UH, OF MUSTER. 
          SO YEAH, I, I GUESS OF COURSE, AJ, JUST TO GIVE SOME CLARIFICATION, THIS LOAD STUDY WAS SUBMITTED TO A 12 MONTHS AGO. 
          UM, THEY HAVEN'T HAD THE RESOURCES TO PERFORM THE LOAD STUDY AND ARE JUST GETTING TO IT. 
          SO I MEAN, THIS IS THROUGH NO FAULT OF OUR OWN. 
          I'M JUST TRYING TO, TO COME UP WITH SOME SORT OF A SOLUTION WHEREBY A LOAD STUDY THAT SHOULD HAVE ALREADY BEEN COMPLETED, HAVE RECEIVED OR GOT APPROVALS, UM, IS IN A POSITION SUCH AS THIS. 
          YEAH, I'M, I'M AFRAID I, I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE, THE WORKLOAD ON THE, THE TSP SIDE, BUT, UH, OUR, OUR PREFERENCE AS IS REPRESENTED HERE IS THAT IT BE AN APPROVED STUDY. 
          GOT IT. 
          WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO GET SOME COMMITMENT FROM ERCOT ON ACCELERATED TIMELINES GIVEN THE BAT STUDY? AND I'M SORRY, I'M PUSHING ON THIS. 
          I'LL, I'LL JUST ADD THAT, YOU KNOW, BIGGER ONE 15 IS IN EFFECT NOW AND THAT HAS TIMELINES BUILT INTO IT FOR ERCOT TO REVIEW AND PROVIDE FEEDBACK. 
          SO, UM, THAT SHOULD, THAT, THAT PROVIDES SOME LIMITATION THERE ON, ON HOW LONG THAT WILL TAKE. 
          NOT TO READ STUDIES, I THINK THAT'S THE UNFORTUNATE PART, BUT I APPRECIATE IT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          [06:25:01]
ALL RIGHT, WELL THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          THANKS TO EVERYBODY FOR HANGING IN THERE. 
          EVERYONE GETS A GOLD STAR OR A COLD BEVERAGE SOMEWHERE ELSE. 
          UM, THANK Y'ALL. 
          SO OUR NEXT ONE, I DID CLIP IT IN, SO I'LL JUST RESTATE WHAT I SAID IS NOT THIS FRIDAY, BUT NEXT FRIDAY, WOULD LOVE TO HAVE BIGGER COMMENTS FILED. 
          THAT'LL HELP EVERYTHING SHOW UP IN AN ORDERLY MEETING ON THE 24TH TUESDAY, TWO WEEKS AWAY. 
          SO ENJOY A LITTLE BREAK WHEN WE GET BACK. 
          IT'S WEEK AFTER WEEK AFTER WEEK. 
          FUN UNTIL JUNE 1ST. 
          SO THANK YOU ALL FOR THE SUPPORT. 
          WE STAND ADJOURNED. 
          WE STAND.
* 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.