Meeting Summary - 05/07/2025 House State Affairs

▶️SB6 King | et al.

• SB6 addresses the increase in large industrial electrical loads due to developments such as chip manufacturing, data centers, and hyperscalers in Texas.
• There is significant growth in electrical demand, with some single customers requiring more electricity than entire cities.
• SB6 mandates the PUC to establish standards for the interconnection of large customers, aiming to support business growth and maintain grid reliability.
• Key requirements include a flat fee for a screening study, proper control of the site, disclosure of duplicate requests for backup generation, and preparation for energy emergencies.
• The bill involves changes to net metering arrangements and gives PUC and ERCOT the authority to approve, deny, or condition these arrangements.
• Utilities are required to develop protocols for emergency curtailment of large loads.
• SB6 requires PUC to re-evaluate and possibly revise the 4CP rule, which is used for cost allocation but does not align with current load profiles.

PANEL 1

▶️Barksdale English, PUCT

• Acknowledgement and gratitude expressed by Barksdale English from the PUC to the committee.
• The bill is designed to welcome new large loads to Texas while maintaining grid reliability.
• Three main aspects of the bill:
• Ensuring transmission system users pay their share.
• Improving visibility into size and number of new large loads for better planning.
• Preventing net loss in generating capability when new loads colocate with existing generation facilities.
• The PUC has 180 days to approve, modify, or deny colocation agreements, or they are deemed approved by default.
• This process requires a full evidentiary hearing led by commissioners, which is challenging for the small commission due to tight timelines.
• Barksdale expresses confidence in PUC's capability to manage the process but acknowledges the strain on resources and the need for expeditious processing to support economic development.
• Offers to take questions from committee members.

▶️Representative Anchía to Barksdale English

• Representative Anchía discussed PUC's regulatory powers with Chair Gleeson and confirmed they have existing authority to regulate the market and large loads.
• The purpose of SB6 is to clarify and make specific the authority and ability to regulate the market, balancing economic development and grid reliability.
• Section 4 (page 6, line 14 to page 9) provides clarity and visibility for ERCOT and the commission regarding arrangements between new large loads and existing generation facilities.
• Subsection D (page 2, line 24 to page 3, line 17) clarifies that new large loads with backup generation facilities should support grid reliability during emergencies.
• Section 5 (page 9, line 18 to page 10, line 21) directs the study of how transmission charges are allocated in the ERCOT region, especially with new large loads.
• These sections clarify concepts that need clarification or provide specific clear authority.

▶️Representative Darby to Barksdale English

• Discussion on the 180-day contested cases that involve complex technical debates between economists, engineers, and lawyers.
• Key difference highlighted between the proposed bill and existing statutes is that applications are deemed approved if the commission does not issue an order within 180 days.
• The commission has the ability to issue a good cause exception order to extend the 180-day period if justified.
• Net metering cases will be contested similarly to other cases, involving applicants and intervening parties who must provide evidence.
• ERCOT is required to be a party in these cases, performing a transmission and security analysis to ensure net metering arrangements do not jeopardize the transmission system.
• ERCOT's analysis process takes approximately three to four months.
• Discussion on updating the 4CP methodology to ensure fair cost distribution for maintaining and expanding transmission, impacting large flexible loads like data centers.
• Current policy allocates charges based on peak usage in a 15-minute window during summer months, with a suggestion to study actual usage year-round.
• Exploration of more equitable cost distribution methods, such as seasonal or time-of-use peak measures.
• Recognition of the urgency to address changes in the Texas grid and load profile, with plans to review 4CP within the current calendar year.
• Encouragement for the Public Utility Commission (PUC) to act promptly in evaluating methodologies to meet projected load growth challenges.

▶️Representative Turner to Barksdale English

• Discussion on the bill's authority for the PUC to approve, deny, or modify co-location agreements.
• Concerns were raised about the PUC's ability to meet the 180-day timeline for reviewing applications, especially with other obligations such as system resiliency, rate case, and electric CCNs.
• The PUC currently does not review these types of arrangements, marking a new process for them.
• Evaluation of applications involves transmission security analysis and resource adequacy analysis.
• Resource adequacy analysis will use a reliability standard comprising magnitude, frequency, and duration of load shed events.
• ERCOT and the PUC will analyze the impact of new large loads on grid reliability, particularly during capacity-scarce moments.
• Clarification on whether PUC evaluates large loads on the transmission and distribution system; it appears not covered in the bill.
• The bill focuses on existing generation resources serving co-located loads, which is seen as a different challenge compared to new large loads entering the market.
• Discussion on market response differences between co-located and new separate large load projects.

▶️Representative Anchía to Barksdale English

• Discussion about two projects with different offtaker locations—one co-located, one nearby but not co-located on the grid.
• Concerns about the regulatory process differences for projects based on their location.
• Importance of immediate price signals in ERCOT's wholesale market for grid reliability.
• Transparency in the market is key for predictable and rational market operations.
• Deliberation on whether a single regulatory framework could apply to all incoming loads for consistency and equity.
• Possibility of incentives for market behavior without creating an extensive new regulatory process.
• Potential issue of perverse incentives arising from the current or proposed regulatory structures.

▶️Representative McQueeney to Barksdale English

• Representative McQueeney raised a question about how new generation for colocation behind a meter would be treated under current legislation if they temporarily join the grid before their intended user is ready to consume their power.
• The question assumes that this temporary contribution of power could be beneficial for Texas, ERCOT, and citizens.
• There is concern over whether this situation places temporary generators under a 180-day rule and if this requires legislative adjustments.
• Barksdale English acknowledged the question as interesting and hypothetical and opted to follow up instead of providing an immediate response.
• Representative McQueeney emphasized the practicality of the situation due to new users coming to Texas and the readiness of power before these users are prepared.
• The discussion noted the potential reluctance of new generators to go through lengthy regulatory procedures to assist in the short term.

▶️Representative Phelan to Barksdale English

• Representative Phelan refers to page 2 line 14 of SB6.
• Discussion on why companies participating in the load program have to disclose projects not in Texas or ERCOT.
• Question raised about the benefits to Texas of this requirement.
• Certain data center companies can choose their location more flexibly to serve specific markets.
• Mention of the possibility for companies to locate in Texas or Oklahoma to serve their target markets.
• The purpose is to understand the probability of a data center moving to Texas over other states.
• ERCOT uses this information to assess the probability of new loads impacting their long-range forecasts.
• Representative checks if the intention is to consider other applications to determine likelihood of locating in Texas.
• Acknowledgment and clarification given on the intent behind the requirement.

▶️Chad Seeley, ERCOT

• Chad Seeley from ERCOT testifies neutrally on SB6.
• Focus on demand flexibility requirements within SB6.
• Three major reliability requirements for large loads outlined in SB6, organized by Chad into three ‘buckets’.
• Slide presented to the committee highlighting ERCOT's current operational tools and procedures in emergencies.
• First bucket (§39.170 (b)): 24-hour notice program allowing large loads to reduce demand before emergencies.
• Second bucket (§37.0561 (d)): Backup generation requirement with 50% or more capacity during energy emergencies.
• Third bucket (§39.170 (a)): Procedures during EEA 3 with controlled outages and switching off large loads.
• Highlight of ERCOT's need for flexibility beyond current thresholds during EEA events.
• Concerns about the ability to apply requirements quickly due to varying response times of large demand centers.
• Proposal for more flexible language to manage reliability based on demand center capabilities.

• Clarification that utilities can manage load shed among large demand centers during EEA 3.
• Emphasis on potential need for segmentation to avoid frequency issues during load reductions.

▶️Representative King to Chad Seeley

• Discussion of Emergency Energy Alerts (EEA) levels: EEA 1, 2, and 3.
• ERCOT's discretion in moving between EEA levels in response to grid conditions.
• EEA level relies on NERC reliability standards for EEA thresholds which consider reserves and frequency.
• Reference to an incident in September 2023 where EEA 2 was initiated due to a frequency issue, skipping EEA 1.
• Multiple grid variables impact the decision to change EEA levels, including unit trips, demand, and renewable forecasts.
• Mention of legislative language potentially impacting load shedding decisions during emergencies.
• Clarification that ERCOT must adhere to NERC requirements to trigger EEA, but ERCOT has discretion over certain watch conditions and reserves.

▶️Representative Anchía to Chad Seeley

• Representative Anchía inquired about the current state of the market's ability to meet the projected load forecast and referenced previous testimony by Mr. Vegas, who affirmed that the existing market forces could support the growth trajectories.
• Concerns were raised about the ongoing modifications to the market structures and the lack of longitudinal experience to evaluate the effectiveness of the current market.
• A question was posed regarding the potential impact of adding additional regulation to an already evolving market structure.
• Chad Seeley emphasized the importance of regulatory certainty for investors and indicated that continuous changes create uncertainties.
• Discussion around the load forecast highlighted its role in providing clear investment signals and the importance of standardizing how data is collected and utilized to improve accuracy.
• The conversation acknowledged that Texas is attracting data centers and other investments without the need for additional legislative measures like SB6.

PANEL 2

▶️Joel Yu, Enchanted Rock

• Joel Yu from Enchanted Rock LLC registered as neutral on the bill and was invited to provide further testimony.
• Enchanted Rock is a microgrid developer based in Houston.
• Focus on developing solutions for large load customers with on-site generation.
• Recommendation for the commission to develop standards recognizing flexible attributes of new co-located dispatchable generation and load in the interconnection process.
• Advocates for expedited interconnection for new large loads investing in co-located generation.
• Emphasizes contribution to reliability and affordability as grid assets.
• Circulated a handout and graph demonstrating benefits of co-located dispatchable generation.
• Supports proposed red line to encourage deployment of co-located generation solutions.
• Goal to bridge the power gap and accelerate economic development.

▶️Greg Turner, Liberty Power

• Greg Turner represented Liberty Power Innovations in support of SB6.
• Liberty Power Innovations is a subsidiary of Liberty Energy, an energy services company founded in 2011.
• Liberty Energy is a significant oilfield service company in North America with nearly 6,000 employees, half based in Texas.
• Liberty operates in nine states and two countries, often in remote areas with self-generated power capabilities.
• They plan to deploy over 700 megawatts of modular natural gas generators in ERCOT.
• ERCOT is seen as a vibrant ISO region with essential leadership in SB6 to support market vibrancy.
• Key SB6 components: transparency in interconnection process, predictable service during emergencies, and reliability programs for large loads with onsite generation.
• Preserving privileges for newly developed co-located resources is crucial for cost advantage and resiliency.
• Current market signals in ERCOT are inadequate for certain technology investments without these components.
• Continued investment in Texas and flexibility of the ERCOT grid with distributed resources are prioritized.

Panel 3

▶️Will McAdams, TEBA

• Will McAdams registered on behalf of Texas Energy Buyers Alliance, holding a neutral position on the bill.
• Will McAdams represents Texas Energy Buyers Alliance (TEBA), a group of over 270 companies, testifying neutrally on SB6.
• TEBA supports modernizing cost allocation, criticizing the outdated 4CP methodology.
• Concerns are raised about phantom load in the queue, with support for clear interconnection standards.
• TEBA endorses provisions for interconnection fees, the posting of financial security, and site control proof.
• Desire for sharper clarity on ERCOT's load management during emergencies.
• Recommendations include restricting ERCOT from unilateral load shutdowns without prior deployment of market tools and services.
• Advocacy for extending new ancillary services for emergency load compensation to all loads.

▶️Julia Harvey, TEC

• Julia Harvey, representing Texas Electric Cooperatives, testifies neutrally on SB6.
• The bill is shaped by stakeholder input and aligns with co-op goals.
• Support for improving accuracy of load forecast and "is it real" provisions of the bill.
• Calls for non-critical large loads to be prioritized for shut-off over residential consumers during load shed scenarios.
• Advocates reevaluation of the transmission cost allocation methodology to address potential cost misallocations.
• The bill, particularly in sections two, four, and five, deals with load standards, load forecast, load shed, and reliability.
• Proposes that large loads directed to curtail be counted towards the load shed allocation.
• Overall support for SB6, recognizing its addressing of pressing grid issues.

▶️Representative Anchía to Julia Harvey

• Julia Harvey discussed a potential issue with load shed allocation during events.
• Load shed allocation is based on the seasonal peak demand from the prior year.
• There may be a misalignment between the assigned load shed and the actual available load during an event.
• Large loads that have turned off for various reasons might not be accounted for properly, leading to coordination issues.
• A dynamic allocation of load shed was suggested as a solution to better reflect real-time conditions.
• Concerns were raised that the current retrospective calculation method could lead to overestimation of load that needs to be reduced.
• The issue is particularly relevant for co-ops serving large loads, potentially leading to larger than necessary assignments to shut off load.

▶️Representative Anchía to Will McAdams

• Will McAdams referenced the impact of Winter Storm Uri, highlighting the issue of disproportionate load shed allocation in the Houston area with CenterPoint.
• McAdams discussed the importance of accounting for large loads in the ERCOT planning model to prevent disproportionate allocations during load sheds.
• Representative Darby inquired about changing legislative language related to colocation overseen by ERCOT 
• In response, McAdams drew parallels to the reliability must run (RMR) evaluation for generation seeking retirement.
• McAdams noted the precedent of a 180-day review process by the Public Utility Commission (PUC), suggesting the complexity of transferring certain responsibilities from the PUC to ERCOT.
• Concerns were raised about the regulatory lag effect impacting business and economic development due to lengthy approval processes.
• The bill proposes that all loads be treated equally regardless of their flexibility, which McAdams agreed was the case.
• McAdams mentioned potential market adaptations due to new curtailment actions and their subsequent impact on price formation.
• There is apprehension about fast-moving reliability events, as highlighted by a previous occurrence in Spain, and the inability of ERCOT to quickly adapt to such scenarios.

▶️Representative Turner to Will McAdams

• Will McAdams discussed the approval process by the PUC for co-located generation and large loads.
• There is concern that this process could deter new generation projects needed to support Texas's growing population.
• McAdams emphasized the importance of setting market conditions as a former regulator.
• He mentioned that while the commission approved a massive transmission plan for Texas, there is worry about discouraging large loads due to costs.
• Generators need time to adapt to new restrictions and conditions set by this process.
• Concerns exist about the time for ERCOT approval and review, and the impact of politics on taking generation off the system.

▶️Walt Baum, TPPA

• Walt Baum, representing Powering Texans, is neutral on the bill.
• The primary focus is ensuring a reliable grid to provide electricity to millions of Texans, prioritizing customer health and safety.
• Support for SB6 to establish necessary requirements for grid reliability and market transparency, while keeping Texas attractive for data center and industrial growth.
• Concerns about SB6 possibly hindering data center development by duplicating regulatory efforts and deferring investment.
• SB6 may impose restrictive reliability requirements that limit market innovation and create burdensome review processes for large loads.
• Opportunity for the house to refine SB6 to avoid placing undue cost burdens on the public and ensure it aligns with ERCOT and PUC processes.
• Emphasis on choosing innovative markets over strict regulatory regimes, and ensuring ERCOT has visibility into large load electric usage.
• Optimism for a refined SB6 that signals Texas's innovation and openness for business while maintaining reliability and affordability.

▶️Representative Anchía to Walt Baum

• Discussion on the need for correct market signals to promote new generation and build more capacity.
• Emergence of data and AI increases demand for electricity, complicating market incentives.
• Previously, low-cost loans were considered instead of directly addressing market signals.
• Concerns over new regulations affecting co-located generation that aids in building new infrastructure.
• Market signals for long-term purchase power agreements seen as positive for infrastructure development.
• Fear that new Public Utility Commission (PUC) processes might hinder progress on market-driven solutions.
• Commentary from Chairman Darby on managing large loads within the constrained grid, focusing on afternoon peaks in August and September.
• Emphasis on grid flexibility to maximize existing fleet utilization and promote new plant constructions.
• Agreement on the need for decentralized and simpler infrastructure.
• Discussion against giving new approval processes to the PUC, favoring ERCOT due to expertise and existing processes.
• Recognition that ERCOT should handle interconnection processes for co-location agreements.

▶️Representative Geren to Walt Baum

• Representative Geren raised concerns about the proposed Public Utility Commission (PUC) timelines affecting forward planning due to delays in rulemaking which might take nearly a year.
• Walt Baum acknowledged that the timeline is detrimental to planning, as it involves starting a new process from scratch and trying to complete the first rulemaking in 180 days.
• Baum pointed out that co-locations and data centers are particularly concerned, as they want faster hookups.
• There are worries about losing business to other states due to these delays, as there have been more announcements in other states recently.

PANEL 4

▶️Dan Diorio, DCC

• Dan Diorio testified neutrally on SB6 on behalf of the Data Center Coalition (DCC) expressing gratitude for being an engaged stakeholder.
• DCC agrees with the bill's goals to insure accurate load forecasts, improve Texas grid reliability, and protect Texans during emergencies.
• Concerns were raised about provisions that could create uncertainty and investment risks in Texas.
• Disclosure of interconnection requests outside Texas may distort load forecasts, providing no probative value.
• Data centers should rely on backup only after market-based tools under SB6 are utilized.
• Opposition to removing data centers from the grid outside emergencies, as they provide critical services.
• Remote disconnection devices for firm load sheds should undergo a robust stakeholder process before any state-wide implementation.

▶️Representative Anchía to Dan Diorio

• Representative Anchía questioned the necessity of a legislative bill, referencing claims that data centers would not be able to establish in Texas without it.
• Dan Diorio disagreed with the claim, stating that he does not believe it to be accurate.
• The conversation shifted to the topic of remote disconnection devices, which some utilities are already installing.
• Concerns were raised about the implications of remote disconnection devices, particularly their impact on data centers that provide essential services beyond social media and streaming, including healthcare, finance, cybersecurity, law enforcement, and national security.
• The risk highlighted was that facilities might be disconnected remotely with inadequate warning, posing national security concerns and impacting critical functions during emergencies.

▶️Representative McQueeney to Dan Diorio

• Concerns were raised about disclosing load forecasts when potential data centers are being considered inside and outside Texas.
• There is difficulty for the industry responding to the needs of businesses and consumers in a market-driven demand.
• The potential for locating data centers in adjacent states like Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Louisiana was discussed.
• The focus was on whether location in these states would impact the Texas market given latency requirements and customer demand.
• Questions were raised about financial commitments, site control, and study fees providing a clearer picture of project viability within ERCOT.
• Discussion involved understanding how similar regional projects are identified and their likelihood of coming to fruition.

▶️Representative Turner to Dan Diorio

• Discussion on ERCOT's ability to curtail large loads in power emergencies.
• Need for clarity on the process for curtailing large loads during emergencies.
• Data centers use backup diesel generators.
• Diesel generators are regulated by the EPA and TCEQ with limits on usage.
• Enforcement discretion from TCEQ needed to run generators during emergencies.
• Guardrails proposed for using diesel generators within Emergency Energy Alert (EEA) levels could provide more certainty for data centers ability to deploy their generators.
• Industry believes backup generation can be used during grid constraints in EEA events.
• Guardrails would ensure generators are used only in emergencies to avoid air quality and emissions concerns.
• Concern expressed over running diesel generators in non-attainment areas in North Texas.

▶️Mark Bell, AECT

• Mark Bell with the Association of Electric Companies of Texas was noted to be neutral on the bill.
• The member companies of AECT have observed significant interest from large load customers seeking to connect to the ERCOT grid.
• SB6 aims to create a framework for incorporating this growth into the electric system while maintaining grid reliability.
• The bill establishes standards for transparency and credibility in the load forecasting process.
• It sets operational requirements for managing facilities during electricity supply emergencies, prioritizing residential customers.
• The bill directs the PUC to evaluate cost allocations among customer classes and engages the stakeholder process at the PUC and ERCOT for addressing technical considerations.
• Proper coordination and collaboration are deemed essential for integrating this growth into the electric system.

▶️Jaren Taylor, Oncor

• Oncor is supportive of SB6 and believes it's necessary for Texas.
• Texas is seeing an unprecedented influx of large data centers that require integration into the electric grid.
• SB6 introduces uniform standards for large loads to integrate into the grid, which is currently lacking consistency.
• Uniform standards will ensure large loads undergo the same process regardless of geographic location, aiding ERCOT, PUC, and the generation market.
• Transparent and objective standards will help utilities assess the viability of potential loads.
• There's a need for additional tools and infrastructure to enhance reliability during tight conditions, a lesson learned from past events like Uri.
• SB6 proposes measures for a competitive process to manage load reduction and provides the necessary infrastructure.
• No questions were posed by members to the witness Jaren Taylor.

PANEL 5

▶️Lee Bratcher, TBC

• Lee Bratcher represented the Texas Blockchain Council and 3,400 MW of flexible load Bitcoin mining and AI data centers.
• Bratcher appreciated stakeholder conversations led by Chairman Schwertner and Senator King.
• An economic impact study projected Bitcoin miners brought $4 billion in capital expenditure, 1,200 jobs, and $1 billion in personal income to Texas.
• Support was expressed for section 2 of the bill, clearing the interconnection queue by removing phantom load for accurate load growth visibility.
• Supported adding costs for load studies in interconnection applications.
• Concerns were raised about section 4 which may change colocation practices, creating business uncertainty.
• Section 5 could bring uncertainty around changes to 4CP impacting long-term investments.
• Recommended that 4CP net load may be more suitable with current solar infrastructure.
• Expressed concern regarding the exclusion of price-sensitive loads in the 24-hour day-ahead program envisioned in the bill.
• Recommended ERCOT assesses the 24-hour day ahead program through a stakeholder process, to avoid unnecessarily excluding price sensitive loads.

▶️Taylor Kilroy, TPPA

• Taylor Kilroy expressed support for the bill SB6 on behalf of the Texas Public Power Association.
• The growth of large loads has led to operational concerns on the ERCOT grid.
• SB6 is backed by stakeholder negotiation and aims to provide a structure for municipally owned electric utilities to interconnect large loads efficiently.
• It is important for each type of customer to pay interconnection and transmission costs relative to their impact on the grid.
• SB6 includes provisions for interconnection cost allocation and revisiting 4CP to prevent unfair outcomes.
• The bill preserves the ability of municipally owned utilities to set their own retail service standards while establishing uniform standards for wholesale load interconnection.
• TPPA encourages quick advancement of SB6 as it addresses large load interconnection comprehensively.
• Taylor Kilroy thanked the committee for the opportunity to provide testimony and is open to questions.

▶️Sara Axelrod, Crusoe

• Sara Axelrod is the senior director of government relations and policy for Crusoe, testifying neutrally on SB6.
• Crusoe is a vertically integrated AI infrastructure company building AI data centers with an energy-first approach.
• Texas is crucial for Crusoe and other data center developers due to its electricity market challenges.
• Crusoe is working on projects worth tens of billions of dollars and potentially thousands of jobs in Texas.
• The company is involved in a significant project in Abilene, Texas, supporting Oracle and AI growth with a 1.2-gigawatt facility.
• SB6 is essential for establishing a predictable large load approval process, which could prevent loss of investments.
• There is a concern about increasing large load interconnect requests expanding across Texas.
• Crusoe worked with stakeholders to refine SB6 for rational solutions.

PANEL 6 

▶️Gideon Powell, Cholla

• Invited questions or discussions on the bill but remained neutral.

▶️Representative Raymond to Gideon Powell

• Discussion on a bill that impacts grid interconnection costs.
• Positive aspects mentioned: free interconnection and reduced complexity, helping startups and entrepreneurs.
• Emphasis on safety and managing load influx in Texas.
• Importance of accurate load forecasting and maintaining an accurate load queue.
• Mention of a committee substitute not yet made available.
• Questions on whether the bill will help attract more data centers and if it improves growth prospects in the ERCOT market.
• Request for committee members to review the committee substitute once available and engage individually, as there will not be another hearing.

▶️Representative Darby to Gideon Powell

• Discussion about Bitcoin miners and their impact on grid reliability.
• Emphasis on the need for the bill to focus more on reliability aspects.
• Assertion that Bitcoin miners are exceptionally reliable loads.
• Comment on the competitive nature of Bitcoin miners in improving market efficiencies.

▶️Representative Turner to Gideon Powell

• Representative Turner asked Gideon Powell for suggestions on improvements and potential gaps in current legislation.
• Gideon Powell suggested creating an alternative path for loads that want to support hospitals and residential areas.
• Powell mentioned competing to provide lower load response and questioned the concept of the 24-hour firming as outlined in SB6 without sufficient research support.
• Powell noted that 3.5 gigawatts on the current system wish to compete more aggressively, compress margins, and benefit ratepayers.
• He expressed concern that SB6 is not effectively attracting the growth they believe is possible.

▶️Cyrus Reed, Sierra Club

• Cyrus Reed represented the Lone Star Chapter Sierra Club and expressed support for SB6, emphasizing the need for consumer protection.
• Highlighted the importance of minimum interconnection charges and planning requirements to ensure ERCOT and PUC are aware of upcoming demands.
• Stressed the necessity of preventing costs from being shifted onto consumers while leveraging available resources.
• Supported revising the 4CP system, stating it is outdated due to changes in peak patterns and demand loads.
• Advocated for an additional large load demand management service with flexible implementation while preventing double counting of resources.
• Proposed increasing reporting requirements for more data on energy use and flexibility, which would benefit the entire system and residential consumers.
• Submitted testimony and documentation.

Panel 7

▶️Stacie Bennett, LS Power

• Stacie Bennett represented LS Power, a company with significant investments in competitive generation and transmission infrastructure.
• Texas's economic and population growth requires resilient power infrastructure to maintain progress.
• LS Power has invested significantly in Texas and aligns with the state’s goals of economic openness and electric grid reliability.
• Large loads are perceived as a challenge to grid reliability, and LS Power suggests a solution.
• Proposes a bill provision for large loads that supports new dispatchable generation.
• New large loads entering a power purchase agreement for new dispatchable generation would receive priority interconnection, excluding battery storage systems.
• The primary requirement is that this agreement leads to new dispatchable generation to offset the new load.
• This proposal could reduce the number of requests for behind the meter co-location.
• There is concern among policymakers about large loads taking megawatts from the grid via co-location agreements.

▶️Katie Coleman, TAM, TCC, & TXOGA

• Katie Coleman testifies neutrally and represents the Texas Association of Manufacturers, Texas Chemistry Council, and Texas Oil and Gas Association.
• Associations hold a neutral stance on the bill, but emphasize that it's not a data center bill; it applies to all large loads over 75 megawatts.
• Engagement in bill negotiations aims for accurate load information, proper reliability tools, and a prosperous business climate in Texas.
• Support for the bill's security requirements and financial postings as they could reduce speculative forecasting.
• Pablo Vegas testified that the current load forecasts don't align with national or global expectations, highlighting the need for refinement.
• The associations support new emergency tools and transmission voltage load inclusion in load shed protocols, advocating for fair treatment of large customers in load shedding.
• The associations back a new large load demand program where sites can reduce consumption with 24-hour notice, providing additional megawatts.
• Clarification provided on the co-location issue, emphasizing its limited scope to colocation matters.

▶️Representative Raymond to Katie Coleman

• Discussion on whether policy initiatives were approached defensively or as opportunities for improvement.
• Concerns about potential policies favoring certain industries over others.
• Emphasis on ensuring universally fair and supportive policies for business models.
• Recognition of the need for all large loads to be included in new policies.
• Support for many features of the bill while acknowledging new obligations compared to the status quo.
• Comparison of additional burdens and costs on site development against current practices.
• Speculation on committee substitutes and reserving judgment until further information is available.

▶️Representative Turner to Katie Coleman

• Clarification requested on whether the co-location agreement applies only to existing generators being taken private, not all co-locations.
• Discussion on the importance of co-location as a business model for both loads and generators, focusing on reliability impacts when a generator is removed from the grid.

Chair Ken King Closing Remarks

• Discussion on the existence of a committee substitute and encouragement for committee members to submit suggestions in writing by the end of the week.
• No further questions were raised, and the meeting moved towards adjournment.
• SB6 is left pending with no objections.
• The agenda concluded and the meeting was adjourned subject to the call of the chair.