GridMonitor

09/26/2024 09:30 AM

Video Player is loading.

Current Time 50:15

Duration 53:03

Loaded: 94.76%

Stream Type LIVE

Remaining Time 2:48

ZOOM HELP

Drag zoomed area using your mouse.

100%

Selection

Transcript

Scroll automatically

Item 0 - Chairman Gleeson calls meeting to order
00:00:08
This meeting of the Public Utility Commission of Texas will come to order. To consider
00:00:12
matters that have been duly posted with the Secretary of State for September
00:00:15
26, 2024. Good morning,
00:00:18
everyone. Good morning, Shelah. Good morning.
00:00:21
Do we have any public comment today? Yes, sir, we do. We have
00:00:25
one person that signed up for public comment. Okay.
00:00:28
Do you want to go through the consent agenda? Yeah, why don't we do the
00:00:30
consent agenda? There should be no recusals, I assume, today, so, yeah, why don't you
00:00:34
lay out the consent agenda and then we'll go to public comment. I know you
00:00:37
got what you wanted, Commissioner Glotfelty. No recusals. No contested cases.
00:00:40
No. No recusals.
Item 0.1 - Commission Counsel Shelah Cisneros lays out Consent Agenda
00:00:44
Good morning Commissioners. By individual ballot, the Commissioners voted
00:00:47
to place Items 6 and 8 on the consent agenda, and no
00:00:51
one signed up to speak on either of those items. Thank you, Shelah.
Item 0.1 - Chairman Gleeson asks for motion to approve items on Consent Agenda
00:00:55
So we will take. So I would entertain a motion to
00:00:59
approve the consent agenda as discussed
00:01:02
by Shelah. So moved. I second. Have a motion and a second. All those in
00:01:06
favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion prevails.
Item 1 - Public comment for matters that are under the Commission’s jurisdiction, but not
specifically posted on this agenda
00:01:09
All right. Now let's move to Public
00:01:13
Comment, Item No. 1. Yes. Commissioners, we have one person that
00:01:16
sign up for Public Comment, Jeff Walker. Mr. Walker, if you'll approach.
00:01:22
And is it the usual three minutes? Three minutes. All right.
00:01:26
Tell me when you're ready. Sure. Would you like to sit down or. No,
00:01:29
if you can speak into the microphone. Yeah, please take a seat. That'll be fine.
00:01:32
I'll do this, thank you very much. Good morning. Perfect. Whenever you're ready.
Item 1 - Jeff Walker, member of Windermere Oaks Water Supply Corporation
00:01:35
All right. Thank you Commission. My name is Jeff
00:01:39
Walker. I'm a member of the WOWSC.
00:01:42
This is the Windermere Oaks Water Supply Corporation. I'm also a board
00:01:45
member since 2003. I know this Commission is tired of
00:01:49
hearing from us. I know they are, at least some of you, because I know
00:01:53
many of you have been part of this whole rate appeal. My comments are coming
00:01:57
from a member and a board member. I speak as both.
00:02:02
Six months ago, our rate appeal got approved
00:02:06
as an order, and that happened in February
00:02:09
of this year. I come to you as just kind
00:02:13
of a six month checkup to let you guys kind of know where we're
00:02:16
at and what's been going on with the rate
00:02:20
appeal. In February
00:02:25
of this year, my bill used to be that 160
00:02:30
511,
00:02:31
$165.11. That's my
00:02:35
bill. That's me in the corner. That's my bill.
00:02:38
In April, 60 days later,
00:02:43
my bill, because of the order of the rate appeal, went to $7.21.
00:02:49
Now, I notice there is a surcharge in there of $39.21.
00:02:53
That is to pay for some legal fees. So I cannot put that into
00:02:56
my operating number. So in essence,
00:02:59
what happened, and I think it was unforeseen by everybody who
00:03:03
looked at this case for the last three years, that you,
00:03:07
that the rate appeal and the new rates and the refunds
00:03:11
cut our revenue by almost 80%.
00:03:16
That's substantial. And me, as being a board
00:03:19
member and trying to run the corporation, I just can't run
00:03:23
it on those type of numbers. We're running into some,
00:03:26
we're running into some challenges in
00:03:31
achieving, or actually just, you know, paying our bills
00:03:34
to operate a water utility for 278 members.
00:03:39
And again, I don't think it was anybody's direct fault.
00:03:43
I think we all were excited about what was happening over the last three years.
00:03:47
We were excited to get our rates reduced. I don't think anybody anticipated
00:03:52
the magnitude of our financial impact that took place with us.
00:03:55
And in the last six months, we've been running a
00:03:58
deficit of revenue versus expenses.
00:04:02
And I'm here to make the Commission
00:04:06
aware of that and to let them know that we may need
00:04:09
to go revisit this. It's putting a
00:04:12
tremendous burden on the corporation. And me being a board member, I have a
00:04:16
fiduciary duty to look at that. I run about
00:04:20
$10,000 in debt every month of this year.
00:04:25
I just can't sustain that. I'm running off of savings from last year
00:04:28
in order to supply the services that I've got.
00:04:32
This is also impacted at the same time that that
00:04:35
came out. Go ahead and finish your
00:04:39
thought. Okay? Yeah, I just have this one thought. Another thing that has happened
00:04:42
is at the same time that the rate appeal was put into place,
00:04:46
a compliance order was also put into place, which had,
00:04:50
you know, four objectives that the commission wanted us to see that
00:04:54
impacted us tremendously in trying to respond to that.
00:04:57
Because I don't have the revenue to pay for such things as a financial audit.
00:05:01
I just don't have the money. I got to put it towards providing clean water
00:05:04
and sewer services. So those are my comments today.
00:05:08
I'd like to Commission to take a look at this and see how we can,
00:05:11
you know, maybe take some action on it. Mister Walker, thank you for being here
00:05:14
this morning. Thank you for bringing this to our attention. Thank you for everybody.
00:05:16
Appreciate it. Thank you. Have a good day. Appreciate it.
00:05:23
So before we move down the agenda, just real quick. I won't take
00:05:27
much time, but Barksdale happy birthday today.
00:05:34
So I love you too.
00:05:37
Okay Shelah, I don't have anything on 2.
Item 5 - Project No. 55999 – Reports of the Electric Reliability Council of Texas
00:05:40
Three, isn't going to be taken up. Nothing on 4. So I think that brings
00:05:44
us to Item No. 5 on the agenda. That is Project No.
00:05:47
55999, reports of the Electric Reliability Council
00:05:51
of Texas. Davita, just in case there are questions
00:05:54
if you don't mind just coming up. I don't know that we'll
00:05:58
have any, but just in case, on the brawnig CPS issue,
00:06:02
I appreciate ERCOT's filing on this that you made on the 19th.
00:06:06
I appreciate that you all continue to work to try to find
00:06:09
solutions to this.
00:06:13
You know, I think if you all believe that
00:06:16
changing the notice of suspension of operation date
00:06:20
to earlier to March 1 of 2025,
00:06:24
is beneficial in multiple ways, I hope that CPS will
00:06:28
hear that and work with you all to try to accomplish that.
00:06:32
I don't know if you want to give any updates on how those are going.
00:06:35
I think, as I understood it, you kind of need an answer to whether or
00:06:38
not they're willing to do that sometime next week. Is that correct?
Item 5 - ERCOT's Davida Dwyer with updates on report,55999
00:06:43
Davida Dwyer with ERCOT. Yes sir, that's correct.
00:06:47
Under the protocols, NSOs had to be provided at
00:06:50
least 150 days before the proposed retirement date,
00:06:54
and by our calculation, that's October 2.
00:06:58
CPS has been receptive to the question
00:07:02
about whether or not they're willing to do it, and my understanding is that they're
00:07:05
investigating whether or not they have the ability to change.
00:07:08
Okay, well, based on the filing, I think that would be
00:07:11
a good outcome, and I hope, you know, CPS can find a way to accommodate
00:07:15
that. Commissioners, any thoughts?
Item 5 - Commissioner Glotfelty's thoughts on ERCOT's report ,55999
00:07:20
Yeah, I guess my. I continue to.
00:07:26
I think this RMR issue and the
00:07:30
IROL issue at the same general
00:07:34
location are more intertwined than
00:07:38
we've really been talking about. We haven't been talking about them as a, as a
00:07:41
total solution. We've been talking about them as two different things.
00:07:45
And I think that we
00:07:49
need to find a way to better coordinate these issues and
00:07:53
not just look at the RMR issue for the
00:07:57
solution, but really have a big discussion.
00:08:01
It may not, we don't have time for it on this one right now,
00:08:05
but reconductoring of lines that
00:08:08
could be strung quicker, that might eliminate congestion,
00:08:11
would solve these problems very quickly. There are multiple lines that could
00:08:15
be done. We can't do that. ERCOT can't
00:08:18
do that. It takes the utility to do that. But none of these things are
00:08:22
coming up in the same proceeding. They're all coming up kind of independently,
00:08:25
and I just hope that we can take this and ERCOT, you all can take
00:08:29
this. Away that if we come back with one of
00:08:32
these, that we could hear from y'all on.
00:08:36
Okay. These are the range of solutions that could solve the problems
00:08:40
that are facing us kind of in this area. And I
00:08:44
think that would be a better menu than just piecemeal. Yeah, I agree.
00:08:48
I mean, looking at these in silos, I think it's better to look at them
00:08:51
comprehensively. I gave a speech yesterday and talked at
00:08:55
length with some folks about reconductor in the system and what benefits that can bring.
00:09:00
And I agree, this process, the MRA process,
00:09:04
it seems like we need to look at all of it. And, yeah,
00:09:07
and I would say in my conversations with ERCOT, they've been more than willing
00:09:11
to talk comprehensively and holistically about all this. So appreciate it.
00:09:15
Keep us kind of up to date on how those negotiations with CPS
00:09:19
are going. Thanks. Thank you, Davida. Thank you.
Item 7 - Project No. 34677 – Reports of the Independent Market Monitor for the ERCOT Region
00:09:26
Item No. 6 was on the consent agenda. So that'll bring
00:09:29
us to Item 7. Project No. 34677,
00:09:33
Reports of the independent market Monitor for the ERCOT region. And staff
00:09:37
filed a memo in this docket.
00:09:41
Good morning, Harika.
Item 7 - Commission Staff's Harika Basaran on IMM report & memo, 34677
00:09:45
Harika Basaran with Staff. So this is the first time we
00:09:49
did that. Kindly asked us to do that for a while back. And thank you
00:09:52
very much to Barksdale, helping me to finish
00:09:55
it. State of the market report has 15
00:09:59
or 16 recommendations and we have
00:10:03
a table where we have replies to them if we support,
00:10:07
if they are neutral or if we disagree and why.
00:10:10
So I will put them in multiple buckets. One of them is really
00:10:13
the policy buckets. It has to be at the Commission. This is the t course,
00:10:17
net metering and small fish. And we have some deadlines when
00:10:21
we want to start on those. So if you have any feedback on that,
00:10:24
we will appreciate that another bucket is ready. Answer reserves
00:10:28
related to. And this is going to be ongoing discussion with IMM and
00:10:31
ERCOT and in the as study in the annual methodology.
00:10:34
These solutions, another one big ones
00:10:38
are the multi interval and load zone changes. Even though those are
00:10:42
not might be strictly policy. These are very big changes to the market
00:10:45
system cost. ERCOT and participants we are seeing gather more
00:10:49
data and don't try to do anything before RTC is
00:10:53
implemented in a steady state, it is reached. And then there is
00:10:57
some other minor things. They are already in progress. There is already
00:11:00
progress made on those with current NPRRs.
00:11:04
And if any of them has this cost solution and
00:11:08
it's not going to delay, RTC and the ERCOT and stakeholders agree,
00:11:11
they can move on with that, but this is really at the high level.
00:11:17
So I want to say thank you for doing this. I'm glad that Connie
00:11:21
and Barksdale endeavored down this path. I think this was super helpful to have kind
00:11:24
of a staff response to the filing to see where you are.
00:11:29
You know, as far as feedback. You know, I talked to staff in my
00:11:33
briefing. I'm comfortable with them kind of determining at what
00:11:37
schedule and when to make some of these changes and address some of
00:11:40
these issues. But if you all have specific items you
00:11:43
want to highlight or kind of put to the top of the list. Happy to
00:11:46
hear thoughts.
00:11:49
I'm really happy that the new Executive Director chose to
00:11:53
be proactive and do this as well. Such an improvement from the
00:11:56
previous one. You'll get no debate from the chairman
Item 7 - Commissioner Glotfelty's thoughts on IMM report & memo, 34677
00:12:03
with a capital C. I agree with
00:12:07
you that the staff should work with how these
00:12:12
things are addressed. I think this is just a, this is a
00:12:15
great improvement to an IMM report
00:12:19
that's thoughtful and model based and has
00:12:22
a lot of information in there on how to make the market efficient. And we
00:12:26
are, we are utilizing that by beginning the debate
00:12:29
that begins the debate now. We're having a discussion and I think it's just,
00:12:32
it's very fruitful for the efficiency of the market,
00:12:38
and I'm just appreciative that, that you all went ahead and did this.
00:12:41
And the memo lays out, don't agree with 100% of
00:12:45
it, but that's why it's important. So thank
00:12:49
you. Yeah. And I know in talking to
00:12:52
Potomac and Jeff, I know they appreciate this, that this
00:12:56
will help start a dialogue about how we should move forward. So I think this
00:12:59
is very, very useful. I appreciate this approach to
00:13:03
responding to the state, the market report from the IMM as
00:13:06
well. And I would leave
00:13:10
it to staff, too. I will say that the one
00:13:14
item that you all support is modifying TCOS away from 4-CP method.
00:13:18
I know that's a point of, I'm sure you all will get
00:13:22
a point of a lot of discussion, but I think it's worth
00:13:26
having, especially as there's a lot
00:13:29
of interest in adding a lot of infrastructure to
00:13:33
our system and infrastructure, meaning transmission infrastructure,
00:13:37
including not only 345 kv, but ehv and the reasons
00:13:41
why it'll be added on there. There's a lot load growth,
00:13:44
and the load has different characteristics now.
00:13:48
Now we have not only crypto miners but AI data centers
00:13:52
that are driving a lot of the load growth in the state. And we have
00:13:55
to make sure that we start proactively looking
00:13:58
at how we are allocating costs and
00:14:03
developing cost allocation and rate design in our
00:14:06
rate cases now, because if we don't do that as soon as
00:14:10
possible, start those discussions, I'm concerned that all of
00:14:14
the massive transmission infrastructure that we're looking at for future will be primarily
00:14:18
allocated to the small business and residential consumers.
00:14:21
So I think that the four CP discussion needs to
00:14:24
start as soon as possible.
Item 7 - Commissioner Jackson's thoughts on IMM report & memo, 34677
00:14:29
So I guess I'm most impressed with creating,
00:14:32
if you will, a process. I mean, oftentimes we get data and information,
00:14:36
and in the vein of continuous improvement, you want to kind of ask yourself,
00:14:40
well, what is it that I need to do moving forward, and how do I
00:14:43
need to evaluate it, and what is the process by which I
00:14:47
look at this work effort? So, successful organizations
00:14:51
manage risk well, and they do that because they manage change.
00:14:55
And so I think this is a really good vehicle to be able to do
00:14:58
that. And, you know, kind of sets forth, if you will, the process
00:15:02
that we can take. The data, we can evaluate it.
00:15:06
We've pinpointed the areas of potential challenges
00:15:10
or potential continuous improvement, and then kind of
00:15:13
moving forward, we can evaluate it
00:15:16
and determine, you know, what is the best way taking this
00:15:20
data and information that we have and managing change. So very appreciative of you doing
00:15:24
this and for Connie and Barksdale and for
00:15:29
working on this work effort. So thank you.
00:15:33
Thanks, Chairman. I just want to make sure that our memo
00:15:36
is clear that Commissioned Staff, capital C,
00:15:39
capital S is.
00:15:43
Excuse me, how old did you turn today again?
00:15:48
My kids usually tell me that I act about 13 at home,
00:15:51
so that's 5
00:15:54
years ahead of the Chairman. Oh, okay. Yeah.
00:15:58
Oh, I heard he's still working on reading is fundamental.
00:16:02
So, you know, it'll make the meetings go quicker when
00:16:05
you only have to call on three other Commissioners.
Item 7 - Deputy Executive Director, Barksdale English gives clarification on Commission Staff's memo, 34677
00:16:08
Perfect. I just want to make sure it's
00:16:12
clear from our memo that Commissioned Staff is supportive
00:16:16
of opening the dialogue about four CP. I don't think there's
00:16:20
uniform opinion on Commission Staff at this
00:16:24
moment that we should be moving away from four CP. So just to make
00:16:27
sure that we're being clear to
00:16:31
the rest of the world that staff has not taken a
00:16:34
position on this. I think it's definitely time, like you said, Commissioner Cobos.
00:16:37
To talk about it and be proactive about, you know, kind of reviewing that
00:16:41
decision that was made 20 years ago and make sure that it remains the
00:16:45
correct one. And if not, then what should we be moving to?
00:16:49
Thanks for that. Absolutely. Thanks for that clarification.
00:16:52
Okay, that's it. Thank you. Harika.
Item 9 - Project No. 55718 – Reliability Plan for the Permian Basin under PURA § 39.167
00:16:57
Item No. 8 was on the consent agenda. So that brings us to Item
00:17:01
No. 9. That's Project No. 55718,
00:17:04
reliability plan for the project Permian Basin under purist section 39.167.
00:17:10
And Commissioner Cobos and Commissioner Hjaltman
00:17:13
both have memos on this. So Commissioner Cobos, if you'd
00:17:17
like to lay out your memo first. Yes, thank you, Chairman Gleeson.
Item 9 - Commissioner Cobos lays out her memo, 55718
00:17:22
I filed a memo to set forth my modified
00:17:26
recommendation on the path forward for approving the Permian Basin reliability
00:17:31
plan in this proceeding,
00:17:33
last proceeding. The goal remains the same in
00:17:37
terms of preserving optionality at this time on the import paths
00:17:41
into the Permian Basin region, so that
00:17:45
ERCOT and the Commission can continue their evaluation of EHV,
00:17:50
primarily 765 transmission lines.
00:17:53
And so the goal has the whole path forward in
00:17:57
terms of preserving optionality. That remains the same as how you
00:18:01
get there. That's changed. Last open meeting,
00:18:05
you know, I had been in discussions with ERCOT. This has been a very fast
00:18:07
moving train. And they were under the impression that perhaps five
00:18:11
of the import pass that I wanted to authorize to the TSP
00:18:15
to start preparing their CCN applications could,
00:18:18
out of those five, three could be interchangeable, because they had common endpoints.
00:18:22
And after further analysis, they've determined that they don't have.
00:18:26
So if you looked at the three imports that
00:18:30
I had that are thought that were interchangeable,
00:18:33
when you more closely examine them, if you go
00:18:37
765, they have different endpoints and substations and
00:18:41
owners. If you go 345 different endpoint substations and owners.
00:18:44
So it's not apples to apples. And so
00:18:48
ERCOT made a filing on September 20 to
00:18:52
clarify that that was no longer a viable path forward based
00:18:57
on additional analysis that they conducted after the
00:19:01
last open meeting. And if they wanted
00:19:05
to make those three and four pass interchangeable, they'd have to conduct additional
00:19:10
engineering analysis, which could take several months. And that's not
00:19:13
what I believe the commission or anybody out of the stakeholders,
00:19:17
we want to approve a plan and get going with the implementation
00:19:21
of that plan. So ultimately,
00:19:23
ERCOT made a new recommendation on
00:19:27
how to preserve optionality, and that is to authorize the tsps
00:19:31
to begin preparing eight CCN
00:19:35
applications for all eight import pass, which includes 5345
00:19:40
kb import pass and 3765
00:19:44
import pass. And so, based on ERCOT's
00:19:48
updated recommendation, and in order to
00:19:51
continue to preserve optionality on the import
00:19:55
pass into the Permian, while ERCOT and the
00:19:58
commission continue to evaluate EHV,
00:20:02
I have recommended in this memo that
00:20:06
the Commission authorize the applicable TSPs to begin preparing the CCN
00:20:10
applications for the eight import pass in addition,
00:20:13
in order to provide more TSP certainty
00:20:18
with the path forward on that preparation of those eight ccns,
00:20:22
and to help mitigate potential import delays,
00:20:25
landowner impacts, and consumer cost, I recommend
00:20:29
that the commission director work with the TSP's,
00:20:33
the applicable tsps to identify the import paths that
00:20:38
would be needed to serve load in 2030 so
00:20:41
that the preparation of those CCN applications is prioritized by the
00:20:45
applicable TSP. So this
00:20:51
recommendation is centered on, as I noted,
00:20:55
to try to provide the tsps with more certainty. I want to make
00:20:58
sure that the tsps begin
00:21:02
preparing the CCN applications for the most critically important
00:21:06
import pass first and at
00:21:10
least we get some moment, some movement towards those
00:21:13
CCN applications now
00:21:18
so that we don't or we mitigate any delays
00:21:22
that could arise from just kind of waiting
00:21:26
until May 1, the date certain that I have proposed in this memo.
00:21:30
And also because potentially you could have eight CCN
00:21:34
applications going at once. If you prioritize some
00:21:38
of the import paths and the preparation of this
00:21:42
preparation of those CCN applications for those import paths,
00:21:45
you would potentially mitigate the landowner
00:21:49
impacts, not maybe have all eight going at once and
00:21:53
also limit consumer costs by prioritizing
00:21:56
certain CC applications to be prepared first by
00:22:00
the tsps. So that was an additional sort
00:22:04
of parameter that I wanted to put in there on authorizing the
00:22:08
Commissioners. I'm sorry, authorizing the TSPs
00:22:11
to move forward with preparing the a CCN applications to try to address those
00:22:15
concerns that I believe could
00:22:19
arise with having all eight going at once. Again,
00:22:23
I think that this revised recommendation remains consistent with
00:22:26
my prior position, which is to allow the applicable
00:22:30
TSP to start preparing their CCN applications for the import pass that are
00:22:33
necessary to serve the Permian. When the Commission
00:22:37
issues the order approving the reliability plan in
00:22:40
this proceeding, it allows ERCOT and the Commission to continue their EHV
00:22:44
evaluation and it will bring finality to the import pass in a
00:22:47
timely manner to allow for the completion of those CCN and applications by
00:22:51
having that date certain in our order and that date certain
00:22:54
that I propose is May 1,
00:22:57
2025. And so, as I had stated
00:23:00
in my prior memo, that date certain is,
00:23:05
and I will emphasize is a hard date. It is an
00:23:08
automatic trigger of a pivot to either 345 or
00:23:12
765. If we haven't made a decision on
00:23:15
EHV by May 1, 2025 on EHV,
00:23:20
then the TSPs that are preparing the
00:23:24
345 kV applications keep going 345 kV on
00:23:27
the five import pass. If we have made a decision to go with 765
00:23:32
then the tsps continue forward with 3765
00:23:37
CCN applications that remains the same, the core sort
00:23:40
of pivot point and how that works
00:23:44
out. And then, of course, the preparation of the CCN
00:23:48
applications that set forth
00:23:52
the voltage that wasn't, that's not going to be built,
00:23:55
would expire. The authorization to continue to prepare
00:23:59
those CCN applications in addition to
00:24:03
those.
00:24:06
The language I carried forward for my memo. But now, with the day certain,
00:24:10
I have added three deadlines that I think are important
00:24:14
to have in the order so we can kick off that second proceeding.
00:24:17
I have in my memo, the first one being that
00:24:21
within ten business days of the Commission's final order approving a reliability
00:24:24
plan and this proceeding, that ERCOT must file notice to the
00:24:28
TSPs in the ERCOT region and file a report in
00:24:32
the second proceeding that will be used to identify the tsps for implementing the Permian
00:24:36
Basin reliability plan. And that report will
00:24:39
identify. Help identify. The TSP is responsible for
00:24:43
the ownership, construction, operation of the transmission lines and facilities
00:24:46
associated with common local projects and import paths. So ERCOT has the
00:24:50
model that can help us identify, at least take that
00:24:54
first cut as to who they believe would be the project owners.
00:24:58
They'll file that report within ten business days of our final order in
00:25:02
that second proceeding. And then within
00:25:06
15 business days of ERCOT's filing of the report,
00:25:10
the tsps would file a response to.
00:25:15
Would have to file a response to ERCOT's report stating whether the TSP's dispute
00:25:20
ERCOT's identification of responsibility of ownership,
00:25:23
construction, operation of those facilities and lines that are in
00:25:27
the plan. So then, after the
00:25:30
TSP's respond to ERCOT, then they'll have 15 days
00:25:36
to try to negotiate things out of their
00:25:39
disputes. But at that 15th day, from the filing of
00:25:43
ERCOT's report, applicable tsps
00:25:47
in ERCOT would file a report stating whether there's a whether
00:25:50
and where on what. There's an agreement on the facilities
00:25:54
and lines associated with the plan. So the whole goal here is
00:25:57
just to set forth these three key deadlines to get
00:26:01
that third, that second proceeding going.
00:26:05
There's still some details that would have to be hashed out for that
00:26:09
second proceeding that I proposed in my memo.
00:26:12
That would be a collaboration with our staff
00:26:17
and ERCOT and stakeholders to make sure we get that, that path
00:26:21
forward. Whatever remaining details that need to be figured
00:26:25
out for that second proceeding hashed out, so that we could
00:26:29
have an efficient way of determining
00:26:34
who the project owners are by setting these three deadlines already,
00:26:38
but also how many ccns that are going
00:26:42
to be needed for all the projects and reliability plans so that our commission staff
00:26:45
can set a cadence on how many ccns would have to be filed
00:26:49
at the Commission per month. Because now we're in
00:26:53
a 180 day deadline to process the CCN
00:26:57
applications pursuant to House Bill 5066.
00:27:01
And then also as we determine who the project owners
00:27:05
are, then ERCOT would be able to identify which import
00:27:08
pass would be prioritized to meet
00:27:11
2030 load out of the CCN applications that
00:27:15
are being prepared so that the tsps can start preparing those CCN applications.
00:27:19
Because on day one of 2030 when the load
00:27:22
starts showing up, according to the models, the massive bulk
00:27:26
of it, I want to make sure that we're not delayed in the imports because
00:27:29
we can't serve the Permian without the imports. So that's
00:27:34
why I think it's important that the second proceeding is
00:27:38
efficient and provides
00:27:42
transparency for everyone and certainty
00:27:46
and ultimately finality how we get there. I mean,
00:27:50
I think after we approve a final order in this
00:27:54
proceeding on approving reliability plan,
00:27:57
we can discuss the details of how,
00:28:00
additional details of how we process that proceeding.
00:28:04
There may be a need for some contested cases. I know Commissioner
00:28:08
Hjaltman mentioned that as well in her memo. And so we can
00:28:12
continue to hash that out and set
00:28:15
forth a clear path forward so that the stakeholders in ERCOT
00:28:19
and the commission are clearly aware of where all
00:28:22
the deliverables and milestones will be so that we can implement this
00:28:26
Permian Basin plan as soon as practical and as
00:28:29
possible. And so part
00:28:33
of the direction I have in there, in addition to in my memo,
00:28:37
in addition to the pros of language that I believe should go into order,
00:28:42
is also a direction to commission staff
00:28:45
to open two projects right
00:28:49
now for this time to identify the tsps for
00:28:53
implementing the Permian Basin plan. And that project will initial
00:28:56
step would be an information gathering phase.
00:29:00
And then the second project would be to establish the oversight
00:29:04
of the completion of the Permian Basin reliability plan. And as
00:29:07
I had put forth in my memo, that's basically the
00:29:11
creation of a Permian Basin Monitor.
00:29:14
And I know I put two options in there. I think probably the
00:29:18
best option moving forward is for the
00:29:22
Commission to have a third party consultant to work
00:29:26
with our staff that is paid for by the TSP so
00:29:29
that we can effectively
00:29:33
monitor the completion of the plan. That's a model that I borrowed
00:29:36
from another large infrastructure build out and I think it worked well.
00:29:40
And those are the highlights of my memo when
00:29:43
I'm open to questions or I'll let Commissioner Hjaltman,
00:29:46
lay out her memo and then we can discuss. Yeah, thank you for that,
00:29:50
Commissioner Cobos. Yeah. Commissioner Hjaltman, why don't you go
Item 9 - Commissioner Hjaltman lays out her memo, 55718
00:29:53
ahead and lay out your memo? So, my memo kind of has three
00:29:57
components, the first being cost, the second, landowner involvement,
00:30:01
and the third, the back half of the process that Commissioner Cobos just
00:30:05
laid out. I think, mainly just want to note that
00:30:09
there's obviously a great concern with the cost that eight lines
00:30:12
will. Will have, and that
00:30:16
I want to caution the tsps to be mindful of that cost and then also
00:30:20
support these expenses being recorded as regulatory assets
00:30:25
that can be. Come back and come before the Commission for those
00:30:29
expenses and recovery of costs. But that's never a guarantee. So,
00:30:32
again, be mindful of that expenditure that you put forth.
00:30:35
Second, the landowner involvement, I don't think, should be a question mark. I think that
00:30:39
eliminating that is definitely not something that we
00:30:43
should do as a commission, so that should not be put forth as an option.
00:30:46
And then the third, for the back half of the process as laid out,
00:30:49
is really to make sure that we have once identified,
00:30:54
through items five, six and seven on Commissioner Cobos' memo,
00:30:58
that we put forth those determinations in a
00:31:01
final commission order and through a contested case,
00:31:05
that will give that finality and decisive decision that everyone will need.
00:31:09
So that's kind of a quick overview. Can walk through that more, but,
00:31:13
in general, would like to ask the Commission Staff
00:31:16
to go back and come up with that process and bring it forth
00:31:20
for us to discuss at a future meeting. Okay,
00:31:23
Commissioners, any comments or questions?
00:31:27
If I can. I'm happy to make a few comments. Thank you all,
00:31:31
both, for your hard work on this.
00:31:35
I think the.
Item 9 - Commissioner Glotfelty's thoughts on the Commissioner's memos, 55718
00:31:39
As I said at the last open meeting, I would be prepared to do 765
00:31:43
today or last open meeting.
00:31:46
I continue to believe that. I continue to believe that
00:31:50
the more we. The deeper we get involved in the process,
00:31:54
and the deeper ERCOT's involved in the process,
00:31:57
the longer it's going to take. Commissioner Cobos, I hope
00:32:01
the days that you put in on item
00:32:05
number five can be held firm.
00:32:09
Utilities are the ones who know how to route,
00:32:12
site, build, energize these lines, not us,
00:32:16
and definitely not ERCOT. So they.
00:32:20
ERCOT, when they plan, they plan from substation to substation. They don't
00:32:23
plan a route. They don't plan route to segments. So we need to
00:32:27
be mindful that a lot of this is in the wheelhouse of the
00:32:30
utilities and their consultants. And if
00:32:35
we continually kick things to ERCOT,
00:32:39
I fear that there are things that we
00:32:43
can get tripped up on and slow down. And that
00:32:46
makes me fearful of the,
00:32:50
the default back to 345.
00:32:54
I said this last time as well.
00:32:59
I don't like the default back to 345. I like us making
00:33:02
a proactive decision and I wish we could do that today.
00:33:06
I'm not going to stand in the way of this, but I don't think that
00:33:09
that's the right default. The amount
00:33:13
of congestion that we see in West Texas that
00:33:16
this could help solve is somewhere
00:33:20
between 100 and $300 million a year. That obviously
00:33:23
would pay for these lines in a short period of
00:33:27
time. Not even considering the economic development in the Permian. If you
00:33:31
look at 765 over 345 in
00:33:34
terms of line losses,
00:33:38
345 lines have about four times line than
00:33:42
a 765 line. Okay, so what does that mean? I did,
00:33:46
I'm getting in trouble because I'm using this new
00:33:49
AI tool called chat GBT.
00:33:53
Wow. I asked that little tool how
00:33:57
much at a 765
00:34:02
versus a 345 line at a 80% capacity
00:34:05
factor of the line, how much
00:34:10
more or how much less generation would be needed if
00:34:13
we did 765 and it came back with 250
00:34:17
mw. So if we do 345
00:34:20
lines, we need 250 mw more just to make up
00:34:24
for the line losses that we're going to lose.
00:34:28
Okay. Times three
00:34:31
dollar gas, that's $35
00:34:35
million a year on one line.
00:34:38
So my point to this is if we want
00:34:42
to think visionary,
00:34:44
765 1st became a discussion item in the early two thousands
00:34:48
in this state. And then they were
00:34:52
in around 2010 when Crez and
00:34:55
they got shelved. And now we have a chance to really be visionary for
00:34:59
the, for the state here. And there are
00:35:04
lots of reasons to do this in my opinion.
00:35:08
Again, I think that Commissioner
00:35:12
Hjaltman, your concern about cost,
00:35:17
the CCN application cost,
00:35:21
I think it bears us watching that every single time.
00:35:24
But I think in comparison to the construction cost
00:35:28
of the project,
00:35:31
$0.25 or dollar swing in global steel prices could
00:35:34
have a ten times greater effect on the price
00:35:37
of these projects than just that part of the application.
00:35:42
We need to look at every part of the application and be as efficient
00:35:45
as we can. So I'm supportive of what you're saying, but in the
00:35:49
global picture, these projects are big and these projects use a
00:35:53
lot of steel and a lot of labor and that's the bulk of
00:35:57
the cost in these technologies.
00:36:02
I hope that we pass this today. I hope we go forward.
00:36:07
I believe that we are doing something here that will,
00:36:11
that we can brag about in a few decades
00:36:15
and people will look back and say this was the right thing to do at
00:36:18
the right time and could have been done sooner,
00:36:21
but we took the chance and we did it.
00:36:25
The load in the permian basin.
00:36:29
My view is that the load is already in the permian basin.
00:36:33
It may peak in 2030, but there's a lot of
00:36:37
load in the permian basin that's nothing
00:36:41
electrically hooked up yet that could be today.
00:36:44
And the sooner we get a decision the better off we're going to be
00:36:48
and the more economic development we're going to have for our state and the more
00:36:51
wages we're going to have for our employees. Finally, I would say
00:36:55
that I know the issue of right
00:36:59
of way in hearings. We can
00:37:02
bring up condemnation as well. The 765
00:37:06
lines use somewhere over
00:37:10
400 miles less right of way,
00:37:13
which means less landowners.
00:37:16
And to me that is a very very positive attribute
00:37:20
of these 765 lines. So all
00:37:24
those things being said, I'm appreciative of your leadership,
00:37:28
Commissioner Cobos. As I said last time, I want to
00:37:31
go faster, but I'm willing to help you all get
00:37:35
to the same place. And I'm happy to vote yes on this
Item 9 - Commissioner Jackson's thoughts on Commissioner's memos, 55718
00:37:39
today. I'm very much supportive
00:37:43
of preserving the optionality.
00:37:47
I think we're at a, if you will, kind of an opportunity
00:37:50
state for the state of Texas to kind of sit back and kind of look
00:37:54
at what does the grid of the future look like. We're very fortunate
00:37:57
that we have growth because this gives us an opportunity to do things that
00:38:01
maybe other parts of the country can't do. And so what
00:38:05
is in, I believe our best interest is gathering all the data and the information
00:38:10
that we can at this point in time asking, if you will, the right questions,
00:38:14
getting stakeholder engagement and really kind of
00:38:18
sitting down and evaluating that data.
00:38:20
Because the better the data, the better the science.
00:38:24
The better the science, the better the ongoing policy and the
00:38:27
opportunity here to study this,
00:38:31
to preserve the optionality and be able to
00:38:34
actually evaluate what are the benefits
00:38:37
of EHV and maybe do a little bit more deeper dive
00:38:41
than just the Google search and
00:38:46
engage people so that we know that we're asking the right
00:38:49
questions and positioning us for the future.
00:38:53
I know we talked a lot about the import lines because that's been
00:38:56
kind of the subject of the day. But I believe you also mentioned
00:39:00
that the game plan here moving forward is to immediately start
00:39:03
on the local, the local transmission. So the
00:39:08
sooner we get this in, the sooner we start garnering the benefits and
00:39:12
kind of sending the message again that Texas does have the grid of the future.
00:39:15
So look forward to the opportunity to
00:39:19
look at 765, to look at 345.
00:39:25
And again, just preserving
00:39:28
that optionality. So I'm very much in favor of this.
00:39:33
Thank you Commissioners and Commissioner Glotfelty.
Item 9 - Commissioner Cobos' thoughts on Commissioner's memos, 55718
00:39:37
We've had a lot of discussions on EHV. I'm looking forward
00:39:40
to this fall and the study that ERCOT provides us.
00:39:43
I think it's going to be very important that that gets completed because it
00:39:47
is. I know you've said it's been brought up in the past and it's been
00:39:50
shelved. If we want to build a grid for the future and EHV
00:39:54
is a part of that, I want to make sure that we get all the
00:39:57
data we can. Because it's not just do you go to 765 and all the
00:40:00
benefits. It's also like the statewide plan that ERCOT wants and
00:40:04
what is the impact, what are the costs and benefits there? And so
00:40:09
I very much look forward to ERCOT completing their evaluation,
00:40:12
their study, putting forth their plan
00:40:17
for the state so that we can evaluate it over here. And with respect
00:40:21
to the optionality, the reason I think that it's,
00:40:24
we're kind of in this place is because the permian basin plan,
00:40:28
the proceeding kicked off last December,
00:40:32
having led this project. And some of you all may be aware
00:40:35
of kind of when EHV entered the discussion for the permian,
00:40:38
Washington in the summer and then
00:40:42
finally in the report. So it's been sort of
00:40:45
a new phenomenon
00:40:49
in the Permian Basin reliability plan. And in order to,
00:40:53
because the EHV process at ERCOT didn't quite line up with the Permian
00:40:57
plan in order to preserve the ability to
00:41:02
look at these high voltage lines as
00:41:05
part of the Permian and not set back the Permian with the imports that they
00:41:08
need and takes, you know, five, seven years to build transmission, I guess.
00:41:12
And we want to make sure that they have the imports on day one,
00:41:14
they're going to need the local projects to be built to
00:41:19
serve the Permian. But the imports are critically important
00:41:23
because we're going to need to move power over there. There's not
00:41:27
sufficient generation there at this time. And we'll know more through the Texas Energy fund
00:41:31
as those operations in the Permian are 24/7 operations. Right.
00:41:35
So we're going to need to move a lot of power over there. And the
00:41:37
imports are critically important. And the optionality is the
00:41:40
best we can do right now to preserve our ability
00:41:44
to keep ehv on the table for evaluation and still
00:41:48
keep the imports going in some form or fashion.
00:41:52
Because as you've noted, Commissioner Glotfelty. I mean, the Permian
00:41:55
is critically important, important for our state. I mean, when we
00:41:59
approve a plan here today, just getting the base
00:42:02
local projects going and getting movement and finally
00:42:06
finality of where those CCN applications go on. Voltage is
00:42:10
going to be just tremendously beneficial for that region.
00:42:15
Beneficial not just to electrify and make their operations
00:42:19
more efficient, but to extend further into
00:42:22
the Delaware basin, which is in West Texas, in my neck
00:42:26
of the woods, kind of. And so, I mean,
00:42:29
it's going to be a tremendous boon for our state in
00:42:32
so many ways. And so I'm really excited
00:42:36
to approve a plan here today. I think that
00:42:39
preserving optionality is a very thoughtful
00:42:43
and prudent and diligent thing to do here today,
00:42:47
just so we could all get comfortable with the idea of 765 and
00:42:50
make sure we have the data to support it, because it's not just going to
00:42:53
be us, the Commission that looks at it, it's going to be the stakeholders.
00:42:56
It's going to be potentially the legislature that may want to have feedback on it.
00:42:59
So we want to put forth the best available data to support ERCOT
00:43:03
needs to put the best data, give us the best data they have, and we
00:43:06
need to go through a robust review process this
00:43:11
next year so that we are sure where we want to head
00:43:16
transmission planning purposes into the future.
00:43:20
Commissioner Hjaltman, your costs about your
00:43:24
concerns about consumers, I mean, I shared those some. I hear what you're saying,
00:43:27
Commissioner Glotfelty, that there's not going to be a lot of costs potentially incurred at
00:43:31
the beginning of preparing these CCN applications.
00:43:34
I just, you know, any, any amount of
00:43:37
money spent on something that's just paper shuffling
00:43:41
to, and not, and some of it may not be paper
00:43:44
shuffling. You may have to put deposits down on equipment and those costs
00:43:48
can go up. Any amount of money that's spent, that the ratepayers have to pay
00:43:51
for something that they didn't benefit from causes me concern.
00:43:55
And so to Commissioner Hjaltman's recommendation on regulatory asset,
00:43:59
I think that is a clear way for the utilities
00:44:03
to track those expenses. And like you
00:44:07
mentioned in your memo,
00:44:10
it doesn't guarantee, I mean, by authorizing the TSPs to move
00:44:13
forward to prepare CCNs and
00:44:18
tracking them through a regulatory asset, I think we want to stress
00:44:22
that they will still have to prove that those costs are reasonable and prudently incurred.
00:44:26
So I share your concerns. I think your path forward makes sense to
00:44:30
me. The landowner concern, definitely agree.
00:44:35
And that's why I provided that optionality the
00:44:38
prioritization piece to the optionality proposal to try to
00:44:42
mitigate those impacts. So we don't have maybe all eight going at once.
00:44:45
And I know that sometimes depending on the TSP some engage
00:44:50
with landowners maybe earlier than others. But we want to let y'all do
00:44:53
what y'all normally do.
00:44:56
Don't want to leave a very important voice
00:45:00
out of this process and that is the property owners of our state.
00:45:04
So do what you normally do in preparing CCNs
00:45:09
and then to your third piece. I think we continue to talk about it.
00:45:12
I hear where you're coming from. I think we're on the same page and we'll
00:45:14
figure out what best, you know, how best to do it with the process on
00:45:17
it. So I appreciate your thoughts and all your feedback on this.
00:45:21
It's been helpful to think through and visit about
00:45:25
these issues here today. So thank you.
00:45:29
Can I just say one thing?
00:45:32
345 765 the thing that I
00:45:36
get fearful about, well, the thing that I think about
00:45:39
is when we build pipelines in this state,
00:45:43
when companies build pipelines in this state. The Railroad Commission
00:45:46
and the legislature don't tell them is it a 30 inch line?
00:45:49
Is it a 60 inch line. They do it
00:45:52
based upon economics for the long term. And that's
00:45:56
what we need to think about here in my opinion is that over
00:46:00
the long term what is the best thing for this state?
00:46:03
So I agree with you. You know, data is important.
00:46:07
Data is great. Data is necessary to
00:46:11
get us over this hum. But I'm convinced that the data will show
00:46:14
that will lead us to the right answer.
00:46:19
The other consideration in my opinion is also timing.
00:46:23
Right? Because this is a race and so we
00:46:27
need to make sure that, you know, if we move forward with 765
00:46:31
as opposed to 345 that we can do it within the timing that
00:46:35
is needed in the Permian because it is such an important asset.
00:46:38
And I mean we've talked about it being economic development but there's no standing
00:46:42
still in economic development. Continue to have even what you have
00:46:45
today unless you invest and you're able and you're capable to
00:46:49
execute in the future. And I think you mentioned that,
00:46:53
you know, when I visited the Permian and saw it for myself, I mean they
00:46:56
are, they're behind right now and
00:47:00
so they could use, you know, what we can provide in
00:47:04
terms of electrifying the Permian right now today. So yes,
00:47:07
we need to make sure that we're thinking about the future but we also are
00:47:11
kind of needing to balance that. It's very much a race and something that we
00:47:14
need to make sure that we cross that finish line when we need to.
Item 9 - Chairman Gleeson's thoughts on Commissioner's memos, 55718
00:47:18
Yeah. I think, for me, that's the salient point
00:47:21
on the plan, is we're trying to strike a balance between that growth
00:47:26
and meeting it. But also, you know, I want to thank everyone
00:47:29
who listened to what I said last time and spent the time to come talk
00:47:32
to me about this, what I heard from the customers over and over again.
00:47:35
Washington, we're fine with 765 if the data proves it
00:47:38
out, but we care mostly about the timing. And so I think kind
00:47:41
of the beauty of this plan is it will
00:47:44
hold us accountable with the timeline to make sure
00:47:48
that if 765 is how we want to go, we do
00:47:51
it on a timeline that works for everybody, and if not, the customers
00:47:55
will still get the build that they think they need. And so that's,
00:47:59
you know, Commissioner, I think that's a really good point. I think that's how I
00:48:02
got to the same place as well, that I think this is the right
00:48:06
way to go. Shelah, I want to make sure that you
00:48:10
and Mark have everything you might need to try to write an order
00:48:13
coming out of this. So I wrote down just a couple of things I
00:48:17
want to make sure we're all in agreement on. Please. If I'm missing anything
00:48:20
that you feel maybe we need more clarity on, let me know.
00:48:24
So I think I heard everyone is good with Commissioner Kobos
00:48:28
memo, the May 1 deadline, correct?
00:48:33
Okay. We're also good from Commissioner Hjaltman's
00:48:37
memo letting the TDUs book the
00:48:41
regulatory asset. Yes. Okay.
00:48:44
And we're good moving forward with a plan that is,
00:48:47
the lines is modified by ERCOT's last addendum that they filed.
00:48:51
Yes. Okay. Shelah, Mark is there
00:48:55
anything else you need? I'm not sure I understand
00:48:59
where Commissioner Hjaltman said that she preferred
00:49:03
or she recommends the steps
00:49:07
being taken to go into a contested docket versus
Item 9 - Commissioner Hjaltman gives clarification on her memo, 55718
00:49:10
a project? I think it is,
00:49:13
for Staff to come back to us at the
00:49:17
next meeting or when they can, with recommendations of how
00:49:20
they would be helpful for us to proceed after
00:49:24
steps five, six, and seven on the memo as laid
00:49:28
out. So once that fact gathering is done by
00:49:31
ERCOT and the TSPs. So in this order,
00:49:35
that would not be laid out yet. So after
00:49:38
steps five through seven. Yes. Okay. So I think I may have misheard what you
00:49:41
said about 5 through 7 being in a final Commission Order. Sorry.
00:49:45
Contested case. Okay. Yes. Got it.
00:49:48
Shelah, Mark anything else?
00:49:51
Okay. Again, thank you to the four of you, and especially
00:49:55
Commissioner Cobos, thank you to you and your staff for all the leadership on this.
00:49:59
All the market participants that came in to ERCOT, to everybody,
00:50:03
this has been quite a lift, and it took
00:50:06
a lot of folks. But you need to be commended for all the work you
00:50:09
did on this to get it to where it is. So everyone should be really
00:50:12
appreciative of you and your staff and all the work. Thank you, Chairman Gleeson.
Item 9 - Motion to direct OPDM to draft order consistent with Commissioner's memos, 55718
00:50:15
So with that, I would entertain a motion to direct OPDM to
00:50:19
draft an order consistent with Commissioner Cobos memo,
00:50:24
Commissioner Hjaltman's memo and our discussion.
00:50:26
So moved. Second. Have a motion and a second.
00:50:30
All those in favor say aye. Opposed?
00:50:33
Motion prevails. Well done. Yes. I feel like I need to
00:50:36
slam a gavel or something. Do we
00:50:39
have a piece of wire of transmission line we could give her? I don't know.
00:50:42
Kristi says she might do a balloon release or something but. May
00:50:47
I recommend doves.
Item 21 - Project No. 56793 – Issues Related to the Disaster Resulting from Hurricane Beryl
00:50:51
Okay. So I don't have anything until we get
00:50:55
to Items 21 and 22, so I'm going to call those
00:50:58
up together. That is Project No. 56793, issues related
Item 22 - Project No. 56822 – Investigation of Emergency Preparedness and Response by Utilities in Houston and Surrounding Communities
00:51:02
to the disaster resulting from Hurricane barrel. And Project No.
00:51:06
56822, investigation of emergency preparedness in
00:51:10
response by utilities in the Houston surrounding communities. I think we
00:51:13
have an update from our Executive Director.
Item 21 - Executive Director, Connie Corona gives update on Houston workshop, 56793
00:51:17
Yes thank you, Chairman. We are
00:51:21
in the process of finalizing the agenda for our October 5 workshop
00:51:25
in Houston that will take place at the Harris County Department
00:51:29
of Education in the Ronald Reagan building beginning
00:51:32
at 09:00am. Members of the public are invited to attend
00:51:37
and provide verbal comments, and we'll also be hearing from
00:51:41
some subject matter experts as it relates to best practices
00:51:45
in storm preparation and response.
00:51:49
So again, I think this is a really important part. I'm glad that we're
00:51:52
going to Houston to do this, to hear from folks out there. I think
00:51:56
we'll learn a lot about how everyone feels and their thoughts
00:52:00
on a number of issues related to resiliency and reliability in the Gulf
00:52:04
coast. So thank you to staff for all your work on pulling this together.
00:52:07
I know Luisa worked a lot on this, so very thankful to her.
Item 22 - Connie Corona on RFI response, 56822
00:52:11
Thank you. Thank you. And I would also like to
00:52:14
extend the staff team's thanks to the
00:52:19
RFI response respondents who have provided
00:52:23
information and been collaborative in their follow up with
00:52:27
staff. We have just about completed our collection
00:52:30
of the information, a handful of things to finalize
00:52:36
with those RFIs, and then we will begin preparing
00:52:40
our investigation report for your consideration in November.
00:52:45
Thank you, Connie. Okay. Commissioners,
00:52:49
we do not have a closed session. Any other items for discussion?
Item 22 - Chairman Gleeson adjourns meeting
00:52:54
All right, nice meeting. With that, as
00:52:58
there being no further business before us. This meeting of the Public Utility Commission is hereby
00:53:01
adjourned.

Commissioner Memos

Control	Item	Filing Date	Party	Description	Action
55718	49	September 25, 2024	PUC OPDM	COMMISSIONER LORI COBOS AND COMMISSIONER COURTNEY HJALTMAN MEMORANDA
55718	49	September 25, 2024	PUC OPDM	COMMISSIONER LORI COBOS AND COMMISSIONER COURTNEY HJALTMAN MEMORANDA