Invenergy has developed around 5 GW of solar and wind capacity in ERCOT.
Comments were submitted with other energy sector players, expressing concerns over proposed rules 25.517 and 22.251.
Concerns include potential negative market impacts and loss of generation capacity, especially as ERCOT anticipates peak load demand reaching 50 GW by 2030.
The proposed rule lacks justification under the Administrative Procedure Act and no study has shown that existing resources pose a reliability risk.
The rule suggests a paradigm shift in regulations, conflicting with existing PUC rules protecting legacy resources.
Current rules exempt resources from compliance that risks equipment damage, and new regulations shouldn't retroactively apply.
The Commission's rules should comply with PURA, avoiding unnecessary regulations on industrial generation facilities.
No legal basis exists for retroactively applying new reliability standards on existing resources.
Clarified that not all retroactive rules are unconstitutional, and retroactivity doesn't invalidate a rule if a Texas statute allows it.
Cited Texas Code Construction Act presumption that statutes are prospective unless made retroactive explicitly.
Highlighted that a rule is retroactive if it impairs a vested right and needs statutory support for retroactive application.
Argued there is no statutory support for the proposed exemption process.
Mentioned existing resources with technical limitations have intrinsic exemptions under current rules.
Pointed out the lack of statutory authority to deny or qualify exemptions suggests nothing to appeal.
Requested consideration of these concerns to assess if the rulemaking is necessary and appropriate.
▶️5 - Laurie Block - TSSA/Solar Energy Industries Assoc.
The associations support effective standards for preventing grid instability and exemptions based on technical and economic concerns.
They recommend deferring action on the rule due to issues with retroactive application of reliability requirements.
The proposal conflicts with the precedent of applying new standards prospectively.
Retroactive standards could create regulatory uncertainty and affect investments in generation assets.
The proposal contradicts recent NERC recommendations and could lead to reliability concerns if resources cannot comply.
Emphasized the need for ERCOT to study the impact of NOGRR245 before imposing new requirements.
Recommended waiting for a detailed reliability risk assessment from ERCOT before proceeding further.
If moving forward, they propose changes to ensure a reasonable and measured exemption process, including defining unacceptable reliability risks and considering compliance costs.
Exemption requests granted to one market participant can transfer some risk to others. Affected entities should have the opportunity to participate in the decision-making process.
A cost component should be included in evaluating reliability risk. The methodology for assessing this cost needs transparency for all affected parties.
A proposal for a 'line in the sand' on exemption requests was introduced, suggesting a 90-day period post-reliability requirement rule adoption to understand all exemption requests at once for better decision-making.
Vistra suggests combining definitions for technical feasibility into one.
Vistra agrees with concerns about ERCOT's ability to revoke exemptions under certain conditions and supports a case-by-case review rather than automatic triggers.
Vistra is concerned about Oncor's suggestion for mandatory revocation of exemptions if system conditions materially change.
The emphasis is on prospective standards, following statutory language, case law, and precedents from NERC, FERC, and other RTOs.
Vistra agrees with TCPA on narrowing the definition of 'unacceptable reliability risk' to address specific catastrophic problems.
Comments pointed out the need for additional guidance on the evaluation of exemption requests and concerns about the review process and ERCOT’s discretion.
There is concern about the procedure requiring ERCOT involvement in cost-based exemptions, despite ERCOT not being empowered to grant them.
Vistra supports allowing parties with justiciable interest to intervene in appeals of exemption denials to ensure due process.
Vistra highlights the importance of regulatory certainty for investment and preventing unnecessary early retirements.
